Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Risk Management Space Projects”

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 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Green Propellant Landing Demonstration at U.S. Range

The Green Propellant Loading Demonstration (GPLD) was conducted December 2015 at Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), leveraging work performed over recent years to bring lower toxicity hydrazine replacement green propellants to flight missions. The objective of this collaboration between NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), WFF, the Swedish National Space Board (SNSB), and Ecological Advanced Propulsion Systems (ECAPS) was to successfully accept LMP-103S propellant at a U.S. Range, store the propellant, and perform a simulated flight vehicle propellant loading. NASA GSFC Propulsion (Code 597) managed all aspects of the operation, handling logistics, preparing the procedures, and implementing the demonstration. In addition to the partnership described above, Moog Inc. developed an LMP-103S propellant-compatible titanium rolling diaphragm flight development tank and loaned it to GSFC to act as the GPLD flight vessel. The flight development tank offered the GPLD an additional level of flight-like propellant handling process and procedures. Moog Inc. also provided a compatible latching isolation valve for remote propellant expulsion. The GPLD operation, in concert with Moog Inc. executed a flight development tank expulsion efficiency performance test using LMP-103S propellant. As part of the demonstration work, GSFC and WFF documented Range safety analyses and practices including all elements of shipping, storage, handling, operations, decontamination, and disposal. LMP-103S has not been previously handled at a U.S. Launch Range. Requisite for this activity was an LMP-103S Risk Analysis Report and Ground Safety Plan. GSFC and WFF safety offices jointly developed safety documentation for application into the GPLD operation. The GPLD along with the GSFC Propulsion historical hydrazine loading experiences offer direct comparison between handling green propellant versus safety intensive, highly toxic hydrazine propellant. These described motives initiated the GPLD operation in order to investigate the handling and process safety variances in project resources between LMP-103S and typical in-space propellants. The GPLD risk reduction operation proved successful for many reasons including handling the green propellant at a U.S. Range, loading and pressurizing a flight-like tank, expelling the propellant, measuring the tank expulsion efficiency, and most significantly, GSFC propulsion personnel's new insight into the LMP-103S propellant handling details.

Propellant↗
NASA NTRS2016

Green Propellant Loading Demonstration at U.S. Range

The Green Propellant Loading Demonstration (GPLD) was conducted December 2015 at Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), leveraging work performed over recent years to bring lower toxicity hydrazine replacement green propellants to flight missions. The objective of this collaboration between NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), WFF, the Swedish National Space Board (SNSB), and Ecological Advanced Propulsion Systems (ECAPS) was to successfully accept LMP-103S propellant at a U.S. Range, store the propellant, and perform a simulated flight vehicle propellant loading. NASA GSFC Propulsion (Code 597) managed all aspects of the operation, handling logistics, preparing the procedures, and implementing the demonstration. In addition to the partnership described above, Moog Inc. developed an LMP-103S propellant-compatible titanium rolling diaphragm flight development tank and loaned it to GSFC to act as the GPLD flight vessel. The flight development tank offered the GPLD an additional level of flight-like propellant handling process and procedures. Moog Inc. also provided a compatible latching isolation valve for remote propellant expulsion. The GPLD operation, in concert with Moog Inc. executed a flight development tank expulsion efficiency performance test using LMP-103S propellant. As part of the demonstration work, GSFC and WFF documented Range safety analyses and practices including all elements of shipping, storage, handling, operations, decontamination, and disposal. LMP-103S has not been previously handled at a U.S. Launch Range. Requisite for this activity was an LMP-103S Risk Analysis Report and Ground Safety Plan. GSFC and WFF safety offices jointly developed safety documentation for application into the GPLD operation. The GPLD along with the GSFC Propulsion historical hydrazine loading experiences offer direct comparison between handling green propellant versus safety intensive, highly toxic hydrazine propellant. These described motives initiated the GPLD operation in order to investigate the handling and process safety variances in project resources between LMP-103S and typical in-space propellants. The GPLD risk reduction operation proved successful for many reasons including handling the green propellant at a U.S. Range, loading and pressurizing a flight-like tank, expelling the propellant, measuring the tank expulsion efficiency, and most significantly, GSFC propulsion personnel's new insight into the LMP-103S propellant handling details.

