Документ взят из кэша поисковой машины. Адрес оригинального документа : http://www.stsci.edu/stsci/meetings/nhst/talks/RudMoe.pdf Дата изменения: Tue Apr 15 23:44:54 2003 Дата индексирования: Sun Dec 23 00:12:39 2007 Кодировка:

On-orbit Assembly Possibilities for Large Telescopes
Where we are now What's needed next What the new capabilities could do How might this come about

Rud Moe GSFC
R. Moe, GSFC April 2003


Brief Summary of Assembly History

Missi o n Shutt l e EASE ACCESS HST Se rvi c in g ISS

On - o rbit Ass e mbl y Ac c o m plis h m e nts

Asse m bly o f truss st r uct u re Re t r o fits t o pre e xisting st r uct u res Asse m bly o f m o d u les an d s t ru c tur e s

R. Moe, GSFC

April 2003



HST Servicing

R. Moe, GSFC

April 2003



Development Path
Conceptual architectures in work
Origins telescopes, SEC missions, ES missions NEXT Gateway, Advanced EVA, Assembly in space Commercial servicing, Remote robotics, GEO

Designs in work
Design center cases (large telescope, Earth science facility) Upper stage accommodation: ? Refueling, modular servicing: Orbital Express

Test hardware in work
Assembleable structures: LaRC, ... Robots: several (JSC, UMD, CMU, JPL, LaRC, ...) Auto-rendezvous: GSFC, MSFC, JSC, DARPA, ...

Assembly & servicing flight demonstration
None in mission integration Use existing capability to support development

Current productive use of assembly & servicing capabilities
HST, Shuttle, ISS, including carriers, tools, procedures Modular interfaces: several

R. Moe, GSFC

April 2003


Technology Development for Optimum Integration of Human and Robotic Roles

Complexity/ Capability

Multi Agent

Single Agent Feed Assembly Planning Dexterity Electrical Joint Utility Integration 20m Parabolic Telescope Robotic Development Structural Joint Structure Assembly Hardware Development Panel Joint Surface Assembly

Crawling

Surface Repair

Structure Repair

ORU change out EVA/Robotic Optimization 2000 2002 2005 2010 Time

R. Moe, GSAnalytic Studies FC

Ground Tests

Space Experiments

April 2003


Access to Space, Productivity in Space
Robots beyond Shuttle, ISS, capabilities needed
Shuttle or ELV launch availability Upper stage integration Auto-rendezvous and dock Communications Sustainability, resupply, self-maintenance Productive working capability

Human presence beyond Earth's magnetosphere, capabilities needed
Habitable volumes Short transit, fast return Cosmic background radiation and Solar storms protection Zero-gravity mitigation Extended mission life support Logistical support, health and well-being Communications Productive working capability

R. Moe, GSFC

April 2003


Capabilities of Assembler/Servicer versus Accommodations Requirements on Facility
A wide range of facility approaches
Simple or mission-optimized spacecraft--no special servicing accommodations Generic or modular spacecraft--some inherent system partition Minimally serviceable spacecraft--some rudimentary accommodations Designed for assembly & servicing--architectural features incorporated in design, build, test Integrated servicer-client system--mutually designed for interoperability, interdependence

A wide range of assembler/servicer capabilities, evolving over time
EVA with safety provisions, airlocks, pressure suits, cranes, custom implements, power tools, interface accommodations, replacement hardware, carriers (current capability for Shuttle, ISS) IVA with telerobotics, cranes, custom implements, power tools, interface accommodations, replacement hardware, carriers (near capability for Shuttle, ISS) Remote telerobotics, with cranes, custom implements, power tools, interface accommodations, replacement hardware, carriers Advanced EVA with improved dexterity, sensing, control, requiring less accommodation Remote robotics, beyond teleoperation range, with improved dexterity, sensing, control, requiring less accommodation Advanced EVA synergistic with advanced telerobotic dexterity, sensing, control Autonomous remote robotics, beyond teleoperation range, with improved dexterity, sensing, control ...

R. Moe, GSFC

April 2003


Allocation of Roles to Humans, Tools, Robots, Autonomy
Shared capabilities of humans and robots in space
Presence, via space transportation Observation, usually via sensors Manipulation, usually via tools

Humans use tools at every level
Implements for enhancing direct manipulation Motorized tools for enabling regimes of strength, speed, scale Electronics for enabling control, sensing, data

Direct handling is of limited use, mostly gross handling, translation
EVA pressure suit reduces access, dexterity, sensing, control, imposes safety constraints Suit enhancements for access, dexterity, sensing, control, greater inherent safety are required Robotic end effectors, grippers, torgers with cameras are also limited Dexterity, sensing, control can be achieved using advanced contols, tools, and sensors

Telerobotics is currently used on Earth for microsurgery and remote surgery on humans, as well as earth moving and other heavy equipment operations, and exploration and operation in dangerous environments
Intermediate step before autonomy

R. Moe, GSFC

April 2003




Large, Complex Tasks Have Additional Requirements
Additional designs and test hardware needed for flight demonstration of complex assembly
Local translation: cranes, structure climbing, clean propulsion Staging of components, tools, parts, materials Planning, inventory management, configuration control Positioning, fixturing, preassembly Protection for temporary configurations Contamination controls Soft goods handling Cryogenic environment, thermal control Figure control and final alignment, sensing and adjustments In-space integration and verification approaches Remote refueling ...

R. Moe, GSFC

April 2003




Investment Stategy
Cost reduction of development of transportation, human, and robotic capabilities Investment costs spread across all users and beneficiaries
Generic capability captures more users than does specific or narrow requirements Commonality features capture even more investors

Experience and capital accumulation through continuity build value
Reusability and extensibility features capture even more investors

Inadequate investment is the enemy of adequate investment
Users must interact with supporting capabilty design requirements

R. Moe, GSFC

April 2003


Agency Goals are Basis for Integration
The Integrated Space Plan integrates across Enterprises/Themes by focusing on the 10 Agency goals:
Science, Aeronautics & Exploration
Astronomical search for Origins Structure & Evol'n of the Univ.

Space Flight Capabilities
International Space Station (ISS) Space Shuttle Program (SSP) Mission & Science Meas. Tech

SSE
Mars Exploration Program Solar System exploration

ESE
Earth Science Applications

OBPR
Biological Sciences Res/ Research Partnerships[s

R
Aeronautics Technology

N

OSF
Space Launch Initiative (SLI)

OAT
Innovative T*T Partnerships

Physical Sciences Res.

Sun-Earth Connections

Enabling Inspire Explore Protect

1. Understand Earth's system... 2. Enable...safer... air transportation 3. Create a more secure world...quality of life 4. Explore the fundamental principles... 5. Explore solar system & universe beyond 6. Inspire & motivate students 7. Engage the public 8. Ensure... space access 9. Extend the duration & boundaries of human... 10. Enabler revolutionary capabilities...technology

Primary contributor toward achieving Goal, accountable for at least one Objective. Supporting contributor toward achieving Objective, accountable for at least one Performance Measure.

The Integrated Space Plan shapes the future direction in space for NASA strategic Aprlilanning p 2003 R. Moe, GSFC

Space & Flight Support

Earth System Science

Education Program

Themes


Space Architecture Planning Process

Strategic Plan Enterprise Strategies

Architectural Studies

Goals for Future Capabilities

Roadmaps · Programmatic · Technology

Current Capabilities Assessments

Gap Assessments

RECOMMENDATIONS to JSAC · Results reflected in the Agency Strategic Plan, Enterprise Strategies, and Center Implementation Plans · Basis for new initiative selection
R. Moe, GSFC April 2003