Terri Wood / NASA GSFC Robert Shendock / SGT, Inc Jenny Williams / CSC

55thth International Workshop International Workshop on Planning and on Planning and

Scheduling for SpaceScheduling for SpaceAutomated Mission Planning and Scheduling

(AMPS) Support of Autonomous Operations for the ST5 Constellation

Terri Wood / NASA GSFCRobert Shendock / SGT, Inc

Jenny Williams / CSC

October 24, 2006 5th IWPSS: AMPS Support for the ST5 Constellation 2

Preface

• ST5 validated some interoperability and distributed control operations concepts intended to lower operational costs and risks

• Interoperability– Distributed message bus to loosely interconnect mission

components on the ground and provide “plug and play” capability

– Form basis of future mission Service Oriented Architecture (SOA)

• Distributed mission control– Used self-managing, autonomous software components to

validate concept for managing increasingly complex missions


Introduction

• The Mission• What new technologies were used to support it

– Challenges in using the application– An approach to modeling that worked

• How well did the technologies support mission objectives– Requirements/problems solved – Improvements to mission cost/quality

• What methods were used to infuse new technologies– Technical & cultural issues– Approaches to infusion that worked & didn’t


Mission Overview

• 3 spacecraft launched 22MAR06

• 300 X 4500 km orbit• 10.5 orbits per day• Same transmitter freq• Supported by DSN and GN• GN Support

– 2 contacts / spacecraft / day– McMurdo Ground Station (MGS)

• DSN Support (34 meter)– 1 contact / spacecraft / day– Primarily Canberra (DSS-34)


Mission Operations RequirementsMotivation for Automated Mission Planning System

• Maintain the health and safety of three spacecraft.• Recover at least 80% of the recorded data.• To design, develop, test and operate a ground

segment supporting multiple spacecraft acting as a single constellation.• Develop ground software to automate constellation

operations.• Demonstrate concepts for autonomous constellation

management and autonomous operations from the ground.• Perform "lights out" operations during which time no

intervention by ground personnel is required to operate the constellation or maintain the health and safety of the spacecraft.


New Technologies Supporting P&S

• Infused GMSEC architecture to facilitate data transfer– Middleware served as generic messaging interface between

components– Provided easy scalability (plug & play) of ground system

• Implemented Model-based operations to meet mission objectives, reduce staff and minimize risk– Simulink ST-5 (ROME) modeling of constrained resource

utilization• For ST5, MATLAB models generated for Solid State Recorders, RF

Link and Power

– Automated Mission Planning System (AMPS) provided planning for near real-time autonomous re-planning

Operations Overview


GMSEC Component Catalog Technologies

GMSEC Interoperable Catalog Components

Middlewares: GSFC Bus, ICS SWB, TIBCO Rendezvous, TIBCO SmartSockets, RTI NDDS, SOAP, MQSeries, ICE

