Advancingautomation and Roboticstechnology for the Space Station ,, - Freedomand for the U.S

Home , Spar Aerospace

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19930014051 2020-03-17T06:58:27+00:00Z

Technical Memorandum 103895

AdvancingAutomation and RoboticsTechnology for the Space Station _,,_-_Freedomand for the U.S. Economy

Committee

Technical Memorandum 103895

Advancing AutomationandRobotics Technologyfor the SpaceStationFreedom and for the U.S. Economy

Progress Report 13 February 15, 1991 through August 15, 1991

Submitted to the Congress of the United States November 1991

Advanced Technology Advisory Committee National Aeronautics and Space Administration

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California 94035-1000 Cover: SpaceStationFreedom PermanentlyMannedCapability

Insets: Lunar Base Planetary Exploration Table of Contents

Introduction ...... 1 Background ...... 1 Climate ...... 2 ATAC Concerns ...... 2 Potential Impact on U.S. Leadership in A&R ...... 3 Focus of Next ATAC Meeting ...... 4

ATAC Assessments ...... 5 Basis of Assessments ...... ,...... 5 Assessment of Progress on ATAC Report 12 Recommendations ...... 5 A&R Status Review of Levels I and II; WP1, WP2, WP4; SSCC and POIC; and Science Payloads ...... 10 New A&R Issues: Space Station Control Station ...... 14 Onboard SSF Science, Operations, and Maintenance ...... 15 A&R Technology Utilization ...... 16

ATAC Progress Report 13 Recommendations ...... 17 Space Station Control Center ...... 17 Onboard SSF Science, Operations, and Maintenance ...... 17 A&R Technology Utilization ...... 17

References ...... 18

Appendices A: Space Station Freedom Program A&R Progress ...... A- 1 B: Japanese A&R Space Station Program ...... B-1 C: Canadian Space Station Program Mobile Servicing System .... C-1 D: Acronyms ...... D-1 E: NASA Advanced Technology Advisory Committee ...... E-1 OR]GINAL PASE BLACK AND WHITE PI--r'OT(9('_RAPH

Life Science Plant Dissection Utilizing Telesclence

Telescience provides for effective interaction of the experiment Principal Investigator (P/) with the onboard crew and experiment through audio and video communications, and networked computer workstations. ThePI isab/e to see a camera view of the onboard laboratory operations insidethe onboard g/ovebox through video down/ink. The onboard crew member is able to see a camera view of the P/'s ground laboratory work area through video up/ink, and receive coaching or assistance. Operational experiment procedures are displayed on both the P/'s and crew's computer screens.

Astronaut performing plant dissection under microgravity environment

Principal investigator assisting astronaut from ground laboratory Introduction

Background range of future mission scenarios in keeping with the needs of space station users In response to the mandate of Congress, and the long-term goals of U.S. space NASA established, in 1984, the policy. Advanced Technology Advisory Com- The ATAC has continued to monitor mittee (ATAC) to prepare a report identi- and prepare semiannual reports on fying specific Space Station Freedom NASA's progress in the use of A&R in (SSF) systems which advance automation achieving this goal. The reports are doc- and robotics (A&R) techno!ogies. In umented in the ATAC Progress Reports l March 1985, as required by Public Law through 12 (refs. 2-13). Progress Reports 98-371, ATAC reported to Congress the 1 through 5 covered the definition and results of its studies (ref. 1). The first preliminary design phase (Phase B) of ATAC report proposed goals for A&R Space Station Freedom. Progress Reports applications for the initial and evolution- 6 through 10 covered the startup of the ary space station. Additionally, ATAC design and development phase (phase provided recommendations to guide the C/D) of the SSF. Reports 11 and 12 have implementation of A&R in the Space Sta- covered the restructured design of SSF tion Freedom Program (SSFP). which was required by Congress in late A further requirement of the law was 1990. Phase C/D will lead to a com- that ATAC follow NASA's progress in pletely assembled station to be opera- this area and report to Congress semian- tional in the late-1990's. nually. In this context, ATAC's mission ATAC Progress Report 12, like pre- is considered to be the following. vious ATAC reports, received wide dis- semination. ATAC Progress Report 12 ATAC Mission " was distributed in the following categories: Congress: 25 Copies Independently review conduct of NASA: 240 Copies the Space Station Freedom Pro- Industry: 110 Copies gram to assess the application of Universities: 50 Copies A&R technology with considera- Total: 425 Copies tion for safety, reliability, schedule, This report is the thirteenth in the performance, and cost effective- series of progress updates and covers the ness (including life-cycle costs). period of February 15, 1991 through Based upon these assessments, August 15, 1991. To provide a useful, develop recommendations to concise report format, all of the commit- enhance A&R technology applica- tee's assessments have been included in tion, and review the recommenda- the section "ATAC Assessments." This tions with NASA management for section of the report includes comments their implementation. Report on SSFP's progress in responding to the assessments and recommendations ATAC recommendations in Report 12. twice annually to Congress. Also, a summary of progress in A&R in the Space Station Program Office as The Space Station Freedom Program written by SSFP is provided as an is charged with developing a baseline appendix. In addition, appendices are station configuration that provides an ini- included on the Japanese A&R Space tial operational capability and which, in Station Program and the Canadian Space addition, can be evolved to support a StationMobileServicingSystem.The (4) The Space Station Control Center command/control, systems failure detec- reportdrawsuponindividualATAC (SSCC) proposed design for Mission tion, and systems failure analysis with members'understandingandassessmentsOperations has not taken full advantage distributed processing for the planning oftheapplicationofA&RintheSSFP of rule-based expert systems as utilized in and flight design elements of the SSCC. anduponmaterialpresentedduringan the Reai-T{me Data Systems (RTDS) for The SSCC design allows for future distri- ATACmeetingheldAugust13-15,1991, onboard systems failure detection. As a bution of systems failure detection and forthepurposesofreviewingtheSSFP result, flight Controller productivity will failure analysis processing to the realtime A&Ractivitiesandformulatingthe be limited until expert system capabilities flight controllers' workstations, it is pointsofthisreport_ are available in the SSCC during the ATAL'Ys opinion that a distributed Permanently Manned Capability (PMC) computational environment for SSCC operations phase of the program. systems failure detection and failure Climate (5) SSF's capability to support the analysis, including expert systems, proposed life and material sciences exper- should be Implemented to enhance A preliminary assessment of the SSF iments during the Man-Tended Capability flight controller productivity in the restructuring, made in response to the management and control of SSF's mis- Congressional budget reduction, was (MTC) period may be marginal and could be enhanced with the addition of A&R sion operations. This configuration completed at the August 1991 ATAC technologies. would offer a better environment for meeting. A summary of the major system the eventual migration of advanced impacts are as follows: In summary, the Congressional- automation technologies back into the (1) All space robotic systems/ mandated reduction has resulted SSF's onboard system. technologies for Space Station Freedom in (1) a deletion of all U.S.-devel- The presently baselined SSCC data will be provided by the Canadians and oped space robotics capability, distribution design incorporates a Fiber Japanese. Robotic interface standards are (2) has removed all onboard Distributed Data Interface (FDDI) net_ being developed by the SSF Project advanced automation from the work employing Open Systems lntercon- Office to ensure compatibility with the U.S. portion of SSF, and (3) may nection (OSI) protocols. The OSI proto- SSF infrastructure and will provide an preclude advanced automation opportunity for the integration of U.S.- cols have not been developed specifically technology evolution from for robotics control and would likely developed space robotics, e.g., the Flight implementation in SSF onboard require augmentation with other Local Telerobotic Servicer (FTS), should that and ground operations. Area Network (LAN) applications such technology development be continued as the Manufacturing Message and validated by NASA's Office of Aero- Specification (MMS), which is tuned for nautics and Space Technology (OAST). ATAC Co c mF robotics control, shouId ground control of Provisions have not yet been included for the manned-base robots become an SSFP operating the robots from the ground, and SpaceS_tion ControiCcnter requirement. hence SSF's robots are highly dependent The design of the SSCC originally Within the SSFP budget constraints, on the crew's presence. included a distributed processing envi- the SSCC has established a design which (2) The Data Management System's ronment allowing applications to be exe- reduces the initial development costs (DMS) capabilities have been severely cuted on flight controller workstations. through the use of a more centralized constrained and there may be limited per- However, the restructuring process signif- architecture and use of existing software. formance margin, if any, left for incorpo- icantly reduced and rephased the funds In taking this more conservative ration of software to support unforeseen available for SSCC development, which appr0ach, the use of exert system appli- contingencies and projected necessitated a major redesign effort to cations will not be implemented during requirements. provide a minimum cost architecture that the MTC operations time phase. (3) All non-time-critical onboard meets requirements for safe operations automation functions have been migrated with potential for future growth. to the ground and provisions have not The restructuring process resulted in been included for migration back into the a more centralized design concept for SSF onboard systems at some future date. ATAC is concerned that the SSCC flights. Unmanned control and manage- The SSF, Level I, advanced A&R has not taken full advantage of the ment of the experiments should be within development effort represents the only technology work being done in the SSF's basic capability since most focused in-house effort to aggressively support of shuttle ground mission command sequences will be prepro- develop and prototype potential cost- operations such as the RTDS grammed events and utilize conventional effective uses for automation and expert system efforts. In addition, automation techniques. robotics. • the evolution of advanced automa- Reahime Video uplink capabilities to tion technologies into the SSCC support onboard science experiments are not clearly provided for, which have been deferred to post-MTC due to Potential Impact on U.S. could result in flight controller the budget restructuring requirements, Leadership in A&R productivity that is lower, during and there appears to be little SSF plan- the initial SSF operations phases, ning being implemented to support pro- As indicated earlier, there is little hope than is presently achievable with posed science experiments. In addition, for the implementation of advanced shuttle ground mission operations there appears to be a lack of understand- automation and robotics in the SSF systems. ing by experimenters of advanced A&R design, both onboard and on the ground. benefits, and unfamiliarity with which The implementation of Congressional SSFP organization has been established budget constraints has virtually pre- SSF Science, Operations, and to coordinate A&R requirements. cluded the further development and Maintenance implementation of U.S.-developed ATAC is concerned that there robotics technologies for SSF. With the Proposed SSF life sciences research appears to be a lack of an SSFP deletion of the FTS development, world facilities include a Centrifuge Facility, a focal point for the advocacy, coor- leadership in space robotics technology Gravitational Biology Facility, an dination, and implementation of will be relegated to the Canadians and EVA/Space Physiology Facility, a Gas- A&R into the life and material sci- Japanese. The intent of Congress to Grain Simulation Facility, and a Con- ences experiments to ensure opti- have SSF serve as the focus for trolled Ecological Life Support System mum utilization of the SSF facility advanced U.S.-developed A&R tech- Test Facility. Since the life sciences and resources, both onboard and nologies, which in turn would stimulate experiments are highly dependent upon on the ground during the MTC the transfer of these technologies into support from the crew, there is a signifi- period. the U.S. industrial sector for inter- cant interest in utilizing technologies national competitiveness, has not been which would maximize the crew time A&R Evolution met. ATAC believes that an integrated efficiency. Two of the identified tech- NASA A&R program would provide nologies are advanced automation and Due to the Congressional budget con- stimulus for increasing the telescience. However, lack of funding has straints, there are no advanced automa- international competitiveness of the prevented any serious consideration tion and robotics planned for the SSF. U.S. industrial community. and/or evaluation of these technologies With the exception of Work Package 4 for onboard utilization. Therefore, mini- (WIP4) Electrical Power System (EPS), mum life sciences experiments are being there is no commitment on the part of planned during the MTC period, due to the WP contractors to seriously con- lack of capabilities to operate the experi- sider the use of robot-friendly ments during the absence of the crew. designs, where applicable, to reduce Proposed material science experi- the overall mission operations costs. ments include protein crystal growth, The WP4 contractor has done an out- solidification systems, fluid physics and standing effort in their aggressive pursuit dynamics, combustion, containertess pro- of the use of advanced automation and cessing, and biotechnology. Science robotics to reduce costs and EVA operations during the presence of the activities. crew will be similar to the Spacelab Focus of Next ATAC (a) SSF's plans for the development The SSCC review will take place at and Implementation of the Payload Johnson Space Center (JSC) in December Meeting Operations Integration Centers (POIC) i99i. for the management of the scientific The current proposal is to have the The next ATAC meeting and report, payloads, and (b) in-depth review of POIC meetin-g hosted by Marshall Space Progress Report 14, will focus on: the SSCC's restructured computa- Flight Center (MSFC) in February 1992. tional environment including the plans for incorporation and migratio_ of : advanced automation technologieS. : =

v= -

; Z_

E | E

4 A TAC Assessments

Basis of Assessments restructured, is unable to comply with this intent. The ATAC assessments foi-=this reporting period are based upon the committee's appraisals of progress in Assessment of Progress advanced automation and robotics for on ATAC Report 12 Space Station Freedom to the extent possible in the midst of restructuring Recommendations impacts. A review of the progress toward the recommendations from ATAC's most ATAC Progress Report 12,

