Results for “mission progress” — Page 66

NASA NTRS2011

GENIE Flight Test Results and System Overview

NASA has envisioned a suite of lander test vehicles that will be flown in Earth s atmosphere to incrementally demonstrate applicable lunar lander performance in the terrestrial environment. As each terrestrial rocket progresses in maturity, relevant space flight technology matures to a higher technology readiness level, preparing it for inclusion on a future lunar lander design.. NASA s "Project M" lunar mission concept flew its first terrestrial rocket, RR1, in June 2010 in Caddo Mills, Texas. The Draper Laboratory built GENIE (Guidance Embedded Navigator Integration Environment) successfully demonstrated accurate, real time, embedded performance of Project M navigation and guidance algorithms in a highly dynamic environment. The RR1 vehicle, built by Armadillo Aerospace, performed a successful 60 second free flight and gave the team great confidence in Project M s highly reliable and robust GNC system design and implementation. This paper provides an overview of the GENIE system and describes recent flight performance test results onboard the RR1 terrestrial rocket.

Brady, Tye↗

NASA NTRS2013

EDSN: A First Demonstration of a Distributed System of Nanosatellites

Edison Demonstration of SmallSat Networks (EDSN) is the first demonstration of a distributed system of nano-scale satellites to use intersatellite communication while working towards common science and technology goals. This unique mission configuration poses key technological challenges, including multi-satellite deployment, close proximity flight, cross-satellite communications, and simplified and effective operations. Tackling these challenges has required extensive development on EDSNs guidance navigation and control (GNC) and flight software systems. Although use of COTS component is common to the CubeSat community, it is prudent to point out that utilization of these components enables EDSN to accomplish its objectives at relatively low cost ($12M) in comparison to current multi-satellite missions capable of cross-link communications. EDSN is on cost and schedule with flight unit shipment in August 2013. This paper aims to update the community of EDSN's progress since SRR and speaks to the approach EDSN has taken to resolve some of the main issues revolving around a distributed system of nano-scale satellites.

Nanosatellite↗

NASA NTRS2010

An Operations Concept for Integrated Model-Centric Engineering at JPL

As JPL's missions grow more complex, the need for improved systems engineering processes is becoming clear. Of significant promise in this regard is the move toward a more integrated and model-centric approach to mission conception, design, implementation and operations. The Integrated Model-Centric Engineering (IMCE) Initiative, now underway at JPL, seeks to lay the groundwork for these improvements. This paper will report progress on three fronts: articulating JPL's need for IMCE; characterizing the enterprise into which IMCE capabilities will be deployed; and constructing an operations concept for a flight project development in an integrated model-centric environment.

Bayer, Todd J.↗

NASA NTRS2017

New Development in NASA's Rodent Research Hardware for Conducting Long Duration Biomedical and Basic Research in Space

Animal models, particularly rodents, are the foundation of pre-clinical research to understand human diseases and evaluate new therapeutics, and play a key role in advancing biomedical discoveries both on Earth and in space. The National Research Councils Decadal survey emphasized the importance of expanding NASAs life sciences research to perform long duration, rodent experiments on the International Space Station (ISS). To accomplish this objective, flight hardware, operations, and science capabilities were developed at NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) to enhance science return for both commercial (CASIS) and government-sponsored rodent research. The Rodent Research program at NASA ARC has pioneered a new research capability on the International Space Station and has progressed toward translating research to the ISS utilizing commercial rockets, collaborating with academia and science industry, while training crewmembers to assist in performing research on orbit. Throughout phases of these missions, our practices, hardware and operations have evolved from tested to developed standards, and we are able to modify and customize our procedure and operations for mission specific requirements. The Rodent Research Habitat is capable of providing a living environment for animals on ISS according to standard animal welfare requirements. Using the cameras in the Habitat, the Rodent Research team has the ability to perform daily health checks on animals, and further analyze the collected videos for behavioral studies. A recent development of the Rodent Research hardware is inclusion of enrichment, to provide the animals the ability to rest and huddle. The Enrichment Hut is designed carefully for adult mice (up to 35 week old) within animal welfare, engineering, and operations constraints. The Hut is made out of the same stainless steel mesh as the cage interior, it has an ingress and an egress to allow animals move freely, and a hinge door to allow crewmembers remove the animals easily. The Rodent Research team has also developed Live Animal Return (LAR) capability, which will be implemented during Rodent Research-5 mission for the first time. The animals will be transported from the Habitat to a Transporter, which will return on the Dragon capsule and splashes down in the Pacific Ocean. Once SpaceX retrieves the Dragon, all powered payloads will be transferred to a SeaVan and transferred to the Long Beach pier. The NASA team then receives the transporter and delivers to a PI-designated laboratory within 120 mile radius of Long Beach. This is a significant improvement allowing researchers to examine animals within 72 hrs. of reentry or to conduct recovery experiments. Together, the hardware improvements and experience that the Rodent Research team has gained working with principal investigators and ISS crew to conduct complex experiments on orbit are expanding capabilities for long duration rodent research on the ISS to achieve both basic science and biomedical objectives.

