Incorporation of Uncertainties in the Mars Science Laboratory Rover Loads Analysis
No abstract available
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
No abstract available
No abstract available
A key element of space nuclear power systems is the energy conversion subsystem that converts the nuclear heat into electrical power. Nuclear systems provide a favorable option for missions that require long-duration power in hostile space environments where sunlight for solar power is absent or limited. There are two primary nuclear power technology options. Radioisotope Power System (RPS) utilize the natural decay heat from Pu238 to generate electric power levels up to about one kilowatt. Fission Power System (FPS) rely on a sustained fission reaction of U235 and offer the potential to supply electric power from kilowatts to megawatts. Example missions for nuclear power include Mars science rovers (e.g. Curiosity, Mars 2020), lunar and Mars surface landers ? including crewed missions, deep space planetary orbiters, Ocean World science landers, and robotic space probes that utilize nuclear electric propulsion. This paper examines the energy conversion technology options that can be used with RPS and FPS, and provides an assessment of their relative performance and technology readiness.
A key element of space nuclear power systems is the energy conversion subsystem that converts the nuclear heat into electrical power. Nuclear systems provide a favorable option for missions that require long-duration power in hostile space environments where sunlight for solar power is absent or limited. There are two primary nuclear power technology options: (1) radioisotope power systems (RPSs) utilize the natural decay heat from 238Pu to generate electric power levels up to about 1 kW and (2) fission power systems (FPSs) rely on a sustained fission reaction of 235U and offer the potential to supply electric power from kilowatts to megawatts. Example missions utilizing nuclear power include Mars science rovers (e.g., Curiosity, Mars 2020), lunar and Mars surface landers, crewed surface outposts, deep space planetary orbiters, Ocean World science landers, and robotic space probes that utilize nuclear electric propulsion. This report examines the energy conversion technology options that can be used with RPSs and FPSs, and provides an assessment of their relative performance.
Risk management advocates have long sought to directly influence the early stages of the systems engineering process through a more effective role in system design trade studies. The principal obstacle to this has been the lack of credible ways to represent and quantify mission risk—that is, a combination of the probability of mission success (“system safety”) and science value—for the project manager and the rest of the design team. If it were possible to quantify mission risk, then the effects of proposed mission and system design changes could be calculated, and along with life-cycle costs, could be used to explore the design space more extensively and select better designs. JPL has been working to build the capability to quantify the probability of mission success using a federation of diverse simulations and models, each of which contributes some vital piece of the puzzle. The initial institutional focus has been on Mars surface operations. This ensemble computing framework enables the diverse models and simulations to work together seamlessly. Recent work at JPL has demonstrated the capability to exercise this ensemble from end-to-end using an Oracle-based database to automatically move results from one model/simulation to the next stage in the analysis.
The Mars Entry, Descent, and Landing Instrumentation (MEDLI2) sensor suite collected data during entry of the Mars 2020 Perseverance rover into Mars’ atmosphere. This suite included a network of MEDLI2 Instrumented Sensor Plugs (MISPs). Each MISP was comprised of a cylinder made of Thermal Protection System (TPS) material with 1-3 embedded thermocouples (TCs), and it was flush mounted into the heatshield or backshell. Data from these in-depth TCs were used to reconstruct the aeroheating environment of the vehicle throughout entry. Surface heating was posed as an inverse problem, with the goal of estimating the surface heating by minimizing an objective function of the difference between MISP temperature measurements during flight and the temperature predictions derived from the Fully Implicit Ablation and Thermal response (FIAT) program. Given an aerothermal environment, FIAT calculates the material response and provides in-depth temperatures throughout the TPS material. To achieve the reverse, an internal tool called FIAT_Opt runs through multiple different environments until the output temperature at the TC depth closely matches the flight data. 95% confidence intervals on the reconstructed surface heating were obtained using Monte Carlo analysis, in which uncertainties in the thermocouple depth and the TPS material properties (e.g., density, thermal conductivity, heat capacity, emissivity) based on flight-lot material testing were included. A variance decomposition method using Sobol indices was employed to assess the sensitivity of the reconstructed peak heating to the TC placement and material property uncertainties. Variance decomposition was found to require tens of thousands of FIAT_Opt runs in order for the Sobol indices to converge. With a single FIAT_Opt run taking on the order of 40 minutes, the required number of computations would take months to complete, even if using multiple CPUs. To mitigate this problem, three machine learning models (ridge regression with cross-validation, random forest regression, and a deep neural network) were trained and tested using the 2000 Monte Carlo runs that were already completed. A subset of 1600 runs were used to train the model (i.e., training set), while the remaining 400 runs were used as the test set. The predictions from the deep neural network (DNN) on the test set showed nearly perfect agreement to the actual values computed with FIAT_Opt (R2 > 0.99). Using the DNN as a surrogate model, the variance decomposition using 50,000 runs was completed within minutes. The resulting Sobol indices showed that the reconstructed peak surface heating was most sensitive to the uncertainties in the thermal conductivity (ST = 0.37) and heat capacity (ST = 0.26). This method can be leveraged to provide requirements for material property measurements needed to improve the accuracy of surface heating prediction and ultimately lead to the reduction of design margins in the future. This presentation will include background on the MEDLI2 suite; the method used for inverse heating estimation; the way that material property uncertainties were accounted for using Monte Carlo analysis; a brief background on variance decomposition; the motivation for using machine learning in this context; how a neural network was trained on the data to enable variance decomposition in a fraction of the time; and the variance decomposition results for one of the MISPs.
No abstract provided
No abstract provided
No abstract provided
No abstract provided
No abstract provided
No abstract provided
The Mars Entry, Descent, and Landing Instrumentation (MEDLI2) sensor suite collected data during entry of the Mars 2020 Perseverance rover into Mars’ atmosphere. An inverse estimation of the backshell and heatshield surface aeroheating was performed, using the data from the MEDLI2 Instrumented Sensor Plugs, a network of thermocouples embedded within the thermal protection system across the aeroshell. Monte Carlo analysis was conducted to assess the sensitivity of the surface heat rate, temperature, and heat load to uncertainties in thermocouple depth and material properties. In this paper, a variance decomposition method using Sobol indices was employed to understand the relative contributions of each uncertainty parameter. Performing this analysis using results from the inverse analysis tool FIAT_Opt was found to require incredibly high computation time, and thus machine learning models were trained and evaluated as a surrogate model for FIAT_Opt. This paper demonstrates that machine learning models can be an efficient, accurate alternative to state-of-the-art inverse analysis tools like FIAT_Opt, especially for computationally-expensive processes. Using these models, the sensitivity analysis showed that uncertainties in heat capacity and thermal conductivity were the main drivers for the overall uncertainty in peak reconstructed heating and heat load.
No abstract provided
No abstract provided