Jump to content

Copernicus Trajectory Design and Optimization System


Recommended Posts

  • Publishers
Posted
artemis-1-0005.png
Screenshot of Copernicus with the Artemis I trajectory
NASA/JSC

Copernicus, a generalized spacecraft trajectory design and optimization system, is capable of solving a wide range of trajectory problems such as planet or moon centered trajectories, libration point trajectories, planet-moon transfers and tours, and all types of interplanetary and asteroid/comet missions.

Latest News

  • January 21, 2022: Copernicus Version 5.2 is now available. This update includes many bug fixes and various new features and refinements.
  • June 17, 2021: Copernicus was selected as winner of the 2021 NASA Software of the Year Award.
  • March 4, 2021: Copernicus Version 5.1 is now available. This updates includes many bug fixes and various new features and refinements.
  • June 26, 2020: Copernicus Version 5.0 is now available. This is a significant update to Copernicus and includes: A new modern Python-based GUI that is now cross-platform and fully functional on Windows, Linux, and macOS, 3D graphics upgrades including antialiasing and celestial body shadowing, a new Python scripting interface, many other new features and options, and bug fixes.
  • May 1, 2018: Copernicus Version 4.6 is now available. The release includes the following changes: a new cross-platform JSON kernel file format, various new reference frame features, including new capabilities for user-defined reference frame plugins, and numerous bug fixes and other minor enhancements.
  • January 24, 2018: Copernicus Version 4.5 is now available. The new version includes a new experimental Mac version, faster exporting of segment data output files (including the addition of a new binary HDF5 format), some new GUI tools, new plugin capabilities, and numerous other new features and bug fixes.
  • October 1, 2016: Copernicus Version 4.4 is now available. The new version includes 3D graphics improvements and various other new features and bug fixes.
  • February 8, 2016: Copernicus Version 4.3 is now available. The new version includes updates to the plugin interface, a new differential corrector solution method, updated SPICE SPK files, updates to the Python interface, new training videos, as well as numerous other refinements and bug fixes.
  • July 21, 2015: Copernicus Version 4.2 is now available.  The update includes further refinements to the new plugin feature, as well as various other new features and some bug fixes.
  • April 13, 2015: Copernicus Version 4.1 is now available.  This update includes a new plugin architecture to enable extending Copernicus with user-created algorithms.  It also includes a new Python interface, as well as various other new features and bug fixes.
  • August 13, 2014: Copernicus Version 4.0 is now available.  This is an update to version 3.1, which was released in June 2012.  The new release includes many new features, bug fixes, performance and stability improvements, as well as a redesigned GUI, a new user guide, and full compatibility with Windows 7.  The update is recommended for all Copernicus users.

Development

The Copernicus Project started at the University of Texas at Austin in August 2001. In June 2002, a grant from the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) was used to develop the first prototype which was completed in August 2004. In the interim, support was also received from NASA’s In Space Propulsion Program and from the Flight Dynamics Vehicle Branch of Goddard Spaceflight Center. The first operational version was completed in March 2006 (v1.0). The initial development team consisted of Dr. Cesar Ocampo and graduate students at the University of Texas at Austin Department of Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics. Since March 2007, primary development of Copernicus has been at the Flight Mechanics and Trajectory Design Branch of JSC.

Request Copernicus

The National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 and a series of subsequent legislation recognized transfer of federally owned or originated technology to be a national priority and the mission of each Federal agency. The legislation specifically mandates that each Federal agency have a formal technology transfer program, and take an active role in transferring technology to the private sector and state and local governments for the purposes of commercial and other application of the technology for the national benefit. In accordance with NASA’s obligations under mandating legislation, JSC makes Copernicus available free of charge to other NASA centers, government contractors, and universities, under the terms of a US government purpose license.  Organizations interested in obtaining Copernicus should click here.

For Copernicus-based analysis requests or specific Copernicus modifications that would support your project, please contact Gerald L. Condon (gerald.l.condon@nasa.gov) at the NASA Johnson Space Center.

Current Version

The current version of Copernicus is 5.2 (released January 21, 2022).

