Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “deployment timelines”

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.

78 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2003

International Space Station Increment-4/5 Microgravity Environment Summary Report

This summary report presents the results of some of the processed acceleration data measured aboard the International Space Station during the period of December 2001 to December 2002. Unlike the past two ISS Increment reports, which were increment specific, this summary report covers two increments: Increments 4 and 5, hereafter referred to as Increment-4/5. Two accelerometer systems were used to measure the acceleration levels for the activities that took place during Increment-4/5. Due to time constraint and lack of precise timeline information regarding some payload operations and station activities, not a11 of the activities were analyzed for this report. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration sponsors the Microgravity Acceleration Measurement System and the Space Acceleration Microgravity System to support microgravity science experiments which require microgravity acceleration measurements. On April 19, 2001, both the Microgravity Acceleration Measurement System and the Space Acceleration Measurement System units were launched on STS-100 from the Kennedy Space Center for installation on the International Space Station. The Microgravity Acceleration Measurement System supports science experiments requiring quasi-steady acceleration measurements, while the Space Acceleration Measurement System unit supports experiments requiring vibratory acceleration measurement. The International Space Station Increment-4/5 reduced gravity environment analysis presented in this report uses acceleration data collected by both sets of accelerometer systems: The Microgravity Acceleration Measurement System, which consists of two sensors: the low-frequency Orbital Acceleration Research Experiment Sensor Subsystem and the higher frequency High Resolution Accelerometer Package. The low frequency sensor measures up to 1 Hz, but is routinely trimmean filtered to yield much lower frequency acceleration data up to 0.01 Hz. This filtered data can be mapped to arbitrary locations for characterizing the quasi-steady environment for payloads and the vehicle. The high frequency sensor is used to characterize the vibratory environment up to 100 Hz at a single measurement location. The Space Acceleration Measurement System, which deploys high frequency sensors, measures vibratory acceleration data in the range of 0.01 to 400 Hz at multiple measurement locations. This summary report presents analysis of some selected quasi-steady and vibratory activities measured by these accelerometers during Increment- 4/5 from December 2001 to December 2002.

Jules, Kenol↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Uncrewed Lunar Surface Operations and Support Activities