recent report, Progress Report 12, will be Recommendation I: Space Sta- discussed first, followed by a review of topics explicitly addressed during the tion Control Center and Payload August 13-15, 1991 ATAC meeting, and Center Automation then a discussion of new A&R issues. Progress appraisal is primarily based "Develop and implement a plan prior upon briefings given to ATAC during the to Critical Design Review (CDR) to August 13-15 meeting at JSC, but also is include advanced automation functions in based on information obtained by atten- the Space Station Control Center (SSCC) dance at relevant SSFP review meetings. and the Space Station Payload Center Before addressing the Progress on (SSPC) and their supporting facilities ATAC Report 12 recommendations, with eventual migration to onboard however, it is important to note that the applications to ensure increased program restructuring has entirely productivity and reduced overall changed the context which existed at the operations costs." time of previous ATAC SSFP Response to ATAC: recommendations. Namely, it was assumed that the United States would be "It is expected that this recommenda- involved in dextrous robotics in the form tion will be addressed prior to CDR. The of the Flight Telerobotic Servicer (FTS). SSCC is the primary ground center for Therefore, making recommendations monitoring and controlling core systems which integrated FTS into the SSFP in of the Space Station Manned Base effective ways was natural. Now, with the (SSMB). It is the focal point of opera- transfer of the FTS out of the SSFP into tions planning for the Space Station and OAST as a research experiment, the Sta- associated ground system and manages tion's baseline requirements for robotics the uplink for core and payload system will be provided by the Canadian Special ensuring the safety of the crew and the Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (SPDM). integrity of the Manned Base." It is ATAC's understanding that the "Following SSFP restructure, the Congress provided funding for NASA's major SSCC development challenge has overall A&R program with the specific been to provide a minimum cost architec- intent to focus and transfer the A&R ture that provides the command and con- technologies into the U.S. industrial trol capability required for safe manned sector and economy by using Space base operation while allowing the Station Freedom as the focused application. Due to the congressional budget constraints, the SSFP, as currently flexibilityforfutureprogramevolution. accommodates the insertion of new tech- was provided to the science team at the Further,theSSCCwill incorporate nology, such as ruled-based expert sys- Science Managers Area within the Pay- technologyandautomationadvances tems, while providing continuous stable load Ops facility. During SLS-2 this throughoutthelifeoftheprogramfor operations support." capability will be provided on-orbit as productivityenhancementswh_enlife "Presently, the Real-Time Data Sys- well as on the ground. The Advisor cycleoperationscostreductionscanbe tems (RTDS) managed by ISC/MOD is increases astronaut productivity and quantified.To_achieve_hesegoals,the demonstrating and validat!ng - the__feasibil- enhances the return of scientific data by SSCCbaselinedesignisahybridpro- ity of advanced automati0n in the m!ssion improving experiment monitoring, con- cessingapproachincorporatingcent_ral-: control and engineering support center trol, and diagnosis of results." izedprocessingforcommand/control environments. This project s_owcases the (datacalibration,limitsensing,command advantages of distributed Computing, processing,datastorage,TLMprocess- advanced displays, and console automa- ATAC Assessment: ing)aswellasintegratedfaultdetection/ tion. While this approach is still being SSFP does not provide implementa- management.All coresystemcalibrated evaluated by the Space Station Program, tion of advanced automation functions it has been selected as a major component data,aswellasproductsfromcritical such as rule based expert systems as early of the Mission Control Center Upgrade application/computations,aredistributed as desired by ATAC. SSCC has stated viaahighspeedfiberopticnetwork,to activity. RTDS is jointly funded by Level that a plan is being developed for migrat- I Engineering Prototype Development, intelligentcolorgraphicworkstationsfor ifig the advanced automation technologies Code MD Advanced Programs, and the processingandpresentationtotheflight to onboard applications sometime in the controller.Thisarchitecturerepresentsa OAST AI Program. Additionally, future. However, ATAC does not have DARPA has, at the request of Code MT, minimumcostandriskapproachto knowledge of this plan. A detailed provided an advanced graphics worksta- ensureconsistencyandcontrolofthe assessment of the SSCC plan will be tion for use by the RTDS team." SSMBoperationalprocesses;it alsopro- conducted by ATAC during December "Related activities within Space Sta- videsgrowthpotentialforevolutiontoa 1991 and reported on in ATAC Progess moredistributedprocessingapproach tion Engineering Prototype Development Report 14. (EPD) include advanced automation including rule-based run-time environ- The Level I sponsored Real-Time applications for monitoring and diagnosis ments, where appropriate. In developing Data Systems for ground monitoring and of Power, Thermal and ECLSS subsys- this hybrid SSCC architecture, the system diagnosis of spacecraft systems, provide tems. These applications are implemented design reflects a significant degree of benefits in improved safety and produc- on a distributed workstation environment leveraging off the Shuttle ground mission tivity, and is being developed and tested and are intended to become an integral operations systems; Mission Control in the Shuttle Mission Control Center Center Upgrades (MCCU) and RTDS. part of the Engineering Support Center environment but is not included in current environment and possibly migrate to the This has been accomplished both from a plans for the SSCC (until post-MTC) or SSCC after evaluation. It is expected that, lessons learned viewpoint as well as the Payload Center. as these applications mature and sup- through direct reuse of MCCU and RTDS ATAC does recognize some areas of designs and software." porting Space Station computer resources SSCC conventional automation outside are made available, applications will be "Within SSFP budget constraints, the the areas of onboard systems monitoring. developed for on-orbit use." SSCC has established a design which These include facility status and control, "Automation of applications in a provides a significant level of integration flight planning, and flight scheduling. Space Station Payload Center will be the and automation in several key operations Further, onboard system failure analysis responsibility of the individual payload areas including Planning and Scheduling, is supported with the Failure Effects Fault Detection and Management (FDM), projects. The EPD activity has sponsored Analysis Tool (FEAT) at First Element efforts to characterize the type of automa- and Status and Control. The design also Launch (FEL). offers improvements in display and com- tion applications which would aid Space putation generation capabilities signifi- Station Payloads. An example is the cantly above that available for present Astronaut Scientific Advisor supporting a Shuttle mission operation systems. The Spacelab Vestibular Physiology experi- SSCC architecture is well proven and ment. On SLS-1, ground-based support ATAC Progress Report 12 Rec- ATAC Assessment: the first step in defining the onboard untended science operations environment ommendation II: Ground-based SsFPdid not give ATAC a briefing for the restructured station. Any advanced SSF Robotic Teleoperation on the status of current planning and automation required to support a specific progress by the ground control splinter science experiment will be the responsi- "Develop and implement a plan prior to group of the Level 1I Robotics Working bility of that experiment." CDR for testbed demonstrations and Group. Therefore, anadequate assess- flight experiments to determine the feasi- ment of the SSFP progress on this rec- bility for operation of the SSF robotic ommendation could not be accomplished. ATAC Assessment: systems from the ground to perform sta- The SSCC design does not incorporate The Level II Untended Operations tion maintenance." network protocols or other applica- Study was not presented to ATAC. tions specifically tuned for robotics ATAC is not able to assess if this study control. The baseline design will have will address the onboard automation and SSFP Response to ATAC: to be modified to support implementa- robotics specifically needed. The Life tion of ground control for the Manned- "A Space Station 'Untended Opera- Sciences and Material Sciences experi- base robots if this becomes a program tions Study' is being led at Level II to ments programs as briefed to ATAC did requirement. quantify the nature and scope of untended not include use of advanced A&R, except operations that can be supported within for an Intelligent Microscope which the boundaries of the restructured design. ATAC Progress Report 12, Rec- showed major benefits. The study will identify limiting factors and prepare recommendations for an ommendation HI: Science untended operations concept consistent ATAC Progress Report 12, Rec- Productivity with projected Station capabilities. The ommendation IV: SSF Dexter- activity is divided into two areas, with "Prior to CDR, evaluate onboard automa- MSFC responsible for Untended Payload tion and robotics specifically needed to ous Robots Operations, and JSC responsible for permit operation of desired science exper- "Develop and implement a plan prior to Untended System Operations." iments during the unmanned periods of CDR for integration of dextrous robots "In a related activity, the Level H-led the Man-Tended Configuration phase, into the onboard SSF science, operations, Robotics Working Group has established and implement an advanced A&R plan as and maintenance activities." a Splinter Group to determine the feasi- appropriate, to enhance MTC science bility and extent of ground-based SSF productivity and utilization." robotics teleoperation. This study activity SSFP Response to ATAC: is being led by JSC/MOD with support from telerobotics experts at various SSFP Response to ATAC: "The Space Station Freedom Pro- centers." gram is committed to integrating dextrous "A Space Station 'Untended Opera- "A Level I Engineering Prototype robots into exte_:nal post-Man Tended tions Study' is being led at Space Station Development-sponsored task at JPL, Capability assembly, maintenance, and Level II to quantify the nature and scope which demonstrated robotic inspection servicing operations. Crew EVA time is a of untended operations that can be sup- with time delay, is currently developing a highly limited resource, and the program ported within the boundaries of the joint plan with the JSC Automation and relies on the Canadian Special Purpose restructured design, identify limiting fac- Robotics Division to implement this Dextrous Manipulator (SPDM) and the tors, and prepare recommendations for an capability on the SSF Robotic Integration Japanese Small Fine Arm (SFA) to untended operations concept consistent Testbed. This activity is being coordi- assemble and maintain the Station core with projected Space Station capabilities. nated with Level II Robotics Working infrastructure and user payloads. The The activity is divided into two areas, Group and splinter group." integration of the SPDM and the SFA is a with MSFC responsible for Untended major aspect of the Robotics Integration Payload Operations, and JSC responsible Technical Area Management Plan that is for Untended System Operations. This is being developed jointly by Level II and ATAC Progress Report 12, Rec- application areas in a range of disciplines the JSC Automation and Robotics Divi- were narrowed to a list of top 21 major ommendation V: Technology sion. This Technical Area Management technology areas. Of these 21 areas, 16 Plan defines the objectives, responsibili- Transfer and Implementation were identified as being program unique ties, activities and products associated and 5 ident-ifi-_dasbeing industry drivenl with robotics integration, and serves to "Strengthen cooperation between the A number of the top 21 requirements document the SSF robotics architecture. technology and programmatic (user) sides support advancements in, and delivery of, Robotic system-to-SSF integration, inter- of the Agency, and provide the SSF automation and robotics technology. For face definition, and system and task veri- Advanced Development Program with example, functional improvements in fication are addressed at a high level in funding levels commensurate with that vehicle health maintenance, crew train- the plan and in greater detail in program required to transfer and implement ing, and robotics are required. It is documentation such as the SPDM System advanced A&R technologies into SSF expected that technologists will use these Requirements Document (SRD), Robotic operational environments." requirements to formuTate the basis of Systems Integration Standards (RSIS), their technology investment. Inherent in and Program Master Verification Plan this process is the necessity forboth sides (PMVP). The plan will be baselined and SSFP Response to ATAC: to continually meetandupdate each other implemented prior to CDR and updated "The Level I Engineering Prototype on their strategic plans and to jointly periodically as required. Dextrous robotic Development activity has aggressively select technology transition opportunities systems are a vital part of SSF operations, pursued cooperation between Flight and consistent with the major areas priori- tized in the assessment. The Level I and are being addressed as a Technical Research Centers by building teams of Management Area to ensure that their technologists and users for many of the Engineering Prototype Development capabilities are effectively and efficiently funded tasks. These collaborations have activity recognizes this responsibility and applied." been further facilitated by jointly funding has attempted to establish productive advanced technology applications with relationships with a number of the Office of Aeronautics and Space technology program managers in the automation and robotics areas." ATAC Assessment: Technology (OAST) and other govern- Level II is making good progress on ment and industrial technology-oriented organizations, such as DARPA. Also, the the organizational management and inte- ATAC Assessment: gration of dextrous robots into the Level I Advanced Studies Program has onboard operations and maintenance identified long-range technology require- A greatly improved process of iden- activities. IVA crew timeline analysis ments necessary for SSF growth and evo- tifyingand prioritizing technology studies have begun which should include lution and provided these to OAST in requirements by the programmatic (user) numerous forums." dextrous robot monitoring and control. side for use by the technology develop- However, there are potential cost "During early FY91, OSF developed ment side of the Agency has been devel- increases of imposing the robot friendly an integrated technology assessment doc- oped. This process, primarily as a result Robotic Systems Integration Standards ument entitled 'Office of Space Flight of advocacy by Level I, has placed high (RSIS) on EVA compatible baselined Technology Requirements - Definition priority on advanced A&R. Also, the designs at this stage of development. The and Planning for Coordinated Programs.' SSFP Level I Engineering Prototype SSFP must be able to negotiate and On April 26, 1991 this document was Development (EPD) (previously th_ transmitted under cover letter from the accommodate these potential cost Advanced Development Program) has increases or only very_ limited use of dex- Associate Administrator for Space Flight been productive in transferring and Vali= to the Associate Administrator for Aero- trous robots will result. No onboard SSF dating advanced A&R technologies into science support with dextrous robots is nautics, Exploration and Technology. The operational organizations (but not yet assessment reflects the consolidated tech- currently planned by either science or the SSF Program baseline operations systems SSFP due to lack of budget priority. nology needs of Space Station, Space and plans) despite budget reductions. Shuttle, and Flight Systems/Advanced Further budget reductions will make Vehicles Programs. Over 250 separate operational use very unlikely; instead, expansionofEPDinA&Rshouldbesup- DTF-1 and potential follow-on flights traditional aerospace industry practices. It ported.Inaddition,ATACisconcerned and with OAST/RC pertaining to robotics should also be pointed out that solid, well thatOASThasnotyetrespondedtothe technology development. The discussions tested, life-cycle cost models do not technologyrequirementsdefinedby between OAST/RX and GSFC are on tar- account for the impacts of automation. SSFPinthetechnologyassessmentdoc- get with Section 4.13 recommendations. This validates the approach of testbed- ument"OfficeofSpaceFlightTechnol- The OAST robotics technology program ding technology on baseline facilities in ogyRequirements- Definitionand linkages to the identified OSF require- order to gain experience with as much PlanningforCoordinatedPrograms," ments are expected to improve in FY92." engineering fidelity as possible." therebyresultinginanoverallNASA "Currently, the Program is culminat- A&RProgramthatisnotcoordinatedand ing its analysis of the impacts of Restruc- integratedwithSSFprogrammatic ATAC Assessment: turing with a series of Work Package requirements. Delta Preliminary Design Reviews in The OAST F_S plans were not preparation for the MTC Phase Review. reviewed by ATAC. ATAC recom- The Program will continue to use avail- mendations II, IV, and V above, if ATAC Progress Report 12, Rec- able life-cycle cost analysis tools and aggressively carded out, would create an techniques in support of the development ommendation VI: Flight Tele- SSF which uses dextrous robots and thus process." would encourage OAST to develop a robotic Servicer (FTS) U.S. space dextrous robotics capability. "Encourage OAST to implement an intel- However, a strong and productive OAST ATAC Assessment: program for Space dextrous robotics is ligent telerobotic flight development pro- The SSF Program has not applied a not possible without adequate funding ject like FTS and to conduct FTS flight standardized procedure to access life- from the U.S. Congress, and without experiments on SSF and/or STS which cycle costs resulting from the current OAST responsiveness to SSF identified will permit evolution of U.S. dextrous restructuring activity and the reduction of robots onto Space Station Freedom." requirements. onboard advanced A&R technologies, nor is the SSFP collecting any meaning- ful metrics in addition to Design, Devel- SSFP Response to ATAC: ATAC Progress Report 12, Rec- opment, Test, and Evaluation (DDT&E) "During early FY91, OSF developed ommendation VII: Life-Cycle cost aggregates to support future development of life-cycle cost models. The an integrated technology assessment doc- Costs ument entitled 'Office of Space Flight SSFP has been forced by Congressional Technology Requirements - Definition "Utilize a standardized procedure to budget reductions to take reduced and Planning for Coordinated Programs.' assess the life-cycle costs across the DDT&E measures with regard to On April 26, 1991 this document was Space Station Freedom Program resulting advanced A&R, which will probably transmitted under cover letter from the from the current restructuring activity and have implications for reduced productiv- Associate Administrator for Space Flight the reduction of onboard advanced A&R ity and increased operations costs over to the Associate Administrator for technologies." the life of the program. Aeronautics and Space Technology and reflects the technology needs of Space Station, Space Shuttle, and Flight SSFP Response to ATAC: Systems/Advanced Vehicles. Robotics "Prior to and during Restructuring, was added as a high priority item subse- the Program has utilized a variety of tools quent to the transfer of the FTS to and techniques to analyze the costs of OAST/RX. Section 4. ! 3 of the document various design trades and operational lists seven specific technology areas that approaches. While these individual trade support SSF telerobotics technology studies may appear unstructured and needs. Discussions have been held with nonstandard, the approaches used follow OAST/RX and GSFC pertaining to FTS A&R Status Review of type Development Program will not have approved and resulting impacts absorbed the impact on the baseline SSFP that it by the program. The standard H-Handle Levels I and II; WP1, could have because of budget constraints. Standard Robotic Interface, Micro Stan- WP2, WP4; SSSC and However, it continues to demonstrate dard Robotic Interface, and Standard valuable technology that is directly appli- Visual Target were tested and evaluated POIC; and Science cable to Space Station Evolution. at GSFC, JSC, and CSA/Spar. Payloads Progress w_ macle on the Dextrous Task List by the Work Packages and Assessment of Level II Level 1I in the Robotics Working Group. This-i-srespofis[ve to ATAC Report 12 ATAC received an excellent presentation Assessment of Level I issue to identify specific dextrous robotic from Level II on their robotics activities. tasks in program documentation. This In robotics, there was a major shift of The Advanced Development Program Dextrous Task List is to be incorporated attention from interfaces and capabilities had previously been reported as the pri- into the PDRD Section 3 as Table 3-55 mary mechanism for the advanced devel- of the Flight Telerobotic Servicer to (CR BB003065). A list of robot-compati- opment of A&R technology for inclusion interfaces and requirements for the ble ORUs was compiled representing in the SSFP. This program is now called Canadian Special Purpose Dextrous 413 ORUs or 48%of theSpace Station the Engineering Prototype Development Manipulator (SPDM). The robotics issues Freedom Program extcrna_ ORUs. This concerning requirements, standards, and Program and continues on at a very mod- could represent an offload of 70% of est level of funding. The objectives of interfaces with the SPDM and Japanese EVAmaintenan¢_ man-hours from EVA this program are to enhance baseline SSF robots are being worked. The to robotics if the change request:no m0k_e flight and ground systems capabilities presentation by Level II directly the ORUs robot-compatible is approved. and to provide enabling technology for addressed progress and completion of Other progress on ATAC recom- SSF evolution. previous ATAC recommendations in mendations include: 1) integration of This program leverages considerable robotics. Effort and progress were evident models and simulations (ATAC joint funding and is accomplishing in establishing standards and interfaces in Report 11 Recommendation II)--splinter significant advanced development robotics. working group formed to address the relative to the limited funds expended. Specific ATAC recommendations issuei 2) Operate telerobotic systems from The emphasis is on placing the advanced were addressed by Level II since the last the g0und iATAC Report 1i Rec6m- technology in the testbeds utilized in the report. The first response was to ATAC mendation V and ATAC Report ! 2 Report I 1 Recommendation I to imple- SSFP. This may allow some advanced Recommendation I/)--R0botic Working automation to get into the SSFP as the ment a formal design standard which is Group Splinter Group being formed to robot-friendly. Orbital Replacement Unit engineers see its value in high fidelity address the issue; 3) perform an IVA testbed applications. (ORU) standards are being developed and timeline study (ATAC Report 11 Rec- Level I is commended for keeping are included in Robotic Systems Integra- ommendation IV)---study being con- this program alive during the current tion Standards (RSIS) Volume I (Robotic ducted by Work Package 1 with decision period of very constrained and limited Accommodation Requirements) which is package recommendations due in April budgets, and continuing to produce and baselined in the program and RSIS Vol- 1992. ume II (Robotic Interface Standards) make available advanced technology. In contrast to the progress in However, the reality of the fiscal con- which is in Change Request status and robotics, no one is assigned to advanced has been issued for program-wide review straints precludes SSFP project managers automation in the Level II organization. via CR BB003065. This effort specifi- from taking full advantage of the There has been no effort directed by cally addresses the ATAC Report 12 rec- advanced technology being developed by Level II to incorporate advanced automa- ommendation to baseline the RSIS. How- Level I programs. tion. As a result, there are no provisions The Level I A&R program received ever, the Change Request still needs to be to review andsupport hard_are scars, high visibility through the recent SSF Evolution Symposium held at JSC. ATAC feels that the Engineering Proto-

