Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Management”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 217 records · Page 12
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2011

NASA Risk Management Handbook

The purpose of this handbook is to provide guidance for implementing the Risk Management (RM) requirements of NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) document NPR 8000.4A, Agency Risk Management Procedural Requirements [1], with a specific focus on programs and projects, and applying to each level of the NASA organizational hierarchy as requirements flow down. This handbook supports RM application within the NASA systems engineering process, and is a complement to the guidance contained in NASA/SP-2007-6105, NASA Systems Engineering Handbook [2]. Specifically, this handbook provides guidance that is applicable to the common technical processes of Technical Risk Management and Decision Analysis established by NPR 7123.1A, NASA Systems Engineering Process and Requirements [3]. These processes are part of the \Systems Engineering Engine. (Figure 1) that is used to drive the development of the system and associated work products to satisfy stakeholder expectations in all mission execution domains, including safety, technical, cost, and schedule. Like NPR 7123.1A, NPR 8000.4A is a discipline-oriented NPR that intersects with product-oriented NPRs such as NPR 7120.5D, NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements [4]; NPR 7120.7, NASA Information Technology and Institutional Infrastructure Program and Project Management Requirements [5]; and NPR 7120.8, NASA Research and Technology Program and Project Management Requirements [6]. In much the same way that the NASA Systems Engineering Handbook is intended to provide guidance on the implementation of NPR 7123.1A, this handbook is intended to provide guidance on the implementation of NPR 8000.4A. 1.2 Scope and Depth This handbook provides guidance for conducting RM in the context of NASA program and project life cycles, which produce derived requirements in accordance with existing systems engineering practices that flow down through the NASA organizational hierarchy. The guidance in this handbook is not meant to be prescriptive. Instead, it is meant to be general enough, and contain a sufficient diversity of examples, to enable the reader to adapt the methods as needed to the particular risk management issues that he or she faces. The handbook highlights major issues to consider when managing programs and projects in the presence of potentially significant uncertainty, so that the user is better able to recognize and avoid pitfalls that might otherwise be experienced.

Dezfuli, Homayoon↗
NASA NTRS2012

Comparison of Controller and Flight Deck Algorithm Performance During Interval Management with Dynamic Arrival Trees (STARS)

Managing the interval between arrival aircraft is a major part of the en route and TRACON controller s job. In an effort to reduce controller workload and low altitude vectoring, algorithms have been developed to allow pilots to take responsibility for, achieve and maintain proper spacing. Additionally, algorithms have been developed to create dynamic weather-free arrival routes in the presence of convective weather. In a recent study we examined an algorithm to handle dynamic re-routing in the presence of convective weather and two distinct spacing algorithms. The spacing algorithms originated from different core algorithms; both were enhanced with trajectory intent data for the study. These two algorithms were used simultaneously in a human-in-the-loop (HITL) simulation where pilots performed weather-impacted arrival operations into Louisville International Airport while also performing interval management (IM) on some trials. The controllers retained responsibility for separation and for managing the en route airspace and some trials managing IM. The goal was a stress test of dynamic arrival algorithms with ground and airborne spacing concepts. The flight deck spacing algorithms or controller managed spacing not only had to be robust to the dynamic nature of aircraft re-routing around weather but also had to be compatible with two alternative algorithms for achieving the spacing goal. Flight deck interval management spacing in this simulation provided a clear reduction in controller workload relative to when controllers were responsible for spacing the aircraft. At the same time, spacing was much less variable with the flight deck automated spacing. Even though the approaches taken by the two spacing algorithms to achieve the interval management goals were slightly different they seem to be simpatico in achieving the interval management goal of 130 sec by the TRACON boundary.