Sustained human presence on the surface of the Moon and future missions to Mars require increased independence from surface crews and Earth-based mission control to operate efficiently, safely, and reliably. The time for surface crews to perform tasks will be limited. Extravehicular activities by surface personnel are burdensome and time-consuming, even when a continuous human presence on the surface occurs. Identifying and balancing human/automation roles and tasks and infusing automation and autonomy practices early in a system’s lifecycle will be essential to achieve mission objectives. Among these objectives are attaining a sustained human presence, improving performance and mission effectiveness, reducing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, and ensuring operations that are robust to communication delays. To achieve these objectives, an operational shift toward increased automation and autonomy with less reliance on humans is needed. Uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities occur when surface crews are not present or are independent of surface crew timeline activities requiring no surface crew oversight or intervention. These uncrewed surface opportunities can also be planned to minimize crew workload that avoids routine maintenance and support tasks, thus maximizing crew exploration time. Uncrewed preparations such as staging and prepositioning equipment and materials before the crew arrives could improve crew task efficiency. Additional opportunities exist to conduct uncrewed science, exploration, and utilization. Uncrewed surface architecture functions can include science and exploration; habitation; launch and landing support; surface communication and navigation; surface power generation and distribution; human surface mobility; lifting, handling, manipulating; excavation, construction, and site preparation; logistics management; maintenance and repair; surface resource utilization; integrated site operations and shared support services (e.g., site scheduling/prioritization, dust mitigation/contamination control, and surface safety). Early robotic lunar surface campaigns will provide information on the availability of resources, such as oxygen and water, and demonstrate surface-based technologies. After the Artemis III human lunar return mission, a series of landers will deliver surface systems, cargo, supplies, science packages, spare parts, and commodities. A balance of crewed and uncrewed surface operations will enable a sustained lunar surface presence at the South Pole of the Moon at a site that will be known as the Artemis Base Camp (ABC). It is envisioned that base camp operations on and around the Moon will then help prepare for the mission durations and activities needed to support the first human mission to Mars. Before long-duration crew missions to the base camp can occur, the necessary surface infrastructure will be pre-deployed and verified operational. Surface assets will be teleoperated and remotely managed from Earth. Additionally, robotic and short-duration crewed missions to the ABC will ensure the site’s merit to achieve long-term science objectives, availability of usable resources, and that terrain, seasonal variations, and illumination conditions are acceptable. ABC will consist of different areas where specific functions and services are rendered, including: • Launch and Landing Area • Habitation Area • Power Production Area • Resource Areas Launch and Landing Area—The launch and landing area will support associated functions for the arrival and departure of vehicles, such as crewed landing and ascent and uncrewed cargo deliveries and offloading. It will evolve from an unimproved site at the beginning of the exploration campaign to a more sustainable landing and launch area that can support repeated arrivals and departures. Initial uncrewed Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) surface operations may include emplacement of navigation beacons and communication equipment, real-time video and photography of landing/liftoff events, and element repositioning, such as portable utility power (PUP) (applicable for other landed assets at other areas). Site preparations, such as surface leveling, soil compaction, and berm/path construction, may be needed for a more sustainable launch and landing area capable of accommodating vehicles that are increasingly more reusable and reduce the effects of plume surface interactions and ejecta impacts on nearby surface assets. During the ABC missions, cargo and logistics will be delivered to the lunar surface via robotic cargo landers before the crew arrives. These shipments, which can arrive in pressurized logistics carriers, will deliver the logistics necessary to support a crewed mission and include items such as food, water, equipment spares, etc. Providing the capability to retrieve, offload, and transport the logistics closer to the ABC site before the arrival of the crew will increase the overall efficiency of crew operations once they arrive. In the sustained phase of exploration, other supporting services may be needed, such as lander propellant servicing, surface power services, commodity refreshes, and additional inspection, maintenance, and repair capabilities, to sustain a cadence of extended personnel stays and cargo arrivals and departures. Habitation Area—Uncrewed support to surface habitation could involve supporting activation and pre-entry operations of the habitat while the crew is in orbit at the Gateway outpost preparing for a surface landing. Surface Habitat (SH) uncrewed operations may include bringing the cabin environment to a habitable temperature and air mix and activating other critical crew support systems. Potential crop production uncrewed tasks in the SH could also include autonomous watering and tending. Additionally, when the crew departs, the SH enters dormancy for the long period of uncrewed operation. A logistical staging area could also be collocated near the SH. If so, staging operations for crew supplies, waste re-location, and recycling operations may be opportunities for uncrewed operations. Power Production Area—The Fission Surface Power (FSP) element and its supporting distribution equipment provide power to surface elements as needed across the ABC to supplement day-to-day operations and survive lunar nights. Uncrewed support of this power system includes any initial LTV-assisted deployments of cables and other distributed equipment, associated electrical connections, and system testing and activation operations. Robotically performing some inspections, maintenance, or repair tasks on the power distribution equipment could reduce the surface crew workload. Resource Area— Uncrewed resource prospecting, mapping, and characterizing possible resource sites is likely to be time-consuming and represents an opportunity for uncrewed operations between crewed missions. Uncrewed mobile equipment operations will be needed in the extreme environments of permanently shadowed locations where resource extractions occur. As In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) pilot plant operations begin, uncrewed surface support activities with available mobile and portable assets (LTV, PUP, etc.) will better support these operations. Any produced commodities can be stored at a centralized storage location for future use. Also associated with these operations is the use of mobile robotic excavators for resource acquisition and robotic/autonomous regolith processing. The waste tailings generated during excavation and regolith processing would also need to be transported and deposited at a dedicated location. Surface assets will continue operating between crew visits to maintain surface capabilities, conduct lunar surface science, technology demonstrations, and public outreach opportunities. Additionally, certain sustaining tasks that would consume valuable crew time could be performed before crew arrival, or after their departure. This capability may offer more affordable options to construct, activate, test, and maintain a broad set of surface assets. Telerobotically operated human surface mobility systems, such as the LTV and Pressurized Rover (PR), can be utilized for various tasks. Surface environmental conditions pose a distinct challenge for all these activities. Surface illumination and localized shadows are one such factor. Night-survival operations could consist of thermal management, battery pre-charging, and load shedding. Some surface systems may hibernate through the night and then awake and continue nominal operations. Uncrewed mobile assets may use a more adaptive approach to optimize their power and operations; one method is to follow the sunlight. Night-survival operations may be initiated remotely by teleoperation, automated, or accomplished by supervised autonomous operation. The ability to pre-deploy and control remote assets in orbit or on Mars before the arrival of the mission crew is a key capability that can be simulated on the moon. The base camp provides a venue where these advanced operational concepts, technologies, and autonomous methods and techniques, including the incorporation of time delays to simulate Earth-Mars latency can be replicated to help buy down future Mars mission risks. This paper will examine the evolution of uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities. It will also discuss the lunar surface environmental conditions (thermal, lighting, terrain, topography, communications) along with the challenges they pose on uncrewed surface operations, and the performance of these activities with limited to minimal human interaction and/or teleoperation. Since lunar missions include Mars mission analogs, such investigation provides the framework for future uncrewed Mars mission support.

