common berthing mechanism
Enable an AI agent to recognize a Common Berthing Mechanism interface, assess its mating and pressure-boundary state, and identify which berthing, inspection, or release actions its verified configuration permits.
Bundle → Layer → Finding → Questions Filled
6 bundles · 11 layers · 16 findings · 26 questions
CBM identity and mating Establish which complementary CBM assemblies and interface configurations are being considered.
Assembly role and boundary
Separate the mechanism half, the complete mating interface, and surrounding spacecraft equipment.
Active and passive identity
The documented CBM architecture uses complementary active and passive mechanisms positioned for berthing by a remote manipulator. [NASA CBM design record](https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19920015843)
- Does this record describe an active half, a passive half, or a particular mated pair? definition
- Which components belong to the CBM rather than the host module, hatch, or robotic manipulator? boundary
Pair compatibility
Resolve counterpart geometry and configuration applicability.
Controlled mating interface
Record compatibility evidence for the actual revisions, installation orientation, and available passage clearance.
- Which controlled interface documents and revisions establish that these two assemblies can mate? provenance
- What mating datums, orientation constraints, and clear-opening dimensions apply to this pair? measurement
Alignment and capture Represent the transition from externally supported positioning to confirmed capture.
Capture envelope
Connect interface pose and readiness indications to permission to begin capture.
Ready-to-latch evidence
JAXA describes a limit-switch readiness indication before capture-latch operation; applicable limits and decision logic need configuration-specific evidence. [JAXA CBM acceptance-test description](https://iss.jaxa.jp/iss/kibo/develop_status_17_e.html)
- What translational, angular, and relative-motion limits define the approved capture envelope? measurement
- Which readiness indications and manipulator conditions must be verified before latch motion is permitted? action
Capture completion
Determine whether latch engagement supports the next connection stage.
Latch-by-latch confirmation
Record each latch's engagement evidence and the criteria for transferring support responsibilities.
- What observations distinguish an extended latch, an engaged latch, and a successfully completed capture? definition
- Which approved response applies if a latch stalls or capture indications disagree? action
Structural fastening and loads Represent bolt engagement, accepted preload, and the resulting joint capability.
Powered-bolt closure
Track structural fastening independently of initial capture.
Bolt engagement and preload
Maintain individual bolt evidence, acceptance criteria, and any unresolved fastening anomaly.
- What engagement and preload evidence is required for each structural bolt? measurement
- Which approved tightening sequence and stop conditions apply when bolt behavior is abnormal? action
Joint service capability
Relate fastening condition to permitted loads and operating conditions.
Accepted load path
Record configuration-specific structural acceptance rather than inferring full capability from apparent closure.
- What combined force, moment, pressure, and thermal limits apply to the accepted joint? measurement
- What engineering disposition, if any, permits operation with an unavailable bolt or unresolved preload indication? provenance
Sealing and pressure readiness Assess the mating seal and pressure evidence needed for use of the connected interface.
Mating seal condition
Identify the installed sealing arrangement and its inspection criteria.
Seal-surface acceptance
The documented CBM connection includes a seal for airtightness; record the installed design and acceptance evidence rather than assuming a universal seal configuration. [JAXA CBM acceptance-test description](https://iss.jaxa.jp/iss/kibo/develop_status_17_e.html)
- Which seals and mating surfaces form the pressure boundary in this configuration? definition
- What inspection criteria govern debris, surface damage, seal degradation, and any protective hardware? action
Leak and pressure verification
Connect test results to the correct interface volumes and operational handoffs.
Pressure-boundary release evidence
Preserve the leak-test method, acceptance result, and pressure conditions supporting subsequent operations.
- Which test volumes, leakage limits, units, stabilization conditions, and measurement uncertainties apply? measurement
- What verified CBM pressure-boundary evidence must be handed to hatch and vestibule procedures before they proceed? boundary
Control, recovery, and reuse Establish trustworthy mechanism state, allowable recovery, and readiness for later separation or mating.
Command and state integrity
Separate requested actions from measured mechanical outcomes.
Verified command prerequisites
Associate each permitted mechanism transition with power, control authority, sensor validity, and applicable inhibits.
- Which electrical supply, controller configuration, and command authority apply to this installation? provenance
- Which transitions must be inhibited when indications are stale, contradictory, or unavailable? action
Separation and life evidence
Use service history and external readiness evidence to assess release and reuse.
Release and remating readiness
Record applicable separation prerequisites, approved anomaly recovery, and inspection or replacement requirements before reuse.
- What pressure, hatch, utility-clearance, and external-support confirmations are prerequisites for the approved unberthing procedure? action
- Which qualification records, cycle limits, exposure history, and post-anomaly inspections establish eligibility for another mating? provenance
Evidence and external alignment What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.
Reported evidence
Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.
Check these first
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these check these first hold for the sense of common berthing mechanism this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Kinds and varieties
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of common berthing mechanism this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Real-world use
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of common berthing mechanism this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Typical measurements
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of common berthing mechanism this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Failure modes and hazards
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of common berthing mechanism this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of common berthing mechanism this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Classifiers Filled
- Family
- Thing Registry
- Category
- Physical world and living systems
- Entry kind
- thing
- Plane
- PHY
- Domain
- PHY.OBJ
What it is Filled
The Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM) is a paired active-passive interface used on the International Space Station to capture, bolt together and seal pressurized modules or visiting spacecraft positioned by a robotic arm.
