Modular, Adaptive, Reconfigurable Systems: Technology for Sustainable, Reliable, Effective, and Affordable Space Exploration

In order to execute the Vision for Space Exploration, we must find ways to reduce cost, system complexity, design, build, and test times, and at the same time increase flexibility to satisfy multiple fimctions. Modular, Adaptive, Reconfgurable System ( M A R S ) technologies promise to set the stage for &e del ivq of system elements that form the buildmg blocks of increasingly ambitious missions involving humans and robots Today, space systems are largely specialized and built on a case-bybasis. The notion of modularity however, is nothing new to NASA. The 1970's saw the development of the Multi-Mission Modular spacecraft (MMS). From 1980 to 1992 at least six satellites were built under this paradigm, and included such Goddard Space Flight Center missions as SSM, EWE, UARS, and Landsat 4 and 5. Earlier versions consisted of standard subsystem "module" or "box" components that cwld be replad witbin a structure based on predefined form hctors. Although the primary motivation for MMS was fastedchqer integration and test, standardization of interfaces, and ease of incorpomting new subsystem technology, it lacked the technology maturity and programmatic "upgrade infrastnactm?e" needed to satisfy varied mission requirements, and Uttimately it lacked user buy-in. cwsequently, it never evolved and was phased out !Such concepts as the Rapid Spacecraft Development Of€ice (RSDO) with its regularly updated atalogue of prequalifkd busses became the preferred method for acquiring satellites. N o t w i h ~ n ding, over the past 30 yems since MMS inception, technology h a advanced considerably and now modularity can be extended beyond &e traditiod MMS module M box to cover levels of integration, from the chip, card, box, subsystem, to the space system and to the system-ofsystems. This paper will present the MARS architecture, cast within the historical context of MMS. Its application will be highlighted by comparing a state-of-the-art point design vs. a MARS-enabled lunar mission, as a representative robotic case design.