BrahmsVE Platform for Design and Test of Large Scale Multi-Agent Human-Centric Mission Concepts
Part 1- Table of Contents
|
PART
|
DESCRIPTION
|
PAGE
|
|
|
Proposal Cover
|
1
|
|
|
Project Summary
|
2
|
|
1
|
Table of Contents
|
3
|
|
2
|
Identification and
Significance of the Innovation and Results of the Phase I Proposal
2.1. Innovation
2.2. Results of Phase I Project
|
4
|
|
3
|
Technical Objectives and
Work Plan
3.1. Technical Objectives
3.2.
Work Plan
3.2.1. Technical Approach
3.2.2. Task Descriptions
3.2.3. Meeting the Technical
Objectives
3.2.4. Task Labor Categories and
Schedules
|
21
|
|
4
|
Company Information
|
32
|
|
5
|
Facilities
and Equipment
|
33
|
|
6
|
Key Personnel and
Bibliography of Directly Related Work
6.1 Key Contractor Participants
6.2 Key NASA Participants
6.3
NASA and Non-NASA Advisors
6.4 Biography of Directly Related Work
|
33
|
|
7
|
Subcontracts and
Consultants
|
38
|
|
8
|
Potential
Applications
8.1 Potential NASA Applications
8.2 Potential Non-NASA Commercial
Applications
|
40
|
|
9
|
9.1. Market
Feasibility and Competition
9.2.
Strategic Relevance to the Offeror
9.3. Key Management,
Technical Personnel and Organizational Structure
9.4.
Production and Operations
9.5. Financial
Planning
9.6. Intellectual
Property
|
42
|
|
10
|
Capital Commitments
Supporting Phase II and Phase III
|
45
|
|
11
|
Related R/R&D
|
46
|
|
|
Proposal Budget
|
|
Part 2 Identification and Significance
of the Innovation and Results of the Phase I Proposal
2.1
Innovation: The declared new exploration vision and the strategic role of a new
Universal Model Repository and critical template simulation applications
All research and development in the nation’s space
program is being aligned around the new exploration vision [1]. Therefore the proposed
work product for this SBIR II, a Universal
Model Repository (UMR) to support a wide range of mission simulation and
training applications, is intended to be an important new low cost tool for
that vision. We will first articulate how this proposed project fits within the
Office of Exploration Systems’ “spiral development” and “systems within
systems” strategies. Following this we will review NASA’s past experience with
3D simulation and DigitalSpace’s prior work for NASA and our Phase I results
which we believe support the case for the proposed project and suggest its
value to NASA and the new vision. In Parts 3 and 4, we will articulate how we will
deliver the UMR platform with the following three template applications deemed
critical for work on the exploration initiative:
Table 1: Three critical
application areas to be delivered with the Universal Model Repository
|
|
1.
Simulation template and applications for crew
health and safety on long duration missions for ISS and Constellation/CEV.
Supporting prior
DigitalSpace work: VAST simulation for JSC
and Lockheed Martin space medicine, use of CHeCS rack on ISS by crew
performing emergency medical procedures, for refinement of procedures
|
|
|
2.
Simulation template and applications for the design of human-robotic systems and practices to support a long duration
surface facilities on the Moon or Mars.
Supporting prior
DigitalSpace work: BrahmsVE/FMARS, MDRS/Mobile Agents, SimLunar visualizations for
Boeing
|
|
|
3.
Simulation template and applications for rapidly developed, low cost just-in-time virtual training for
in-flight ISS and future Constellation/CEV crews.
Supporting prior
DigitalSpace work: SimStation SimEVA application - STS-114 CMG change-out crew
refresher simulation for Raytheon and JSC/Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory.
|
Spiral Development pathway
for 3D simulation-based acquisition
As articulated by the Office of Exploration Systems
(Code T), development of the next generation of missions is to follow a
“spiral” strategy where each set of technologies enables a subsequent
generation of development. Figure 1 below represents what we perceive to be the
logical spiral development pathway in the domain in which we are engaged: 3D
simulation-based design, acquisition, training, and planning.
Figure 1: Spiral Development
pathway for 3D simulation-based mission support
The above 3D simulation spiral mimics the spiral development
cycles of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) [2] and the Boeing 777 [3] both of
which relied heavily on simulation-based acquisition (SBA). However, the use of
3D simulation in space programs will go far beyond the normal CAD/CAM uses of
the technology.
Consider the following example illustrating the above
six spirals of 3D simulation-based approaches to aid in the deployment of a
hypothetical long duration lunar base facility.
1.
In the first spiral, a long
duration lunar base design is completely modeled in real-time 3D graphics with
full simulation elements for power, life support, local resource utilization,
safety and crew health, consumables and communications. This model can be
rapidly modified during conferences of experts and is represented online for
remote virtual collaboration. The model supports back-end documents, databases
and annotations from participants. This synthetic lunar installation is in
effect a “3D collaborative white board” in the early design engineering phases.