ISS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development Efforts and Status of Plume-Surface Interaction Capabilities for Propulsive Landing Systems

Rocket plume-surface interaction is a multi-phase problem characterized by plume flow physics, erosion physics, and ejecta dynamics. All propulsive landers will experience plume-surface interaction. The risks posed by such effects can vary greatly as a function of the local environment, lander concept of operations, configuration, and physical scale. Prior Lunar and Martian landers have overcome challenges posed by these environments, on the basis of scaled ground testing and subsequent flight experience, but the landing systems for present and future missions are planning to operate increasingly outside of NASA's current experience with plume-surface interaction. This presentation discusses the current efforts and status of activities within NASA to progress understanding of fundamental plume-surface interaction physics, the capability to predict resulting environments and effects, and the definition of implications for current and future Lunar and planetary landing systems.

Landing↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Effects of Replacing Treadmill Running with Alternative Exercise Countermeasures During Long-Duration Spaceflight

Introduction: Current exercise countermeasures on the International Space Station (ISS), including treadmill running, cycle ergometry, and resistive exercise, are used to protect crewmember health and performance during long-duration spaceflight. However, exploration vehicles for Artemis and beyond will have volume and power restrictions, requiring exercise hardware to have a smaller footprint and use fewer resources. Thus, recent efforts have focused on developing exercise devices (such as the European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device [E4D]) that provide both aerobic and resistive training on one platform without including a treadmill. It is critical to validate the efficacy of exploration-focused exercise modalities to preserve muscle strength, aerobic fitness, bone density, and sensorimotor performance. Thus, the aim of this study is to determine the physiological effects of spaceflight that occur with nominal ISS exercise prescriptions compared to exploration-forward exercise modalities to determine if a treadmill is required to maintain current levels of protection during long-duration missions. Methods: Crewmembers will be assigned to one of three groups: 1) Control Group (n ≥ 40), who will partake in nominal exercise on the ISS, including running on the Treadmill with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization 2 (T2), ergometry on the Cycle Ergometer with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization (CEVIS) device, and strength training on the Advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED); 2) Active Group 1, who will partake in CEVIS and ARED exercise only (n = 8); and 3) Active Group 2, who will partake in aerobic and resistive exercise on the E4D only (n = 8). For Active Group 1, nominal aerobic exercise on T2 will be replaced with corresponding exercise on CEVIS. For Active Group 2, a dedicated exercise prescription will be designed to maximize the capabilities of the E4D to include resistive exercise, cycle ergometry, rowing, and rope pulling. Crewmembers in both active groups will not be permitted to perform treadmill exercise. Health and performance markers including bone mineral density (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry [DXA]), body composition (DXA), cardiovascular fitness (cycle VO2peak), muscle strength and endurance (isometric/isokinetic testing, power endurance testing), sensorimotor performance (sit-to-stand, obstacle course), postural control (computerized dynamic posturography), Results: Eight subjects (2 Active [CEVIS + ARED], 6 Control) have been recruited for this study. Data collection is currently in progress. Conclusions: This study will assess the efficacy of exploration exercise modalities, including the effects of removing the treadmill exercise capability or of exclusively using the E4D, compared to nominal ISS exercise across an entire mission on bone, muscle, aerobic, and sensorimotor health and performance. Findings from this study will help provide a recommendation on whether these exploration exercise modalities can sufficiently protect against physiological deconditioning during spaceflight or whether a treadmill may be required to maintain current levels of protection during future exploration class spaceflight missions.