Green Propellant↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Planetary Protection Program to Assure Mission Safety and Success

NASA’s planetary protection program seeks to understand and control harmful contamination of solar systems targets of exploration by terrestrial contamination and prevent harmful biological contamination of the Earth-Moon system by extraterrestrial life, should it exist. To accomplish these objective’s NASA has developed a balanced safety and mission assurance strategy that leverages COSPAR Policy guidelines, workshops, scientific consensus, partnerships and international working groups to develop policy and implementation guidelines. Upcoming crewed missions to the Moon and Mars, as well as robotic missions to small solar system bodies, Europa, Titan and Mars are some of the driving activities of astrobiological interest that continue to emphasize the importance of planetary protection throughout the project life cycle. Development of a responsive and updated agency planetary protection policy has been a focus area in supporting upcoming mission opportunities for exploration to include Mars sample return and crewed mission concepts. An extensive update of this policy is underway which encompasses crewed and robotic procedural polices, a general technical requirements standard, and an implementation handbook. During this timeframe NASA has been working with the international community to develop scientific consensus, and to identify and fill in knowledge gaps for developing balanced policy guidelines, incorporation of risk informed decision making and quantitative technical standards. NASA has developed a planetary protection roadmap as a technology management strategy to track and monitor the development of each knowledge gaps. The Committee of Space Research (COSPAR) Policy on Planetary Protection and the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine’s Committee of Planetary Protection are used to inform updates to the planetary protection polices and guidelines. This integrated strategy for planetary protection seeks to provide a transparent, structured approach for enabling missions, providing guidance for NASA and NASA partnered missions, and being responsive to the increased interest and activities in space exploration whilst maintaining an understanding and control of harmful contamination.

James Benardini↗
NASA NTRS2015

Risky Business

During my internship I worked on two major projects, recommending improvements for the Center's Risk Management Workshop and helping with the strategic planning efforts for Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA). The risk management improvements is the key project I worked on this semester through my internship, while the strategic planning is the secondary assignment. S&MA Business Office covers both aspects in its delegation, getting both spans some of the work done in the office. A risk is a future event with a negative consequence that has some probability of occurring. Safety and Mission Assurance identifies, analyzes, plans, and tracks risk. The directorate offers the Center a Risk Management Workshop, and part of the ongoing efforts of S&MA is to make continuous improvements to the RM Workshop. By using the Project Management Institute's (PMI) Standard for Risk Management, I performed a gap analysis to make improvements for our materials. I benchmarked the PMI's Risk Management Standard, compared our Risk Management Workshop materials to PMI's standard, and identified any gaps in our material. My major findings were presented to the Business Office of S&MA for a decision on whether or not to incorporate the improvements. These suggestions were made by attending JSC working group meetings, Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) panel reviews and various risk review meetings. The improvements provide better understanding of risk management processes and enhanced risk tracking knowledge and skills. Risk management is an integral part of any engineering discipline, getting exposed to this section of engineering will greatly help shape my career in the future. Johnson Space Center is a world leader in risk management processes; learning risk management here gives me a huge advantage over my peers, as well as understanding decision making in the context of risk management will help me to be a well-rounded engineer. Strategic planning is an area I had not previously studied. Helping with the strategic planning efforts in S&MA has taught me how organizations think and function as a whole. S&MA is adopting a balanced scorecard approach to strategic planning. As part of this planning method strategic themes, objectives, and initiatives are formed. I attended strategic theme team workshops that formed the strategy map for the directorate and gave shape to the plan. Also during these workshops the objectives were discussed and built. Learning the process for strategic planning has helped me better understand how organizations and businesses function, which also helps me to be a more effective employee. Other assignments I had during my internship included completing the Safety and Mission Assurance Technical Excellent Program (STEP) Level 1, as well as doing a two week rotation through the Space Exploration division in S&MA, specifically working with a thermal protection systems (TPS) engineer. While working there, I learned about the Orion capsule and the SpaceX Dragon cargo capsule. I attended meetings to prepare the engineers for the upcoming Critical Design Reviews for both capsules and reviewed test data. Learning risk management, strategic planning, and working in the Space Exploration division has taught me about many aspects of S&MA. My internship at NASA has given me new experiences and taught me numerous subjects that I would have otherwise not learned. This opportunity has expanded my educational horizons and is helping me to become a more useful engineer and employee.

