Survey of Inter-satellite Communication for Small Satellite Systems: Physical Layer to Network Layer View

Small satellite systems enable whole new class of missions for navigation, communications, remote sensing and scientific research for both civilian and military purposes. As individual spacecraft are limited by the size, mass and power constraints, mass-produced small satellites in large constellations or clusters could be useful in many science missions such as gravity mapping, tracking of forest fires, finding water resources, etc. Constellation of satellites provide improved spatial and temporal resolution of the target. Small satellite constellations contribute innovative applications by replacing a single asset with several very capable spacecraft which opens the door to new applications. With increasing levels of autonomy, there will be a need for remote communication networks to enable communication between spacecraft. These space based networks will need to configure and maintain dynamic routes, manage intermediate nodes, and reconfigure themselves to achieve mission objectives. Hence, inter-satellite communication is a key aspect when satellites fly in formation. In this paper, we present the various researches being conducted in the small satellite community for implementing inter-satellite communications based on the Open System Interconnection (OSI) model. This paper also reviews the various design parameters applicable to the first three layers of the OSI model, i.e., physical, data link and network layer. Based on the survey, we also present a comprehensive list of design parameters useful for achieving inter-satellite communications for multiple small satellite missions. Specific topics include proposed solutions for some of the challenges faced by small satellite systems, enabling operations using a network of small satellites, and some examples of small satellite missions involving formation flying aspects.Comment: 51 pages, 21 Figures, 11 Tables, accepted in IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorial

Quality-of-service in wireless sensor networks: state-of-the-art and future directions

Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) are one of today’s most prominent instantiations of the ubiquituous computing paradigm. In order to achieve high levels of integration, WSNs need to be conceived considering requirements beyond the mere system’s functionality. While Quality-of-Service (QoS) is traditionally associated with bit/data rate, network throughput, message delay and bit/packet error rate, we believe that this concept is too strict, in the sense that these properties alone do not reflect the overall quality-ofservice provided to the user/application. Other non-functional properties such as scalability, security or energy sustainability must also be considered in the system design. This paper identifies the most important non-functional properties that affect the overall quality of the service provided to the users, outlining their relevance, state-of-the-art and future research directions