Battiste, Vernol↗
NASA NTRS2015

Human System Risk Management for Space Flight

This brief abstract reviews the development of the current day approach to human system risk management for space flight and the development of the critical components of this process over the past few years. The human system risk management process now provides a comprehensive assessment of each human system risk by design reference mission (DRM) and is evaluated not only for mission success but also for long‐term health impacts for the astronauts. The discipline of bioastronautics is the study of the biological and medical effects of space flight on humans. In 1997, the Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD) initiated the Bioastronautics Roadmap (Roadmap) as the "Critical Path Roadmap", and in 1998 participation in the roadmap was expanded to include the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI) and the external community. A total of 55 risks and 250 questions were identified and prioritized and in 2000, the Roadmap was base-lined and put under configuration control. The Roadmap took into account several major advisory committee reviews including the Institute of Medicine (IOM) "Safe Passage: Astronaut care for Exploration Missions", 2001. Subsequently, three collaborating organizations at NASA HQ (Chief Health and Medical Officer, Office of Space Flight and Office of Biological & Physical Research), published the Bioastronautics Strategy in 2003, that identified the human as a "critical subsystem of space flight" and noted that "tolerance limits and safe operating bands must be established" to enable human space flight. These offices also requested a review by the IOM of the Roadmap and that review was published in October 2005 as "A Risk Reduction Strategy for Human Exploration of Space: A Review of NASA's Bioastronautics Roadmap", that noted several strengths and weaknesses of the Roadmap and made several recommendations. In parallel with the development of the Roadmap, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) began a process in 2004 of evaluating the tolerance limits and safe operating bands called for in the Bioastronautics Strategy. Over the next several years, the concept of the "operating bands" were turned into Space Flight Human System Standards (SFHSS), developed by the technical resources of the SLSD at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC). These standards were developed and reviewed at the SLSD and then presented to the OCHMO for acceptance. The first set of standards was published in 2007 as the NASA‐STD‐3001, Volume 1, Crew Health that elaborated standards for several physiological areas such as cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, radiation exposure and nutrition. Volume 2, Human Factors, Habitability and Human Health was published in 2011, along with development guidance in the Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH). Taken together, the SFHSS Volumes 1 and 2, and the HIDH replaced the NASA‐STD‐3000 with new standards and revisions of the older document. Three other changes were also taking place that facilitated the development of the human system risk management approach. In 2005, the life sciences research and development portfolio underwent a comprehensive review through the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS) that resulted in the reformulation of the Bioastronautics Program into Human Research Program (HRP) that was focused on appropriate mitigation results for high priority human health risks. The baseline HRP budget was established in August 2005. In addition, the OCHMO formulated the Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) in 2006 that established the position of the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) at the NASA JSC along with other key technical disciplines, and the OCHMO became the responsible office for the SFHSS as noted above. The final change was the establishment in 2008 of the Human System Risk Board (HSRB), chaired by the CMO with representation from the HRP, SLSD management and technical experts. The HSRB then began to review all human system risks, established a comprehensive risk management and configuration management plan and data sharing policy. These major developments of standards, the HRP, the HMTA and a forum for review of human system risks (HSRB) facilitated the integration of human research, medical operations, systems engineering and many other disciplines in the comprehensive review of human system risks. The HSRB began a comprehensive review of all potential inflight medical conditions and events and over the course of several reviews consolidated the number of human system risks to 30 where the greatest emphasis is placed for investing program dollars for risk mitigation. The HSRB considers all available evidence from human research, medical operations and occupational surveillance in assessing the risks for appropriate mitigation and future work. All applicable DRMs (low earth orbit 6 and 12 months, deep space sortie for 30 days and 1 year, a one year lunar mission, and a planetary mission for 3 years) are considered as human system risks are modified by the hazards associated with space flight such as microgravity, exposure to radiation, distance from the earth, isolation and a closed environment. Each risk has a summary assessment representing the state of knowledge/evidence base for that risk, the available risk mitigations, traceability to the SFHSS and program requirements, and future work required. These data then can drive coordinated budgets across the HRP, the International Space Station, Crew Health and Safety and Advanced Exploration System budgets. These risk assessments were completed for 6 DRMs in December of 2014 and serve as the baseline for which subsequent research and technology development and crew health care portfolios can be assessed. The HSRB will review each risk at least annually and especially when new information is available that must be considered for effective risk mitigation. The current status of each risk can be reported to program management for operations, budget reviews and general oversight of the human system risk management program.

Davis, Jeffrey↗
NASA NTRS2016

Management of Asymptomatic Renal Stones in Astronauts

Introduction: Management guidelines were created to screen and manage asymptomatic renal stones in U.S. astronauts. The risks for renal stone formation in astronauts due to bone loss and hypercalcuria are unknown. Astronauts have a stone risk which is about the same as commercial aviation pilots, which is about half that of the general population. However, proper management of this condition is still crucial to mitigate health and mission risks in the spaceflight environment. Methods: An extensive review of the literature and current aeromedical standards for the monitoring and management of renal stones was done. The NASA Flight Medicine Clinic's electronic medical record and Longitudinal Survey of Astronaut Health were also reviewed. Using this work, a screening and management algorithm was created that takes into consideration the unique operational environment of spaceflight. Results: Renal stone screening and management guidelines for astronauts were created based on accepted standards of care, with consideration to the environment of spaceflight. In the proposed algorithm, all astronauts will receive a yearly screening ultrasound for renal calcifications, or mineralized renal material (MRM). Any areas of MRM, 3 millimeters or larger, are considered a positive finding. Three millimeters approaches the detection limit of standard ultrasound, and several studies have shown that any stone that is 3 millimeters or less has an approximately 95 percent chance of spontaneous passage. For mission-assigned astronauts, any positive ultrasound study is followed by low-dose renal computed tomography (CT) scan, and flexible ureteroscopy if CT is positive. Other specific guidelines were also created. Discussion: The term "MRM" is used to account for small areas of calcification that may be outside the renal collecting system, and allows objectivity without otherwise constraining the diagnostic and treatment process for potentially very small calcifications of uncertain significance. However, a small asymptomatic MRM or stone within the renal collecting system may become symptomatic, and so affect launch and flight schedules, cause incapacitation during flight, and ultimately require medical evacuation. For exploration class missions, evacuation is unlikely. The new screening and management algorithm allows better management of mission risks, and will define the true incidence of renal stones in U.S. astronauts. This information will be used to refine future screening, countermeasures and treatment methods; and will also inform the needed capabilities to be flown on exploration-class missions.