10 softwarehooks,orotherprovisionsfor U.S. competitive position in space interface standards for its external sys- evolutionofthesystem.Theapproach robotics. ATAC is concerned that the tems. Although progress is being made, appearstobev&yShortsightedandmay SPDM may nothave tla_fu!l range of considerable work needs to be done to increaselifecycleoperationscosts. capabilities to support desiredservicing define, design, and test robotic interfaces Advancedautomationhasbeendeleted on the Space Station. ATAC is also con- for the Unpressurized Logistics Carders bytherestructuredSpaceStation. cerned that little progress has been made with their Cryogenic Nitrogen Carriers, AdvancedAutomationPrototypes in evaluating Telerobotic Ground Remote Cryogenic Oxygen Carriers, and Dry developedbySpaceStationLevelI may Operations for use in the baseline opera- Cargo Carriers, so that cryogenic sup- stillhaveanimpactonthebaseline tor control station. plies, dry supplies, and replacement program,butthisisverydifficultinthe Level II has been very active with its ORUs can be unloaded and handled by currentenvironment. Robotics Working Group trying to estab- the robotic systems. A sanctionedRoboticsWorking lish standards for robotic interfaces and GroupmanagedbyLevelII isnowvery other critical issues. ATAC commends activesponsoringmeetingsofthework this effort and visible progress, but is Assessment of Work Package 2 packagesandtheinternationalpartners. concerned that the planned shift of The WP2 contractor reported a continua- Progressisbeingmadeontheintegration responsibility of the Level II Robotics tion of the decline in A&R staffing that ofteleroboticsonspacestation.The Working Group from Level II to Work was evident at the time of ATAC Report developmentofRoboticSystemIntegra- Package 2 will reduce its influence in Number 12. And, at this time, all WP2 tionStandards(RSIS)iscrucialtothe establishing standards across all work ORUs are baselined for EVA mainte- implementationofroboticinterfacesand packages. standardsonSpaceStationenabling ATAC is also concerned that there is nance. However, the baseline designs generally do not preclude robotics. And teleroboticoperations.JSCintheircon- little or no provision in the Space Station WP2 contract requirements have been tractbaselinedEVAforexternalmainte- Freedom Program for evolution of the modified to state that "SSMB design shall nancewithroboticsbeingusedwhere robotic systems and no provision for baseline SPDM and/or SSRMS practicalandcost-effective.Presently, advanced automation or the evolution to mostJSCWorkPackage20RUsarenot advanced automation. Provisions need to manipulation for external ORUs selected on the basis of hazard to EVA crew serviceablebyrobots.Currently, there are be made in the overall program for no interfaces for grasping by telerobots advanced A&R evolution; this lack of members, crew member capability limitations, the potential for reducing on the ORUs. If these units are not attention to advanced technology and EVA maintenance time requirements, redesigned to be robot-compatible, the evolution planning will increase life cycle full burden of maintenance of the WP2 COSTS. reliability, and criticality." The WP2 ORUs will be through EVA. contractor is maintaining a "Robotic In conclusion, the ATAC assessment Candidate List" to identify ORUs that could subsequently be baselined for is that the Space Station program is mov- Assessment o_Work Package 1 ing toward the capability to have ORUs robotic manipulation. Currently the WP2 Work Package I did not send a repre- Robotic Candidate List contains 193 replaced by either EVA astronauts or sentative to support the ATAC meeting telerobots. This step is absolutely crucial ORUs which represent over 60 per cent or report on their A&R activities. of WP20RU maintenance man-hours to having adequate servicing capability There is currently no WP1 plan to required per year. on the Space Station. Without the capa- implement IVA automation or robotics. bility of interfacing for servicing by the In its planning for implementation of This approach will certainly cut front-end Canadian Special Purpose Dextrous automation and robotics, as in other costs but will increase the Life Cycle cost Manipulator system, the Space Station areas, work package 2 is still adapting to for operation of the Environmental Con- maintenance program would be seriously the recent program restructuring. The PIT trol and Life Support System and Power jeopardized. The U.S. is no longer pro- exercise may have provided improved Management and Distribution system. opportunities for robotic accommodation, viding telerobotic hardware for the Space However, Work Package 1 is supporting Station, which will seriously degrade the the Level II Robotics Working Group and is supporting the work to establish robotic

I1 butthedeletionoftheFTSwouldappear and thermal condition of the EPS. Nomi- on the use of FTS for ORU removal and tohavehadthe opposite effect, at least nal operations are automatic including replacement and are currently examining initially. Plans to make WP20RUs detection, _!solation,_and reconfigurat!0n_ the inieffacing-betwcen the Ca_nadian_ i robot-compatible, and to rely on robotics of the systemfor failure control. Caution SPDM afidihe-Epg:m_ules.q'hey h-ave to significantly offload EVA and warning conditions are automatically been an active participant in the Robotics requirements, are hampered by the facts determined and annunciated. The ground Working Grou p to establish the Robotic that the remaining (non-US) robots are controller' s task is t° maximizeproduc- Systems Integration Standards (RSI S) less well defined than was the FTS and tivity of power management by_!pa_d andare actively participating|n R_S!S the WP2/Canadian working relationship scheduling throughout the envelope of revisions with a goal of minimizing cost is not as well established as was the changing operational configurations impacts to SSF. relationship between WP2 and WP3. including remedial options after a fault Work Package 2 has no reluctance to has occurred. work the problems associated with estab- LeRC is developing an automation Assessment of Space Station lishing a role for non-US robotics in sta- program to assist the ground control Control Center tion assembly and maintenance. How- operators in the planning anddecisipn-- ..... __ i : i...... : ever, due to the uncertainties and making associated with power manage- The last report of the A_ACJdentified an unknowns about the robotics to be pro- ment control. They plan to test the pro- initial impact of program restructuring on vided by the international partners, WP2 gramon the Space Station Freedom the use of A&R in SSF operations. Th e seems to believe that responsible project Power Test-Bed. The advisory system reduction in number of Standard Data management requires them to plan on consists of three elements: failure diagno- Processors (SDP) and the limitation of EVA for all maintenance. The SPDM is sis, security analysis, and operations systems software in the Data Manage- not planned to be available to the pro- planning and scheduling. The diagnosis ment System (DMSO to 1 Mbyte will gram until 1997 (MB-7). This is a little expert system uses available telemetry requ!re_ the.tra_nsfer Of all but Category 1 _ = late for robotics to play a big role in data to determine the most likely cause of and time-critical Fault Detection, Isola- assembly. a failure. The security analysis system - tion, an d_Recovery (EDIR) functions to In report 12 A TAC_ indi_cake_dthat all conducts "what if" contingency analysis the ground, i.e., the SSCC. Inorder to .. of the advanced aut0mation functions tO determine thedsi_ _-co-niinue d opera- assesstheapplication of A&R tech_nology _I planned for _WP2 had been deleted from tion. The res_u]_t_so_fthis event_ analysis in thls context, othe ATAC_ r_eceix'ed _ very [ SSF. The hope was expressed that much alter the operating constraints and mis- comprehensive set of briefings on the of this advanced automation would be sion objectives which in turn require a SSCC architecture, current R&D work moved to the ground. The advanced revised operating plan. The scheduling and application plans in fault manage- automation has been removed from system provides assistance in developing ment, and on related A&R app!ications in - onboard SSF, but there appears to be no this plan by allocating resources accord- the Shuttle program. current plans for implementation of ing to the constraints identified by the Very successful Shuttle A&R appli- advanced automation on the ground. event analysis system. The output of cations have been develol_dunder die these programs acts as an expert advisor to the gr0und_contrqller- __ opment programs, and have been transi- Assessment_of Work Package 4 ATAC commends WP4 for their tioned to operational environments. The effort in designing and testing the EPS OAST,'Re_amSyste_msTS.an_SSF ady____c.edd:(R_S) _ase_vel-pro- [ The Electrical Power System (EPS) ORUs for telerobotic replacement capa- vide-da w3(ksfai!o nZbase-d_ffient consists of a flight support system on bility. Their design approa_c_h was to uti- for the development of expe_ gy-st-ems,_ -=-" board to control safety and time critical lize telerobotic manipulation for ORU and has been used by STS flight con- functions and ground-based dispatchers replacement with EVA as a backup. Over trollers to develop automated fault detec- -" t0perform the command and control 80 percent of the EPS ORUs are due to be tion capabilities for their individual decision-making activities to maximize robot-compatible. They conducted a productivity. The flight support system comprehensive test program with GSFC includes a significant level of automation for monitoring and control of the power