Mark E Lewis↗
NASA NTRS2026

X-Hab 2026: LiDAR-Powered Autonomous Charging Service Capability for Surface Rovers and Systems

This document details the timeline of the LiDAR-Powered Autonomous Charging Service Capability for Surface Rovers and Systems project, initiated by the Fall 2025 semester class and completed by the Spring 2026 semester class. This project focuses on developing a fully autonomous system composed of a mobile surface rover and an induction charging station with a robotic arm, both controlled by their own NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano. Structural improvements to the rover suspension system and body eliminated excessive camber, reduced stress and strain on the plexiglass body, and improved maneuverability and durability of the rover. The charging station robotic arm was fully redesigned to increase reach while minimizing weight and increasing misalignment tolerance during docking on uneven terrain. Electrical system improvements addressed previous torque and power limitations of both the rover and charging station arm. High-torque servo motors were selected based on updated calculations which incorporated terrain slope and Factor of Safety, enabling zero-point turning for the rover and increased payload capacity of the charging station arm. Significant progress was made in autonomy and perception. The rover now employs 3D LiDAR and SLAM mapping for localization, mapping, and path planning. The Battery Monitoring System (BMS) was created to coordinate battery management between the rover and charging station. The BMS provides continuous monitoring of battery state of charge, temperature, current, and will enable the autonomous initiation, execution, and termination of the charging cycle via Bluetooth communication. Testing of the WIBOTIC induction charging system demonstrated reliable power transfer under both aligned and misaligned conditions. This project demonstrated the ability of an autonomously navigating surface rover to independently plan a path to the charging station, dock, and the charging station to autonomously deploy a robotic charging arm and initiate charging of the rover. This work details the progress made to demonstrate the feasibility of autonomous surface rover navigation and recharging systems.