Reyes, David↗
NASA NTRS2016

Management of Asymptomatic Renal Stones in Astronauts

Introduction: Management guidelines were created to screen and manage asymptomatic renal stones in U.S. astronauts. The risks for renal stone formation in astronauts due to bone loss and hypercalcuria are unknown. Astronauts have a stone risk which is about the same as commercial aviation pilots, which is about half that of the general population. However, proper management of this condition is still crucial to mitigate health and mission risks in the spaceflight environment. Methods: An extensive review of the literature and current aeromedical standards for the monitoring and management of renal stones was done. The NASA Flight Medicine Clinic's electronic medical record and Longitudinal Survey of Astronaut Health were also reviewed. Using this work, a screening and management algorithm was created that takes into consideration the unique operational environment of spaceflight. Results: Renal stone screening and management guidelines for astronauts were created based on accepted standards of care, with consideration to the environment of spaceflight. In the proposed algorithm, all astronauts will receive a yearly screening ultrasound for renal calcifications, or mineralized renal material (MRM). Any areas of MRM, 3 millimeters or larger, are considered a positive finding. Three millimeters approaches the detection limit of standard ultrasound, and several studies have shown that any stone that is 3 millimeters or less has an approximately 95 percent chance of spontaneous passage. For mission-assigned astronauts, any positive ultrasound study is followed by low-dose renal computed tomography (CT) scan, and flexible ureteroscopy if CT is positive. Other specific guidelines were also created. Discussion: The term "MRM" is used to account for small areas of calcification that may be outside the renal collecting system, and allows objectivity without otherwise constraining the diagnostic and treatment process for potentially very small calcifications of uncertain significance. However, a small asymptomatic MRM or stone within the renal collecting system may become symptomatic, and so affect launch and flight schedules, cause incapacitation during flight, and ultimately require medical evacuation. For exploration class missions, evacuation is unlikely. The new screening and management algorithm allows better management of mission risks, and will define the true incidence of renal stones in U.S. astronauts. This information will be used to refine future screening, countermeasures and treatment methods; and will also inform the needed capabilities to be flown on exploration-class missions.

Reyes, David↗
NASA NTRS2016

Combining Livestock Production Information in a Process-Based Vegetation Model to Reconstruct the History of Grassland Management

Grassland management type (grazed or mown) and intensity (intensive or extensive) play a crucial role in the greenhouse gas balance and surface energy budget of this biome, both at field scale and at large spatial scale. However, global gridded historical information on grassland management intensity is not available. Combining modelled grass-biomass productivity with statistics of the grass-biomass demand by livestock, we reconstruct gridded maps of grassland management intensity from 1901 to 2012. These maps include the minimum area of managed vs. maximum area of unmanaged grasslands and the fraction of mown vs. grazed area at a resolution of 0.5deg by 0.5deg. The grass-biomass demand is derived from a livestock dataset for 2000, extended to cover the period 19012012. The grass-biomass supply (i.e. forage grass from mown grassland and biomass grazed) is simulated by the process-based model ORCHIDEE-GM driven by historical climate change, risingCO2 concentration, and changes in nitrogen fertilization. The global area of managed grassland obtained in this study increases from 6.1 x 10(exp 6) km(exp 2) in 1901 to 12.3 x 10(exp 6) kmI(exp 2) in 2000, although the expansion pathway varies between different regions. ORCHIDEE-GM also simulated augmentation in global mean productivity and herbage-use efficiency over managed grassland during the 20th century, indicating a general intensification of grassland management at global scale but with regional differences. The gridded grassland management intensity maps are model dependent because they depend on modelled productivity. Thus specific attention was given to the evaluation of modelled productivity against a series of observations from site-level net primary productivity (NPP) measurements to two global satellite products of gross primary productivity (GPP) (MODIS-GPP and SIF data). Generally, ORCHIDEE-GM captures the spatial pattern, seasonal cycle, and inter-annual variability of grassland productivity at global scale well and thus is appropriate for global applications presented here.