References

Publications about Copernicus

  • C. A. Ocampo, “An Architecture for a Generalized Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, Proceedings of the International Conference on Libration Points and Missions, June, 2002.
  • C. A. Ocampo, “Finite Burn Maneuver Modeling for a Generalized Spacecraft Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, Annals of the New York Academy of Science, May 2004.
  • C. A. Ocampo, J. Senent, “The Design and Development of Copernicus: A Comprehensive Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, Proceedings of the International Astronautical Congress, 2006. IAC-06-C1.4.04.
  • R. Mathur, C. A. Ocampo, “An Architecture for Incorporating Interactive Visualizations into Scientific Simulations”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, Feb. 2007.
  • C. A. Ocampo, J. S. Senent, J. Williams, “Theoretical Foundation of Copernicus: A Unified System for Trajectory Design and Optimization”, 4th International Conference on Astrodynamics Tools and Techniques, May 2010.
  • J. Williams, J. S. Senent, C. A. Ocampo, R. Mathur, “Overview and Software Architecture of the Copernicus Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, 4th International Conference on Astrodynamics Tools and Techniques, May 2010.
  • J. Williams, J. S. Senent, D. E. Lee, “Recent Improvements to the Copernicus Trajectory Design and Optimization System”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, 2012.
  • J. Williams, “A New Architecture for Extending the Capabilities of the Copernicus Trajectory Optimization Program”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, 2015, volume 156.
  • J. Williams, R. D. Falck, and I. B. Beekman. “Application of Modern Fortran to Spacecraft Trajectory Design and Optimization“, 2018 Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, (AIAA 2018-1451)
  • J. Williams, A. H. Kamath, R. A. Eckman, G. L. Condon, R. Mathur, and D. Davis, “Copernicus 5.0: Latest Advances in JSC’s Spacecraft Trajectory Optimization and Design System”, 2019 AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, Portland, ME, August 11-15, 2019, AAS 19-719