Front End Processors+ Simulators

GMSEC APIs/Ops Systems

Linux

Solaris

C, C++

J ava

Python

HP/UX

Telemetry + CommandSystems

ASIST

ITOS

TReK

Desk TM

InControlNG

ScriptingControlGDS

FEDS

FFTB

IRTS

SIMSS

STARS

Python

SCL

Automation

ANS

CAT

Pag

ing

ScenarioScheduler

ExpertSystems

Planning +Scheduling

AMPS

MOPSS

STK/Scheduler

Flight Dynamics

STK

MTASS

MSASS

XFDS

Archive + Assessment

Tre

ndin

gS

yste

ms

RPTS

SystemMonitoring

ITPS

TAPS

MTASS

Archiving

SimulinkROME

MacOSHigh

Fly/SCOS

VisualFocus

Front End Processors+ Simulators

GMSEC APIs/Ops Systems

Solaris

C, C++

Python

HP/UX

Telemetry + CommandSystems

ASIST

ITOS

TReK

Desk TM

InControlNG

ScriptingControlGDS

FEDS

FFTB

SIMSS

STARS

Python

SCL

Automation

ANSPag

ing

ExpertSystems

Planning +Scheduling

AMPS

STK/Scheduler

STK

MTASS

MSASS

XFDS

Archive + Assessment

Tre

ndin

gS

yste

ms

RPTS

SystemMonitoring

ITPS

TAPS

MTASS

Archiving

SimulinkROME

MacOS

FlexPlan

VisualFocus

IRTSANSR

IRTSScenarioScheduler

IRTSCAT

IRTSPPF

IRTSGREAT

Windows

IRTSLinux

FocusConstellation

AutoFDS

IRTSMOPSS

IRTSST5

Eclipse

Java

Usage Key:

IRTS

PerlPerl

– GMSEC approach gives users choices for the components in their system.

– ST5 added or enhanced key components in the GMSEC catalog.


Technologies ST5 Architecture

CommandTelemetryTrack

DSN Site

Frame SyncLocal Data ArchiveCommand Transmit

NISN

IP Routing

Command

R/T Telemetry

Tracking Data

P/B Telemetry

Acquisition Data

FDF

Orbit Predicts

FEDS / ASIST

Telemetry MonitoringCommand Management

Data ArchivalPN DecodingRS Decoding

Level-0 Processing

ADS

NRT Attitude Determination Mission Planning Product

GenerationManeuver Planning

ST5 Mission Operations Control Center

Command

R/T Telemetry

P/B Telemetry

Tracking Data

Acquisition Data

PredictedOrbit

Science Processing Facility

Level-0Data

Simulink ST-5

ROME based Operations Modeling System

AMPS

Intelligent Mission Operations Planning

ITPS

Data Plotting & Trending

CAT / ANSR

Problem Detection & Notification System

GN Site

Frame SyncLocal Data ArchiveCommand Transmit

Command

R/T Telemetry

Tracking Data

P/B Telemetry

Acquisition Data

DSN / GN Scheduling

Planning Data

Schedules

Planning Data

Schedules Clock Estimation

Definitive Timing System

DefinitiveOrbit

DefinitiveClock Data

I&T Site

GSFC

Command

R/T Telemetry

P/B Telemetry

Launch Site

VAFB

Command

R/T Telemetry

P/B Telemetry

Sim Center

GSFC / FlatSat

Command

R/T Telemetry

P/B Telemetry

GMSEC Bus

HERITAGE HERITAGE W/MODS NEW OR MODIFIED

CPT

DSN & GN Schedules on GMSEC Bus


TechnologiesGMSEC Architecture

• GSFC Mission Services Evolution Center (GMSEC) coordinates data systems development & services

• Standardized Interfaces and Messages (not components)– COTS or in-house tools have the same key interface definitions – To provide for plug-and-play modules that can be integrated quickly

and to allow the “trading” of components with other organizations

• Middleware– Provide message-based communications services on a bus– Makes it much easier to add new tools, reduce integration effort

• GMSEC focuses on the Architecture and Interfaces– Traditional development organizations still own their domain areas– Create a system from GMSEC offerings, populate the databases,

add mission unique features


Technologies Mission Planning Centric

• Automated Mission Planning System (AMPS) provides constellation and autonomous operations support– Plans integrated spacecraft stored command, spacecraft real-

time command, and GSE directives• One product showing all planned activities

– Supports integrated planning for all constellation spacecraft• One product for the constellation

– Provides a command/directive interface with other applications

• What you scheduled is what is executed

GMSEC Apps

GMSEC Bus

Model-Based Ops

CMD/TLMSystem AMPS

User Rules

UserRequests


Technologies Model Based Operations

• Real-time Object Modeling Executive (ROME)– Supports multiple models and multiple spacecraft – Leverages common engineering modeling environments– Models from various sources are easily integrated– Fully supports GMSEC bus– Models initialized and maintained from telemetry– Model control via configuration file or bus directive– Results available to GMSEC subscribers– Easily configured via XML– Highly scalable

