Autonomic Management of Space Missions

With NASA s renewed commitment to outer space exploration, greater emphasis is being placed on both human and robotic exploration. Even when humans are involved in the exploration, human tending of assets becomes cost-prohibitive or in many cases is simply not feasible. In addition, certain exploration missions will require spacecraft that will be capable of venturing where humans cannot be sent. Early space missions were operated manually from ground control centers with little or no automated operations. In the mid-l980s, the high costs of satellite operations prompted NASA, and others, to begin automating as many functions as possible. In our context, a system is autonomous if it can achieve its goals without human intervention. A number of more-or-less automated ground systems exist today, but work continues with the goal being to reduce operations costs to even lower levels. Cost reductions can be achieved in a number of areas. Ground control and spacecraft operations are two such areas where greater autonomy can reduce costs. As a consequence, autonomy is increasingly seen as a critical approach for robotic missions and for some aspects of manned missions. Although autonomy will be critical for the success of future missions (and indeed will enable certain kinds of science data gathering approaches), missions imbued with autonomy must also exhibit autonomic properties. Exploitation of autonomy alone, without emphasis on autonomic properties, will leave spacecraft vulnerable to the dangerous environments in which they must operate. Without autonomic properties, a spacecraft may be unable to recognize negative environmental effects on its components and subsystems, or may be unable to take any action to ameliorate the effects. The spacecraft, though operating autonomously, may then sustain a degradation of performance of components or subsystems, and consequently may have a reduced potential for achieving mission objectives. In extreme cases, lack of autonomic properties could leave the spacecraft unable to recover from faults. Ensuring that exploration spacecraft have autonomic properties will increase the survivability and therefore the likelihood of success of these missions. In fact, over time, as mission requirements increased demands on spacecraft capabilities and longevity, designers have gradually built more autonomicity into spacecraft. For example, a spacecraft in low-earth orbit may experience an out-of-bounds perturbation of its attitude (orientation) due to increased drag caused by increased atmospheric density at its altitude as a result of a sufficiently large solar flare. If the spacecraft was designed to recognize the excessive attitude perturbation, it could decide to protect itself by going into a safe-hold mode where its internal configuration and operation are altered to conserve power and its coarse attitude is adjusted to point its solar panels toward the Sun to maximize power generation. This is an example of a simple type of autonomic behavior that has actually occurred. Future mission concepts will be increasingly dependent on space system survivability enabled by more advanced types of autonomic behavior