Megan Steele↗
NASA NTRS1990

A global view of lander-to-orbiter communications accessibility for a Mars Global Network Mission

Given the mission objective to deploy a number of small landers to the surface of Mars at various latitude/longitude locations, it is of interest to obtain a global perspective of the communications link geometry between the landers and a data relay orbiter. Specifically, the question to be answered is what is the total time interval over one Martian day (1 sol) that a lander at any given latitude and longitude can communicate data to the orbiter. Results should be obtained for more than one elevation angle constraint (lander antenna design issue), and also for several time points into the mission since the orbiter's periapsis location moves under the influence of Mars' oblateness perturbation. Such information is presented in terms of global contour maps of available communications time per sol summed over all orbiter pases on that day. Global data of this type complements more detailed local site data such as communications range and elevation vs time per pass. Communications time contour maps are included here for sol grids of 180, 232, 318, 361, and 404 corresponding to orbiter periapsis latitudes of 35 S, 90 S, equatorial, 45 N, and 90 N. For each of these days, there is a map for both a 15 deg and 45 deg minimum elevation constraint on the lander-to-orbiter line of sight. The jagged appearance of the contour lines is due to computational resolution in interpolating between a finite number of latitude/longitude grid points. Although the contours should really be smooth, the general information content is represented by the lower resolution maps shown here. An example of the tabulated, finite-grid data points is also given. Communication with all sites is possible at the 15 deg elevation constraint, at times only for several minutes per sol but more generally for a much longer time up to 14 hours per sol. Significantly less time is available with a 45 deg elevation constraint, and at certain times in the mission some localized regions of the planet are inaccessible. Still, one may conclude that the reference orbit selection will support a more than adequate communications link through the mission timeline with landers emplaced at any desired location on Mars.

Friedlander, Alan L.↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Utility of a Small Pressurized Rover with Suit Ports for Lunar Exploration: A Geologist's Perspective

Rover trade study: As summarized recently, mission simulations at Black Point Lava Flow (Arizona) that included realistic extravehicular activity (EVA) tasking, accurate traverse timelines, and an in-loop science CAPCOM (or SciCOM) showed that a small pressurized rover (SPR) was a better mobility asset than an unpressurized rover (UPR). Traverses within the SPR were easier on crew than spending an entire day in a spacesuit, enhancing crew productivity at each station. The SPR, named Lunar Electric Rover (LER), and sometimes called the Space Exploration Vehicle (SEV), could also provide shelter during a suit malfunction, radiation event, or medical emergency that might occur on the Moon. Intravehicular activity (IVA) capabilities: From within the vehicle, crew could describe and photo-document distant features during drives between stations, as well as in the near-field, directly in front of the LER, providing an ability to begin EVA planning on approach to each outcrop prior to egress. The vehicle can rotate 360º without any lateral movement, providing views in all directions. It has high-visibility windows, a ForeCam, AftCam, port and starboard cameras, docking cameras, and a GigaPan camera. EVA capabilities: To reduce timeline, mass, and volumetric overhead, rapid egress and ingress were envisioned, replacing an airlock with lower cabin pressure than on the International Space Station and suit ports on the aft cabin wall [2]. When needed for closer inspection and sample collecting, crew could egress in about 10 minutes through suit ports. Crew use SuitCams for additional photo-documentation, transmit mobile observations verbally, and collect surface materials. Typical simulations involved 3 to 4 EVA stations/day and 2 to 3 hr/day of boots on the ground. This allowed crew to explore a far larger territory, with more complex geological and in situ resource utilization (ISRU) features, than would a single, longer-duration EVA at one location, while also minimizing crew time in a spacesuit. Additionally, the vehicle could be driven with crew locked into the suit ports. This approach could involve a driver in the cockpit with a suited crewmember in a suit port, or the vehicle could be driven from the aft deck with both crewmembers in their suit ports. This approach was used when distances between stops were short enough that vehicle ingress and egress were less efficient than remaining in the suits and driving. Utility of suit ports: The advantages of suit ports were clearly demonstrated in those field-based trade studies. To illustrate those advantages further, consider the consequences of a SPR without suit ports at the Apollo 17 landing site. At that site, the crew's second EVA was an approximately 18 km loop conducted in a UPR, called the Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV), in 7 hr 36 min 56 s. The traverse was composed of 5 formal stations, plus 8 additional LRV stations where crew made brief scientific stops. In a scenario involving a SPR without suit ports, crew would go EVA through an airlock and probably be limited to a single EVA per day. In that case, crew could drive the SPR ~9 km from the landing site to station 2, go EVA, and complete station 2 tasks. However, to conduct station 3 tasks, the crew would then need to walk approximately 3 km to station 3, while ground control in Houston tele-robotically drives the LER to station 3. A walk of approximately 3 km is possible, as that is what the Apollo 14 crew did before LRVs were deployed, but it is a lengthy and potentially grueling EVA. Assuming crew completes station 3 tasks, they would likely need to re-enter the SPR, ending the day's EVA, and return to the landing site. They would not be able to walk the additional distances to stations 4 and 5 (the latter being about 6 km from station 3). Thus, crew in an SPR without suit ports would require two days to accomplish the same tasks Apollo 17 crew completed in a single day. If a future crew is involved in long duration traverses on the lunar surface, the deployment of a vehicle with suit ports would probably be a better solution.