A.N. Varanoske↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Effects of Replacing Treadmill Running with Alternative Exercise Countermeasures During Long-Duration Spaceflight

Introduction: Current exercise countermeasures on the International Space Station (ISS), including treadmill running, cycle ergometry, and resistive exercise, are used to protect crewmember health and performance during long-duration spaceflight. However, exploration vehicles for Artemis and beyond will have volume and power restrictions, requiring exercise hardware to have a smaller footprint and use fewer resources. Thus, recent efforts have focused on developing exercise devices that provide both aerobic and resistive training on one platform without including a treadmill, such as the European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device (E4D). It is critical to validate the efficacy of exploration-focused exercise modalities to preserve muscle strength, aerobic fitness, bone density, and sensorimotor performance. Thus, the aim of this study is to determine the physiological effects of spaceflight that occur with nominal ISS exercise prescriptions compared to exploration-forward exercise modalities to determine if a treadmill is required to maintain current levels of protection during long-duration missions. Methods: Crewmembers will be assigned to one of three groups: 1) Control Group (n ≥ 40) who will partake in nominal exercise on the ISS, including running on the treadmill with vibration isolation system 2 (T2), ergometry on the cycle ergometer with vibration isolation and stabilization device (CEVIS), and strength training on the advanced resistive exercise device (ARED); 2) Active Group 1, who will partake in CEVIS and ARED exercise only (n = 8); and 3) Active Group 2, who will partake in aerobic and resistive exercise on the E4D only (n = 8). For Active Group 1, nominal aerobic exercise on T2 will be replaced with corresponding exercise on CEVIS. For Active Group 2, a dedicated exercise prescription will be designed to maximize the capabilities of the E4D to include resistive exercise, cycle ergometry, rowing, and rope pulling. Crewmembers in both active groups will not be permitted to perform treadmill exercise. Health and performance markers including bone mineral density (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry [DXA]), body composition (DXA), cardiovascular fitness (cycle VO2peak), muscle strength and endurance (isometric/isokinetic testing, power endurance testing), sensorimotor performance (sit-to-stand, obstacle course), postural control (computerized dynamic posturography), and blood and urine biochemical markers of bone metabolism will be assessed before, during, and following spaceflight. Results: Data collection for this study is currently in progress. Conclusions: This study will assess the efficacy of exploration exercise modalities, including the effects of removing the treadmill exercise capability or of exclusively using the E4D, compared to nominal ISS exercise across an entire mission on bone, muscle, aerobic, and sensorimotor health and performance. Findings from this study will help provide a recommendation on whether these exploration exercise modalities can sufficiently protect against physiological deconditioning during spaceflight or whether a treadmill may be required to maintain current levels of protection during future exploration class spaceflight missions.

A.N. Varanoske↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Effects of Replacing Treadmill Running with Alternative Exercise Countermeasures During Long-Duration Spaceflight

INTRODUCTION: Current exercise countermeasures on the International Space Station (ISS) include treadmill running, cycle ergometry, and resistive exercise, which are used to protect crewmember health and performance during long-duration spaceflight. However, exploration vehicles for Artemis and beyond will have volume and power restrictions, requiring exercise hardware to have a smaller footprint and use fewer resources. Thus, recent efforts have focused on developing exercise devices (such as the European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device [E4D]) that provide both aerobic and resistive training on one platform without including a treadmill. It is critical to validate the efficacy of exploration-focused exercise modalities to preserve muscle strength, aerobic fitness, bone density, and sensorimotor performance. Thus, the aim of this study is to determine the physiological effects of spaceflight that occur with nominal ISS exercise prescriptions compared to exploration-forward exercise modalities to determine if a treadmill is required to maintain current levels of protection during long-duration missions. METHODS: Crewmembers will be assigned to one of three groups: 1) Control Group (n ≥ 40), who will partake in nominal exercise on the ISS, including running on the Treadmill with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization 2 (T2), ergometry on the Cycle Ergometer with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization (CEVIS) device, and strength training on the Advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED); 2) Active Group 1, who will partake in CEVIS and ARED exercise only (n = 8); and 3) Active Group 2, who will partake in aerobic and resistive exercise on the E4D only (n = 8). For Active Group 1, nominal aerobic exercise on T2 will be replaced with corresponding exercise on CEVIS. For Active Group 2, a dedicated exercise prescription will be designed to maximize the capabilities of the E4D to include resistive exercise, cycle ergometry, rowing, and rope pulling. Crewmembers in both active groups will not be permitted to perform treadmill exercise. Health and performance markers including bone mineral density (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry [DXA]), body composition (DXA), cardiovascular fitness (cycle VO2peak), muscle strength and endurance (isometric/isokinetic testing, power endurance testing), sensorimotor performance (sit-to-stand, obstacle course), postural control (computerized dynamic posturography), and blood and urine biochemical markers of bone metabolism will be assessed before, during, and following spaceflight. RESULTS: Thirteen subjects (3 Active [CEVIS + ARED], 10 Control) have been recruited for this study. Data collection is currently in progress. CONCLUSIONS: This study will assess the efficacy of exploration exercise modalities, including the effects of removing the treadmill exercise capability or of exclusively using the E4D, compared to nominal ISS exercise across an entire mission on bone, muscle, aerobic, and sensorimotor health and performance. Findings from this study will help provide a recommendation on whether these exploration exercise modalities can sufficiently protect against physiological deconditioning during spaceflight or whether a treadmill may be required to maintain current levels of protection during future exploration class spaceflight missions.