12 consolepositions,includingCommunica- The SSCC will provide distributed assessment of the JSC Engineering Direc- tions,MainEngineMonitoring,Guid- automation of the complex Space Station torate Model, Manipulator Analysis ance,NavigationandControl,Mechani- planning system. The planning and Graphical Interactive Kinematic calSystems,theRMS,andtheEmer- scheduling subsystem will provide the (MAGIK), and the CSA "MIKE" kine- gencyMissionControlCenter.Thisrep- tools for generation of tactical and short- matic model is ongoing at this time. Both resentsanexcellentandsignificantstep term plans and schedules with automatic models are Shuttle RMS based and intheapplicationofA&Rtechnologyto assessment and resource conflict include general requirements for model- controlcenteroperations,andshould resolution. ing of integrated operations of the provideaninitialtargetforSSCC. In summary, while the SSCC does SSRMS and SPDM along with the capa- SSCCadvanceddevelopmentwork provide automation of facility operations bility to model hands-off with the SRMS isplannedasfollows:At FEL,theflight and flight planning functions at FEL, for joint Shuttle/Space Station freelance controllersmonitoringonboardsystems ATAC believes the additional up-front robotic operations. The SSCC will rehost willhavetheFailureEnvironmental investment in flight systems monitoring one of these models after appropriate AnalysisTool(FEAT)forsystemsfailure will be far outweighed by the future cost review and analysis to ensure that all analysis.Forfailuredetection,theSSCC savings to NASA. SSCC planning and real-time robotic utilizesadvancedalgorithmsandspecial The capability to accomplish model- operations requirements can be met. The computations developed in conjunction ing of the Space Station Remote Manipu- present models may not include SPDM with the FEAT. Both failure analysis and lator System (SSRMS) is being devel- since the design information is not yet detection information is presented on oped for use in a console within the mature enough. In addition, due to the workstation monitors using displays SSCC. This capability will allow the issue of CSA/USA roles and responsibili- developed with the "SAMMI" display ground controllers to model onboard ties which is still being worked by the builder tool. This tool provides flexible SSFP robotic operations prior to actual SSFP at Level II, neither the SSCC support for computation and display of astronaut operations, which will assure design team nor the MAT has been able failure detection and analysis at FEL. that functions will be accomplished in the to obtain detailed technical data regarding The post restructure SSCC develop- most reliable, efficient, and safe manner. the specifies of the planned CSA MIKE ment plan shows the full integration of Since most robotic operations on SSF models. the fault detection and fault analysis will include the use of the Special Pur- capabilities at the MTC delivery. Work pose Dextrous Manipulator (SPDM) on on AI/expert systems (such as failure the end of the SSRMS, modeling of the Assessment of Payload Opera- detection with rule-based expert systems) entire SSRMS/SPDM coordinated system tions Integration Center (POIC) does not start until post MTC. The SSCC will be required within the SSCC robotics architecture has centralized processing of console to assure that all onboard opera- The development of the POIC has as a the command/contrgl, fault detection, and tions are evaluated prior to onboard use stated goal the avoidance of future opera- fault analysis functions while distributing by the astronauts. tions costs through the use of expert sys- the planning and flight design functions. The present plan for the SSCC, as tems in system monitoring, control, and It does, however, retain the option to dis- well as Space Station Training Facility fault analysis. The only current A&R tribute the system failure detection and (SSTF), is to take full advantage of the application described was an M-based analysis processing. ATAC believes that robotics modeling being accomplished tutoring system to train payload special- the introduction of rule-based expert sys- within the JSC/Engineering Directorate ists and the supporting operations team. tems for onboard systems failure detec- and/or the Canadian Space Agency The briefing on the architecture design tion and analysis should be accelerated. (CSA). The JSC Mission Operations for the POIC was less detailed than that Secondly, ATAC understands the ratio- Directorate has an active Model Assess- on the SSCC, but was sufficient to iden- nale for a centralized command/control ment Team (MAT) which is continually tify potential system elements to support function, but believes all or most of the assessing and reviewing available models this automation. However, there is a gen- failure detection and analysis should be for reuse in the SSCC and SSTF. The eral concernthat budget decisions could decentralized. It is felt this will provide a create similar barriers to automation as more flexible environment for the devel- described above for the SSCC. opment of advanced automated systems.

13 Crew-tendedpayloadoperations are point for coordination, there is currently In summary, SSF life science pay- planned to be similar to Spacelab opera- very minimal if any advanced A&R tech- loads are highly dependent upon crew tions. Due to budget constraints, the nology planned for use in SSF life sci- support, and rely very little on advanced development of a planning and schedul- ence experiments. In addition, real-time A&R. Thus, very minimal return from ing system has been deferred, and the video uplink capabilities have been life science experiments is expected until scheduling system used for the current deleted as _fSSF restructuring. PMC. SSF materiai science payloads Spacelab will be used into the late 1990s. Because of heing highly dependent Upon generally do not require the crew other Where payload crntrol can be automated interaction with the crew, there are no life than for experiment setup, and science from the ground, this will be supported in science experiments planned on SSF return is expected to begin during MTC. parallel with crew-controlled operations. during MTC except for those brief times SSFP should designate a science A&R Because t_eprimary function of the that the crew is present on STS flights. focal point, and should provide real-time POIC is to support payioad operations, Material science SSF experiment video uplink capabilities to enhance tele- many of the p0tefitiaI appI_dations of areas include piZotein crys-taF_fwthl science effectiveness. A&R will be depenffefit bn t_e experi- solidificatlohsystefns,, fluid physics and • :z : ments being flown, consequently, they dynamics, combustion, containerless pro- must be developed along with the exper- cessing, and biotechnology. Science New A&R Issues: Space iments and cannot be evaluated at this return from material science experiments Station Control Center time. will begin in 1997 during MTC and will continue into PMC and beyond. Science Space Station Control Center operations during times of crew presence Assessment of SSF Science will be similar to Spacelab flights except Automation for the added tasks of collecting and Payloads During the ATACReport 12 review in securing of samples, experiment setup for February i99i, it was indicated that all ATAC received for the first time a brief- unmanned runs, and rack/module equip- SSFP automation functions would be ing from the scientific community on ment changeout. Unmanned operations. : migrated to the ground Space Station proposed SSF life and material science will require minimal two-way communi- Control Center (SSCC). pursuant to th_s experiments, and to what extent A&R is cations between payloads and ground. new direction, ATAC recommended in being utilized. Payload automation will typically consist Re_ i2 that: _SSFP develop and Life sciences biological research of preprogrammed command sequences implementa plan prior to CDR to include facilities on SSF include a Centrifuge and automated fault detection for out-of- advanced automation functions in the Facility, a Gravitational Biology Facility, limits conditions. Space Station Control Center (SSCC), the an EVA/Space Physiology Facility, a There appears to be little SSF plan- Space Station Payload Center (SSPC), i Gas-Grain Simulation Facility, and a ning being implemented to support pro- and thek_suppo_ng facilities with even= Controlled Ecological Life Support Sys- posed science experiments. Also, there tuaI migration to onboai-dapplications to tem Test Facility. Because life science appears to be a lack of understanding by ensure increased productivity and reduce experiments are highly dependent upon experimenters of advanced A&R benefits, overalloperations costs. _ " _ : support from the crew, there is a particu- and which SSFP organization is At the August 1991 ATAC review, it lar interest in utilizing advanced technol- established to coordinate A&R require- ogy where there can be a significant sav- ments. ATAC is concerned that there was reported that the funding Would n0t support a rule-based expert system tech- ings in crew time compared to the costs. appears to be no A&R focal point in nology development until post MTC. The Life sciences experiments can benefit the SSFP organization to which science significantly from telescience capabilities payload personnel can come for Level I Advanced Development Program review indicated that there are marly which would provide improved commu- expertise and advice. nications between crew and principal expert system prototypes for power, thermal control, environmental control, investigators, and which would allow for real-time changes to experiment protocols. However, given the current funding limitations and lack of an SSFP focal

14 etc., that have been developed to the focal point within SSFP for the payload ORUs to meet robotic capability are not point to justify future implementation community to come to for expertise and within the baseline program. Also, it was within the SSCC. advice on DMS design requirements. It is indicated that the SPDM may not be able ATAC's opinion that a focal point within to support robotic change-out of ORUs ATAC recommends that the SSCC SSFP for advanced A&R expertise 'and even if they were modified to software development team evalu- consultation available to the payload accommodate the operations. ate and implement applicable por- community would be very productive for tions of the Level I Advanced enhanced SSF science return. ATAC recommends that SSFP Development expert systems into insure that external ORUs are the baseline SSCC prior to MTC. ATAC recommends that SSFP robot-compatible and developed increase its level of expert consul- with standardized robotic inter- tation and assistance to the cur- faces on the assumption that rently proposed life and material SPDM will have the capability to Onboard SSF Science, sciences experimenters on support ORU changeout. Operations, and advanced A&R technologies to enhance science productivity and SSRMS and SPDM Maintenance make the payload community more knowledgeable of A&R Accommodations Science Productivity benefits. The Canadian A&R Space Program, as Science return from material science represented by SPAR, has demonstrated experiments will begin in 1997 during Robotic and EVA SSFP outstanding performance in space MTC after launch of the U.S. Laboratory robotics with the Shuttle RMS and other Maintenance with minimal, if any, enhancements from previous robotics applications, and has utilization of advanced A&R. Material Since the ATAC Progress Report 12 established a large experience base for science payload automation will typically there has been an extensive effort to space robotics. SPAR's experience lends consist of preprogrammed command develop standards for assuring that strong credibility to the anticipated suc- sequences and automated fault detection robotics can be used for SSFP mainte- cess of SSRMS and SPDM. The SPDM for out-of-limits conditions. Life science nance functions, including ORU change- will have considerably more dextrous experiments are highly dependent upon out. The Robotic Accommodation robotic capabilities than the SRMS and support from the crew, and can benefit Requirements document (RSIS Vol. I) can provide significant capabilities to significantly from telescience capabilities has been baselined via directive support ORU maintenance requirements. which would provide improved commu- BB003023, the Robotic Interface Stan- However, ATAC is concerned that the nications between crew and principal dards and PDRD Section 3 Table 3-55 SSRMS and SPDM robotic capabilities to investigators, and which would allow for have been developed and issued for support SSF needs may be reduced if not real-time changes to experiment proto- program-wide review via CR BB003065; fully integrated into SSFP plans. cols. However, real-time video uplink Robot-to-ORU interface testing is in capabilities have been deleted as a result progress at GSFC, JSC, and CSA/SPAR; ATAC recommends that SSFP of SSF restructuring. and SSFP Level II has defined an IVA insure that an appropriate process A conclusion of a study conducted maintenance demand study. However, is established to fully integrate by the SSFP Level I Engineering Office during the ATAC work package reviews SSRMS and SPDM design into indicated that there is currently no visible of ORUs most of the contractors indi- SSF plans. cated that modifications of their proposed

15 A&R Technology year, th!s prograrr__has focusedo n c_0m- ATAC recommends that SSFP pleting demonstrations of advanced increase the Level I Engineering Utilization automation software on SSFP high Prototype Development Program fidelity testbeds prior to the Critical support for A&R technology con- Design Review (CDR). These efforts tributions to the SSF baseline Level I Engineering Prototype have increased the awareness of the SSFP configuration. workpackage contractors of the benefits Development of advanced A&R technologies, and have The Level I Engineering Prototype initiated an integrated effort for prelimi- Development Program is the only signifi- nary technology verification and cant advanced A&R development being validation. pursued within the SSFP. During the past

16 A TA C Progress Report 13 Recommendations

Space Station Control Recommendation HI: Robotics Center and EVA SSFP Maintenance

"SSFP insure that external ORUs are robot-compatible and developed with Recommendation I: Space standardized robotic interfaces on the Station Control Center assumption that SPDM will have the Automation capability to support ORU changeout."

"The SSCC software development team evaluate and implement applicable Recommendation IV: SSRMS portions of the Level I Advanced Devel- and SPDM Accommodations opment expert systems into the baseline SSCC prior to MTC." "SSFP insure that an appropriate process is established to fully integrate SSRMS and SPDM design into SSF plans." Onboard SSF Science, Operations, and A&R Technology Maintenance Utilization

Recommendation H: Science Recommendation V: Level I Productivity Engineering Prototype "SSFP increase the level of expert Development consultation and assistance to the currently proposed life and material "SSFP increase the Level I Engineering sciences experimenters on advanced Prototype Development Program support A&R technologies to enhance science for A&R technology contributions to the productivity and make the payload SSF baseline configuration." community more knowledgeable of A&R benefits."

17 References

1. NASA. 1985. Advancing Automation and Robotics for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy, March 1985, NASA TM 87566.

2. NASAl 1985. Advancing Automation and Robotics for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy, Progress Report 1, April-September 1985, NASA TM 87772.