Yarbrough, Katherine↗
NASA NTRS2003

Enough Is Enough

The spacecraft was nearly integrated and had passed some of its early mechanical and electrical testing. One of its instruments, the Proportional Counter Array (PCA), had a gas leak in one of the five proportional counter modules that made up the array. The science division where the instrument was being developed wanted a gas replenishment system added to assure the PCA would last for the entire mission. Adding a gas replenishment system would mean interrupting spacecraft integration and testing; developing a new subsystem and integrating it onto the spacecraft; modifying all the PCA modules; including a complex integration of the instrument onto the spacecraft; and implementing a more complex performance and environmental test process. It was the wrong answer because it made a simple design more complex and added little value to the mission at a major cost in time and dollars. Our mission couldn't afford the additional budget and schedule risks. XTE was the latest of a long line of projects being managed by my Explorer Program Office, but it was unique in being the first project we had agreed to do for a fixed price. NASA HQ agreed, in return, to provide us with the funding profile we needed to make it happen. We were both trying to break the unhealthy spiral in the Explorer program that saw current missions overrunning and pushing subsequent missions downstream to the point where their science was becoming marginal. The science community was upset and wanted better performance from NASA. I summarized my arguments to the director. The Engineering Directorate had taken responsibility for the spacecraft development when we established XTE as an in-house project at Goddard Space Flight Center, and also was supporting the PCA development. "It adds complexity," I reiterated. "It's a significant cost impact for only a marginal reliability increase". His response was music to my ears, "Jim, I won't stand in your way, but you'll have to convince the scientists and engineers."

Barrowman, James↗
NASA NTRS2007

All Source Solution Decision Support Products Created for Stennis Space Center in Response to Hurricane Katrina

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and in response to the needs of SSC (Stennis Space Center), NASA required the generation of decision support products with a broad range of geospatial inputs. Applying a systems engineering approach, the NASA ARTPO (Applied Research and Technology Project Office) at SSC evaluated the Center's requirements and source data quality. ARTPO identified data and information products that had the potential to meet decision-making requirements; included were remotely sensed data ranging from high-spatial-resolution aerial images through high-temporal-resolution MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) products. Geospatial products, such as FEMA's (Federal Emergency Management Agency's) Advisory Base Flood Elevations, were also relevant. Where possible, ARTPO applied SSC calibration/validation expertise to both clarify the quality of various data source options and to validate that the inputs that were finally chosen met SSC requirements. ARTPO integrated various information sources into multiple decision support products, including two maps: Hurricane Katrina Inundation Effects at Stennis Space Center (highlighting surge risk posture) and Vegetation Change In and Around Stennis Space Center: Katrina and Beyond (highlighting fire risk posture).

Ross, Kenton W.↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Integrated Medical Model: Outcomes from Independent Review

In 2016, the Integrated Medical Model (IMM) v4.0 underwent an extensive external review in preparation for transition to an operational status. In order to insure impartiality of the review process, the Exploration Medical Capabilities Element of NASA's Human Research Program convened the review through the Systems Review Office at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). The review board convened by GSFC consisted of persons from both NASA and academia with expertise in the fields of statistics, epidemiology, modeling, software development, aerospace medicine, and project management (see Figure 1). The board reviewed software and code standards, as well as evidence pedigree associated with both the input and outcomes information. The board also assesses the models verification, validation, sensitivity to parameters and ability to answer operational questions. This talk will discuss the processes for designing the review, how the review progressed and the findings from the board, as well as summarize the IMM project responses to those findings. Overall, the board found that the IMM is scientifically sound, represents a necessary, comprehensive approach to identifying medical and environmental risks facing astronauts in long duration missions and is an excellent tool for communication between engineers and physicians. The board also found IMM and its customer(s) should convene an additional review of the IMM data sources and to develop a sustainable approach to augment, peer review, and maintain the information utilized in the IMM. The board found this is critically important because medical knowledge continues to evolve. Delivery of IMM v4.0 to the Crew Health and Safety (CHS) Program will occur in the 2017. Once delivered for operational decision support, IMM v4.0 will provide CHS with additional quantitative capability in to assess astronaut medical risks and required medical capabilities to help drive down overall mission risks.