Livestock dataset↗
NASA NTRS2018

Using Remote Sensing Mapping and Growth Response to Environmental Variability to Aide Aquatic Invasive Plant Management

Management of aquatic weeds in complex watersheds and river systems present many challenges to assessment, planning and implementation of management practices for floating and submerged aquatic invasive plants. The Delta Region Areawide Aquatic Weed Project (DRAAWP), a USDA sponsored area-wide project, is working to enhance planning, decision-making and operational efficiency in the California Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Satellite and airborne remote sensing are used map (area coverage and biomass density), direct operations, and assess management impacts on plant communities. Archived satellite records enable review of results following previous climate and management events and aide in developing long-term strategies. Examples of remote sensing aiding effectiveness of aquatic weed management will be discussed as well as areas for potential technological improvement. Modeling at local and watershed scales using the SWAT modeling tool provides insight into land-use effects on water quality (described by Zhang in same Symposium). Controlled environment growth studies have been conducted to quantify the growth response of invasive aquatic plants to water quality and other environmental factors. Environmental variability occurs across a range of time scales from long-term climate and seasonal trends to short-term water flow mediated variations. Response time for invasive species response are examined at time scales of weeks, day, and hours using a combination of study duration and growth assessment techniques to assess water quality, temperature (air and water), nitrogen, phosphorus, and light effects. These provide response parameters for plant growth models in response to the variation and interact with management and economic models associated with aquatic weed management. Plant growth models are to be informed by remote sensing and applied spatially across the Delta to balance location and type of aquatic plant, growth response to altered environments and phenology. Initial utilization of remote sensing tools developed for mapping of aquatic invasive plants improved operational efficiency in management practices. These assessment methods provide a comprehensive and quantitative view of aquatic invasive plants communities in the California Delta.

Remote Sensing↗
NASA NTRS2017

Ramp Traffic Console (RTC) Ramp Manager Traffic Console (RMTC) Observer Mode User Manual

This document serves as a user manual for the Observer Mode Ramp Traffic Console (RTC) in Charlotte Douglas International Airport Ramp Control Tower. It describes the elements of the full RTC interface and provides explanations for how to interact with the RTC while managing ramp traffic using one of the four RTC sector displays. The RTC provides digitally updated data for all flights including Earliest Off Block Times (EOBT) and Traffic Management Initiatives. Use of the RTC in observer mode allows only for observer and reading of data provided on RTC. In Observer Mode, the RTC may not be used to make data entries. This includes pushback, holds, and proceed inputs as well as updates to a flights data using the flight menu. However, using the RTC in Observer Mode allows for real time observation of ramp operations including pushback and hold entries made by the ramp sector controllers. The pushback advisories and Traffic Management Initiative information is also provided in Observer Mode. The RTC also provides notifications, runway departure counts and lists and near arrival flight lists as additional sources of information for management of ramp traffic. There are also detailed instructions for how to manage traffic with Surface Time Based Metering (STBM) advisories provided on RTC if in STBM mode. This document also provides instructions for use of the Ramp Manager Traffic Console (RMTC) while performing ramp manager functions such as managing the priority flight list, setting ramp status, and setting the metering mode. The RTC and RMTC ramp tool are one component of a suite of ATD-2 Tools.

Stevens, Lindsay K.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Managing Flagship Missions to Reduce Cost and Schedule

Flagship missions are highly complex with highly nested systems. This level of complexity poses unique management problems as complexity influences risk which, in turn, affects cost and schedule. Establishing a strong technical and programmatic leadership team is critical to mission success. Developing and using a mission architecture is critical to informing the management organization, product ownership, interface and integration relationships, schedule organization, and integration and test paths. In highly nested systems, the mission phasing can be significantly out of sync with product phasing. Targeted technology development prior to Phase A is critical to reducing risk. Early architecture, concept design, and requirements development is critical to reducing risk. Modular design; pathfinders; parallel manufacturing and integration and test paths; and properly handling institutional requirements across interfaces are all management techniques that can be applied to reduce risk. NASA’s large strategic missions, sometimes referred to as flagship missions, are designed to provide answers to some of the most compelling scientific questions being asked. These types of missions are a series of highly nested subsystems that pose unique management problems when compared to more traditional instrument and spacecraft designs. They typically have an overall architecture that is very complex and nested; they typically require a tremendous amount of technology development; they typically involve many contractors and subcontractors with many associated contracts; and they typically involve staff from all over the world. Successful management of a flagship requires the balance between science requirements, engineering and technology capabilities, and resource constraints. Mismanaging these flagship missions can and will lead to significant cost and schedule growth, both of which are detrimental to NASA’s overall reputation which, in turn, is detrimental to the development of future flagship missions. While many of the same management principles used on smaller instruments and spacecraft are relevant, managing flagship missions requires an evolution of those current best practices to better address the specific needs and additional complexity and vastness of these missions. This paper explores how to leverage lessons learned from previous flagship missions to better manage flagship missions in the future.

