Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “space systems”

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.

At least 127 records · Page 7

Going beyond reliability to robustness and resilience in space systems

The words reliability, robustness, and resilience, are often used interchangeably to describe tough and dependable systems but the distinctions between them suggest how to design more serviceable space systems. Reliability is simply the quality of consistently performing well. A system that dependably meets its design requirements in the specified environments is reliable. The designers may not consider themselves responsible for failures under unanticipated conditions. Robustness is the capability of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions, which can go beyond the expected range to include possible off-nominal conditions. Resilience is the ability to recover from or adapt to damaging events, such as failures, accidents, external disruptions, and repurposing. Such changes are usually unanticipated. They often invalidate the usual operating assumptions and cause system failure. Reliability, robustness, and resilience describe dependable performance under increasingly difficult conditions, first the specified environment, then a wider possible environment, and finally unanticipated damaging events. These three are increasingly desirable and increasingly difficult to achieve. Engineering for resilience would design systems that can ignore or repair failures, survive accidents, and recover from disruptions. Increasing the resilience of space systems, the ability to perform after unanticipated events, would greatly increase space crew safety. Improving reliability and robustness can be done by dealing with known sources of problems, but improving resilience requires implementing a general approach to reducing the impact of unknown future events. Two contrasting approaches are reducing system complexity and adding supervisory control. The need for resilience has been claimed for decades but little has been accomplished. Systems designers assume that they understand requirements, technologies, designs, architectures, integration, testing, operations, and environments. The potential problems of changes, failures, accidents, unknown environments, and unknown unknowns are ignored. Systems designers are typically overconfident and ignore the need for robustness and resilience.

Harry W Jones↗

OAST planning model for space systems technology

The NASA Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST) planning model for space systems technology is described, and some space technology forecasts of a general nature are reported. Technology forecasts are presented as a span of technology levels; uncertainties in level of commitment to project and in required time are taken into account, with emphasis on differences resulting from high or low commitment. Forecasts are created by combining several types of data, including information on past technology trends, the trends of past predictions, the rate of advancement predicted by experts in the field, and technology forecasts already published.

Sadin, S. R.↗

Space system production cost benefits from contemporary philosophies in management and manufacturing

The cost of manufacturing space system hardware has always been expensive. The Engineering Cost Group of the Program Planning office at Marshall is attempting to account for cost savings that result from new technologies in manufacturing and management. The objective is to identify and define contemporary philosophies in manufacturing and management. The seven broad categories that make up the areas where technological advances can assist in reducing space system costs are illustrated. Included within these broad categories is a list of the processes or techniques that specifically provide the cost savings within todays design, test, production and operations environments. The processes and techniques listed achieve savings in the following manner: increased productivity; reduced down time; reduced scrap; reduced rework; reduced man hours; and reduced material costs. In addition, it should be noted that cost savings from production and processing improvements effect 20 to 40 pct. of production costs whereas savings from management improvements effects 60 to 80 of production cost. This is important because most efforts in reducing costs are spent trying to reduce cost in the production.

Rosmait, Russell L.↗

Operational environments for electrical power wiring on NASA space systems

Electrical wiring systems are used extensively on NASA space systems for power management and distribution, control and command, and data transmission. The reliability of these systems when exposed to the harsh environments of space is very critical to mission success and crew safety. Failures have been reported both on the ground and in flight due to arc tracking in the wiring harnesses, made possible by insulation degradation. This report was written as part of a NASA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (Code Q) program to identify and characterize wiring systems in terms of their potential use in aerospace vehicles. The goal of the program is to provide the information and guidance needed to develop and qualify reliable, safe, lightweight wiring systems, which are resistant to arc tracking and suitable for use in space power applications. This report identifies the environments in which NASA spacecraft will operate, and determines the specific NASA testing requirements. A summary of related test programs is also given in this report. This data will be valuable to spacecraft designers in determining the best wiring constructions for the various NASA applications.

Stavnes, Mark W.↗

IC and Component Selection for Space Systems

This viewgraph presentation reviews the integrated circuit (IC) and selections of the IC components for space systems. Included in the discussion are a overview of semiconductors and the evolution of integrated circuit. It also reviews the three different viewpoints of the IC selection: technical, programmatic, and risk. From a radiation perspective there are four criteria for selecting ICs for space systems: guaranteed hardness, historical ground-based data, historical flight usage, and unknown assurance.

