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.
A paper describes algorithms for guidance and control (G&C) of a spacecraft maneuvering near a planet, moon, asteroid, comet, or other small astronomical body. The algorithms were developed following a model-predictive-control approach along with a convexification of the governing dynamical equations, control constraints, and trajectory and state constraints.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) launched on June 18, 2009 from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station aboard an Atlas V launch vehicle and into a direct insertion trajectory to the oon. LRO, which was designed, built, and operated by the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, MD, is gathering crucial data on the lunar environment that will help astronauts prepare for long-duration lunar expeditions. The mission has a nominal life of 1 year as its seven instruments find safe landing sites, locate potential resources, characterize the radiation environment, and test new technology. To date, LRO has been operating well within the bounds of its requirements and has been collecting excellent science data images taken from the LRO Camera Narrow Angle Camera of the Apollo landing sites appeared on cable news networks. A significant amount of information on LRO s science instruments is provided at the LRO mission webpage. LRO s Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) subsystem is made up of an onboard attitude control system (ACS) and a hardware suite of sensors and actuators. The LRO onboard ACS is a collection of algorithms based on high level and derived requirements, and reflect the science and operational events throughout the mission lifetime. The primary control mode is the Observing mode, which maintains the lunar pointing orientation and any offset pointing from this baseline. It is within this mode that all science instrument calibrations, slews and science data is collected. Because of a high accuracy requirement for knowledge and pointing, the Observing mode makes use of star tracker (ST) measurement data to determine an instantaneous attitude pointing. But even the star trackers alone do not meet the tight requirements, so a six-state Kalman Filter is employed to improve the noisy measurement data. The Observing mode obtains its rate information from an inertial reference unit (IRU) and in the event of an IRU failure, the rate data is be derived from the star tracker, but with degraded pointing performance. The Delta-V control mode responsibility is to maintain attitude pointing during the cruise trajectory, insertion burns and lunar orbit maintenance by adjustments made to the spacecraft s velocity magnitude and vector direction. The ACS also provides for a thruster based system momentum management algorithm (known as Delta-H) to maintain the system and wheel momentum to within acceptable levels. In the event an anomaly causes the LRO spacecraft to lose the ability to maintain its current attitude pointing, a Sun Safe mode is included in the ACS for the purpose of providing a known power and thermally safe coarse inertial sun attitude for an indefinite period of time, within the manageable limits of the reaction wheels. The Sun Safe mode is also the initial spacecraft control mode off of the launch vehicle and provides for a means to null tip-off rates immediately after separation. The nominal configuration is to use the IRU for rate information in the controller. In the event of a gyro failure a gyroless control mode was developed that computes rate information from the CSS data.
To date, diagnostic quality ultrasound images were obtained aboard the International Space Station (ISS) using the ultrasound of the Human Research Facility (HRF) rack in the Laboratory module. Through the Advanced Diagnostic Ultrasound in Microgravity (ADUM) and the Braslet-M Occlusion Cuffs (BRASLET SDTO) studies, non-expert ultrasound operators aboard the ISS have performed cardiac, thoracic, abdominal, vascular, ocular, and musculoskeletal ultrasound assessments using remote guidance from ground-based ultrasound experts. With exploration class missions to the lunar and Martian surfaces on the horizon, crew medical officers will necessarily need to operate with greater autonomy given communication delays (round trip times of up to 5 seconds for the Moon and 90 minutes for Mars) and longer periods of communication blackouts (due to orbital constraints of communication assets). The SURGE project explored the feasibility and training requirements of having non-expert ultrasound operators perform autonomous ultrasound assessments in a simulated exploration mission outpost. The project aimed to identify experience, training, and human factors requirements for crew medical officers to perform autonomous ultrasonography. All of these aims pertained to the following risks from the NASA Bioastronautics Road Map: 1) Risk 18: Major Illness and Trauna; 2) Risk 20) Ambulatory Care; 3) Risk 22: Medical Informatics, Technologies, and Support Systems; and 4) Risk 23: Medical Skill Training and Maintenance.