A.N. Varanoske↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Effects of Replacing Treadmill Running with Alternative Exercise Countermeasures During Long-Duration Spaceflight

INTRODUCTION: Current exercise countermeasures on the International Space Station (ISS) include treadmill running, cycle ergometry, and resistive exercise, which are used to protect crewmember health and performance during long-duration spaceflight. However, exploration vehicles for Artemis and beyond will have volume and power restrictions, requiring exercise hardware to have a smaller footprint and use fewer resources. Thus, recent efforts have focused on developing exercise devices (such as the European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device [E4D]) that provide both aerobic and resistive training on one platform without including a treadmill. It is critical to validate the efficacy of exploration-focused exercise modalities to preserve muscle strength, aerobic fitness, bone density, and sensorimotor performance. Thus, the aim of this study is to determine the physiological effects of spaceflight that occur with nominal ISS exercise prescriptions compared to exploration-forward exercise modalities to determine if a treadmill is required to maintain current levels of protection during long-duration missions. METHODS: Crewmembers will be assigned to one of three groups: 1) Control Group (n ≥ 40), who will partake in nominal exercise on the ISS, including running on the Treadmill with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization 2 (T2), ergometry on the Cycle Ergometer with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization (CEVIS) device, and strength training on the Advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED); 2) Active Group 1, who will partake in CEVIS and ARED exercise only (n = 8); and 3) Active Group 2, who will partake in aerobic and resistive exercise on the E4D only (n = 8). For Active Group 1, nominal aerobic exercise on T2 will be replaced with corresponding exercise on CEVIS. For Active Group 2, a dedicated exercise prescription will be designed to maximize the capabilities of the E4D to include resistive exercise, cycle ergometry, rowing, and rope pulling. Crewmembers in both active groups will not be permitted to perform treadmill exercise. Health and performance markers including bone mineral density (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry [DXA]), body composition (DXA), cardiovascular fitness (cycle VO2peak), muscle strength and endurance (isometric/isokinetic testing, power endurance testing), sensorimotor performance (sit-to-stand, obstacle course), postural control (computerized dynamic posturography), and blood and urine biochemical markers of bone metabolism will be assessed before, during, and following spaceflight. RESULTS: Thirteen subjects (3 Active [CEVIS + ARED], 10 Control) have been recruited for this study. Data collection is currently in progress. CONCLUSIONS: This study will assess the efficacy of exploration exercise modalities, including the effects of removing the treadmill exercise capability or of exclusively using the E4D, compared to nominal ISS exercise across an entire mission on bone, muscle, aerobic, and sensorimotor health and performance. Findings from this study will help provide a recommendation on whether these exploration exercise modalities can sufficiently protect against physiological deconditioning during spaceflight or whether a treadmill may be required to maintain current levels of protection during future exploration class spaceflight missions.

A.N. Varanoske↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Update on NASA’s ISRU Development and Mission Plans for the Artemis Program