Label, Kenneth A.↗

Capabilities in large space systems construction

Orbital construction, demonstration, space construction system analysis, solar power satellite, and space operations are reviewed. Satellite services, holding and positioning aids, and space construction experiments are discussed.

Crum, E. M.↗

The 1980 Large space systems technology. Volume 2: Base technology

Technology pertinent to large antenna systems, technology related to large space platform systems, and base technology applicable to both antenna and platform systems are discussed. Design studies, structural testing results, and theoretical applications are presented with accompanying validation data. A total systems approach including controls, platforms, and antennas is presented as a cohesive, programmatic plan for large space systems.

Kopriver, F., III↗

Integrated analysis capability for large space systems

The development of an integrated analysis computer program capable of performing the conceptual/preliminary structural system design analysis of large space systems is addressed. The integrated analysis capability (IAC) specifications include thermal/structural/controls integration, an emphasis on existing software and interactive graphics and I/O, a project size capability of 1 to 50 users (1 to 5 users concurrent), and the use of the FORTRAN '77 language. The advantages of the DISCOS and NASTRAN computer programs to the IAC are outlined and recommendations for other programs are made. Barriers to the development of the system arising from the interdisciplinary data flow are defined.

Vos, R. G.↗

Auxiliary propulsion requirements for large space systems

An insight into auxiliary propulsion systems (APS) requirements for large space systems (LSS) launchable by a single shuttle is presented. In an effort to scope the APS requirements for LSS, a set of generic LSSs were defined. For each generic LSS class a specific structural configuration, representative of that most likely to serve the needs of the 1980's and 1990's was defined. The environmental disturbance forces and torques which would be acting on each specific structural configuration in LEO and GEO orbits were then determined. Auxiliary propulsion requirements were determined as a function of: generic class specific configuration, size and openness of structure, orbit, angle of orientation, correction frequency, duty cycle, number and location of thrusters and direction of thrusters and APS/LSS interactions. The results of this analysis were used to define the APS characteristics of: (1) number and distribution of thrusters, (2) thruster modulation, (3) thrust level, (4) mission energy requirements, (5) total APS mass component breakdown, and (6) state of the art adequacy/deficiency.

Maloy, J. E.↗

Auxiliary propulsion requirements for large space systems

An insight into auxiliary propulsion systems (APS) requirements for large space systems (LSS) launchable by a single shuttle is presented. In an effort to scope the APS requirements for LSS, a set of generic LSSs were defined. For each generic LSS class a specific structural configuration, representative of that most likely to serve the needs of the 1980's and 1990's was defined. The environmental disturbance forces and torques which would be acting on each specific structural configuration in LEO and GEO orbits were then determined. Auxiliary propulsion requirements were determined as a function of: generic class specific configuration, size and openness of structure, orbit, angle of orientation, correction frequency, duty cycle, number and location of thrusters and direction of thrusters and APS/LSS interactions. The results of this analysis were used to define the APS characteristics of: (1) number and distribution of thrusters, (2) thruster modulation, (3) thrust level, (4) mission energy requirements, (5) total APS mass component breakdown, and (6) state of the art adequacy/deficiency. Previously announced in STAR as N83-26922

Maloy, J. E.↗

Study of auxiliary propulsion requirements for large space systems. Volume 1: Executive summary

An insight into auxiliary propulsion systems (APS) requirements for large space systems (LSS) launchable by a single shuttle is presented. In an effort to scope the APS requirements for LSS, a set of generic LSSs were defined. For each generic LSS class a specific structural configuration, representative of that most likely to serve the needs of the 1980's and 1990's was defined. The environmental disturbance forces and torques which would be acting on each specific structural configuration in LEO and GEO orbits were then determined. Auxiliary propulsion requirements were determined as a function of: generic class specific configuration, size and openness of structure, orbit, angle of orientation, correction frequency, duty cycle, number and location of thrusters and direction of thrusters and APS/LSS interactions. The results of this analysis were used to define the APS characteristics of: (1) number and distribution of thrusters, (2) thruster modulation, (3) thrust level, (4) mission energy requirements, (5) total APS mass component breakdown, and (6) state of the art adequacy/deficiency.