Hylan, Jason↗
DOE OSTI2024

Herbicide‐resistant weed management with robots: A weed ecological–economic model

The heavy reliance on herbicides for weed control has led to an increase in resistant weeds in the United States. Robotic weed control is emerging as an alternative technology for removing weeds mechanically using artificial intelligence. We develop an integrated weed ecological and economic dynamic (I‐WEED) model to examine the biophysical and economic drivers of adopting robotic weed management and simulate the optimal timing and intensity of robotic adoption within and across growing seasons. We specify a cohort‐based weed growth model that relates yield damages to effective weed density and treats the susceptibility of weeds to herbicides as a renewable resource that can be regenerated by using mechanical weeding robots, due to a fitness cost that makes resistant weeds less prolific. Compared to myopic weed management which ignores resistance development, forward‐looking management leads to earlier adoption of robots and treating robots as complements instead of substitutes to herbicides. This weed management results in adopting fewer robots, deploying robots on a smaller portion of the land, higher profitability, and lower yield loss in the long run, relative to myopic management. Counterintuitively, myopic management leads to a lower resistance level through its higher robot adoption intensity. We also find that a lower level of initial weed seed resistance and/or a higher fitness cost result in a higher level of resistance because they create incentives for farmers to delay the adoption of robotic weed control. Our analysis shows the importance of jointly considering the interactions between weed ecology and economics in analyzing the incentives and effects of robotic weed management on weed resistance.

agricultural robotics↗
DOE OSTI2024

Survey and Gap Prioritization of U.S. Electric Vehicle Charge Management Deployments

The goal of this study was to survey and characterize the scope of current technical and programmatic knowledge pertaining to EV charge management technologies and practices in the US and relevant international jurisdictions. This characterization of existing field demonstrations and knowledge derived were used to determine gaps in the SCM demonstration landscape. Addressing these gaps through research and demonstration could increase confidence in the U.S. that load management and EV charge control could achieve overarching societal benefits. A survey of charge management deployments and input from stakeholders was completed to determine the state-of-the-art of smart charge management (SCM) where SCM is defined as controlling the amount of power exchanged between chargers and EVs to meet customers' charging needs while also responding to external power demand or pricing signals to provide load management, resilience, or other benefits to the customer and electric grid. The survey was the basis of the gap analysis in this report and determines which areas are well understood, with high confidence, and which areas need further investigation. Existing examples of EV charge management are characterized here to determine aspects that are ready for widespread deployment and have been demonstrated in the field. These include demonstration studies, pilots, programs, and EV-specific tariffs. In all, 110 examples of charge management were characterized. The data sources were public literature and utility filings as well as targeted interviews. In addition, 43 interviews with stakeholders were conducted with a consistent set of questions used in each interview. This study prioritized gaps in demonstrated SCM capabilities based on 1) Urgency of the particular use-case to offset traditional grid assets, 2) Impact, extensibility, and scaling of results across the entire spectrum of 3000+ utility service territories including projected technical and market potential for a given grid service, and 3) Value of federal funding in addressing the gap, including potential to leverage and/or add scope to existing field demonstrations funded by other non-federal funding mechanisms.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Farm Practice Typologies as a Strategy for Management-Relevant Land Use and Land Cover Mapping in the Great Lakes Region (Version 1) [Dataset]

Dataset overview and development This dataset provides spatially explicit agricultural land-use and land-management typologies developed for the Great Lakes Region (GLR) at the farm-parcel level. The typologies were designed to characterize not only the land-use and land-cover (LULC) associated with individual agricultural farm parcels, but also the land-management practices (LMPs), including irrigation, tile drainage, and conservation easements, occurring within those parcels and how these characteristics change through time. The dataset contains four related typology products: Annual integrated typology – describes the combined LULC and land-management characteristics for each farm parcel for individual years. LULC transition typology – describes the temporal pattern of LULC change for each farm parcel across the study period (2008-2023). LMP trend typology – describes the temporal pattern in the occurrence of LMPs for each farm parcel across the study period. Multi-year integrated typology – combines the LULC transition typology and LMP trend typology to provide an integrated characterization of long-term land-use and management patterns. Purpose of the dataset The purpose of these products is to provide a management-relevant integrated and consistent framework for evaluating the spatial and temporal organization of agricultural landscapes across the GLR. The resulting typologies can: support landscape-scale environmental and land-use analysis; provide spatial information relevant to land-management strategies, conservation planning, policy development, and program evaluation; characterize spatial patterns of agricultural land use and management; examine changes in agricultural landscapes through time; and identify persistent, transitional, and changing agricultural systems. Please refer to the README file provided in Files for more details.

Agriculture↗
NASA NTRS1995

Project Risk Management

Project risk management is primarily concerned with performance, reliability, cost, and schedule. Environmental risk management is primarily concerned with human health and ecological hazards and likelihoods. This paper discusses project risk management and compares it to environmental risk management, both with respect to goals and implementation. The approach of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory to risk management is presented as an example of a project risk management approach that is an extension to NASA NHB 7120.5: Management of Major System Programs and Projects.