In 2017, NASA initiated the Artemis program to send astronauts back to the lunar surface, create a sustainable human lunar exploration program, and lead the first human exploration mission to the Mars surface. While much of NASA’s plans for the Artemis program currently focus on the Human Lunar Return and the ability for astronauts to explore the lunar surface for limited durations each year, the longer-term vision for the Artemis program is to enable sustained human exploration and commercial operations in cis-lunar space and the lunar surface. An important aspect of achieving this long-term vision, is to better understand and characterize the resources on the Moon and Mars and learn how to extract and use these resources. Known as In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), the identification, mapping, extraction, and processing of space resources has the potential to greatly reduce the cost and risk of human exploration. These are achieved by reducing what needs to be delivered from Earth and the dependency on these supplies, lowering costs through commercial operations, and expanding infrastructure for safer and more capable exploration and surface operations. To guide development of ISRU technologies and systems on the ground and demonstrate these capabilities on the Moon and Mars, the NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) created and released the ISRU Envisioned Future Priorities (EFP) strategic plan in 2022 and updated it in 2023. While lunar ISRU technology development had already started, these publicly released strategic plans have been used to guide and prioritize technology development, and assess the progress in achieving the vision. Since the release of the ISRU EFP, there have been several significant activities/events that have occurred with respect to human lunar exploration, surface infrastructure, and ISRU. One was the release of the Artemis Architecture Definition Document Revision 1 that included ISRU as a sub-architecture. The second was the release of several STMD solicitations including the Announcement of Collaborative Opportunities (ACO) and Tipping Point (TP). The third was the release of a Request for Information for the Lunar Infrastructure Foundational Technology-1 (LIFT-1) mission with the primary objective of extracting oxygen from lunar regolith. The fourth was the release of STMD technology and capability Shortfalls, and the review, ranking by numerous stakeholders and individuals, and subsequent prioritization of the Shortfalls that will be utilized in future solicitation and development plans. This paper will provide an overview and status of on-going technology and system development activities, an update of ISRU into the Artemis campaign, an update on ISRU-related mission, and the impacts of the Shortfall prioritization.

NASA↗

NASA NTRS2001

The AstroBiology Explorer (ABE) MIDEX Mission Concept

The Astrobiology Explorer (ABE) is a MIDEX mission concept under study at NASA's Ames Research Center in collaboration with Ball Aerospace & Technologies, Corp. ABE will conduct IR spectroscopic observations to address important problems in astrobiology, astrochemistry, and astrophysics. The core observational program would make fundamental scientific progress in understanding the distribution, identity, and evolution of ices and organic matter in dense molecular clouds, young forming stellar systems, stellar outflows, the general diffuse ISM, HII regions, Solar System bodies, and external galaxies. The ABE instrument concept includes a 0.6 m aperture Cassegrain telescope and two moderate resolution (R = 2000-3000) spectrographs covering the 2.5-16 micron spectral region. Large format (1024x 1024 pixel or larger) IR detector arrays and bandpass filters will allow each spectrograph to cover an entire octave of spectral range or more per exposure without any moving parts. The telescope will be cooled below 50K by a cryogenic dewar shielded by a sunshade. The detectors will be cooled to approximately 8K. The optimum orbital configuration for achieving the scientific objectives of the ABE mission is a low background, 1 AU Earth driftaway orbit requiring a Delta II launch vehicle. This configuration provides a low thermal background and allows adequate communications bandwidth and good access to the entire sky over the approximate 1-2 year mission lifetime.

Ennico, Kimberly↗

NASA NTRS2006

NASA Exploration Launch Projects Overview: The Crew Launch Vehicle and the Cargo Launch Vehicle Systems

The U.S. Vision for Space Exploration (January 2004) serves as the foundation for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) strategic goals and objectives. As the NASA Administrator outlined during his confirmation hearing in April 2005, these include: 1) Flying the Space Shuttle as safely as possible until its retirement, not later than 2010. 2) Bringing a new Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) into service as soon as possible after Shuttle retirement. 3) Developing a balanced overall program of science, exploration, and aeronautics at NASA, consistent with the redirection of the human space flight program to focus on exploration. 4) Completing the International Space Station (ISS) in a manner consistent with international partner commitments and the needs of human exploration. 5) Encouraging the pursuit of appropriate partnerships with the emerging commercial space sector. 6) Establishing a lunar return program having the maximum possible utility for later missions to Mars and other destinations. In spring 2005, the Agency commissioned a team of aerospace subject matter experts to perform the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS). The ESAS team performed in-depth evaluations of a number of space transportation architectures and provided recommendations based on their findings? The ESAS analysis focused on a human-rated Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) for astronaut transport and a heavy lift Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) to carry equipment, materials, and supplies for lunar missions and, later, the first human journeys to Mars. After several months of intense study utilizing safety and reliability, technical performance, budget, and schedule figures of merit in relation to design reference missions, the ESAS design options were unveiled in summer 2005. As part of NASA's systems engineering approach, these point of departure architectures have been refined through trade studies during the ongoing design phase leading to the development phase that begins in 2008. Comprehensive reviews of engineering data and business assessments by both internal and independent reviewers serve as decision gates to ensure that systems can fully meet customer and stakeholder requirements. This paper provides the current CLV and CaLV configuration designs and gives examples of the progress being made during the first year of this significant effort. Safe, reliable, cost-effective space transportation systems are a foundational piece of America s future in space and the next step in realizing the plan for revitalizing lunar capabilities on the passageway to the human exploration of Mars. While building on legacy knowledge and heritage hardware for risk reduction, NASA will apply lessons learned from developing these new launch vehicles to the growth path for future missions. The elements for mission success and continued U.S. leadership in space have been assembled over the past year. As NASA designs and develops these two new systems over the next dozen years, visible progress, such as that reported in this paper, may sustain the national will to stay the course across political administrations and weather the inevitable trials that will be experienced during this challenging endeavor.