GMSEC Apps

GMSEC Bus

Planning System

CMD/TLMSystem

Matlab / Simulink

ModelModel

Model

ROME


Technologies Allocate responsibilities

• Applications provide integrated support for space and ground segments– Planning system defines planned on-board absolute time

command sequences and real-time ground sequences– Ground segment supports more dynamic spacecraft

management capabilities– System can assess and respond to changing spacecraft and

ground states

• Autonomy provided by the on-board Flight Software was judiciously utilized– Auto operations support was applied where best suited– Allocation based on availability of functional capabilities and

state information


Technologies Challenges

• Define a reasonable operations concept– System approach to technology integration while minimizing risk – ST5: Restrict the scope of the work to be performed (cost /

benefit analysis)Consider quality of heritage capabilities during system design

• Assure data is available when and where it is needed– System analysis resulting in application and interface

specification– ST5: Defined the what, where, when and quality of data;

assigned functional requirements accordingly

• Find the right people to develop the application database– By definition, new technology applications do not have a large

pool of experienced people to draw from– ST5: No good solution


Technologies Challenges 2

• Develop a reasonable test environment for meaningful durations– Local simulators usually not good in simulating networks or

space link environments– ST5: Test it like you’ll fly it. Utilized FlatSat simulator and

conducted Operational Simulations using the fullest ground system available

• Support refinement of the application following launch– FOT product type refinements as well as application developer

support– ST5: Didn’t do the best, FOT staffing lean, developer money

short – paid the price in diminished performance


TechnologiesModeling Notes

• Finding the resources for model development– Modeling is expensive but done during the mission life cycle– ST5: Took what was available & utilized students and contractor

support to build additional models

• Generation and transfer of analysis derived from the models to the user– Get the needed analytical results when & where they are needed– ST5: Developed a system to initialize, execute and distribute the

resulting analysis in a useable form

• Maintaining the fidelity of the model– Modeled environments change with time, lack of maintenance

frequently kills high fidelity models– ST5: Developed a system to autonomously maintain

configuration & performance parameters based on spacecraft & ground system data


Mission Support Approach to Supporting Mission Objectives

• Devise and validate a plan off-line – Plan is directly executed for automated control of ground and

space segments

• Provide self-updating predictive models– Support plan validation off-line – Report changes in constrained resource availability in real-time

• Autonomously re-plan in real-time in response to reported changes in resource availability

Operations Overview


Mission Support Using Model-Based Operations

Inserting model-based predictive software within the control loop yields higher quality Command and Control of space-borne platforms

Validation of operator generated plan of activities (UDAP)

Self-updating, or ‘tuning’, models for accuracy over mission lifecycle


Mission Support AMPS Generated Integrated Activity Plan

• Typical contact– Spacecraft

stored commands

– Real-time spacecraft commands

– GSE directives– Orbital,

scheduling & planning events

– Note “as scheduled” release entry

Operations Overview

2006:143:02:22:13 224 NONE FD MGS_NORTH_UAV; 2006:143:02:25:27 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP sendRFProfilingDirective(155 GRAPH 2006-143-02:30:27 2006-143-02:43:52 MGS); 2006:143:02:25:27 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP S cgs_prepass("MGS",11,646,"2006-143-02:30:27","2006-143-02:43:52",155); 2006:143:02:27:24 094 NONE FD ZOI; 2006:143:02:27:26 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP S cgs_aos(155); 2006:143:02:30:27 155 NONE FD MGS_NORTH_UAV; 2006:143:02:30:27 155 NONE SCD BOT McMurdo; 2006:143:02:30:27 155 NONE ACT GN_Contact_Prepass_Type_11; 2006:143:02:30:27 155 NONE ACT Contact 100K; 2006:143:02:30:27 155 ASISTPRI CMD MSCSTARTR(RTS=23); 2006:143:02:33:27 155 NONE ACT Playback Dump All Dataset 0; 2006:143:02:33:27 155 ASISTPRI CMD MSCSTARTR(RTS=37); 2006:143:02:38:53 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP SingleSSRProfile(155); 2006:143:02:39:52 094 NONE FD MGS_NORTH_UAV; 2006:143:02:39:53 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP s cdh_ds_postprofile("all",2,155); 2006:143:02:41:52 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP s cgs_los(155); 2006:143:02:42:51 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP s cgs_postpass(155); 2006:143:02:43:00 224 NONE FD ZOI; 2006:143:02:43:52 155 NONE SCD EOT McMurdo; 2006:143:02:43:52 155 NONE FD ZOI; 2006:143:02:44:50 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP s cgs_clkest(155); 2006:143:02:45:16 094 NONE FD ZOI; 2006:143:02:45:52 155 NONE ACT GN_Contact_Postpass; 2006:143:02:45:52 155 NONE ACT Transmitter Power Disable; 2006:143:02:45:52 155 ASISTPRI CMD MSCSTARTR(RTS=25);