2.
Spiral two plays host to the processes
of SBA as driven by prime contractors and subcontractors working together to
design the flight hardware in CAD and deliver test components to NASA. A large
volume of CAD models and functional data will be developed in this phase and
exported to the UMR for use in the upper spirals.
3.
The third spiral is engaged
when vehicles are ready for flight and mission planning is the focus. From
orbital dynamics to lunar locales for initial landing of early automated base
delivery systems and resource utilization virtual models realistically
represent the lunar surface landing sites and projected performance of mission
hardware.
4.
In the fourth spiral, when
mission profiles have been established and crew and ground staff assigned, virtual
models will permit planners and training facilities personnel to supplement
training provided at the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory, JSC, KSC and elsewhere
with virtual analogs of procedures. This will be an extension of the work DigitalSpace
is already being employed for at JSC and other NASA centers.
5.
When a mission is in process in spiral
five, 3D simulations connected with real time telemetry that drives the 3D
scene, will allow mission control to visualize complex situations and assist
with decision. 3D simulations will enable package-able “just in time” training
that can be transmitted to crew and provide “in situ” training. This is perhaps
the highest return on investment of the entire spiral cycle, permitting
enhanced safety (even survivability) for crew who cannot access training
facilities and test rigs on Earth.
6.
The final, sixth spiral is a
benefit reaped from the presence of a common 3D simulation architecture and
repository throughout all previous spirals. The 3D simulation archive will
represent the comprehensive capture of design simulations, CAD/CAM from
production, training scenarios, operational visualizations and links to all
associated databases and communications for the mission. As we have seen with
Apollo, a retiring generation can leave NASA and its community lacking
essential knowledge. A simulation system designed from the beginning to capture
knowledge would preserve this valuable asset for subsequent generations of the
NASA community.
Table 2: DigitalSpace’s
visualizations of a lunar base facility and CEV
DigitalSpace engaged in a design simulation exercise
and produced a number of 3D concept visualizations of lunar base designs and
CEV for a Boeing workshop in April 2004. Table 2 shows some visualizations of
aspects of lunar base/CEV on the first rung of the spiral. These simulations
were instrumental in Boeing awarding a Chairman’s Innovation Initiative to
DigitalSpace and partners to pursue this further. This suggests to us that 3D
design visualization studies on spiral 1 are proving to be of value. We will be
including this project in the UMR platform being proposed in this Phase II.
The “Systems within Systems”
approach for 3D simulation projects
Figure 2: A 3D simulation
platform in a systems within systems methodology
Figure 2 above proposes how, through time, the
creation of a competent core simulation platform will permit the natural
development of subsequent functional layers. These layers map directly to the
spirals in the previous diagram. Seeing this view allows us to illustrate that
the core element to this platform, the Universal Model Repository (UMR) lies at
the center of any successful strategy to employ modeling and simulation for
whole life cycle virtual vehicles and work practices design and training. We
will now discuss the scope of simulation challenges at NASA and DigitalSpace’s
history of involvement with those challenges.
NASA’s
special needs in the area of 3D simulation: key to mission design, planning and
safe operations
NASA’s vehicles and
missions differ from military or commercial aviation in their need for long
duration human-in-the-loop inhabitation. Manned space operations such as
Shuttle and the International Space Station (ISS) have shown that complex
vehicles in which humans interact with a large number of subsystems and robotic
agents are becoming increasingly difficult to manage. Mission control and astronauts
alike often have difficulty visualizing the complexity of the flight
environment and in a state of challenged cognition safety can be easily
compromised by human error. Increasingly, synthetic environments are being
integrated into training to provide cognitive aids allowing procedures to be
seen from new points of view, whole systems and scenarios to be better
comprehended, and steps to be optimized and safety enhanced. NASA has a long
history with virtual tele-operations, CAD/CAM, aerodynamic visualization and
other aspects of 3D simulation but is relatively new to the domain of
human-in-the-loop work practice simulation. Some of the most successful recent
use of virtual environments in mission training and operations was for the
Hubble Telescope repair mission in 1993 [4-6] and the stereoscopically
constructed 3D scene for Mars Pathfinder in 1997 [7].
The
dramatically lowering costs of 3D modeling and simulation applications
Chart 1: Ten year cost and time curve
estimate for 3D modeling, scripting, animating a detailed human figure
animation (source: Web 3D consortium [31], figures are in 2004 dollars)
In the past decade, the cost
for producing real-time rendered 3D simulations has declined dramatically (ref
Chart 1). Several factors have helped to drive down costs and time including:
1.
A dramatic
decline in real-time 3D hardware costs from $36,000 for SGI Indigo 2 3D reality
pipeline in 1994 to $129 for a Radeon ATI 9800 card in 2004 (with 10x the
performance).
2.