Snoddy, Jimmy R.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Aircraft Turbine Engine Control Research at NASA Glenn Research Center

This lecture will provide an overview of the aircraft turbine engine control research at NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Glenn Research Center (GRC). A brief introduction to the engine control problem is first provided with a description of the current state-of-the-art control law structure. A historical aspect of engine control development since the 1940s is then provided with a special emphasis on the contributions of GRC. The traditional engine control problem has been to provide a means to safely transition the engine from one steady-state operating point to another based on the pilot throttle inputs. With the increased emphasis on aircraft safety, enhanced performance and affordability, and the need to reduce the environmental impact of aircraft, there are many new challenges being faced by the designers of aircraft propulsion systems. The Controls and Dynamics Branch (CDB) at GRC is leading and participating in various projects in partnership with other organizations within GRC and across NASA, other government agencies, the U.S. aerospace industry, and academia to develop advanced propulsion controls and diagnostics technologies that will help meet the challenging goals of NASA programs under the Aeronautics Research Mission. The second part of the lecture provides an overview of the various CDB technology development activities in aircraft engine control and diagnostics, both current and some accomplished in the recent past. The motivation for each of the research efforts, the research approach, technical challenges and the key progress to date are summarized. The technologies to be discussed include system level engine control concepts, gas path diagnostics, active component control, and distributed engine control architecture. The lecture will end with a futuristic perspective of how the various current technology developments will lead to an Intelligent and Autonomous Propulsion System requiring none to very minimum pilot interface, interfacing directly with the flight management system to determine its mode of operation, and providing personalized engine control to optimize its performance given the current condition and mission objectives.

Propulsion↗

NASA NTRS2014

Air Breathing Propulsion Controls and Diagnostics Research at NASA Glenn Under NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Programs

This lecture will provide an overview of the aircraft turbine engine control research at NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Glenn Research Center (GRC). A brief introduction to the engine control problem is first provided with a description of the current state-of-the-art control law structure. A historical aspect of engine control development since the 1940s is then provided with a special emphasis on the contributions of GRC. The traditional engine control problem has been to provide a means to safely transition the engine from one steady-state operating point to another based on the pilot throttle inputs. With the increased emphasis on aircraft safety, enhanced performance and affordability, and the need to reduce the environmental impact of aircraft, there are many new challenges being faced by the designers of aircraft propulsion systems. The Controls and Dynamics Branch (CDB) at GRC is leading and participating in various projects in partnership with other organizations within GRC and across NASA, other government agencies, the U.S. aerospace industry, and academia to develop advanced propulsion controls and diagnostics technologies that will help meet the challenging goals of NASA programs under the Aeronautics Research Mission. The second part of the lecture provides an overview of the various CDB technology development activities in aircraft engine control and diagnostics, both current and some accomplished in the recent past. The motivation for each of the research efforts, the research approach, technical challenges and the key progress to date are summarized. The technologies to be discussed include system level engine control concepts, gas path diagnostics, active component control, and distributed engine control architecture. The lecture will end with a futuristic perspective of how the various current technology developments will lead to an Intelligent and Autonomous Propulsion System requiring none to very minimum pilot interface, interfacing directly with the flight management system to determine its mode of operation, and providing personalized engine control to optimize its performance given the current condition and mission objectives.