Kring, David A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

VIPER Lunar Rover Agile Mission Systems

Agile development methods, which have gone from outlier to mainstream in software development, are poised to expand into all aspects of space mission development. Modern software development operates on a principle of continuous deployment, where progress is verified not with conventional metrics, but with a continuous build, available to key stakeholders, enabling direct examination of the state of the code base, and assessment of progress through demonstration of capability. Delivery times are measured in weeks, not months. Stakeholders are part of the process on an ongoing basis. The cost of change is comparatively low and requirements, which often are not precisely defined at the start of a project, may be iteratively refined in a series of agile development cycles. Agile methods are compatible with traditional system engineering methods and may be tailored to the space operations environment. The low cost of change and iterative development cycles of agile enable requirements to be defined as outcomes and constraints, with design details to be refined during the development cycle. We are now at a point where agile methods may be extended beyond software, to Mission Systems, including the Mission Operations System and the Ground Data System. For NASA’s VIPER Lunar Rover Mission, scheduled to land at a lunar pole in late 2023, we are developing the Mission System using agile methods. As in agile software, where the measure of progress is working code, in agile mission system development, the measure of capability is what we can demonstrate. Demonstrations over presentations. We demonstrate mission system capability using simulations. The concept of operations, from commanding, to driving the rover, to how we downlink images for evaluation for a near-real time command cycle, will be tested and proven in simulation, years before we begin the traditional simulation cycle for training. “Say it then simulate it.” We develop and refine our designs using simulations, with an emphasis on new components of the system that are not well known early. For example, the required duration of a mission planning cycle for a lunar surface asset such as VIPER, that operates twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, with continuous communications and a unique set of constraints based on the physics of the lunar poles and the line of site to Earth, is a unique problem in mission planning that is unlikely to be solved in a series of meetings. A small number of requirements specifying the outcomes may serve as the jumping off point to an agile development cycle, with demonstration in simulations. We have already demonstrated this process with simulations of rover driver decision time. VIPER is driven using near-real time command and control to waypoints. The driver decision time between waypoints is a fundamental enabling unit of productivity to accomplish the mission timeline. We have validated driver decision time in simulations of rover driving at the lunar South Pole, using the prototype mission tools for driving, command and control. The capability to develop and refine designs using simulations as part of agile Mission System development cycle changes the nature of team interactions, creating a focus on doing, rather than analyzing and documenting. Waterfall development cycles were, in part, a product of the significant cost of change in the early days of spaceflight. When the cost of change is high, it is vital to get your requirements right at the outset, because the system will be built to those specifications, and, when change is expensive, you better get it right early. However, modern technology has greatly lowered the cost of change, enabling iterative, rapid development cycles, in which key operations concepts may be tested and refined during development. Extending agile development to the Mission System for VIPER is a significant step in moving agile development methods for space operations beyond software, to the Mission System.

Agile↗