Time (GMT) S/C Application Type User Defined Data


Mission Support Long-Term Mission Planning ROME Profile

• During the off-line planning process:– Develop a

proposed plan– Generate ROME

model profiles– Adjust the plan

based on profile results

– Re-profile using the revised plan

– Commit the plan once violations are resolved


Mission Support Real-Time Mission Planning ROME Profile

• During the real-time execution process:– Generate short-

term ROME model profiles

– Generate alarm messages if user-defined thresholds are violated

– Mission planning system adjusts plan to avoid (minimize) threshold violation


Mission Support Real-Time AMPS Re-Plan

• Post-pass Activity Plan “AS RUN”– Release

request modified from 2 to 1 in response to ROME alarm

2006:143:02:22:13 224 NONE FD MGS_NORTH_UAV; 2006:143:02:25:27 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP sendRFProfilingDirective(155 GRAPH 2006-143-02:30:27 2006-143-02:43:52 MGS); 2006:143:02:25:27 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP S cgs_prepass("MGS",11,646,"2006-143-02:30:27","2006-143-02:43:52",155); 2006:143:02:27:24 094 NONE FD ZOI; 2006:143:02:27:26 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP S cgs_aos(155); 2006:143:02:30:27 155 NONE FD MGS_NORTH_UAV; 2006:143:02:30:27 155 NONE SCD BOT McMurdo; 2006:143:02:30:27 155 NONE ACT GN_Contact_Prepass_Type_11; 2006:143:02:30:27 155 NONE ACT Contact 100K; 2006:143:02:30:27 155 ASISTPRI CMD MSCSTARTR(RTS=23); 2006:143:02:33:27 155 NONE ACT Playback Dump All Dataset 0; 2006:143:02:33:27 155 ASISTPRI CMD MSCSTARTR(RTS=37); 2006:143:02:38:53 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP SingleSSRProfile(155); 2006:143:02:39:52 094 NONE FD MGS_NORTH_UAV; 2006:143:02:39:53 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP s cdh_ds_postprofile("all",1,155); 2006:143:02:41:52 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP s cgs_los(155); 2006:143:02:42:51 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP s cgs_postpass(155); 2006:143:02:43:00 224 NONE FD ZOI; 2006:143:02:43:52 155 NONE SCD EOT McMurdo; 2006:143:02:43:52 155 NONE FD ZOI; 2006:143:02:44:50 155 CMD.ASIST RT_STEP s cgs_clkest(155); 2006:143:02:45:16 094 NONE FD ZOI; 2006:143:02:45:52 155 NONE ACT GN_Contact_Postpass; 2006:143:02:45:52 155 NONE ACT Transmitter Power Disable; 2006:143:02:45:52 155 ASISTPRI CMD MSCSTARTR(RTS=25);


Mission Support Summary: Checking & Using the Plan

Operations Overview

Off-line Mission Planning Near-real-time Profiling

ST5 Autonomous Spacecraft Management (Option 3) – Model-based Operations Functional FLow