Engine Control↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway Program Development Progress

This paper provides an overview and status of Gateway, humanity’s first space station to orbit the Moon providing vital support for a sustained, long-term human return to the lunar surface and a steppingstone to Mars as part of the Artemis missions. As a lunar outpost, Gateway is a destination for deep space crew expeditions and science investigations, a port for deep space transportation, including landers transiting to the lunar surface or spacecraft embarking to deep space destinations beyond the Earth-Moon system. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) leads the Program and is the integrator of the spaceflight capabilities and contributions of U.S. commercial partners and international partners to develop Gateway. This paper will provide an overview of Gateway’s major components in various stages of development. The entire Gateway spacecraft is at preliminary design level of maturity, with some components at or near critical design review. Gateway’s major components are the Power and Propulsion Element; the Habitation and Logistics Outpost; Deep Space Logistics; the International Habitation module; Gateway External Robotics System; European System Providing Refueling, Infrastructure and Telecommunications; and an Airlock. This paper will also provide an update on the status of the integration activities necessary to fly and operate this complex, next-generation integrated spacecraft for a minimum 15 year design life, including systems engineering integrated analysis cycles, the autonomous Vehicle System Manager software, verification and validation labs, and common vehicle equipment. Expanding on the successful partnership that has provided over 20 years of continuous crew operations in low-Earth orbit on the International Space Station, Gateway is an evolution of this extraordinary partnership leveraging the capabilities of each contributor to expand humankind’s sustained exploration deeper into the cosmos. Highlighting the international program with participation from multiple space agencies, this paper will also provide a status of Gateway multilateral governance structure and international agreements.

Sean M Fuller↗

NASA NTRS2024

Gateway Program Development Progress

This paper provides an overview and status of Gateway, humanity’s first space station to orbit the Moon providing vital support for a sustained, long-term human return to the lunar surface and a steppingstone to Mars as part of the Artemis missions. As a lunar outpost, Gateway is a destination for deep space crew expeditions and science investigations, a port for deep space transportation, including landers transiting to the lunar surface or spacecraft embarking to deep space destinations beyond the Earth-Moon system. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) leads the Program and is the integrator of the spaceflight capabilities and contributions of U.S. commercial partners and international partners to develop Gateway. This paper will provide an overview of Gateway’s major components in various stages of development. The entire Gateway spacecraft is at preliminary design level of maturity, with some components at or near critical design review. Gateway’s major components are the Power and Propulsion Element; the Habitation and Logistics Outpost; Deep Space Logistics; the International Habitation module; Gateway External Robotics System; European System Providing Refueling, Infrastructure and Telecommunications; and an Airlock. This paper will also provide an update on the status of the integration activities necessary to fly and operate this complex, next-generation integrated spacecraft for a minimum 15-year design life, including systems engineering integrated analysis cycles, the autonomous Vehicle System Manager software, verification and validation labs, and common vehicle equipment. Expanding on the successful partnership that has provided over 20 years of continuous crew operations in low-Earth orbit on the International Space Station, Gateway is an evolution of this extraordinary partnership leveraging the capabilities of each contributor to expand humankind’s sustained exploration deeper into the cosmos. Highlighting the international program with participation from multiple space agencies, this paper will also provide a status of Gateway multilateral governance structure and international agreements.