Risk Management↗
NASA NTRS2020

Benefit Assessment of the Integrated Demand Management Concept for Multiple New York Metroplex Airports

Benefits of the Integrated Demand Management (IDM) concept were assessed utilizing a newly developed automated simulation capability called ‘Traffic Management Initiative Automated Simulation (TMIAutoSim).’ The IDM concept focuses on improving traffic flow management (TFM) by coordinating the FAA’s strategic Traffic Flow Management System (TFMS) with its more tactical Time-Based Flow Management (TBFM) system. The IDM concept leverages a new TFMS capability called Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP) to strategically pre-condition traffic demand flowing into a TBFM-managed arrival environment, where TBFM is responsible for tactically managing traffic by generating precise arrival schedules. The IDM concept was developed over a multi-year effort, focusing on solving New York metroplex airport arrival problems. TMIAutoSim closely mimics NASA’s high-fidelity simulation capabilities while enabling more data to be collected at higher speed. Using this new capability, the IDM concept was evaluated using realistic traffic across various weather scenarios. Six representative weather days were selected after clustering three months of historical data. For those selected six days, Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) and LaGuardia Airport (LGA) arrival traffic scenarios were developed. For each selected day, the historical data were analyzed to accurately simulate actual operations and the weather impact of the day. The current day operations and the IDM concept operations were simulated for the same weather scenarios and the results were compared. The selected six days were categorized into two groups: ‘clear weather’ for days without Ground Delay Programs (GDP) and ‘convective weather’ for days with GDP and significant weather around New York metroplex airports. For the clear weather scenarios, IDM operations reduced last minute, unanticipated departure delays for short-haul flights within TBFM control boundaries with minimal to no impact on throughput and total delay. For the convective weather scenarios, IDM significantly reduced delays and increased throughput to the destination airports.

Traffic Management Initiative Automated Simulation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Concept of Operations (ConOps) of an In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) for Advanced Air Mobility (AAM)

The growth of new emerging operations involving Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) necessitates developing a perspective for an In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS). This perspective advances from the National Academies report on IASMS and its recommendation for developing a Concept of Operations (ConOps) for IASMS. A ConOps has been developed for In-time System-Wide Safety Assurance (ISSA) from which the IASMS ConOps pivots to provide a robust scope commensurate with the broad vision defined by the National Academies. The IASMS ConOps focuses on emerging operations and spans innovations in Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) and an increasingly complex ecosystem comprised of a widening mix of vehicles and technologies, Urban Air Mobility (UAM) with industry-federated services, traditional operations, as well as new supersonic aircraft and space launch systems.The challenge for the IASMS ConOps is to be broad to encompass innovations in the coming years and decades while agile to ensure levels of safety compatible with operational and certification requirements of the National Airspace System (NAS). The IASMS ConOps interweaves increasing complexity of operational safety capabilities and unlocking UAS Maturity Levels (UMLs). The relationships between increased complexity of automation and automated systems, fewer operators who are not as traditionally higher skilled, more complex operational environments, and aviation operations management with mixed aircraft and equipage pose a multi-dimensional space for IASMS capabilities essential for safety assurance and risk management. Instantiating IASMS capabilities and how they would be integral to AAM operations and increasing maturity of UAM could be accomplished through a series of Safety Demonstrators. These Safety Demonstrators could provide increased understanding and insight into use of controls for risk mitigation, means of compliance for certification, and operational experience with safety services such as in relation to contingency management. The IASMS capabilities can be viewed as initially residing with the vehicle, airspace, and Supplemental Data Service Provider (SDSP). For example, vehicle capabilities include communications including the command and control link, Remote Identification (ID), conflict advisory/alerting, and UAS system monitoring. These capabilities monitor and assess data such as battery health, aircraft state, and human performance. Complexity of ISAMS capabilities depends on a number of factors. These factors are intendedonly as a notional categorization with the purpose being to reflect the complexity of the AAM ecosystem that would drive up the complexity of ISSA capabilities including systems, sensors, models, standards, and controls. Factors could include the Vehicle Flight Management, Environment, Airspace, and Contingency Management. Each of these factors can be comprised of multiple sub-factors that contribute to increasing complexity. For example, Airspace at a lower level of complexity could be dedicated to UTM operations that are unmonitored, and at a higher level of complexity could involve mixed UTM and ATM operations. The IASMS concept includes safety services that provide data and information to different participants in AAM. The roles and responsibilities of participants can be defined using the Responsible-Accountable-Consulted-Informed (RACI) analysis. For example, for the safety service involving the Remote ID, the Operator would be accountable for providing the data, the Vehicle would be responsible for transmitting it, and the USS, SDSP, Vertiports, FIMS (FAA), and Public Entities such as safety services would be informed by receiving the data. The IASMS ConOps identifies the capabilities needed for risk mitigation and safety assurance in the increasingly complex national airspace. The ConOps serves as a pathway for engaging with industry to gain operational experience including through the Safety Demonstrator series, the RACI analysis, and operational complexity factors. The ConOps serves to integrate these different perspectives to build a cohesive and cogent approach to an AAM safety management system.