Smith, W. W.↗

A Process for Comparing Dynamics of Distributed Space Systems Simulations

The paper describes a process that was developed for comparing the primary orbital dynamics behavior between space systems distributed simulations. This process is used to characterize and understand the fundamental fidelities and compatibilities of the modeling of orbital dynamics between spacecraft simulations. This is required for high-latency distributed simulations such as NASA s Integrated Mission Simulation and must be understood when reporting results from simulation executions. This paper presents 10 principal comparison tests along with their rationale and examples of the results. The Integrated Mission Simulation (IMSim) (formerly know as the Distributed Space Exploration Simulation (DSES)) is a NASA research and development project focusing on the technologies and processes that are related to the collaborative simulation of complex space systems involved in the exploration of our solar system. Currently, the NASA centers that are actively participating in the IMSim project are the Ames Research Center, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), the Johnson Space Center (JSC), the Kennedy Space Center, the Langley Research Center and the Marshall Space Flight Center. In concept, each center participating in IMSim has its own set of simulation models and environment(s). These simulation tools are used to build the various simulation products that are used for scientific investigation, engineering analysis, system design, training, planning, operations and more. Working individually, these production simulations provide important data to various NASA projects.

Cures, Edwin Z.↗

Large space systems technology, 1981

A total systems approach including structures, analyses, controls, and antennas is presented as a cohesive, programmatic plan for large space systems. Specifically, program status, structures, materials, and analyses, and control of large space systems are addressed.

Boyer, W. J.↗

Modular, Reconfigurable, and Rapid Response Space Systems: The Remote Sensing Advanced Technology Microsatellite

Modular, Reconfigurable, and Rapid-response (MR(sup 2)) space systems represent a paradigm shift in the way space assets of all sizes are designed, manufactured, integrated, tested, and flown. This paper will describe the MR(sup 2) paradigm in detail, and will include guidelines for its implementation. The Remote Sensing Advanced Technology microsatellite (RSAT) is a proposed flight system test-bed used for developing and implementing principles and best practices for MR(sup 2) spacecraft, and their supporting infrastructure. The initial goal of this test-bed application is to produce a lightweight (approx. 100 kg), production-minded, cost-effective, and scalable remote sensing micro-satellite capable of high performance and broad applicability. Such applications range from future distributed space systems, to sensor-webs, and rapid-response satellite systems. Architectures will be explored that strike a balance between modularity and integration while preserving the MR(sup 2) paradigm. Modularity versus integration has always been a point of contention when approaching a design: whereas one-of-a-kind missions may require close integration resulting in performance optimization, multiple and flexible application spacecraft benefit &om modularity, resulting in maximum flexibility. The process of building spacecraft rapidly (< 7 days), requires a concerted and methodical look at system integration and test processes and pitfalls. Although the concept of modularity is not new and was first developed in the 1970s by NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center (Multi-Mission Modular Spacecraft), it was never modernized and was eventually abandoned. Such concepts as the Rapid Spacecraft Development Office (RSDO) became the preferred method for acquiring satellites. Notwithstanding, over the past 30 years technology has advanced considerably, and the time is ripe to reconsider modularity in its own right, as enabler of R(sup 2), and as a key element of transformational systems. The MR2 architecture provides a competitive advantage over the old modular approach in its rapid response to market needs that are difficult to predict both from the perspectives of evolving technology, as well as mission and application requirements.

Esper, Jaime↗

Mission Success Driven Space System Sparing Analysis

Among the maintenance resources, the spare parts are the most difficult to predict. Items in the space systems are very different from the point of view of reliability, cost, weight, volume, etc. The different combinations of spares make different contribution to the: mission success, spare investment, volume occupied and weight. Hence, the selection of spares for a mission planned must take into account all of these features. This paper presents the generic mission success driven sparing model developed, for the complex space systems. The mathematical analysis used in the model enables the user to select the most suitable selection of the spare package for the mission planned. The illustrative examples presented clearly demonstrate the applicability and usefulness of the model introduced.

Knezevic, J.↗