Sim

ulin

k S

T5

Res

ourc

e P

rofil

es

AM

PS

LO

S

Det

erm

inat

ion

Mod

el

AM

PS

Sce

nario

S

ched

uler

AM

PS

UD

AP

Eng

inee

ring Rules / priority scheme

for:1) Power2) Communications3) tracking data4) data recovery

Network Schedule

Spacecraft telemetry

LOS Determination Model

Engineering Review

Schedule events and activities

SSR Data recovery profile

Tracking data duration validation

Power profile

Re- Schedule activities and LOS events

Real/time commands

Stored Commands Revised Real/time

commands

Communications link profile

Tracking data duration validation

SSR Data recovery profile

Communications link profile

Power profile


Mission Support How Well Did We Do: Mission Metrics

Data Recovery & Staffing

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

12 16 20 24

Op Week

All SC All VR (%)

On Console (hr/day)


Mission Support Solutions & Improvements

• Problems were solved / requirements met– Exceeded all mission requirements– Maintained health and safety throughout the mission– Recovered 93% of the data for the entire mission– System supported the mission throughout at increasing levels of

automation– Successfully conducted at least one full Operational Week of

“lights out” operations

• Improvements to the mission realized– Reduced off-shift staffing requirement– Reduced complexity of operations– Minimized “trivial’ errors


Infusion of New TechnologiesTechnological / Cultural Issues

• Utilization of existing technologies may not be fully implemented in your environment– Master available capabilities and demonstrate utility /

worthlessness before pressing on

• In situations where controllers become uncomfortable with the current situation, they instinctively disable the new technology– This generally created an environment where the probability of

operator error increased– The team needs to undergo a true end-to-end cultural shift –

understanding & feeling comfortable with the new technologies– Has resulted in the premature death of multiple “sound”

technologies


Infusion of New TechnologiesApproaches That Worked

• Support of management makes all the difference– Keep all levels of project management well informed– Work system design, development & test with a knowledge of

and in parallel with spacecraft development• Consider a Spacecraft Controller Team (test conductor / controller)

approach

• Define and mitigate risks during all mission phases– Be well prepared, have sound mitigation approaches

• Apply an appropriate level of engineering to the project– Engineers like to over-design, ops likes it simple, easy and as it

was– Explicitly define a realistic and consistent scope


Infusion of New TechnologiesApproaches That Worked 2

• Knowledge is power, but action requires knowledge and control authority– Analyze the detailed what, where, when and quality of your data– Send data to the most logical agent for action– Provide the most logical agent for action with the authority to

effect change

• Define reasonable mission requirements– From a project perspective, if it isn’t a requirement, it may not

get done– From a project perspective, if it is a requirement, it better get

done

• Provide a quality toolset, have the team use it often– Each mission is “different”, provide the tools first, then the

solution


Infusion of New TechnologiesApproaches That Worked 3

• Staff to meet your needs, build the team you need– Pre-launch development is different from nominal mission– Hire support staff capable and willing to nurture new

technologies

• Test on the ground, budget for support in-flight – Ground test will be incomplete by definition– Budget and plan on support for the technologies in-flight

• Don’t be “out there” unless you’re required to be “out there”


Infusion of New TechnologiesApproaches That Don’t Work

• Assuming ops “buy in” if the intent is to reduce staff– Very few people will work hard to put themselves or friends out

of a job– Most people will work to meet previously published requirements

• Poor risk management or presentation of risk mitigation– Ops exposure is limited until Flight Ops Review, plan & present

well– If not correctly managed, risk reduction may equate to scope

reduction or worse (RFAs)– Propose sound requirements, develop a realistic implementation

plan early on in the mission

• Expect to significantly advance new technologies if:– They are “goals” (i.e. not required)– You rely on real-time ops support to do it in their spare time


Contact Information

• Terry Wood– NASA /GSFC Code 583 301-614-6432 – [email protected]

• Bob Shendock– SGT,Inc 301-883-4051– [email protected]

• Jenny Williams– CSC 443-436-6934– [email protected]

Terri Wood / NASA GSFC Robert Shendock / SGT, Inc Jenny Williams / CSC

Documents

Transcript of Terri Wood / NASA GSFC Robert Shendock / SGT, Inc Jenny Williams / CSC