In-Time Aviation Safety Management System↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Demand Capacity Balancing at Vertiports for Initial Strategic Conflict Management of Urban Air Mobility Operations

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) is a new transportation concept that enables highly automated, cooperative, passenger or cargo-carrying air transportation services in and around urban areas. To achieve the high level of operational density and complexity desired by the UAM community, an airspace system that allows UAM operators to readily access and operate safely and efficiently in the airspace is needed. This airspace system will require air traffic management designed to reduce the risk of conflicts and loss of separation between UAM flights. In general, strategic conflict management is considered as the first layer of conflict management for safe flight operations to condition the traffic to reduce the need for airborne separation provision, the second layer of conflict management. Demand Capacity Balancing (DCB) is one of the concept components to achieve strategic conflict management. DCB strategically evaluates traffic demand and resource capacities to allow UAM operators to determine when, where and how they operate, while mitigating conflicting needs for airspace and vertiport capacity. DCB can be applied whenever UAM demand exceeds the capacity in airspace or at vertiports. As the UAM ecosystem evolves with advanced technologies and matured operational procedures, more complicated conflict management will likely be needed. In the current UAM ‘Concept of Operation (ConOps) 1.0’ operational stage defined by FAA, however, it will be meaningful to explore the demand capacity balancing at vertiports only, as an initial strategic conflict management approach for UAM operations because vertiport capacity seems to be a bottleneck of UAM traffic. For this research, we developed a demand-capacity imbalance detection and resolution service for UAM. This DCB service identifies the demand from operators and compares the demand to a given capacity at the shared resources (i.e., vertiports) over the upcoming time horizon which is divided into time bins having a constant interval. When a new flight plan is submitted, the algorithm embedded in the DCB service checks the available time bins based on the desired departure time and estimated arrival time at origin and destination vertiports, respectively. If the time bins for the originally desired times are already occupied by other flights (i.e., demand is at or above capacity), the algorithm finds the next available time bins for takeoff and landing and shifts the conflicting departure time to the earliest time that satisfies the capacity constraints at both origin and destination vertiports. The details of the algorithm will be described in the final manuscript. Figure 1 shows that the proposed DCB algorithm works well for a sample traffic scenario. In this example, a total of 144 flights, split between two operators, are planned over 2 hours, traveling 10 routes between five vertiports. In the heatmaps, the horizontal axis shows 12 time bins where each bin represents a 12-minute interval, and the vertical axis shows five vertiports. The number in each cell shows the number of operations, counting both departures and arrivals, at a specific vertiport in each time bin. For the given capacity of 2 operations/vertiport/bin, Figure 1 shows that the original demand sometimes exceeds the capacity, but the modified demand is reduced to the given capacity after resolving demand-capacity imbalances. When UAM flights are operated, it is expected that many practical issues would arise in the federated system architecture with multiple operators. UAM operators may experience a time synchronization issue due to communication delay between operator and vehicle. UAM vehicles would fly at different flight speeds, depending on vehicle models. Actual departure and arrival times can have large variations, compared to the schedule. The lead time from flight plan submission to desired departure time can vary by service type (e.g., regular shuttle service vs. on-demand service). Using the proposed DCB algorithm, we also investigated how the actual flight schedule and DCB performance are affected by these uncertainties such as unsynchronized times between operators, flight speed differences, lead time differences, and departure time errors. The final manuscript will include the background of this research work, the description of the DCB algorithm and its use cases with traffic scenarios. It will also provide the analytical results about the impact of various uncertainties that can occur in actual UAM operations on the DCB at vertiports, in terms of demand distribution changes, number of simultaneous operations, and delay propagation.