Airbreathing hypersonic systems offer distinct performance advantages over rocket-based systems for space access vehicles. However, these performance advantages are dependent upon advances in current state-of-the-art technologies in many areas such as ram/scramjet propulsion integration, high temperature materials, aero-elastic structures, thermal protection systems, transition to hypersonics and hypersonic control elements within the framework of complex physics and new design methods. The complex interactions between elements of an airbreathing hypersonic vehicle represent a new paradigm in vehicle design to achieve the optimal performance necessary to meet space access mission objectives. In the past, guidance, navigation, and control (GNC) analysis often follows completion of the vehicle conceptual design process. Individual component groups design subsystems which are then integrated into a vehicle configuration. GNC is presented the task of developing control approaches to meet vehicle performance objectives given that configuration. This approach may be sufficient for vehicles where significant performance margins exist. However, for higher performance vehicles engaging the GNC discipline too late in the design cycle has been costly. For example, the X-29 experimental flight vehicle was built as a technology demonstrator. One of the many technologies to be demonstrated was the use of light-weight material composites for structural components. The use of light-weight materials increased the flexibility of the X- 29 beyond that of conventional metal alloy constructed aircraft. This effect was not considered when the vehicle control system was designed and built. The impact of this is that the control system did not have enough control authority to compensate for the effects of the first fundamental structural mode of the vehicle. As a result, the resulting pitch rate response of the vehicle was below specification and no post-design changes could recover the desired capability.
This final report summarizes the results of a comparative assessment of the fault tolerance and reliability of different Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) architectural approaches. This study was proactively performed by a combined Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Draper Laboratory team as a GN&C "Discipline-Advancing" activity sponsored by the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC). This systematic comparative assessment of GN&C system architectural approaches was undertaken as a fundamental step towards understanding the opportunities for, and limitations of, architecting highly reliable and fault tolerant GN&C systems composed of common avionic components. The primary goal of this study was to obtain architectural 'rules of thumb' that could positively influence future designs in the direction of an optimized (i.e., most reliable and cost-efficient) GN&C system. A secondary goal was to demonstrate the application and the utility of a systematic modeling approach that maps the entire possible architecture solution space.
This research addresses the 45th Weather Squadron's (45WS) need for improved guidance regarding lightning cessation at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and Kennedy Space Center (KSC). KSC's Lightning Detection and Ranging (LDAR) network was the primary observational tool to investigate both cloud-to-ground and intracloud lightning. Five statistical and empirical schemes were created from LDAR, sounding, and radar parameters derived from 116 storms. Four of the five schemes were unsuitable for operational use since lightning advisories would be canceled prematurely, leading to safety risks to personnel. These include a correlation and regression tree analysis, three variants of multiple linear regression, event time trending, and the time delay between the greatest height of the maximum dBZ value to the last flash. These schemes failed to adequately forecast the maximum interval, the greatest time between any two flashes in the storm. The majority of storms had a maximum interval less than 10 min, which biased the schemes toward small values. Success was achieved with the percentile method (PM) by separating the maximum interval into percentiles for the 100 dependent storms.
A distributed guidance and control algorithm was developed for a constellation of satellites. The system repositions satellites as required, regulates satellites to desired orbits, and prevents collisions. 1. Optimal methods are used to compute nominal transfers from orbit to orbit. 2. Satellites are regulated to maintain the desired orbits once the transfers are complete. 3. A simulator is used to predict potential collisions or near-misses. 4. Each satellite computes perturbations to its controls so as to increase any unacceptable distances of nearest approach to other objects. a. The avoidance problem is recast in a distributed and locally-linear form to arrive at a tractable solution. b. Plant matrix values are approximated via simulation at each time step. c. The Linear Quadratic Gaussian (LQG) method is used to compute perturbations to the controls that will result in increased miss distances. 5. Once all danger is passed, the satellites return to their original orbits, all the while avoiding each other as above. 6. The delta-Vs are reasonable. The controller begins maneuvers as soon as practical to minimize delta-V. 7. Despite the inclusion of trajectory simulations within the control loop, the algorithm is sufficiently fast for available satellite computer hardware. 8. The required measurement accuracies are within the capabilities of modern inertial measurement devices and modern positioning devices.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration created the Constellation program to develop the next generation of manned space vehicles and launch vehicles. The Orion abort system is initiated in the event of an unsafe condition during launch. The system has a controller gains schedule that can be tuned to reduce the attitude errors between the simulated Orion abort trajectories and the guidance trajectory. A program was created that uses the method of steepest descent to tune the pitch gains schedule by an automated procedure. The gains schedule optimization was applied to three potential abort scenarios; each scenario tested using the optimized gains schedule resulted in reduced attitude errors when compared to the Orion production gains schedule.
Conference presentation sharing aspects of the pitch guidance optimization for the Orion ascent Abort Flight Test.
The Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle is being designed with greater automation capabilities than any other crewed spacecraft in NASA s history. The Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) flight software architecture is designed to provide a flexible and evolvable framework that accommodates increasing levels of automation over time. Within the GN&C flight software, a data-driven approach is used to configure software. This approach allows data reconfiguration and updates to automated sequences without requiring recompilation of the software. Because of the great dependency of the automation and the flight software on the configuration data, the data management is a vital component of the processes for software certification, mission design, and flight operations. To enable the automated sequencing and data configuration of the GN&C subsystem on Orion, a desktop database configuration tool has been developed. The database tool allows the specification of the GN&C activity sequences, the automated transitions in the software, and the corresponding parameter reconfigurations. These aspects of the GN&C automation on Orion are all coordinated via data management, and the database tool provides the ability to test the automation capabilities during the development of the GN&C software. In addition to providing the infrastructure to manage the GN&C automation, the database tool has been designed with capabilities to import and export artifacts for simulation analysis and documentation purposes. Furthermore, the database configuration tool, currently used to manage simulation data, is envisioned to evolve into a mission planning tool for generating and testing GN&C software sequences and configurations. A key enabler of the GN&C automation design, the database tool allows both the creation and maintenance of the data artifacts, as well as serving the critical role of helping to manage, visualize, and understand the data-driven parameters both during software development and throughout the life of the Orion project.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Engineering and Safety Center designed, developed and flew the alternative Max Launch Abort System (MLAS) as risk mitigation for the baseline Orion spacecraft launch abort system already in development. The NESC was tasked with both formulating a conceptual objective system design of this alternative MLAS as well as demonstrating this concept with a simulated pad abort flight test. Less than 2 years after Project start the MLAS simulated pad abort flight test was successfully conducted from Wallops Island on July 8, 2009. The entire flight test duration was 88 seconds during which time multiple staging events were performed and nine separate critically timed parachute deployments occurred as scheduled. This paper provides an overview of the guidance navigation and control technical approaches employed on this rapid prototyping activity; describes the methodology used to design the MLAS flight test vehicle; and lessons that were learned during this rapid prototyping project are also summarized.
The Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) was designed and built at the Goddard Space Flight Center, launched from Cape Canaveral on February 11, 2010, and reached its final geosynchronous science orbit on March 16, 2010. The purpose of SDO is to observe the Sun and continuously relay data to a dedicated ground station. SDO remains Sun-pointing throughout most of its mission for the instruments to take measurements of the Sun. The SDO attitude control system (ACS) is a single-fault tolerant design. Its fully redundant attitude sensor complement includes sixteen coarse Sun sensors (CSSs), a digital Sun sensor (DSS), three two-axis inertial reference units (IRUs), and two star trackers (STs). The ACS also makes use of the four guide telescopes included as a part of one of the science instruments. Attitude actuation is performed using four reaction wheels assemblies (RWAs) and eight thrusters, with a single main engine used to provide velocity-change thrust for orbit raising. The attitude control software has five nominal control modes, three wheel-based modes and two thruster-based modes. A wheel-based Safehold running in the attitude control electronics box improves the robustness of the system as a whole. All six modes are designed on the same basic proportional-integral-derivative attitude error structure, with more robust modes setting their integral gains to zero. This paper details the final overall design of the SDO guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) system and how it was used in practice during SDO launch, commissioning, and nominal operations. This overview will include the ACS control modes, attitude determination and sensor calibration, the high gain antenna (HGA) calibration, and jitter mitigation operation. The Solar Dynamics Observatory mission is part of the NASA Living With a Star program, which seeks to understand the changing Sun and its effects on the Solar System, life, and society. To this end, the SDO spacecraft carries three Sun-observing instruments: Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI), led by Stanford University; Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (AIA), led by Lockheed Martin Space and Astrophysics Laboratory; and Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment (EVE), led by the University of Colorado. The basic mission is to observe the Sun for a very high percentage of the 5-year mission (10-year goal) with long stretches of uninterrupted observations and with constant, high-data-rate transmission to a dedicated ground station to be located in White Sands, New Mexico. These goals guided the design of the spacecraft bus that will carry and service the three-instrument payload. Overarching design goals for the bus are geosynchronous orbit, near-constant Sun observations with the ability to fly through eclipses, and constant HGA contact with the dedicated ground station. A three-axis stabilized ACS is needed both to point at the Sun