Software
tools have improved significantly and lowered in cost (from $15,000 for an
Inventor license from SGI in 1994 to a few hundred dollars for Discrete’s GMax
in 2004).
3.
Volume
economics of the game industry have produced a thousand fold increase in the
number of studios and 3D modeling specialists and driven the hourly labor costs
down.
4.
Cameras
costing a few hundred dollars permit 3D scanning of objects, tools and
algorithms allow the creation of realistic human figure animations, and physics
engines give “free” procedurally generated realistic motion for simulations. In
1994 such realism would have been achieved using costly motion capture
hardware.
NASA has begun to adopt
lower cost approaches to 3D modeling and simulation but our experience on the
projects described below suggests that the adoption of late model tools and
techniques is not consistent. We found that there are at least a dozen separate
projects to model the International Space Station [14,16, 18-20] and a number
of virtual astronaut projects. The proposed Universal Model Repository will
give NASA and its contractors access to a common library of low cost models,
animations, scripts, procedures and web-services techniques to build
applications, encouraging cost sharing and the adoption of the latest hardware
and zero license cost net-based 3D renderers. Thus, a major focus of this
proposal to construct the UMR and template applications is producing cost and time savings for NASA.
DigitalSpace’s history and innovation with NASA in
the area of 3D simulation
DigitalSpace has been
engaged with a variety of NASA centers and companies for five years and has developed
an open platform for low cost, rapid development, cross-agency, multiple
mission applications: DigitalSpace SimSpace ™.
Figure 3:
DigitalSpace’s SimSpace Architecture
Figure 3 introduces the
current components of the SimSpace architecture and illustrates that the open
format of SimSpace supports 3rd party simulation engines, including
the Brahms and Mobile Agents projects of one ARC/JSC team (Clancey, Sierhuis et
al [8-13]) and the SimSpace project of an ARC/JSC/Langley team (Shirley,
Cochrane et al [14]). The open methodology of SimSpace enhances these two
platforms, and any future platform with of the following unique and novel
features:
·
Real-time
3D virtual environments viewable through the internet using a variety of 3D
rendering technologies (commercial and open source engines).
·
Rapidly
developed models and animation lower costs (employing a model repository which
is the subject of a full Phase II development proposal).
·
Multi
user interaction to permit shared presence in the simulations.
·
Collaborative
database to associate existing vehicle databases with 3D scenarios.
·
Web-accessibility
permitting universal access to the environments even employing computers in
vehicles in flight.
·
Open
scripting component architecture to permit physical and haptic device
interfaces (planned).
SimSpace combines 3rd
party Foundation elements (Brahms,
SimStation, shared models and any other pluggable system) within a common Simulation layer (SimSpace including the
BrahmsVE interface, Oworld Agent Information Broker (OWIB) and OWorld engine)
and drives a flexible Presentation
layer (commercial or open source 3D engines) enabling a much larger range of Applications than would be possible with
a monolithic system. The next section covers some of these applications.
Applications
built on the SimSpace platform
The approach has proven
successful as SimSpace has begun to gain wider acceptance across NASA centers
and within the contractor community. The following applications have been built
on SimSpace and delivered to customers:
·
SimHab: FMARS and
Mars Desert Research Station Analog Habitats (using Brahms from ARC - figures 4-6 below) [21].
·
SimRover: 3D
scenarios of Mobile Agents work practice (current summer 2004) (Brahms from ARC
and rovers from JSC). MER Rover surface operations reconstruction prototype in
“Drive On Mars” (ARC VizOpps group, JPL surface data – figure 7 below) [22].
·
SimStation:
Web-based collaborative rendering of SimStation application including exterior
3D ISS configurations with linked in photography and database documents
(SimStation group at ARC, JSC, Langley –
figure 13 below) [14, 23, 29].
·
SimEVA and SimIVA: EVA
training prototype for Neutral Bouyancy Laboratory/Raytheon including CMG
changeout for STS-114 and RPCM changeout on the ISS (SimStation group at ARC –
see figure 10 below) [24]. Simulation of Personal Satellite Assistant in ISS
IVA operations (ARC – figure 8 below) [15-17, 26]. Simulation of EVA on Mars
for BrahmsVE application (ARC – figures 9-11 below).
·
SimMedical: VAST
project for ISS crew medical training on CHeCS rack procedures (Lockheed
Martin, ARC, JSC, Langley – figure 14 below). National Institutes of Health
project for childhood autism, safety learning game (DoToLearn) [27].
·
SimVehicle and SimLunar: 3D simulations for Boeing of Lunar base and Crew Exploration Vehicle
(CEV) concepts. Prototypes for Space Exploration Online (SEO), initiative for a
massively multiplayer space oriented Lunar base reality game (Boeing CII
project, ARC, JSC, MOVES Institute, Arsenal Interactive – see table 2 above)
[28].
Figures showing the SimSpace
applications, years: 2000-2001
