logoalt Hacker News

Artemis II Fault Tolerance

41 pointsby speckxtoday at 5:39 PM25 commentsview on HN

Comments

methodicaltoday at 9:23 PM

Candidly, while I understand the need for some amount of redundancy, I'm curious what this level of redundancy adds in terms of complexity to the system of a whole and whether or not that complexity-add almost outweighs the higher redundancy. I'm sure NASA has calculated the trade off, but I'd be curious to see the thoughts behind that.

I feel in a similar vein when learning of certain aircraft accidents over the years, where it feels like the redundancy of certain systems and the complexity it adds has been the indirect cause of accidents instead of preventing them. I suppose there's not really a way to quantify the accidents that it's prevent to be able to compare them directly.

WorkerBee28474today at 7:40 PM

> Orion utilizes two Vehicle Management Computers, each containing two Flight Control Modules, for a total of four FCMs. But the redundancy goes even deeper: each FCM consists of a self-checking pair of processors.

Who sits down and determines that 8 is the correct number? Why not 4? Or 2? Or 16 or 32?

show 3 replies
_whiteCaps_today at 8:20 PM

I'm a big fan of Dissimilar Redundancies (but didn't know that was the term until today) for building system software.

Build for various Linux distros, and some of the BSDs. You'll encounter weird compile errors or edge cases that will pop up. Often times I've found that these will expose undefined behaviour or incorrect assumptions that you wouldn't notice if you were building for a single platform.

MiracleRabbittoday at 8:07 PM

Interesting. In safety components we are using Lockstep Microcontrollers which are doing something similar in a much smaller scale.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockstep_(computing)

Example: https://www.st.com/resource/en/datasheet/spc574k72e5.pdf

show 1 reply
tcp_handshakertoday at 7:07 PM

For the Airbus they used different CPUs because CPUs have bugs too...

show 1 reply
ranger207today at 8:46 PM

> The self-checking pairs ensure that if a CPU performs an erroneous calculation due to a radiation event, the error is detected immediately and the system responds.

How does a pair determine which of the pair did the calculation correctly?

show 4 replies
y1n0today at 8:18 PM

What I would like to see is the fault data. Also a graph of the # of in sync FMCs over time and how well did it correlate with predictions.

I other words, how over engineered is it.

m3kw9today at 8:30 PM

The training the astronauts need must be a lot

show 1 reply