In scope
- Active and passive CBM identities, mating geometry, and compatibility evidence
- Alignment features, capture latches, powered bolts, and their mating fittings
- Structural joint condition, bolt engagement, and verified load capability
- Mating seals, interface leakage, and pressure-boundary readiness
- Electrical actuation, state sensing, command prerequisites, and fault recovery
- Inspection, qualification, maintenance, and mating-cycle history
Out of scope
- The robotic manipulator, its grapple fixture, and spacecraft approach navigation
- Complete spacecraft or station-module structure and life-support systems
- Hatch mechanisms and their independent opening or closure authority
- Docking mechanisms from other interface families, including adapters as complete products
- Intermodule utility connections beyond their effect on CBM readiness
- A particular manufacturer's product record or an individual flight unit as the definition of the kind
Why it exists Filled
Enable an AI agent to recognize a Common Berthing Mechanism interface, assess its mating and pressure-boundary state, and identify which berthing, inspection, or release actions its verified configuration permits.
Distinguishing features Filled
- Identify the specific CBM interface family through controlled drawings or interface documentation; the ability to join spacecraft is insufficient.
- Check for complementary active and passive halves rather than assuming two identical interfaces can mate.
- Distinguish robot-positioned berthing from a mechanism intended to capture an independently approaching spacecraft.
- For the documented ISS configuration, check for four capture latches followed by engagement of 16 powered bolts. [JAXA CBM acceptance-test description](https://iss.jaxa.jp/iss/kibo/develop_status_17_e.html)
- Distinguish the module-to-module berthing joint from the hatch that closes the passage through that joint.
What robots and AI may and may not do Filled
Must not
- Disclose non-public engineering, operational or security details of the mechanism.
- Present speculation about failures or leaks as confirmed.
- Help interfere with spacecraft operations or their ground systems.
Only with a human decision
- Any request involving operation or analysis of a live berthing.
May
- Describe the common berthing mechanism and its role on the space station from official sources.
- Report publicly released berthing events and mission records.
Moral aspects Filled
- A sealed berth keeps the crew alive; a failure endangers lives.
- Public accounts of space incidents should be accurate and not alarmist.
Who is affected
- Space station crews
- Mission teams
- The public
Owners Filled
Steward
The space station partner agencies that operate the station.
Links to other meta-models Filled
parent
- Q22793406 - registry parent class
What else AI and robots need to interact with it Filled
Identity and identifiers required Filled
- Vercy registry: vr.tr.common-berthing-mechanism
- Wikidata: Q1116068 (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1116068)
Direct properties required Filled
- Assembly role: active CBM | passive CBM | identified mated pair
- Interface configuration: controlled drawing revision, applicable interface document, counterpart configuration
- Capture geometry: translation in mm and angular offset in degrees, relative to a named interface frame
- Capture-latch condition: per latch: position indication, engagement evidence, fault status, observation time
- Structural-bolt condition: per bolt: engagement, preload acceptance, sensor validity, fault status
- Bolt preload: N per bolt, with measurement or estimation method and allowable range
- Joint load envelope: forces in N and moments in N·m, with reference axes and combined-load criteria
- Seal verification: untested | accepted | failed | indeterminate, with test record and validity conditions
- Interface pressure differential: Pa between explicitly identified volumes
- Actuation supply: V and A at the specified electrical interface, with supply availability
- Thermal condition: °C at identified ring, seal, or actuator locations; temperature differences in K
- Mating and exposure history: dated mating cycles, inspections, storage or orbital exposure, repairs, and anomalies
Recognition required Filled
- A large ring with latches and bolts around a hatch, active on one side and passive on the other.
- Seen at module joints and on visiting cargo craft held by the station's robotic arm.
Capabilities and actions required Filled
- Match an active assembly to a documented compatible passive counterpart.
- Assess capture readiness from alignment, mechanism indications, and external manipulator readiness.
- Track capture and structural fastening as separate, evidenced milestones.
- Evaluate pressure-boundary readiness from applicable seal tests and pressure measurements.
- Identify applicable hold, inspection, or recovery procedures when latch, bolt, or sensor evidence disagrees.
- Assess release prerequisites and remaining life from the installed configuration and maintenance history.
Hazards and failure modes required Filled
- Seal damage or debris can cause air leaks.
- Bolt or latch faults can prevent safe capture or release.
Standards and interfaces required Filled
- NASA-STD-5017, issued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, provides design and development requirements for spaceflight mechanisms of this type, subject to program applicability and tailoring.
Context of use required Filled
- This mechanism connects compatible pressurized modules and visiting spacecraft within an orbital station.
- A robotic arm positions the mating interfaces before the mechanism secures and seals the connection.
- It supports a pressurized passage for crew and cargo transfer.
Sources Filled
- Wikidata item Q1116068: common berthing mechanism - identity and sense of the item
- Wikipedia: Common Berthing Mechanism - general description of the item
Open questions
- Which controlled NASA ISS program interface and verification documents, including revisions and issuing authorities, govern each operational CBM configuration?
- What are the configuration-specific clear-opening dimensions, capture envelope, electrical requirements, bolt preload targets, and combined structural and thermal limits?
- Which seal arrangements, leak-test acceptance criteria, and pressure-equalization dependencies apply to different installations?
- Which historical or proposed CBM variants belong within this registry entry, and how should their differences from operational ISS hardware be represented?
- What approved degraded-operation rules, recovery procedures, replaceable items, mating-cycle limits, and inspection intervals are supported by accessible engineering records?
Machine files
Provenance
thing registry research (pass 2) · unreviewed
Built from: models/things/publications/thing-q1116068/spec.json