MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134769761 · doi:10.2514/6.2011-6263

Assessment of an Automated Touchdown Detection Algorithm for the Orion Crew Module

2011· article· en· W2134769761 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace Engineering and Energy Systems
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrewTouchdownComputer scienceAlgorithmReal-time computingSimulationEngineeringAeronautics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Orion Crew Module (CM) touchdown detection is critical to activating the post-landing sequence that safe?s the Reaction Control Jets (RCS), ensures that the vehicle remains upright, and establishes communication with recovery forces. In order to accommodate safe landing of an unmanned vehicle or incapacitated crew, an onboard automated detection system is required. An Orion-specific touchdown detection algorithm was developed and evaluated to differentiate landing events from in-flight events. The proposed method will be used to initiate post-landing cutting of the parachute riser lines, to prevent CM rollover, and to terminate RCS jet firing prior to submersion. The RCS jets continue to fire until touchdown to maintain proper CM orientation with respect to the flight path and to limit impact loads, but have potentially hazardous consequences if submerged while firing. The time available after impact to cut risers and initiate the CM Up-righting System (CMUS) is measured in minutes, whereas the time from touchdown to RCS jet submersion is a function of descent velocity, sea state conditions, and is often less than one second. Evaluation of the detection algorithms was performed for in-flight events (e.g. descent under chutes) using hi-fidelity rigid body analyses in the Decelerator Systems Simulation (DSS), whereas water impacts were simulated using a rigid finite element model of the Orion CM in LS-DYNA. Two touchdown detection algorithms were evaluated with various thresholds: Acceleration magnitude spike detection, and Accumulated velocity changed (over a given time window) spike detection. Data for both detection methods is acquired from an onboard Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) sensor. The detection algorithms were tested with analytically generated in-flight and landing IMU data simulations. The acceleration spike detection proved to be faster while maintaining desired safety margin. Time to RCS jet submersion was predicted analytically across a series of simulated Orion landing conditions. This paper details the touchdown detection method chosen and the analysis used to support the decision.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it