Some studies that have used Copernicus

  • C. L. Ranieri, C. A. Ocampo, “Optimization of Roundtrip, Time-Constrained, Finite Burn Trajectories via an Indirect Method”, Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 28, No. 2, March-April 2005.
  • T. Polsgrove, L. Kos, R. Hopkins, T. Crane, “Comparison of Performance Predictions for New Low-Thrust Trajectory Tools”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August, 2006.
  • L. D. Kos, T. P. Polsgrove, R. C. Hopkins, D. Thomas and J. A. Sims, “Overview of the Development for a Suite of Low-Thrust Trajectory Analysis Tools”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August, 2006.
  • M. Garn, M. Qu, J. Chrone, P. Su, C. Karlgaard, “NASA’s Planned Return to the Moon: Global Access and Anytime Return Requirement Implications on the Lunar Orbit Insertion Burns”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference and Exhibit, August, 2008.
  • R. B. Adams, “Near Earth Object (NEO) Mitigation Options Using Exploration Technologies”, Asteroid Deflection Research Symposium, Oct. 2008.
  • J. Gaebler, R. Lugo, E. Axdahl, P. Chai, M. Grimes, M. Long, R. Rowland, A. Wilhite, “Reusable Lunar Transportation Architecture Utilizing Orbital Propellant Depots”, AIAA SPACE 2009 Conference and Exposition, September 2009.
  • J. Williams, E. C. Davis, D. E. Lee, G. L. Condon, T. F. Dawn, “Global Performance Characterization of the Three Burn Trans-Earth Injection Maneuver Sequence over the Lunar Nodal Cycle”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 135, 2010. AAS 09-380
  • J. Williams, S. M. Stewart, D. E. Lee, E. C. Davis, G. L. Condon, T. F. Dawn, J. Senent, “The Mission Assessment Post Processor (MAPP): A New Tool for Performance Evaluation of Human Lunar Missions”, 20th AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, Feb. 2010.
  • J. W. Dankanich, L. M. Burke, J. A. Hemminger, “Mars sample return Orbiter/Earth Return Vehicle technology needs and mission risk assessment”, 2010 IEEE Aerospace Conference, March 2010.
  • A. V. Ilin, L. D. Cassady, T. W. Glover, M. D. Carter, F. R. Chang Diaz, “A Survey of Missions using VASIMR for Flexible Space Exploration”, Ad Astra Rocket Company, Document Number JSC-65825, April 2010.
  • J. W. Dankanich, B. Vondra, A. V. Ilin, “Fast Transits to Mars Using Electric Propulsion”, 46th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, July 2010.
  • S. R. Oleson, M. L. McGuire, L. Burke, J. Fincannon, T. Colozza, J. Fittje, M. Martini, T. Packard, J. Hemminger, J. Gyekenyesi, “Mars Earth Return Vehicle (MERV) Propulsion Options”, 46th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, July 2010, AIAA 2010-6795.
  • J. S. Senent, “Fast Calculation of Abort Return Trajectories for Manned Missions to the Moon”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August 2010.
  • D. S. Cooley, K. F. Galal, K. Berry, L. Janes, G. Marr. J. Carrico. C. Ocampo, “Mission Design for the Lunar CRater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS)”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August, 2010.
  • A. V. Ilin, L. D. Cassady, T. W. Glover, F. R. Chang Diaz, “VASIMR Human Mission to Mars”, Space, Propulsion & Energy Sciences International Forum, March 15-17, 2011.
  • J. Brophy, F. Culick, L. Friedman, et al., “Asteroid Retrieval Feasibility Study,” Technical Report, Keck Institute for Space Studies, California Institute of Technology, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, April 2012.
  • A. V. Ilin, “Low Thrust Trajectory Analysis (A Survey of Missions using VASIMR for Flexible Space Exploration – Part 2), Ad Astra Rocket Company, Document Number JSC-66428, June 2012.
  • P. R. Chai, A. W. Wilhite, “Station Keeping for Earth-Moon Lagrangian Point Exploration Architectural Assets”, AIAA SPACE 2012 Conference & Exposition, September, 2012, AIAA 2012-5112.
  • F. R. Chang Diaz, M. D. Carter, T. W. Glover, A. V. Ilin, C. S. Olsen, J. P. Squire, R. J. Litchford, N. Harada, S. L. Koontz, “Fast and Robust Human Missions to Mars with Advanced Nuclear Electric Power and VASIMR Propulsion”, Proceedings of Nuclear and Emerging Technologies for Space, Feb. 2013. Paper 6777.
  • J. Williams, “Trajectory Design for the Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission”, JSC Engineering, Technology and Science (JETS) Contract Technical Brief JETS-JE23-13-AFGNC-DOC-0014, July, 2013.
  • J.P. Gutkowski, T.F. Dawn, R.M. Jedrey, “Trajectory Design Analysis over the Lunar Nodal Cycle for the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Exploration Mission 2 (EM-2)”, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences Guidance, Navigation and Control, Vol. 151, 2014. AAS 14-096.
  • R. G. Merrill, M. Qu, M. A. Vavrina, C. A. Jones, J. Englander, “Interplanetary Trajectory Design for the Asteroid Robotic Redirect Mission Alternate Approach Trade Study”, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, 2014. AIAA 2014-4457.
  • J. Williams, G. L. Condon. “Contingency Trajectory Planning for the Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission”, SpaceOps 2014 Conference (AIAA 2014-1697).
  • J. Williams, D. E. Lee, R. J. Whitley, K. A. Bokelmann, D. C. Davis, and C. F. Berry. “Targeting cislunar near rectilinear halo orbits for human space exploration“, AAS 17-267
  • T. F. Dawn, J. Gutkowski, A. Batcha, J. Williams, and S. Pedrotty. “Trajectory Design Considerations for Exploration Mission 1“, 2018 Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, (AIAA 2018-0968)
  • A. L. Batcha, J. Williams, T. F. Dawn, J. P. Gutkowski, M. V. Widner, S. L. Smallwood, B. J. Killeen, E. C. Williams, and R. E. Harpold, “Artemis I Trajectory Design and Optimization”, AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, August 9-12, 2020, AAS 20-649

View the full article

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Topics

    • By NASA
      Download PDF: Statistical Analysis Using Random Forest Algorithm Provides Key Insights into Parachute Energy Modulator System