3. NASA. 1986. Advancing Automation and Robotics for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy, Progress Report 2, October 1985-March 1986, NASA TM 88785.

4. NASA. 1986. Advancing Automation and Robotics for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy, Progress Report 3, April-September, 1986, NASA TM 89190.

5. NASA. 1987. Advancing Automation and Robotics for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy, Progress Report 4, October 1986-May 15, 1987, NASA TM 89811.

6. NASA. 1987. Advancing Automation and Robotics for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy, Progress Report 5, May 16 - September 1987, NASA TM 100777.

7. NASA. 1988. Advancing Automation and Robotics for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy, Progress Report 6, October 1987-March 1988, NASA TM 100989.

8. NASA. 1988. Advancing Automation and Robotics for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy, Progress Report 7, April t988-September 1988, NASA TM 101691.

9. NASA. 1989. Advancing Automation and Robotics for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy, Progress Report 8, October 1988-March 1989, NASA TM 101561.

10. NASA. 1990. Advancing Automation and Robotics for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy, Progress Report 9, March 1989-July 1990, NASA TM 101647.

11. NASA. 1990. Advancing Automation and Robotics for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy, Progress Report 10, July 13, 1989 to February 14, 1990, NASA TM 102668.

12. NASA. 1990. Advancing Automation and Robotics for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy, Progress Report 11, February 14, 1990 to August 23, 1990, NASA TM 102872.

13. NASA. 1991. Advancing Automation and Robotics for the Space Station and for the U.S. Economy, Progress Report 12, August 23, 1990 to February 14, 1991, NASA ! TM 103851. i | B

18 = Appendix A

Space Station Freedom Advanced Programs has recently been reorganized within the Level I Program A&R Progress Space Station Engineering Division to reflect the priorities resultant from Pro- The Space stafionFreedom Program gram Restructuring. The Advanced (SSFP) has committed to apply A&R Development Program has been retitled technologies to the design, development, Engineering Prototype Development and and operation of the baseline Space Sta- placed within the Systems Development tion when found to be appropriate within Branch of Level I Engineering. This the context of overall system design, to move more closely ties advanced tech- have a favorable cost to-benefit ratio, and nology developments to baseline issues where the enabling technology is suffi- and concerns, and facilitates the opportu- ciently mature. The program recognizes nity to insert new technology where A&R technologies are experiencing rapid appropriate. Evolution Studies has been change, exhibiting varying levels of tech- placed within the Systems Engineering nology readiness, and have unique and Analysis Branch to more closely requirements for successful integration align growth and evolution concepts with with conventional design approaches and baseline scenarios. system engineering methodologies. Con- The Engineering Prototype Devel- sequently, the provision for design opment activity enhances baseline Space accommodations and mature technologies Station flight and ground systems capa- which permit the program to fully capi- bilities by prototyping applications of talize on A&R advances during the devel- advanced technology. These improve- opment and evolution of Space Station ments will lead to increased system pro- Freedom is an important consideration. ductivity and reliability, and help prevent As such, the program intends to leverage increased operations and life cycle costs the significant momentum in A&R due to technological obsolesence. The research and technology development activity evaluates technologies needed for within other government, industrial, and Freedom's flight and ground systems. academic initiatives. This is accomplished by building user/ Progress by the SSFP is described in technologist teams within flight and the following sections. research centers, developing applications using a mix of conventional and advanced techniques, addressing transi- Level I A&R Progress tion and implementation issues, and eval- The Advanced Programs activity at uating performance and documenting Level I was initially divided into two design accommodations for technology major components, Evolution Studies and insertion and implementation. Specifi- Advanced Development. A detailed cally, cooperative arrangements have overview of Advanced Programs was been pursued with the Office of Aeronau- provided in ATAC Progress Report 7, tics, Exploration and Technology; the Appendix B, "Overall Plan for Applying Space Shuttle Program; the Office of A&R to the Space Station and for Space Science and Application; DARPA; Advancing A&R Technology." Addi- and other DoD programs. tional information can be found in ATAC As a result of these efforts, the SSFP Progress Report 8, Appendix A, "OSS is acquiring mature technologies, tools, A&R Progress," and ATAC Progress Reports 9, 10, 11, and 12 Appendices A. A-1 andapplicationsforkeysystems.In IntheFlightandGroundSystems ground-based capabilities and to later addition,performancespecificationsand area,advancedautomationapplications migrate those functions back to space. designaccommodationsarebeingdevel- arebeingdevelopedforPowerManage- The most significant accomplishments opedfortheinsertionofadvanced mentandDistribution(PMAD)andEnvi- during this reporting period follow. technologies. ronmentalControlandLifeSupportSys- PMAD FDIR application and user Currently,themajorityoftheEngi- tem(ECLSS)atWorkPackagel, the interface software on the Marshall Space neeringPrototypeDevelopmentFY91 ThermalControlSystem(TCS)and Flight Center (MSFC) PMAD testbed has budgetof$7.4MisdedicatedtoA&R applicationsfortheMissionControlCen- been linked with the Lewis Research applicationsandtec_hn01ogy__develop- ter (MCC) and Space Station Control Center (LeRC) Power Management and ment.Nineteentasksaredividedbetween Center (SSCC) at Work Package 2, Control (PMAC) testbed. The second Flight and Ground Systems_($2.6M), Power Management and Control (PMAC) successful test of this linkage demon- Space Station Data Systems ($2.3M), at Work Package 4, and a Spacelab scien- strated the ability for LeRC and MSFC to AdvancedSoftware Engine erin_g tific experiment. The applications focus schedule primary and secondary loads ($1.4M), and Telerobotic Systems heavilyon Fault Detection, Isolation, and respectively; LeRC then detected a fault, ($1.1M). Thirteen of the tasks are Reconfiguration (FDIR) and provide_a rescheduled its loads, and issued a power leveraged-by-]oini-funding from the range of support in system status monitor- reduction warning to MSFC; MSFC then Office of Aeronautics and Space Tech- ing, sa_ngT_d-recoverj. All area mix of automatically shed all low-priority sec- nology (OAST), theShutt!e_.p_rogram, tlie conv enti0nal andlKn0wledge-Based Sys- ondary loads. It is planned to continue United States Air Force (USAF), and the tem (KBS) techniques and each provides linked test-bed demonstrations to further Defense Advanced Research Projects apowerfuluser interface to support inter- integrate power generation and power Agency (DARPA). The joint funding actions in an advisory mode. The primary distribution automation. PMAD Bread- adds $7.3M to the tasks and enables benefits of these applications are boards are shown in figure A i. The Texas Engineering Prototype Development to improved system monitoring, enhanced A&M Center for the Commercial Devel- have considerably greater impact within fault detection and isolation capabilities, opment of Space has expressed interest in the Station program thanits fundinglevel and increased productivity for SSF mis- applying Electrical Power System auton- would indicate. Also worthy of note is the sion control personnel and crew mem- omy technology derived from SSM/ significant participation of Work Package bers. Increased system reliability via the PMAD to their Commercial Expendable contractors within the activity. Several detection and prevention of incipient fail- Transport program. This may provide an have focused their own internal Indepen- ures, reduced IVA maintenance time, and additional flight opportunity. dent Research & Development funding to better monitoring with fewer sensors are Advanced automation techniques address complementary objectives of also added benefits of advanced FDIR have been selected to support the ECLSS Engineering Prototype Development. techniques. Predevelopment Operational System Test This joint funding and coordination sig- These tasks provide an understand- scheduled to begin evaluating the Air nificantly augments the amount of ing of the design accommodations Revitalization Subsystem in January resources devoted to building SSF A&R required to support advanced automation 1992. Work continues on a potable water applications, and facilitates technology (e.g., instrumentation, interfaces, control quality monitoring prototype by using tranSitiOn tothe baseline siatiom _ redundancy, etc,) and identify KBS inputs from a high-fidelity simulation. During FY91, the continuing resolu- implementation issues (e.g., integration The Thermal Control automation tion process, program restructuring,_and of KBS and conventional algorithmic project is belng integrated into the SSF FY92 Congressional delib-erations forced techniques, processing, data storage, Thermal Control System (TCS) test-bed Engineering Prototype Development to communication requirements, and soft- to support the TCS verification process. allocate funds in seven increments. The Ware deveJopment, testing, and mainte- Communications between the RODB-like result of this "Just-in Time" financial nance procedures) required for KBS software and the thermal test-bed data management exercise has been numerous development and support. As more and collection software has been established schedule slips, strained joint funding rela- more functions are scrubbed to a ground and will be tested during ambient and tionships, and an uncertainty regarding implementation, the value and importance thermal vacuum tests this fall. The TCS task continuation during the coming fis- of these tasks increase, for they provide test-bed at JSC is shown in figure A2. cal year. the necessary R&D foundation to develop

A-2 0I_IGINAL PAGE BL_CK AND WHITE PH;OT_'_'RAP_

Digital Dual channel Dc Dc-Dc Converter (6.25 kw) Remote Power Controller (50amp)

Figure A1. Power management and distribution breadboards.

The RTDS continues to expand and Rotating Dome. This prototype demon- Investigator have been actively involved make dramatic improvements within strated that KBS techniques can signifi- in the prototype's development and Space Shuttle Mission Operations. The cantly improve an astronaut's ability to evaluation. Results of this task are being Flight Director Wind Monitor system perform in-flight science and provides used to influence design requirements for flawlessly supported Flight Directors dur- protocol flexibility, detection of interest- Space Station Freedom laboratory ing STS-37, -39, -40, and -43. In addi- ing phenorfiena, improved user interface experiment interfaces to ensure that tion, new Fuel Cell and Data Processing for experiment control, real-time data analogous capabilities can be provided Expert Systems were placed on-line in acquisition, monitoring, and on-board during MTC and PMC. Recently, a the Shuttle MCC. Improved data acquisi- trouble shooting of experiment equip- number of scientific principle investi- tion software was also used successfully ment. The system, known as the Astro- gators have indicated that "intelligent in support of the recent Shuttle missions. naut Science AdvisOr, was ground-tested tending" will be crucial to their A prototype KBS advisory experi- in the Spacefab Baseline Data Collection experiments. ment protocol manager has been devel- Facility and was iased-to support the Within Space Station Data Systems, oped at Ames Research Center (ARC) SLS-1 mission on STS-40. The prototype the computer and network architectures and the Massachusetts Institute of Tech- will be flown and used in-flight on SLS-2 of Space Station Freedom's Data Man- nology (MIT) for a Spacelab-based during the STS-63 mission. Crew mem- agement System are being analyzed to vestibular physiology experiment, the bers and the experiment's Principal

A-3 ORtGINAL PAGE BLACK AND WHITE PHOTE)G'R,A_P_

Figure A2. Thermal control system testbed at Johnson Space Center.

provide increased performance and relia- currently being performed. Results have The COMputer Aided Scheduling bility and to determine long-range growth recently been communicated to the Pro- System (COMPASS) continues to requirements. Additionally, advanced gram, the prime contractors, and the improve in functionality and is used in a mission planning and scheduling_tools are DMS subcontractors. variety of scheduling applications. It has being developed and demonstrated for An evaluation of DMS system inter- been used to derive and highlight sched- use on board Freedom as well as on the face options and computer hardware and ule scenarios within the SSFP Design ground. The most significant accom- software interfaces is currently being Reference Mission documents and is plishments during this reporting period supported by a set of STS Development currently being evaluated for its ability to follow. Test Objective (DTO) tasks. Recently, an schedule facility l"esources and crew The Advanced DMS Architectures STS DTO on STS-43 using a Macintosh training time. MDSSC has already task continues to evaluate existing and portable evaluated cur_sor controlharfl- selected it to schedule time within their proposed uni_- and multiProcessors; net - ware, use of on-line manuals,_wor_d pro- SSFP facilities. work, protocol and connectivity options; cessing, management of diskettes, and a In Advanced Software Engineering, and system management software. Tests number of other advanced crew interface software tools, methodologies, and envi- and evaluations defining requirements and operational support capabilities. ronments are being pursued to suppQ_rt the and interface specifications (hardware Computer and software was also used to design, development, and maintenance of and software) for high-performance, support the Lower Body Negative Pres- SSFP advanced software and system fault-tolerant multiproeessors capable of sure Suit Experiment. engineering applications. Tasks have numeric and symbolic computation are included developing and evaluating Ada