accurately and to keep the roll about the Sun vector correctly positioned with respect to the solar north pole. This roll control is especially important for the magnetic field imaging of HM I. The mission requirements have several general impacts on the ACS design. Both the AIA and HMI instruments are very sensitive to the blurring caused by jitter. Each has an image stabilization system (ISS) with some ability to filter out high frequency motion, but below the bandwidth of the ISS the control system must compensate for disturbances within the ACS bandwidth or avoid exciting jitter at higher frequencies. Within the ACS bandwidth, the control requirement imposed by AIA is to place the center of the solar disk no more than 2 arc sec, 3 , from a body-defined target based on one of the GTs that accompany the instrument. This body-defined target, called the science reference boresight (SRB), was determined from the postlaunch orientation of the GTs by averaging the bounding telescope boresights for pitch to get a pitch SRB coordinate, and by averaging the bounding boresights for yaw toet the yaw SRB coordinate. The location of this SRB in the 0.5-deg field-of-view for each GT then becomes the central target for each telescope; one GT is selected for use as the ACS controlling guide telescope (CGT) at any given time. Fine Sun-pointing is effected based on this SRB for all three instruments when the Sun is within the linear range of the CGT. In addition to limiting jitter, HMI science requires averaging several observations, making the instrument sensitive to low frequency motion that induces differential motion between each observation. This requires the spacecraft attitude to be stable about the roll axis to approximately 10 arcsec over a ten-minute period. Instrument calibrations require that the spacecraft point the SRB up to 2.5 degrees in pitch and yaw away from the center of the Sun, placing the Sun outside the field-of-view of the guide telescopes. In such instances, when the GTs cannot provide the definitive target for the ACS, on-board attitude determination combined with ephemeris prediction of the Sun direction must provide the definitive target. EVE is capable of observing the Sun with less dependence on attitude control. However, the ground data processing needs for calibrations result in the most strict attitude knowledge requirements for the mission: [35,70,70] arcsec, 3 , of knowledge with respect to the center of the solar disk. In addition to driving the ACS sensor selection, the knowledge requirements, which have their effect primarily during Inertial mode calibrations, drive the accuracy requirements for the solar ephemeris. The need to achieve and maintain geosynchronous orbit (GEO) drove the need for high-efficiency propulsive systems and appropriate attitude control. The main engine provided high specific impulse for the maneuvers to attain GEO, while the smaller ACS thrusters managed the disturbance torques of the larger engine and provided the capability for much smaller adjustment burns on orbit. SDO s large solar profile means that solar radiation pressure is a large torque disturbance, and the momentum buildup from this disturbance and the GEO altitude drives the ACS to use thrusters to manage vehicle momentum. The demanding data capture budget for the mission, however, requires SDO to avoid frequent thruster maneuvers, while concerns about on-orbit jitter restrict the maximum desired wheel speeds desired from the RWAs. The plan for on-orbit wheel speed and momentum management will be discussed as well as what is now being done in operation after the jitter environment was characterized. The SDO ACS hardware complement is single-fault tolerant. Two main processors carry virtually identical copies of the command and data handling and ACS software, and two identical attitude control electronics (ACE) boxes carry Coldfire processors with contingency ACS software and other hardware interface cards; the ACE structure allows reaction wheels to be commanded by the Sun-pointing Safehold independent of the Mil Std 1553 data bus. The sixteen Adcole CSSs are grouped into primary and backup sets of eight sensors, each set providing the ability to calculate a sun vector. Each set of eight eyes provides full 4 -steradian coverage. The Adcole DSS comprises an optics head and a separate electronics box providing a 1553 data interface. The electronics box is mounted inside the Faraday cage created by the spacecraft bus module. The DSS head with its 32- deg square FOV is mounted on the instrument module with its boresight along the spacecraft X axis, nearly aligned with the Sun during observations. Adcole has designed the DSS calibration parameters so that the accuracy is 0.24 arcminutes within 10 deg of the boresight, and diminishes to 3 arcminutes as the Sun moves towards the edges of its FOV . This DSS calibration scheme provides higher accuracy attitude determination over the range of the instrument calibration maneuvers.
The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) is an independently funded NASA Program whose dedicated team of technical experts provides objective engineering and safety assessments of critical, high risk projects. NESC's strength is rooted in the diverse perspectives and broad knowledge base that add value to its products, affording customers a responsive, alternate path for assessing and preventing technical problems while protecting vital human and national resources. The Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C) Technical Discipline Team (TDT) is one of fifteen such discipline-focused teams within the NESC organization. The TDT membership is composed of GN&C specialists from across NASA and its partner organizations in other government agencies, industry, national laboratories, and universities. This paper will briefly define the vision, mission, and purpose of the NESC organization. The role of the GN&C TDT will then be described in detail along with an overview of how this team operates and engages in its objective engineering and safety assessments of critical NASA.