      Energy modulators (EM), also known as energy absorbers, are safety-critical components that are used to control shocks and impulses in a load path. EMs are textile devices typically manufactured out of nylon, Kevlar® and other materials, and control loads by breaking rows of stitches that bind a strong base webbing together as shown in Figure 1. A familiar EM application is a fall-protection harness used by workers to prevent injury from shock loads when the harness arrests a fall. EMs are also widely used in parachute systems to control shock loads experienced during the various stages of parachute system deployment.
      Random forest is an innovative algorithm for data classification used in statistics and machine learning. It is an easy to use and highly flexible ensemble learning method. The random forest algorithm is capable of modeling both categorical and continuous data and can handle large datasets, making it applicable in many situations. It also makes it easy to evaluate the relative importance of variables and maintains accuracy even when a dataset has missing values.
      Random forests model the relationship between a response variable and a set of predictor or independent variables by creating a collection of decision trees. Each decision tree is built from a random sample of the data. The individual trees are then combined through methods such as averaging or voting to determine the final prediction (Figure 2). A decision tree is a non-parametric supervised learning algorithm that partitions the data using a series of branching binary decisions. Decision trees inherently identify key features of the data and provide a ranking of the contribution of each feature based on when it becomes relevant. This capability can be used to determine the relative importance of the input variables (Figure 3). Decision trees are useful for exploring relationships but can have poor accuracy unless they are combined into random forests or other tree-based models.
      The performance of a random forest can be evaluated using out-of-bag error and cross-validation techniques. Random forests often use random sampling with replacement from the original dataset to create each decision tree. This is also known as bootstrap sampling and forms a bootstrap forest. The data included in the bootstrap sample are referred to as in-the-bag, while the data not selected are out-of-bag. Since the out-of-bag data were not used to generate the decision tree, they can be used as an internal measure of the accuracy of the model. Cross-validation can be used to assess how well the results of a random forest model will generalize to an independent dataset. In this approach, the data are split into a training dataset used to generate the decision trees and build the model and a validation dataset used to evaluate the model’s performance. Evaluating the model on the independent validation dataset provides an estimate of how accurately the model will perform in practice and helps avoid problems such as overfitting or sampling bias. A good model performs well on
      both the training data and the validation data.
      The complex nature of the EM system made it difficult for the team to identify how various parameters influenced EM behavior. A bootstrap forest analysis was applied to the test dataset and was able to identify five key variables associated with higher probability of damage and/or anomalous behavior. The identified key variables provided a basis for further testing and redesign of the EM system. These results also provided essential insight to the investigation and aided in development of flight rationale for future use cases.
      For information, contact Dr. Sara R. Wilson. sara.r.wilson@nasa.gov
      View the full article
    • By European Space Agency
      A multi-orbit constellation of about 300 satellites that will deliver resilient, secure and fast communications for EU governments, European companies and citizens will be put in orbit after two contracts were confirmed today in Brussels.
      View the full article
    • By European Space Agency
      Image: Space design chamber made in LEGO View the full article
    • By NASA
      iss071e650763 (Sept. 14, 2024) — The long exposure photograph taken by NASA astronaut Matthew Dominick shows star trails, streaks of city lights, and two Roscosmos crew ships, the Soyuz MS-26 docked to the Rassvet module (foreground) and the Soyuz MS-25 (background) docked to the Prichal docking module, as the International Space Station orbited 265 miles above central China.NASA Space Station trajectory data is now available to the public!
      This data, called an ephemeris, is generated by the ISS Trajectory Operations and Planning Officer (TOPO) flight controllers in the Mission Control Center at NASA’s Johnson Space Center. TOPO keeps track of where the ISS is, where it is going to be, and most importantly makes sure it isn’t at risk of colliding with other objects in space. At ISS’s altitude, a very thin atmosphere is still present. This thin atmosphere creates drag and over time can cause TOPO’s predicted ISS trajectory to accumulate error. Because of this, TOPO updates the predicted trajectory approximately three times a week, so the ISS Flight Control Team has the best trajectory estimate possible. An accurate trajectory is essential for maintaining communications links, planning visiting vehicle rendezvous, and ensuring ISS’s path is clear of any potential collisions.
      The links above and below are to the most current posted ephemeris. The ephemeris is in the CCSDS Orbital Ephemeris Message (OEM) standard and is available in .txt and .xml file formats. Each file contains header lines with the ISS mass in kg, drag area in m2, and drag coefficient used in generating the ephemeris. The header also contains lines with details for the first and last ascending nodes within the ephemeris span. Following this is a listing of upcoming ISS translation maneuvers, called “reboosts,” and visiting vehicle launches, arrivals, and departures.
      After the header, ISS state vectors in the Mean of J2000 (J2K) reference frame are listed at four-minute intervals spanning a total length of 15 days. During reboosts (translation maneuvers), the state vectors are reported in two-second intervals. Each state vector lists the time in UTC; position X, Y, and Z in km; and velocity X, Y, and Z in km/s.
      Orbit Ephemeris Message (OEM)
      https://nasa-public-data.s3.amazonaws.com/iss-coords/current/ISS_OEM/ISS.OEM_J2K_EPH.txt https://nasa-public-data.s3.amazonaws.com/iss-coords/current/ISS_OEM/ISS.OEM_J2K_EPH.xml Users of this data should monitor this page for information regarding any future changes to the file format. Past data postings can be found archived on data.nasa.gov by searching “ISS COORDS.”
      NOTE: NASA is providing this information for use by the general public. The OEM data format is supported natively by many commercial spaceflight software applications. Please consult your application’s support documentation for specific details on how to deploy this data.
      View the full article
    • By Amazing Space
      What They Didn't Teach You About Mercury - The Planets of the Solar System
  • Check out these Videos

×
×
  • Create New...