Urban Air Mobility↗
NASA NTRS2022

National Campaign (NC)-1 Strategic Conflict Management Simulation (X4) Final Report

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) enables highly automated, cooperative, passenger or cargo-carrying air transportation services in and around urban areas. UAM is a subset of the Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) concept under development by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and industry. The Strategic Conflict Management (SCM) Simulation, dubbed “X4”, was conducted between July 2021 and June 2022 by NASA with the FAA and industry to evolve the Provider of Services for UAM (PSU) that will be needed to ensure initial UAM operations can scale in the National Airspace System (NAS). The FAA UAM Concept of Operations (ConOps) v1 [1] served as an initial guiding document for the X4 airspace management system design to ensure the architecture supports testing of services provided by third-party service providers. To that end, the X4 architecture leveraged concepts and technologies developed for Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) while also developing and testing new capabilities and services needed for UAM. The architecture included an initial prototype of the FAA-Industry Exchange Protocol (FIDXP), third-party services such as the PSUs, and Discovery and Synchronization Service (DSS), and other new services such as Demand-Capacity Balancing (DCB) to facilitate UAM strategic conflict management. During X4, NASA led discussions and collaborated with seven industry airspace partners to develop initial airspace management concepts for UAM that drove what would be tested and evaluated during the simulations. The initial capabilities defined for PSU leveraged UTM UAS Service Supplier (USS) as a starting point and evolved to meet UAM requirements. These discussions were also an opportunity for NASA to collaborate with industry to develop a set of initial Community-Based Rules (CBRs). These CBRs enabled how UAM traffic would be cooperatively managed among UAM operators. The collaborative, iterative process of developing CBRs with industry during X4 provided insight into the challenges involved and identified the need for a suitable and effective forum for future CBR development. In parallel with these discussions, NASA conducted a series of seven software sprints and two collaborative simulations with the airspace partners that built up in complexity. Over the course of the year, all seven partners successfully completed all the sprints by demonstrating the required capabilities. They also participated in the two collaborative simulations to demonstrate how multiple PSUs could work together in a collaborative, more complex environment with higher traffic density. The X4 simulation accomplished NASA's objectives and helped advance the development of the seven participating PSUs. The lessons learned provided insight into key elements of the UAM Notional Architecture from the FAA ConOps v1 [1] and UTM technologies when applied to UAM: - Having a Concept of Use (ConUse) defined prior to the activity would accelerate the time and effort from concept development to testing. - While the UAM Notional Architecture provided a starting point for a federated architecture that support services provided by third-party providers, the USS and PSU differed in their capability definitions for operational intent submission and sharing, conformance monitoring, airspace authorization, strategic conflict management, airspace constraints and dynamic replanning. - While existing DSS developed for UTM provided a way for PSU and other UAM services (such as DCB) to discover relevant operations from each other, additional complexity and challenges were found during X4 testing and illuminated the need for a more suitable solution for UAM. Industry can leverage the results of this demonstration to accelerate UAM requirements, CBRs, and standards development. The FAA and other government municipalities and agencies will be able to leverage results to inform future policies and identify additional gaps that require further analysis, moving toward operationalization of UAM.

Urban Air Mobility↗
NASA NTRS2023

NASA GRC ICME Schema for Materials Data Management: An Executive Summary

Integrated Computational Materials Engineering (ICME) has received a growing emphasis in attention due its potential impact on rapid material design, reduction in cost and time to market for new applications, and the promise of ‘fit-for-purpose’ materials coupled with recent advances in high performance computing and material characterization tools. However, for an organization to implement ICME practices for material discovery and design, a series of both technical and cultural challenges must be overcome to foster an environment that enables efficient, traceable, and predictive multiscale simulations of material behavior to enable virtual design of materials. In 2016, NASA sponsored a 2040 Vision study to define the potential 25-year future state required for integrated multiscale modeling of materials and systems to improve both the associated time and cost for aerospace and aeronautical innovation. The study envisions a cyber-physical-social ecosystem of experimentally validated computational models, tools, and techniques, along with the associated digital tapestry, that can enable rapid, optimized, ‘fit-for-purpose’ design of materials, components, and systems. A key requirement for such an ecosystem is the development of a robust information management system for materials across their full lifecycle, including material pedigree, experimental (real) and virtual (simulation) data, developed material models, and the implementation of models in engineering applications, such that process-structure-property-performance relationships can be established, thereby enabling the virtual design and optimization of materials. Such an information management system must be able to effectively capture: i) material information at each length scale; ii) test data and analysis; iii) associated material models; and iv) material and model deployment in engineering applications. These systems must also provide traceability between experimental and virtual representations of the material to ensure, when appropriate, the material digital twin is maintained. Additionally, this robust material information management system must be able to seamlessly connect with both commercial and an organization’s in-house software tools, be they analysis tools, other material databases, product lifecycle management (PLM) or simulation data management (SDM) tools, etc., such that automation of the design and analysis of a material across multiple length scales is possible. In this paper, an executive summary of the NASA GRC ICME Schema for materials information management is presented. The database best practices and schema design philosophy specifically for ICME materials data management and an overview description of each element in the schema is given, along with its associated role in an ICME workflow. Additionally, auxiliary tools that interact with the database and provide judicious automation with regards to importing, exporting, and analyzing materials data are presented. Such tools are critical to an ICME ecosystem, not only for their role in enabling optimization, but also in relieving users of tedious manual tasks, thus helping to promote adoption and combat the cultural challenges organizations face in enabling ICME.

Materials↗