An escape vehicle was designed to provide an emergency evacuation for crew members living on a space station. For maximum escape capability, the escape vehicle needs to have the ability to safely evacuate a station in a contingency scenario such as an uncontrolled (e.g., tumbling) station. This emergency escape sequence will typically be divided into three events: The fust separation event (SEP1), the navigation reconstruction event, and the second separation event (SEP2). SEP1 is responsible for taking the spacecraft from its docking port to a distance greater than the maximum radius of the rotating station. The navigation reconstruction event takes place prior to the SEP2 event and establishes the orbital state to within the tolerance limits necessary for SEP2. The SEP2 event calculates and performs an avoidance burn to prevent station recontact during the next several orbits. This paper presents the tools and results for the whole separation sequence with an emphasis on the two separation events. The fust challenge includes collision avoidance during the escape sequence while the station is in an uncontrolled rotational state, with rotation rates of up to 2 degrees per second. The task of avoiding a collision may require the use of the Vehicle's de-orbit propulsion system for maximum thrust and minimum dwell time within the vicinity of the station vicinity. The thrust of the propulsion system is in a single direction, and can be controlled only by the attitude of the spacecraft. Escape algorithms based on a look-up table or analytical guidance can be implemented since the rotation rate and the angular momentum vector can be sensed onboard and a-priori knowledge of the position and relative orientation are available. In addition, crew intervention has been provided for in the event of unforeseen obstacles in the escape path. The purpose of the SEP2 burn is to avoid re-contact with the station over an extended period of time. Performing this maneuver properly requires knowledge of the orbital state, which is obtained during the navigation state reconstruction event. Since the direction of the delta-v of the SEPI maneuver is a random variable with respect to the Local Vertical Local Horizontal (LVLH) coordinate system, calculating the required SEP2 burn is a challenge. This problem was solved using a neural network as a model-free function approximation technique.
An algorithm was developed that determines the fuel-optimal spacecraft guidance trajectory that takes into account uncertainty, in order to guarantee that mission safety constraints are satisfied with the required probability. The algorithm uses convex optimization to solve for the optimal trajectory. Convex optimization is amenable to onboard solution due to its excellent convergence properties. The algorithm is novel because, unlike prior approaches, it does not require time-consuming evaluation of multivariate probability densities. Instead, it uses a new mathematical bounding approach to ensure that probability constraints are satisfied, and it is shown that the resulting optimization is convex. Empirical results show that the approach is many orders of magnitude less conservative than existing set conversion techniques, for a small penalty in computation time.
A report describes the Laser Mapper (LAMP) -- a lightweight, compact, low-power lidar system under development for guidance of a spacecraft or exploratory robotic vehicle (rover) at Mars or another planet. The LAMP is intended especially for use during rendezvous of two spacecraft in orbit, for mapping terrain during descent and landing of a spacecraft, for capturing a sample that has been launched into orbit, or navigation and avoidance of obstacles by a rover traversing terrain. The LAMP includes a laser that emits high-power, short light pulses. The laser beam is aimed in azimuth and elevation by use of a mirror on a two-axis gimbal, which scans the beam across a field of regard. Light reflected by a target is collected by a telescope, and the distance to the target is determined by measuring the round-trip travel time for reflected light pulses. The distance information is combined with directional information to construct a three-dimensional map of targets in the field of regard.
In 2011, the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) will be launched in a mission to deliver the largest and most capable rover to date to the surface of Mars. A follow on MSL-derived mission, referred to as Mars 2018, is planned for 2018. Mars 2018 goals include performance enhancements of the Entry, Descent and Landing over that of its predecessor MSL mission of 2011. This paper will discuss the main elements of the modified 2018 EDL preliminary design that will increase performance on the entry phase of the mission. In particular, these elements will increase the parachute deploy altitude to allow for more time margin during the subsequent descent and landing phases and reduce the delivery ellipse size at parachute deploy through modifications in the entry reference trajectory design, guidance trigger logic design, and the effect of additional navigation hardware.
G-View is a 3D visualization tool for supporting spacecraft guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) simulations relevant to small-body exploration and sampling (see figure). The tool is developed in MATLAB using Virtual Reality Toolbox and provides users with the ability to visualize the behavior of their simulations, regardless of which programming language (or machine) is used to generate simulation results. The only requirement is that multi-body simulation data is generated and placed in the proper format before applying G-View.