Gateway↗

NASA NTRS2005

Learning Lessons from the X-37 Project

The X-37 was planned as an automated vehicle capable of flight-testing new aerospace technologies in combined environments that are beyond the capability of existing ground or flight platforms. Flight demonstration with the X-37 architecture and configuration in relevant environments was planned to reduce the risk of developing launch vehicle technologies for sustainable, affordable exploration and other aerospace applications. Current plans are for the X-37 Approach and Landing Test Vehicle (ALTV) to be atmospheric tested in 2005 from Scaled Composite's White Knight carrier aircraft at up to 40,000 feet over California's Mojave Spaceport, with and turnaround maintenance performed. The fight Operations Control Center will conduct the mission, using a streamlined operations concept. Taxi-tow and captive-carry tests will be conducted prior to the atmospheric-test series. Sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) with NASA participation, technical objectives are to: (1) mature Computed Air Data System/Remote Pressure Sensor technology, (2) manage energy during Terminal Area Energy Management/Heading Alignment Cone maneuvers, and (3) validate the aerodatabase. The X-37 Project began in 1999 under a cooperative agreement as an element of NASA's Future X Program and transitioned to a NASA Research Announcement under the Space Launch Initiative. In mid-2004, NASA transferred ownership to DARPA, with its heritage of performing high-risk, high-payoff research and development. NASA contributes technical expertise, including risk analysis and system integration. The Boeing Company is the prime contractor, with nationwide suppliers. This recent partnership exemplifies the synergy attainable when NASA Centers, other Government agencies, and industry work together toward a common goal - contributing to the knowledge base for U.S. exploration and other aerospace endeavors. The X-37 team represents a range of space transportation disciplines - from engineering to management. Some members have been with the project since its inception. All have gained priceless experience during the design, manufacturing, and testing of the ALTV, as well as through developing advanced orbital flight technologies, such as state-of-the-art Thermal Protection Systems and hot structures. Throughout this process, the X-37 Project team captures lessons that are directly applicable to other such efforts. The upcoming ALTV flights offer another dimension of data and first-hand experience that will prove invaluable to those designing new generations of reusable spacecraft. And ongoing technology developments will expand the aerospace knowledge base. Delivering prototype hardware is always a risky proposition. During the course of the X-37 effort, the team has experienced many challenging opportunities, delivering significant accomplishments and learning numerous lessons in the process. The ability to manage the risk landscape is key to overcoming obstacles, especially technical hurdles that are encountered in progressing hardware from design to flight. The approach to managing risk under this partnership is evolving but, in general, the team allocates resources to reduce the likelihood of severe-consequence risks, thus maximizing mission success and ensuring that the X-37 Project delivers value to its stakeholders. As the team sharpens its focus on operations, it continues to contribute knowledge to those who would undertake high-risk, high-payoff research and development and provides valuable experience to implement the exploration vision.

Turner, Susan↗

NASA NTRS2005

Learning Lessons from the X-37 Project

The X-37 was planned as an automated vehicle capable of flight-testing new aerospace technologies in combined environments that are beyond the capability of existing ground or flight platforms. Flight demonstration with the X-37 architecture and configuration in relevant environments was planned to reduce the risk of developing launch vehicle technologies for sustainable, affordable exploration and other aerospace applications. Current plans are for the X-37 Approach and Landing Test Vehicle (ALTV) to be atmospheric tested in 2005 from Scaled Composite s White Knight carrier aircraft at up to 40,000 feet over California's Mojave Spaceport, with landing and turnaround maintenance performed. The Flight Operations Control Center will conduct the mission, using a streamlined operations concept. Taxi-tow and captive-carry tests will be conducted prior to the atmospheric-test series. Sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) with NASA participation, technical objectives are to: (1) mature Computed Air Data System/Remote Pressure Sensor technology, (2) manage energy during Terminal Area Energy Management/Heading Alignment Cone maneuvers, and (3) validate the aerodatabase. The X-37 Project began in 1999 under a cooperative agreement as an element of NASA's Future X Program and transitioned to a NASA Research Announcement under the Space Launch Initiative. In mid-2004, NASA transferred ownership to DARPA, with its heritage of performing high-risk, high-payoff research and development (R&D). NASA contributes technical expertise, including risk analysis and system integration. The Boeing Company is the prime contractor, with nationwide suppliers. This partnership exemplifies the synergy attainable when NASA Centers, other Government agencies, and industry work together toward a common goal - contributing to the knowledge base for U.S. exploration and other aerospace endeavors. The X-37 team represents a range of space transportation disciplines - from engineering to management. Some members have been with the project since its inception. All have gained priceless experience during the design, manufacturing, and testing of the ALTV, as well as through developing advanced orbital flight technologies, such as state-of-the-art Thermal Protection Systems and hot structures. Throughout this process, the X-37 Project team captures lessons that are directly applicable to other such efforts. The upcoming ALTV flights offer another dimension of data and first-hand experience that will prove invaluable to those designing new generations of reusable spacecraft. And ongoing technology developments will expand the aerospace knowledge base. Delivering prototype hardware is always a risky proposition. During the course of this effort, the X-37 team has experienced many challenging opportunities, delivering significant accomplishments and learning numerous lessons in the process. The ability to manage the risk landscape is key to overcoming obstacles, especially technical hurdles that are encountered in progressing hardware from design to flight. The approach to managing risk under this partnership is evolving but, in general, the team allocates resources to reduce the likelihood of severe-consequence risks, thus maximizing mission success and ensuring that the X-37 Project delivers value to its stakeholders. As the team sharpens its focus on operations, it continues to contribute knowledge to those who would undertake high-risk, high-payoff R&D and provides valuable experience to implement the Vision for Space Exploration.

Turner, Susan↗