Engineering Resilient Space Systems

Several distinct trends will influence space exploration missions in the next decade. Destinations are becoming more remote and mysterious, science questions more sophisticated, and, as mission experience accumulates, the most accessible targets are visited, advancing the knowledge frontier to more difficult, harsh, and inaccessible environments. This leads to new challenges including: hazardous conditions that limit mission lifetime, such as high radiation levels surrounding interesting destinations like Europa or toxic atmospheres of planetary bodies like Venus; unconstrained environments with navigation hazards, such as free-floating active small bodies; multielement missions required to answer more sophisticated questions, such as Mars Sample Return (MSR); and long-range missions, such as Kuiper belt exploration, that must survive equipment failures over the span of decades. These missions will need to be successful without a priori knowledge of the most efficient data collection techniques for optimum science return. Science objectives will have to be revised ‘on the fly’, with new data collection and navigation decisions on short timescales. Yet, even as science objectives are becoming more ambitious, several critical resources remain unchanged. Since physics imposes insurmountable light-time delays, anticipated improvements to the Deep Space Network (DSN) will only marginally improve the bandwidth and communications cadence to remote spacecraft. Fiscal resources are increasingly limited, resulting in fewer flagship missions, smaller spacecraft, and less subsystem redundancy. As missions visit more distant and formidable locations, the job of the operations team becomes more challenging, seemingly inconsistent with the trend of shrinking mission budgets for operations support. How can we continue to explore challenging new locations without increasing risk or system complexity? These challenges are present, to some degree, for the entire Decadal Survey mission portfolio, as documented in Vision and Voyages for Planetary Science in the Decade 2013–2022 (National Research Council, 2011), but are especially acute for the following mission examples, identified in our recently completed KISS Engineering Resilient Space Systems (ERSS) study: 1. A Venus lander, designed to sample the atmosphere and surface of Venus, would have to perform science operations as components and subsystems degrade and fail; 2. A Trojan asteroid tour spacecraft would spend significant time cruising to its ultimate destination (essentially hibernating to save on operations costs), then upon arrival, would have to act as its own surveyor, finding new objects and targets of opportunity as it approaches each asteroid, requiring response on short notice; and 3. A MSR campaign would not only be required to perform fast reconnaissance over long distances on the surface of Mars, interact with an unknown physical surface, and handle degradations and faults, but would also contain multiple components (launch vehicle, cruise stage, entry and landing vehicle, surface rover, ascent vehicle, orbiting cache, and Earth return vehicle) that dramatically increase the need for resilience to failure across the complex system. The concept of resilience and its relevance and application in various domains was a focus during the study, with several definitions of resilience proposed and discussed. While there was substantial variation in the specifics, there was a common conceptual core that emerged—adaptation in the presence of changing circumstances. These changes were couched in various ways—anomalies, disruptions, discoveries—but they all ultimately had to do with changes in underlying assumptions. Invalid assumptions, whether due to unexpected changes in the environment, or an inadequate understanding of interactions within the system, may cause unexpected or unintended system behavior. A system is resilient if it continues to perform the intended functions in the presence of invalid assumptions. Our study focused on areas of resilience that we felt needed additional exploration and integration, namely system and software architectures and capabilities, and autonomy technologies. (While also an important consideration, resilience in hardware is being addressed in multiple other venues, including 2 other KISS studies.) The study consisted of two workshops, separated by a seven-month focused study period. The first workshop (Workshop #1) explored the ‘problem space’ as an organizing theme, and the second workshop (Workshop #2) explored the ‘solution space’. In each workshop, focused discussions and exercises were interspersed with presentations from participants and invited speakers. The study period between the two workshops was organized as part of the synthesis activity during the first workshop. The study participants, after spending the initial days of the first workshop discussing the nature of resilience and its impact on future science missions, decided to split into three focus groups, each with a particular thrust, to explore specific ideas further and develop material needed for the second workshop. The three focus groups and areas of exploration were: 1. Reference missions: address/refine the resilience needs by exploring a set of reference missions 2. Capability survey: collect, document, and assess current efforts to develop capabilities and technology that could be used to address the documented needs, both inside and outside NASA 3. Architecture: analyze the impact of architecture on system resilience, and provide principles and guidance for architecting greater resilience in our future systems The key product of the second workshop was a set of capability roadmaps pertaining to the three reference missions selected for their representative coverage of the types of space missions envisioned for the future. From these three roadmaps, we have extracted several common capability patterns that would be appropriate targets for near-term technical development: one focused on graceful degradation of system functionality, a second focused on data understanding for science and engineering applications, and a third focused on hazard avoidance and environmental uncertainty. Continuing work is extending these roadmaps to identify candidate enablers of the capabilities from the following three categories: architecture solutions, technology solutions, and process solutions. The KISS study allowed a collection of diverse and engaged engineers, researchers, and scientists to think deeply about the theory, approaches, and technical issues involved in developing and applying resilience capabilities. The conclusions summarize the varied and disparate discussions that occurred during the study, and include new insights about the nature of the challenge and potential solutions: 1. There is a clear and definitive need for more resilient space systems. During our study period, the key scientists/engineers we engaged to understand potential future missions confirmed the scientific and risk reduction value of greater resilience in the systems used to perform these missions. 2. Resilience can be quantified in measurable terms—project cost, mission risk, and quality of science return. In order to consider resilience properly in the set of engineering trades performed during the design, integration, and operation of space systems, the benefits and costs of resilience need to be quantified. We believe, based on the work done during the study, that appropriate metrics to measure resilience must relate to risk, cost, and science quality/opportunity. Additional work is required to explicitly tie design decisions to these first-order concerns. 3. There are many existing basic technologies that can be applied to engineering resilient space systems. Through the discussions during the study, we found many varied approaches and research that address the various facets of resilience, some within NASA, and many more beyond. Examples from civil architecture, Department of Defense (DoD) / Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) initiatives, ‘smart’ power grid control, cyber-physical systems, software architecture, and application of formal verification methods for software were identified and discussed. The variety and scope of related efforts is encouraging and presents many opportunities for collaboration and development, and we expect many collaborative proposals and joint research as a result of the study. 4. Use of principled architectural approaches is key to managing complexity and integrating disparate technologies. The main challenge inherent in considering highly resilient space systems is that the increase in capability can result in an increase in complexity with all of the 3 risks and costs associated with more complex systems. What is needed is a better way of conceiving space systems that enables incorporation of capabilities without increasing complexity. We believe principled architecting approaches provide the needed means to convey a unified understanding of the system to primary stakeholders, thereby controlling complexity in the conception and development of resilient systems, and enabling the integration of disparate approaches and technologies. A representative architectural example is included in Appendix F. 5. Developing trusted resilience capabilities will require a diverse yet strategically directed research program. Despite the interest in, and benefits of, deploying resilience space systems, to date, there has been a notable lack of meaningful demonstrated progress in systems capable of working in hazardous uncertain situations. The roadmaps completed during the study, and documented in this report, provide the basis for a real funded plan that considers the required fundamental work and evolution of needed capabilities. Exploring space is a challenging and difficult endeavor. Future space missions will require more resilience in order to perform the desired science in new environments under constraints of development and operations cost, acceptable risk, and communications delays. Development of space systems with resilient capabilities has the potential to expand the limits of possibility, revolutionizing space science by enabling as yet unforeseen missions and breakthrough science observations. Our KISS study provided an essential venue for the consideration of these challenges and goals. Additional work and future steps are needed to realize the potential of resilient systems—this study provided the necessary catalyst to begin this process