A-4 cross-compilersforexistingKBStools theSpaceStationTrainingOfficeto cooperative,equalstatusdual-6-dofarms. andbenchmarkingtheirperformance demonstratethevalueofICATarchitec- Anarratedvideotapeexplainingthetech- usingoperationaladvancedautomation turesandtheirfeasibilityforbaseline nologiesdemonstratedhasbeenproduced prototypes,creatingtoolkitswhichsup- trainingoperations.Thefirstprototype anddistributed.JPLisnowcompletinga portthereuseofdesigninformation,and beingdevelopedisfortrainingonthe seriesofoperatorperformancetestswith developinganddemonstratingverifica- SSFThermalControlSystem.Addition- noviceoperatorstoestablishthestandard tion,validation,testing,andmaintenance ally,theICATarchitectureisbeingeval- learningcurveforoperatortrainingin toolsandtechniquesforflightandground uatedtosupportSpacelabcrewtrainingat theseadvancedtechnologies. software.IntelligentComputerAided MSFC. Thesetechnologiesarebeingtrans- Trainingarchitecturesarebeingdevel- TeleroboticSystemsfocusesonthe ferredtotheintegratedPIT-segment opedanddemonstratedinoperational reductionofIVA teleoperationtimefor dual-armworkceilunderdevelopmentat settings.Thesearchitecturesoffertraining dexterousroboticstasks,eveninthe JSC.Currenteffortsinvolverehostingthe improvementsbyreducingtheoverhead presenceofsignificantcommunications softwareinanIRISgraphicsworkstation involvedin settinguptrainingenviron- orcomputationtimedelays.Advanced inreal-timeAda.Thecontrolalgorithms ments,schedulingclasses,anddevelop- teleroboticsreducesanoperator'swork- havebeentranslatedintoAdaandare ingsimulations.Themostsignificant loadbyallowingtherobottocontrolfine beingverifiedwitha7-dofRobotics accomplishmentsduringthisreporting parameters(suchasforceexertedagainst Researcharmanda6-dofhandcon- periodfollow. asurface)whiletheoperatordirectsthe troller,whiletheOCMVsoftwareis TheFailureEnvironmentAnalysis task.Withimprovedsensing,planning, optimizedtoruninsidethegraphicsenvi- toolhasbeenselectedbyLevelII asthe andreasoning,anddisplaysandcontrols, ronment.JPLandJSCarenowworking standardtoolforintegratingsubsystem simpletaskslikeunobstructedinspections cooperativelytolinktheirtwotele- FailureModesEffectsAnalysis(FMEA) andtranslationsmaybeaccomplishedby roboticslabstogetheroveranexisting data.Thistoolusesdirectedgraphs remoteoperatorsinthepresenceofsig- Internetnetworksothatroboticsimula- (DiGraphs)tomodelcause-and-effect nificantcommunicationstimedelay. tionscanbedrivenremotelyfromeither relationships,providingsignificantbene- Supervisedautonomycanhelpfreethe ofthetwosites. fitsoverfaulttrees.Digraphingfacilitates on-orbitcrewfromroutine,repetitive, At GSFC,four-elementcapacitive modelingandproducesavery-high- andboringmaintenancetaskswhenever reflectorsensorskinarrayshaveinstalled fidelitysimulationcapabilityasanatural possible.Themostsignificantaccom- onbothPuma762andRRC1607robot by-productofreliabilityengineering. plishmentsduringthisreportingperiod arms.ThePuma'sarrayisconstructed TheSoftwareSupportEnvironment follow. entirelyfromflight-provenmaterialsand (SSE)iscurrentlybeingevaluatedand Sharedcontrolsoftwarealgorithms coatings,includingtheappliqueNASA characterizedforpotentialtechnology thatpermitsimultaneoushumanand logo.Thearray'sbuilt-incontrollogic enhancementstosupportgroundsoftware computer-generatedcontrol,local/remote stopstherobotupto12inchesfroma development.A varietyofComputer controlalgorithmpartitioningtohandle sensedobject(anydielectricorconduc- AidedSoftwareEngineering(CASE) timedelay,UserMacroInterface(UMI) tor)andmaintainsthatdistanceregard- environmentsarebeingsurveyedfortheir softwaretobuildandexecutesequenceof lessoflightingorhumidity.If theobject contributionstowardsimprovingman- tasksteps(macros)undersupervisedcon- advances,thePumawillbackaway.If agementofthesoftwarelifecycle.The trol,andOperatorCoachedMachine theobjectretreats,thePumawillattempt AirForceSoftwareLifeCycleSupport Vision(OCMV)toallowhumanstocor- tocontinueitstrajectory.Qualificationof Environment(SLCSE)wasevaluatedin rectandupdatevision-basedworldmod- thecapaciflector'ssensitivitytovarious termsofmodularity,dependenceon els,havebeendevelopedandextensively flightprovenmaterialsisunderway. VAX/VMSservices,amountandclarity testedontheJPLTeleroboticsTest-Bed. Capaciflectorsarebeingshippedtoboth ofdocumentation,anditslanguageusage Afull setofsatelliteassemblyandmain- JSCandJPLforintegrationintotheir in lightof SSFcodingstandardsforpos- tenancetasks,includingsatellitecapture, testbeds.Preliminarytestswithcapaci- sibleintegrationwiththeSSEtoimprove servicingbayaccess,ORUchangeout, flectancesensorsmountedonasimulated thegrowthandevolutionof SSEservices. satelliterefueling,electronicsboard box-typeORUhavedetectedmounting A seriesofintelligenttrainingsys- changeout,andsatellitecloseout,have holesandnarrowslotsforblinddocking/ temsarescheduledtobeprototypedfor beenperformedundertimedelaywith A-5 berthing.Thistechnologyhasaccelerated personnel to manage the insertion of except emphasis is placed on integration rapidlytodemonstratingtotally A&R technology within the baseline pro- and verification rather than on hardware autonomousORUberthing,withthe gram. These individuals are responsible development. This allows for the oppor- ORUmountedsensorsdetectingan for ensuring integration across Work tunity to exploit the expertise and opening,aligningthepayload'sfacepar- Packages and International Partners (e.g., resources available at NASA field center- allelandthepayload'sZaxisnormalto ORU Standards, DDCU locati0n, MSS line OrganiZations, for example, the JSC it,andinsertingthepayloadintothe Delta PDRissues). They also address Automation & Robotics Division. cavity.Thistechnologyholdsgreat issues with impact at a programmatic Robotics integration islogically divided promiseinsuccess-fullycompleting leVel Suchashand controller commonai- into R0bot_c MaintenancelServicing Task identifiedORUchangeouttaskswhere ity, SSF/roboiicdynamlc interactions, integ_a-tlbn. MSS Ifftegration, an-d _iher theSPDMorSSRMScamerasmaybe anc(=veri_cadon_A/ddlt{onaii),io_all onl (e.gi_ J_ RM-_ integrati0n, _-ogrami blockedfromviewingaberthingslotby orbit assembly and maintenance respon- level Studies, Change Requests, etch). The thegraspedORU. sibility resides at Level II. A force- robotics integration Technical Area Man- reflective hand controller for control of ager is proposed to become responsible end-effectors such as the SSRMS and for RSIS Volumes I and II, the Dextrous Level II A&R Progress APS is shown in figure A3. Task List, the MSC and SPDM System Robotics integration is being defined Requirements Documents (this is a joint Level II devotes two full-time civil as an SSFP Technical Management Area. responsibility with CSA), the robotics servants, several part-time civil servants, It is roughly analogous to an ACD Agent, and a number of support contracting

Figure A3. Force-reflective handcontroller.

A-6 section of the Program Master Verifica- program-level resource just like weight Module Rack Integration Analysis and tion Plan, and to chair the Robotics and power. Specific allocations to each Optimization Tool, Packaging Manager Working Group. The Technical Area Work Package arid InterriationaI Partner (PACKMAN) and Automated Logistics Manager is also proposed to be the have been made. Level II has also initi- Element Planning System (ALEPS). NASA integrator of the MSS and JEM ated an IVA maintenance demand study The Work Package 1 Prime Contrac- RMS into the SSFP. and delegated the study responsibility to tor independently is seeking ways to Since ATAC Report 12, the RSIS WP1. increase crew effectiveness and produc- Volume I Robotic Accommodation Level II has initiated a collision pre- tivity by using automation and robotics. Requirements has been baselined and the diction and avoidance trade study. This Restructuring has resulted in a longer RSIS Volume II Robotic Interface Stan- study is expected to determine the num- Man-Tended phase of SSF which dards and PDRD Section 3 Table 3-55 ber and location of external cameras presents a golden opportunity for have been developed and issued for required to support collision avoidance scientific use of the microgravity program-wide review. Additionally, using only operator cues provided by environment. Advanced automation and Robot-to-ORU interface testing was con- direct and indirect viewing. It wilt also IVA robotics can be applied to increase eluded at GSFC and has begun at JSC evaluate the added value of automated experiment utilization during this phase. and CSA/Spar. The Dextrous Task List collision prediction. The results of this Particularly suitable to robotics has been refined and a list of Robot- study are expected by early 1992 and will application are materials transfer and Compatible ORUs to be incorporated into be used to recommend changes to the packaging, experiment loading and the PDRD has been generated. A total of PDRD as appropriate. unloading, limited remote operation of 413 ORUs, which represents 48% of Level II is also leading an effort to lab equipment, and remote maintenance SSFP external ORUs, have been identi- integrate the various robotic simulation inspection. After the Permanently fied. This provides a potential of offload- activities within the SSFP. A Robotics Manned milestone is reached, crew time ing 571 maintenance man-hours from Simulation Splinter to the Robotics will continue to be in great demand. The EVA per 8.33 years which represents a Working Group has been chartered to man-tended phase can be used as a period 70% offload of EVA to robotics. evaluate, coordinate, and recommend to prove the capabilities of advanced There has been an ongoing interna- robotic simulation activities. embedded automation and robotics and tional program issue concerning the loca- verify both the low level of risk and tion of the DC-DC Converter Units enhanced station operational capabilities (DDCUs) for the ESA Attached Pressur- Work Package 1 A&R Progress expected from robotics application prior ized Module and the NASDA Japanese to the permanently manned phase. During its long operational lifetime, Experiment Module. Level II initiated a significantly large amounts of Space Sta- study involving ESA, NASDA, and the tion Freedom design knowledge and EVA & Robotics community to deter- Work Package 2 A&R Progress experience concerning the different sub- mine if external DDCUs could be made systems and components are, and will be, The following paragraphs describe roboticaily compatible. An intensive generated. Trade studies, alternative the organization for automation and cooperative effort has resulted in two designs, configuration simulations, and robotics being developed within Work candidate robot/EVA compatible config- prototype systems will be commissioned Package 2 at both JSC and MDSSC under urations. This study has demonstrated and conducted producing a flow of internal funding and the prime contract. that cooperation between the external knowledge and experience throughout the Space Station A&R is centered in the equipment developer and the robotics whole spectrum of engineering and sci- Project Integration Office of the Space community is the key to successful entific disciplines. Station Projects Office. This office is implementation of robot-compatible To support WPI, several tools have responsible for defining requirements for design. been developed. These are the Design A&R while the actual implementation is SSF internal and external mainte- Alternatives/Rationale Tool (DART), done by the various system and element nance responsibility has been formally Environmental Control and Life Support organizations. Engineering management delegated to the In-flight Maintenance System Simulator (ECLSS-Simulator), support from the institution comes from Working Group. IVA, EVA, and Robotic the A&R division's chief scientist who is crew time has been established as a A-7 alsotheFunctional Area Manager (FAM) space models from the Failure Environ- conducted by a diagnostic expert system for A&R. Support for integration of the ment Analysis Tool. It is projected to be and by a security analysis system. The Canadian robotics elements with Work delivered by the PMC software release. diagnostic system uses available teleme- Package 2's mobile transporter is pro- The DMS FDIR expert system now try data to determine the most likely vided by both the project office and the includes an MTC laboratory module cause of the failure while the security institution. In a recent institutional reor- model with local bus and MDM models analysis system conducts contingency ganization, JSC formed an A&R division currently being developed. This activity (What if...?) analyses to determine the with four branches: Intelligent Systems, is forming the basis of the DMS System risk of continued operation. The results of Flight Robotic Systems, Robotic Systems Management FDIR FSSR. Finally, the these event analyses alter the operating Technology, and Space Systems Auto- TCS automation project is a joint activity constraints and mission objectives, WhLCh mated Integration and Assembly Facility with _F Levei I Engineering Prototype in turn require a revlsec[0perating plan. (SSAIAF). Development. As described earlier it is The scheduling system provides this plan The _ prime contractor's A&R well on schedule to support baseline TCS by allocating resources according to the group is organized Similarly to the JSC evaluation. constraints identified during event analy- organization. Three main groups are sis. Human operators coordinate the managed within system's engineering and exchange of information among these integration: A&R analysis, A&R devel- Work Package 4 A&R Progress four systems, opment, and A&R integration. While The Work Package 4 Engineering One of the strategies used during the there is no strong contractual obligation Support Center will be used to evaluate latest restructuring of the Space Station or requirement for A&R, the prime con- the impact of these decision support sys- Freedom project was to move all but the tractor has been working to ensure that tems in a ground control environment. most essential fuctionality from aboard technology point solutions can influence This facility features a real-time data sys- the space station to the ground control baseline design. center. WP1 activities have been refo- tem with an open, distributed architec- Within Robotics, the contractor has ture. In this environment, the focus will cused to address the needs of ground- aggresively pursued making the high- be on total power system operations and based operations. maintenance external ORUs robotically the evolution of automated decision aids The refocused approach concentrates compatible. As of August 1991, the WP1 that have the same look and feel as the on partitioning control decisions for the candidate list consisted of 193 ORUs. baseline's proposed control productS. electric power system into four decision- This represents over 60% of the This provides a common basis for making entities. The first, the flight sup- MMH/YR requirement for MB-I through measuring the benefitS of automating port system, is responsible for issuing the MB-7. Furthermore, it has been deter- diagnosis, security analysis, and resource commands to the electric power system mined that baseline designs do not pre- schedUlifig. aboard the space station. It monitors the clude robotics. ORU designs currently These products are being connected system's status and prompts the flight being evaluated include; the Avionics directly to the LeRC Space StationFree- controller for appropriate responses. 6-B Box, the Avionics Box on the dom PMAD testbed as a preliminary step When addressing failures, this system radiator door, the Standard Quick before introducing them into theEngi- must detect the failure and isolate Universal Interface Device (SQUID), the neering Support Center. This initiative affected systems so that the station's Zip Nut, the Fluids Box, and a variety of develops the interfaces that are required integrity is not jeopardized. In addition, tools. to build a communication path between the corresponding flight rules must be Within Automation, the contractor the machines running the automation executed to minimize system degradation. has focused on three fault management software and the power test-bed's proto- Three other systems are used to aid the applications to improve fault detection, type flight control computer. Further, this command and control activities of the isolation, and recovery (FDIR) of the approach defines the communication flight support system by performing Integrated Station Executive (ISE), the requirements for integrating the test-bed detailed event analyses and operations Data Management System (DMS), and with the Engineering Support Center. planning, and it is on these three systems This activity augments the baseline the Thermal Control System (TCS). The that efforts to introduce automation have ISE FDIR expert system is based on par- design in an advisory manner. The base- been focused. The event analyses are simonious set covering and uses failure line design has automatic regulation of

A-8 batterychargingaccordingtospecified powersystemadvisorycontrollerwith Theseinvestigationschecktheadequacy maximumprofiles,alongwithclosed- theirelectricpowersystemsimulation. ofthedesignfor:handling,alignmentand loopcontrolsystemsregulatingbattery Todate,theyhavedemonstrated visualcues,aswellasmechanicaland temperature,betagimbalpositioncontrol, detectionanddiagnosisofmeasurement thermalintegrity.Also,WP4hasactively andarrayvoltageregulation.All ofthese anomalies. participatedin interfacedesignreviews, automaticcontrolsystemsrequireset- TheRoboticseffortatWorkPackage technicalinterchangeswithCSA,and pointsspecifiedbygroundcontrol.The 4hasfocusedondesigningtheorbital variousadhocworkinggroups decisionaidswillhelpoperatingperson- replacementunitssothattheyaccommo- addressingroboticsandEVA.Inpar- nelissuetheappropriatesupervisory dateteleroboticmanipulationwithhuman ticular,WP4hasimplementedtheRSIS commandstothesesystemsunderall EVAasabackup.Asthisdesignmatures, robottoORUandORUtoSSFinterface circumstances. it iscontinuallybeingverifiedbycom- requirements,aswellasadvocatedRSIS Rocketdyne,Inc.isalsopursuing putersimulationofORUinstallationand revisionsthatwouldlowerthecostsof healthmonitoring,failurediagnosis,and removal,byzero-gravitytelerobotictests incorporatingrobotictechnologyintothe humaninterfacesintheirIR&Dprogram. atOceaneeringSpaceSystems,andby SSFdesign. Theyhavesuccessfullyintegrateda zero-gravityEVAtestsatJSC'sWETF.

A-9

Appendix B

Japanese A&R Space the exposed (external) environment tasks as depicted in figure B I. JEMRMS per- Station Program forms these tasks with two manipulator arms, the Main Arm (fig. B2), and the Small Fine Arm (fig. B3). The Main Arm is fixed to the PM and will be used for Overview large payload handling. The Small Fine Japan is responsible for the development Arm is attachable/detachable to and from of the Japanese Experiment Module the Main Arm and will be used to handle (JEM) and its associated Remote small, light payloads requiring dextrous Manipulator System (RMS). The manipulations. In order to facilitate the JEMRMS is one of the Japanese Experi- one-man operation, an integrated system ment Module elements which Japan is consisting of a highly automated control developing in the international collabora- system and a man-in-the-loop control tion of Space Station Freedom. One-man system has been baselined to provide a operation has been base!ined for control- reduction in crew time and crew fatigue. ling JEMRMS to allow a single crew The basic functional diagram of the member to manipulate the robot arms JEMRMS is shown in figure B4. from Pressurized Module (PM) to support

Experiment logistics module ,ssurlzed section (ELM-PS)

dpulator

Exposed facility Pressurized module

Alrlock

Experiment logistics module - exposed section (ELM-ES)

Figure B I. General arrangement--Japanese experiment module.

:_ B-I Vision Elbow pitch joint equipment (1)

Boom (2)

Boom (1) Shoulder Wrist pitch joint pitch joint

Wrist

Shoulder roll joint yaw joint

Base mechanism Wrist yaw joint

Vision equipment End / effector

Figure B2. JEMRMS configuration (main arm).

- 6-DOF hand controller consisting of NASDA. The software environment con- Key Technologies and a single hand controller for the Main sists of the C language for the JEMRMS Components Arm and the Small Fine Arm control control. - Force/torque sensor Key JEMRMS technologies are as - Long life, replaceable end effector follows: for the Main Arm Development Status - Collision avoidance - Small, light weight TV camera and - Space-qualified robotics arm and The advanced research and development pan/tilt mechanism control system - Small Fine Arm tool evaluation and test of the key tech- - Man-machine interface nologies and components were conducted - Stereo vision (projected) - Bilateral force feedback control during the Phase B study. These efforts - Mobility of the Main Arm base - Dynamic simulation tools included the joint mechanism of the Main mechanism (projected) - Test and validation methodologies Arm; the Force/moment sensor; the Key JEMRMS components are as Stereo vision system; the 2-dimensional follows: model; and the 3-dimensional man- Computational Environment - Highly efficient, long-life joint machine interface model. mechanism A 16-bit MPU and the co-processor wilt The development tests of the ORU- - ORU design for the Main Arm joint be used for the robotics control, the MPU type Main Arm joint mechanism model, mechanism being a NASDA QPL part and the the controllability test of the Main Arm co-processor being developed by and the Small Fine Arm using single

B-2 Shoulderjoint

Force_orque sensor

Elbow Joint

Smalltime arm end effector

Wristjoint

Figure B3. Small fine arm.

6-DOF hand controller, and the Small the JEM External Facility (EF). The First can be controlled from the ground. The Fine Arm end effector models (gripper and Second Groups of experiments are second-generation space robotics efforts and tool) were completed in September shown in figure BS. There are about consist of research on the telerobotics 1990. 20 experiments planned for eventual control technologies and the design of an The Phase C developmental effort, flight. Figure B6 depicts a concept of a on-orbit flight demonstration experiment using the baseline configuration estab- material sciences experiment operated by using the Engineering Test Satellite lished during Phase B and its associated preprogrammed robotic control. (ETS-VII). The ETS-VII is an experimen- follow-on study, was initiated during tal satellite to demonstrate the January 1990 and is scheduled to be rendezvous/docking technologies and the completed during the latter part of Projected Evolutionary Growth use of on-orbit space robotics. Objectives CY-1991. of this experiment are as follows: Space automation and robotics (A&R) is - Coordinated control of the robot arm considered by Japan to be a critical tech- and the satellite attitude Experiments Status nology for their future space activities - Demonstration and evaluation of the and NASDA has implemented a focused teleoperation capability Several experiments are being planned and concenti=a_ed _research and develop- - Demonstration and evaluation of on- for the JEM. Material science and life ment effort t0 achieve their overall space orbit servicing capability with science experiments are primarily A&R objectives. The JEMRMS repre- emphasis on the battery exchange conducted inside the JEM PM, while sents Japan's first attempt to develop a and the fuel resupply operations, engineering experiments and other exper- space robot. both of which will be done by ORU iments requiring the use of large equip- Research is now being focused on exchanges. ment are planned to be implemented on the second-generation space robot which

B-3 i ...... ! ...... I PM inside I PM outside I I I --r ...... ! I Electrical I I ! I I power system I I ii Management F I RMS management subsystem L ...... ,I equipment I I i ...... __J ...... I I I ...... ___L ...... _ ...... I

Main arm I I I I Arm control I equipment "iiI i I Arm subsystem ! ! ! ! 'I Small fine arm I I ! 1 t [ ...... 1 ! ! ---I- ...... T ...... I I ...... q I Communication I It Vision control _ i Main arm I I and control system I =;r:ll ...... equipment I : ':, i vision equipment I' I Vision subsystem ,"' [ i ...... ]__ j B _

i - ;Iill Conf_o,rack I 'I I ! l I I I t I Operation rack I I Integration t I I t

, • I I I I Integration II/W I ]'

iI I /_It /t L...... L;.__L...... ,

I ...... - I i ...... I-_ '-_------. I PIU controller I ! ! 1 EF integration L ...... | I

t Small fine v arm storage 'I I I ......

Figure B4. Basic schematic diagram of JEMRMS.

The third-generation space robot will tical Science (ISAS), National Aerospace robotics issues. The membership of the be the autonomous space robot using Laboratory (NAL), Japan Society for Forum consists of approximately advanced technologies from the second- Astronautical and Space Science 100 engineers and scientists from the generation space robot (described above) (JSASS), Japanese Society for Artifical national labs, universities, and private as the baseline infrastructure and includ- Intelligence (JSAI), and Robotics Society industry. Several of the technologies ing AI-based technologies. Basic research of Japan (RSJ). The SAIRAS '90 meeting resulting from the Forum discussions has been initiated for this effort with was the first international meeting spon- have been applied to civil applications. information being exchanged through the soredby the six Japanese 0rganizations i Space Artificial Inteiiigence, RobotiCS, noted above and by three U. S. organiza- and Automation Symposium (SAIRAS) tions, the AIAA, AAAI, and NASA. The Participants Space Robotics Forum was also orga: and the Space Robotics Forum. The first Major participants in Japan's integrated nized by NASDA in 1987 with two major annual SAIRAS meeting, organized by space A&R program are shown in fig- NASDA, was held in 1987 and has had objectives: to provide an opportunity for ure B7. Roles played by each of the the robotics and space engineering com- annual meetings every year since 1987. participants are shown in figure BS. The six Japanese space agencies and munities to communicate with each other; societies sponsoring SAIRAS are and to provide an integrated environment NASDA, Institute of Space and Astronau- to study and]nvestigate the space

B-4 1st group *2nd group

Isothermal furnace Physical and chemical experiment facility

Gradient heating furnace Vapor growth facility

Zone melting furnace Solution growth facility

Levitation furnace Fluid physics facility

Cell culture equipment Small animal holding

Protein crystallization equipment Extravehicular exposure unit

Electrophoresis unit Space environment measurement

Clean bench Experiment support equipment for manipulator remote control from ground

Candidate

Figure B5. List of experiment equipment.

maximum ieveraging of the expertise pace technologies to the industrial sector, Summary resident in each of the participating thereby providing the Japanese with a Japan's space automation and robotics organizations and there is a very unique strength in the application and program is a well-focused and integrated structured program to transition the implementation of industrial robotics to program with well-defined goals and technology from basic research to space their areas of interest. objectives. Roles played by each of the flight applications. In addition, a formal major participants are designed to provide mechanism is in existence to transfer the

B-5 Figure B6. Mockup of material sciences experiment operated by preprogrammed robotic control.

B-6 NASDA: National Space Development Agency of Japan ISAS: Institute of Space and Astronautical Science ETL: Electro-Technical Laboratory MEL: Mechanical Engineering Laboralory JSUP: Japan Space Utilization Promotion Center USEF: Institute of Unmanned Space Experiment Flyer CRL: Communication Research Laboratory SCR: Space Communication Research Institute NTT: Nippon Telegram and Telephone NHK: Nippon Hoso Kyokai (Japan Broadcasting Company)

Prime Minister i JCSAT:scc: spaceJapancommunicationCommunication CompanySatellite i

I Space Activities Commission I (R&D Operation) (Research) (User)

"--I Science and Technology Agency _ ] National I t Aerospace Lab I t JsuPJ

.__ MinistryTrade ofandInternationalindustry J [ J ETL, MEL I [ USEF ]

.__ MinistryTelecommunicationsof Posts and I i I °""SCRI t JCSAT._,..Kr SCC Ij

q Ministry of Transport Met.CenterSat. I

Figure BZ Space-related organizations in Japan.

B-7 Launch/ operation :> I _e NASDA, ISAS t- mo Development I q,. m NASDA, ISAS

o Advancedresearch I NASDA, ISAS National Labs I researchBasic I National Labs Universities Launch X - 10 X - 5 X - 0 Years

Figure B8. Role sharing for the space projects.

B-8 Appendix C

Canadian Space Station U.S. supplied transporter and also includes the power, data, and video Program Mobile systems for the MSC. The MBS accom- Servicing System modates the SSRMS, SPDM, tools, and attachment fixtures for holding and transporting Orbital Replacement Units (ORUs) and payloads. Introduction The SSRMS is functionally similar to the Shuttle RMS but has increased Canada is responsible for the develop- reach and load capability. The SSRMS is ment and construction of the only cur- a redundant system with 7 degrees-of- rently operational space telerobot, the freedom. The most unique feature of the Shuttle Remote Manipulator System SSRMS is that both ends are identical (SRMS). Canada's role under the Space and either end can act as the base or the Station International Agreement is the tip. Either end therefore can be coupled development and operation of the Mobile and operated from any Power Data Servicing System (MSS). Major elements Grapple Fixture (PDGF) on the MBS or of the MSS are the Mobile Servicing any other location on the Space Station. Center which is the responsibility of This allows the system to include self- Canada. The Mobile Servicing Center relocatability by moving from one PDGF (MSC) includes the Mobile Transporter to another like an inch worm. (MT) which is United States supplied. The SPDM can mount and operate The M$$ includes two telerobots, the from any PDGF on Space Station, the Space Station Remote Manipulator MBS, or the end of the SSRMS as shown System (SSRMS) and the Special in figure C1. The SPDM includes two Purpose Dextrous Manipulator (SPDM). identical seven-degree-of-freedom arms The MT allows linear motion along the which are mounted on a body with an Station truss. The objectives of the Cana- additional five degrees-of-freedom. The dian Space Station Program include the system includes wrist and body TV cam- development and operation of the MSS, eras, a tool change-out mechanism at participation in the operation and utiliza- each wrist, and tool storage. tion of Space Station Freedom, and the The MSS has been assigned a role in generation and spinoff of technology a number of Space Station functions development, primarily in A&R. including assembly, external mainte- The Canadian program is an invest- nance, payload servicing, payload ment of $1.2B (Canadian) of which deployment, retrieval, transportation, and $800M is allocated to develop and con- handling. The SPDM will provide the struct the MSS. The system design, base- dextrous capabilities required to line capabilities, and advanced program accomplish these functions. SPDM elements represent significant advance- functions include inspection and ment in A & R technology. monitoring, ORU exchange, utility con- The MSC shown in figure C 1 is nect and disconnect, mate and demate of composed of three major components: the connectors, manipulating small payloads, MBS, the SSRMS, and control equip- and the positioning of tools and materials ment. Also shown is the SPDM. The to support EVA. MBS is the mechanical interface to the

C-I _'_...

Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS)

Special Purpose Dexterous Longw MRS ORUs Manipulator (SPDM) I/F (PDGF) Payload/ORU Accommodations (POA) Flight Telerobotic System Interface (FTS) (PDGF) PSA 2 POA Support Assembly (PSA)-I MFR* Mobile Remote Servicer Base System (MBS) MRS Tool Mobile Transporter (MT) MBS to MT Interface_ \.. PDGF _ Space Station Truss _ .._ j-'" Keel Trunnion

*US (NASA) Supplied

Figure CL Mobile Servicing Center, including special purpose dextrous manipulator.

To accompliSh these Space Station This force/torque information is also dis- activation, and ORU removal and instal- functions, an impressive list of A&R played to the operator. All manipulators lation are planned as part of the baseline technologies are planned for the MSS:_.... will have closed-loo p control using an system. A number of routine functions The SSRMS and SPDM will both have artificial vision function allowing auto- for system operation will also be auto- force and moment accommodation, which matic tracking and capture of marked tar- mated, such as system startup and shut allows limiting and the controlled gets. Automatic task primitives for application of tip forces and moments. manipulator motion, tool positioning and

C-2 down, deployment and storage, and tool clockwise torque and a 50 ft-lb counter- to investigate and evaluate advanced acquisition. clockwise torque capability. robotic control techniques. An advanced SPAR briefed ATAC on its research control technique demonstrated was program for control of robots for future torque output control at the joints of a ATAC Assessment of SPAR applications. The thrust of the research is robot. A single joint of the industrial in the application of advanced control robot was implemented with such control Space Station Program Robotics methods enabling greater precision, and demonstrated stability in contact over Activities higher speed, improved payload handling a range of surfaces. and, in general, improved performance ATAC toured the SPAR SPDM The Canadian Space Agency hosted a through higher bandwidth control. One Ground Testbed facility which has a full- visit for ATAC members in October 1991 area of this research having immediate scale hardware model of the SPDM to the Advanced Technology Systems near-term application for the SPDM is manipulators in place and fully opera- Group of SPAR Aerospace Limited force-moment accommodation. The tional, including R&D engineering work- located in Toronto, Canada. The follow- approach is to establish torque output as a station controls and displays (figs. C2 ing assessment is based upon the review joint control objective. The benefit for the and C3). SPAR demonstrated the SPDM provided to ATAC by SPAR of its SPDM will be stability of the manipulator functional capabilities for ORU replace- robotics capabilities and, in particular, its in contact with a wide class of SSF ment, including both operator control and SSRMS and SPDM programs. The SPAR equipment without significant mechanical automated vision control. Several visit specifically included briefings on or operational constraints. The strategy is graphical displays for aid in ORU SPDM ORU handling and on SPAR that improved control leads to relaxation replacement were demonstrated, includ- research for control of robots for future of mechanical design constraints. ing force-torque feedback displays and applications, and included tours of the ATAC toured the SPAR SRMS virtual target displays. SPDM collision SRMS laboratory, robotics analytical and laboratory which is outfitted to investi- avoidance capability which utilizes geo- experimental laboratories, and SPDM gate "planar motion" of the SRMS in a metric modeling was also demonstrated, Ground Test-Bed Facility. one-g environment and to conduct analy- including a laser scanner capability for The SPAR developed target, micro sis of instrumented RMS arms which updating geometric models. interface, and H interface have been have flown on previous Shuttle flights. SPAR indicated that the current SSF incorporated into the SSFP RSIS docu- This has provided SPAR with a substan- SSF Standard Data Processor (SDP) ment as standard robotic handling fea- tial database of robotic flight performance capacities are adequate for SSRMS and tures. The target provides coarse and fine under one-g and zero-g conditions with SPDM. Growth beyond the baseline MSS alignment for the SPDM to the ORU. The which to validate engineering models for capabilities will require additional SDPs. micro interface provides SPDM interface future space robotic developments. CSA indicated that there is no known to smaller ORUs (0-250 Ibs) while the SPAR's space robotics engineering expe- technical reason to prevent implementa- H interface provides interface to larger rience and flight performance database tion of ground control of the SSRMS and ORUs (100-1200 lbs). ORUs have lends strong credibility to its SSRMS and SPDM, and the planned HW and SW V guides or alignment levers for rota- SPDM development activities. should not preclude the future use of tional and translational misalignment, and ATAC toured the SPAR analytic ground control operations. It is ATAC's are compatible to both crew and robotic robotic path planning laboratory in which opinion that a flight experiment would changeout. The alignment capabilities of simulation models of the SSRMS and validate the feasibility for such an the target, micro interface, and H interface are shown in table CI. SPDM are utilized to investigate robot approach. trajectory planning and to optimize vari- The SSRMS CDR and the SPDM The SPDM ORU Tool Changeout ous geometric configurations. ATAC also PDR are scheduled for August 1992. Mechanism (OTCM) is compatible to both the H and micro interfaces. It has an toured the SPAR robotic experimental laboratory which houses a large industrial opening range of travel of 0 to 5.5 inches, robot and associated support equipment a grasp force of 200 Ibs, a 25 ft-lb

C-3 O_IGINAL PAGE OLACK AND WHITE PHOTOG'RAP,,-,

Figure C2. SPAR SPDM ground test-bed model replacing ORU.

established a large experience base for Summary SSRMS and SPDM. ATAC was highly space robotics. Their SPDM plans are not impressed with the robotics experience The Canadian A&R Space Program, as far advanced beyond what they have and capabilities of SPAR, and fully antic- represented bySPAR, has deinonstrated alread_y ia__c0nipl(s_hed; altlaough the_ ipates that the SSRMS and SPDM will outstanding pei'fo?nia-n_e _n space- SPDM will be more dextrous than the successfully meet SSF needs and robotics with the Shtittie RSMSand other SRMS. SPAR's experience lends strong requirements. previous robotics applications, and has credibility to the anticipated success of

C-4 ORIGIblAL PAGE BIL.alCK AND WHITE PHOTO6_R_PF*

Figure C3. SPAR SPDM ground test-bed workstation collision avoidance display.

Table C1. ORU INTERFACE ALIGNMENT CAPABILITIES.

X Axis Y Axis Z Axis Target _-/-0.05inches i-0.05 inches :1.-0.20 inches +1 degree +1 degree i-0.5 degrees Micro i-0.50 inches i-0.50 inches :t0.25 inches .+_35degrees +11 degrees :t:30 degrees H _.50 inches _+0.70 inches i-0.55 inches +26 degrees +15 degrees i20 degrees

C-5

Appendix D

Acronyms

A&R Automation and Robotics AC Assembly Complete ALEPS Automated Logistics Element Planning System ARC Ames Research Center ATAC Advanced Technology Advisory Committee AWP Assembly Work Platform C&T Communications and Tracking CASE Computer Aided Software Engineering CDR Critical Design Review CETA Crew and Equipment Translation Aid Code M NASA HQ Code for the Office of Space Flight Code MT NASA HQ Code for the Office of Space Flight, Space Station Engineering Code R NASA HQ Code for the Office of Aeronautics, Exploration and Technology Code S NASA HQ Code for the Office of Space Science and Applications COMPASS Computer Aided Scheduling System CR Change Request CSP Canadian Space Program DARPA Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency DART Design Alternatives/Rationale Tool DDCU DC-DC Converter Units DKC Design Knowledge Capture DMS Data Management System DTF-1 Development Test Flight (first FTS test flight) DTLCC Design to Life-Cycle Costs DTO Development Test Objective ECLSS Environmental Control Life Support System EMI Electric-Magnetic Interference EMST External Maintenance Solutions Team EPD Engineering Prototype Development EPS Electrical Power System EVA Extravehicular Activity FAM Functional Area Manager FD1R Fault Detection, Isolation, and Recovery FDM Fault Detection and Management FEAT Failure Effects Analysis Tool FEL First Element Launch FMEA Failure Modes Effects Analysis FSE Flight Support Equipment FTS Flight Telerobotic Servicer GN&C Guidance, Navigation, and Control GSFC Goddard Space Flight Center

D-1 Acronyms--continued

IDR Integrated Design Review ISE Integrated Station Executive IVA Intravehicular Activity JEM Japanese Experiment Module JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratory JSC Johnson Space Center KBS Knowledge-Based Systems KSC Kennedy Space Center LaRC Langley Research Center LCC Life-Cycle Cost LeRC Lewis Research Center _ MBS Mobile Remote Servicer Base System MCC Mission Control Center MCCU Mission Control Center Upgrades MSC Mobile Servicing Center MSFC Marshall Space Flight Center MSS Mobile Servicing System MT Mobile Transportation MTC Man-Tended Capability MUT Mission Utilization Team NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration OAST Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology OCMV Operator Coached Machine Vision OMS Operations Management System ORU Operational Replacement Unit PDGF Power Data Grapple Fixture PDR Preliminary Design Review PORD PDR Document PIT Pre-Integrated Trusss PM Pressurized Module PMAD Power Management and Distribution PMC Permanently Manned Capability POIC Payload Operations Integration Center POP Program Operating Plan RMS Remote Manipulator System RSIS Robotic Systems Integration Standards RTDS Real-Time Data System SDP Standard Data ProcessOr SDTM Station Design Tradeoff Model SLCSE Software Life Cycle Support Environment SPDM speClal Purpose Dextrous Manipulator SQUID Standard Quick Universal Interface Device SRMS Shuttle Remote Manipulator System

D-2 Acronyms--concluded

SSAIAF Space Systems Automated Integration and Assembly Facility SSCC Space Station Control Center SSE Software Support Environment SSF Space Station Freedom SSFP Space Station Freedom Program SSMB Space Station Manned Base SSPC Space Station Payload Center SSRMS Space Station Remote Manipulator System SSTF Space Station Training Facility TCS Thermal Control System TEXSYS Thermal Expert System UMI User Macro Interface WETF Weightless Environmental Test Facility WP Work Package

D-3

Appendix E

NASA Advanced Technology Advisory Committee

Members and Alternates

Henry Lum, Jr., Chairman, Chief Information Sciences Division, ARC John Bull, Executive Secretary, ARC Ed Chevers, Alternate Executive Secretary, ARC Leslie Hoffman, Administrative Assistant, ARC

Henry Plotkin, Assistant Director for Development Projects, GSFC Stan Ollendorf, Alternate, GSFC

Giulio Varsi, Manager, Space Automation and Robotics Program, JPL Wayne Schober, Alternate, JPL

Jon D. Erickson, Chief Scientist, Automation and Robotics Division, JSC

Tom Davis, Chief, Advanced Systems and Technology Office, KSC Astrid Heard, Alternate, KSC

Alfred Meintel, Jr., Asst. Chief, Information Systems Division, LaRC Kelli Willshire, Alternate, LaRC

Denis Connolly, Deputy Chief of Applied Research, Space Electronics Division, LeRC

Jonathan Haussler, Research and Technology Office, MSFC

Liaison Members

Gregg Swietek, Deputy Chief, System Development Branch, HQ/MT Mark Gersh, Alternate, HQ/MT

Lee Holcomb, Director, Information Sciences and Human Factors Division, HQ/RC Mel Montemerlo, Alternate, HQ/RC

N. Tarmet, Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel

JoAnn Clayton, Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board

E-I , ,= Form Approved i REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMBNo.0704-0188 Public reportingburden for this collectionof informationis estimated to average 1 hourper response, includingthe timefor reviewingInstructions,searchingexistingdata sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completingand reviewingthe collectionof information. Send comments regardingthis burdenestimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,includingsuggestionsfor reducingthis burden, to WashingtonHeadquarters Services, D rectoratefor nformationOperationsand Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway. Suite t204, Arlington,VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, PaperworkReductionPrciect (0704-0188). Washington,DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED November 1991 Technical Memorandum i ii 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Advancing Automation and Robotics Technology for The Space Station Freedom and for the U.S. Economy--Progress Report 13 476-14-01 6. AUTHOR(S) Advanced Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) [ATAC Progress Report 13] Henry Lum, Jr., Chairman

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 7. PERFORMINGORGANIZATIONNAME(S)ANDADDRESS(ES) REPORT NUMBER Advanced Technology Advisory Committee

Chairman, Henry Lum, Jr./FI A-91235 NASA ARC, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000

10. SPONSORING/MONITORING 9o SPONSORING/MONITORINGAGENCYNAME(S)ANDADDRESS(ES) AGENCY REPORT NUMBER NASA Headquarters Attn: Earle Huckins/MT NASA TM- 103895 Washington, DC 20546-0001

11. SUPPLEMENTARYNOTES Point of Contact: Henry Lum, Jr., Ames Research Center, MS 244-7, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000 (415) 604-6544 or FrS 464-6544

12a, DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

Unclassified-Unlimited Subject Category - 59

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words) In April 1985, as required by Public Law 98-371, the NASAAdvanced Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) reported to Congress the results of its studies on advanced automation and robotics technology for use on Space Station Freedom. This material was documented in the initial report (NASA Technical Memorandum 87566). A further requirement of the law was that ATAC follow NASA's progress in this area and report to Congress semiannually. This report is the thirteenth in a series of progress updates and covers the period between February 14-August 15, 1991. The report describes the progress made by Levels I, II, and EI of the Space Station Freedom in developing and applying advanced automation and robotics technology. Emphasis has been placed upon the Space Station Freedom Program responses to specific recommendations made in ATAC Progress Report 12, and issues of A&R implementation into Ground Mission Operations and A&R enhancement of science productivity. Assessments are presented for these and other areas as they apply to the advancement of automation and robotics technology for Space Station Freedom.

15. NUMBER OF PAGES 14. SUBJECT TERMS 53 Robotics, Space Station, Automation, Expert systems, Artificial intelli- 16. PRICE CODE gence, Freedom A04

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACl OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT Unclassified Unclassified i NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Prescribed by ANSI Std. z3g-18