Smart Sensor Data Acquisition in trains

Whether for work or leisure, we see a large number of people traveling by train every day. In order to ensure the comfort and safety of passengers, it must be checked whether the composition is working normally. For this purpose, a constant monitoring of a train must be done, followed by a diagnosis of the com-position, prediction of failures and production of alarms in the event of any anomaly. To perform monitoring on a train, it is necessary to collect data from sensors distributed along its carriages and send them to a software system that performs the diagnosis of the composition in a fast and efficient way. The description of the activities necessary for monitoring of a train imme-diately refers to topics such as distributed systems, since the intended system will have to integrate several sensors distributed along the train, or Smart Systems, since each sensor must have the capacity to not only acquire data, but also trans-mit it, preferably, wirelessly. However, there are some obstacles to the implementation of such a system. Firstly, the existence of sources of distortions and noise in the medium interferes both in the acquisition and transmission of data and secondly the fact that the sensors distributed along the train are not prepared to be connected directly to a software system. This dissertation seeks to find a solution for the problems described by im-plementing a data acquisition system that is distributed and takes advantage of the current technologies of low-cost sensor nodes as well as web technologies for sensor networks

2020 NASA Technology Taxonomy

This document is an update (new photos used) of the PDF version of the 2020 NASA Technology Taxonomy that will be available to download on the OCT Public Website. The updated 2020 NASA Technology Taxonomy, or "technology dictionary", uses a technology discipline based approach that realigns like-technologies independent of their application within the NASA mission portfolio. This tool is meant to serve as a common technology discipline-based communication tool across the agency and with its partners in other government agencies, academia, industry, and across the world

Sensor-based autonomous pipeline monitoring robotic system

The field of robotics applications continues to advance. This dissertation addresses the computational challenges of robotic applications and translations of actions using sensors. One of the most challenging fields for robotics applications is pipeline-based applications which have become an indispensable part of life. Proactive monitoring and frequent inspections are critical in maintaining pipeline health. However, these tasks are highly expensive using traditional maintenance systems, knowing that pipeline systems can be largely deployed in an inaccessible and hazardous environment. Thus, we propose a novel cost effective, scalable, customizable, and autonomous sensor-based robotic system, called SPRAM System (Sensor-based Autonomous Pipeline Monitoring Robotic System). It combines robot agent based technologies with sensing technologies for efficiently locating health related events and allows active and corrective monitoring and maintenance of the pipelines. The SPRAM System integrates RFID systems with mobile sensors and autonomous robots. While the mobile sensor motion is based on the fluid transported by the pipeline, the fixed sensors provide event and mobile sensor location information and contribute efficiently to the study of health history of the pipeline. In addition, it permits a good tracking of the mobile sensors. Using the output of event analysis, a robot agent gets command from the controlling system, travels inside the pipelines for detailed inspection and repairing of the reported incidents (e.g., damage, leakage, or corrosion). The key innovations of the proposed system are 3-fold: (a) the system can apply to a large variety of pipeline systems; (b) the solution provided is cost effective since it uses low cost powerless fixed sensors that can be setup while the pipeline system is operating; (c) the robot is autonomous and the localization technique allows controllable errors. In this dissertation, some simulation experiments described along with prototyping activities demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed system

Autonomous Flight, Fault, and Energy Management of the Flying Fish Solar-Powered Seaplane.

The Flying Fish autonomous unmanned seaplane is designed and built for persistent ocean surveillance. Solar energy harvesting and always-on autonomous control and guidance are required to achieve unattended long-term operation. This thesis describes the Flying Fish avionics and software systems that enable the system to plan, self-initiate, and autonomously execute drift-flight cycles necessary to maintain a designated watch circle subject to environmentally influenced drift. We first present the avionics and flight software architecture developed for the unique challenges of an autonomous energy-harvesting seaplane requiring the system to be: waterproof, robust over a variety of sea states, and lightweight for flight. Seaplane kinematics and dynamics are developed based on conventional aircraft and watercraft and upon empirical flight test data. These models serve as the basis for development of flight control and guidance strategies which take the form of a cyclic multi-mode guidance protocol that smoothly transitions between nested gain-scheduled proportional-derivative feedback control laws tuned for the trim conditions of each flight mode. A fault-tolerant airspeed sensing system is developed in response to elevated failure rates arising from pitot probe water ingestion in the test environment. The fault-tolerance strategy utilizes sensor characteristics and signal energy to combine redundant sensor measurements in a weighted voting strategy, handling repeated failures, sensor recovery, non-homogenous sensors, and periods of complete sensing failure. Finally, a graph-based mission planner combines models of global solar energy, local ocean-currents, and wind with flight-verified/derived aircraft models to provide an energy-aware flight planning tool. An NP-hard asymmetric multi-visit traveling salesman planning problem is posed that integrates vehicle performance and environment models using energy as the primary cost metric. A novel A* search heuristic is presented to improve search efficiency relative to uniform cost search. A series of cases studies are conducted with surface and airborne goals for various times of day and for multi-day scenarios. Energy-optimal solutions are identified except in cases where energy harvesting produces multiple comparable-cost plans via negative-cost cycles. The always-on cyclic guidance/control system, airspeed sensor fault management algorithm, and the nested-TSP heuristic for A* are all critical innovation required to solve the posed research challenges.Ph.D.Aerospace EngineeringUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studieshttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/91453/1/eubankrd_1.pd