medical equipment↗
NASA NTRS2011

The Application of Lean Thinking Principles and Kaizen Practices for the Successful Development and Implementation of the Ares I-X Flight Test Rocket and Mission

On October 28, 2009 the Ares I-X flight test rocket launched from Kennedy Space Center and flew its suborbital trajectory as designed. The mission was successfully completed as data from the test, and associated development activities were analyzed, transferred to stakeholders, and well documented. Positive lessons learned from Ares I-X were that the application of lean thinking principles and kaizen practices are effective in streamlining development activities. Ares I-X, like other historical rocket development projects, was hampered by technical, cost, and schedule challenges and if not addressed boldly could have resulted in cancellation of the test. The mission management team conducted nine major meetings, referred to as lean events, across its elements to assess plans, procedures, processes, requirements, controls, culture, organization, use of resources, and anything that could be changed to optimize schedule or reduce risk. The preeminent aspect of the lean events was the focus on value added activities and the removal or at least reduction in non-value activities. Trained Lean Six Sigma facilitators assisted the Ares I-X developers in conducting the lean events. They indirectly helped formulate the mission s own unique methodology for assessing schedule. A core team was selected to lead the events and report to the mission manager. Each activity leveraged specialized participants to analyze the subject matter and its related processes and then recommended alternatives and solutions. Stakeholders were the event champions. They empowered and encouraged the team to succeed. The keys to success were thorough preparation, honest dialog, small groups, adherence to the Ares I-X ground rules, and accountability through disciplined reporting and tracking of actions. This lean event formula was game-changing as demonstrated by the success of Ares I-X. It is highly recommended as a management tool to help develop other complex systems efficiently. The key benefits for Ares I-X were obtaining unambiguous schedule margin, defining enabling options for risk reduction, and most importantly a stronger more unified team.

Askins, B. R.↗
NASA NTRS2016

TAT-C: A Trade-Space Analysis Tool for Constellations

Under a changing technological and economic environment, there is growing interest in implementing future NASA Earth Science missions as Distributed Spacecraft Missions (DSM). The objective of our project is to provide a framework that facilitates DSM Pre-Phase A investigations and optimizes DSM designs with respect to a-priori Science goals. In this first version of our Trade-space Analysis Tool for Constellations (TAT-C), we are investigating questions such as: Which type of constellations should be chosen? How many spacecraft should be included in the constellation? Which design has the best costrisk value? This paper describes the overall architecture of TAT-C including: a User Interface (UI) interacting with multiple users - scientists, missions designers or program managers; an Executive Driver gathering requirements from UI and formulating Trade-space Search Requests for the Trade-space Search Iterator, which in collaboration with the Orbit Coverage, Reduction Metrics, and Cost Risk modules generates multiple potential architectures and their associated characteristics. UI will include Graphical, Command Line and Application Programmer Interfaces to respond to the demands of various levels of users expertise. Science inputs are grouped into various mission concepts, satellite specifications, and payload specifications, while science outputs are grouped into several types of metrics - spatial, temporal, angular and radiometric. Orbit Coverage leverages the use of the Goddard Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT) to compute coverage and ancillary data that are passed to Reduction Metrics. Then, for each architecture design, Cost Risk will provide estimates of the cost and life cycle cost as well as technical and cost risk of the proposed mission. Additionally, the Knowledge Base module is a centralized store of structured data readable by humans and machines. It will support both TAT-C analysis when composing new mission concepts from existing model inputs, and TAT-C exploration when discovering new mission concepts by querying previous results.

Science Data Processing↗
NASA NTRS2013

Practical Application of PRA as an Integrated Design Tool for Space Systems

This paper presents the application of the first comprehensive Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) during the design phase of a joint NASA/NOAA weather satellite program, Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite Series R (GOES-R). GOES-R is the next generation weather satellite primarily to help understand the weather and help save human lives. PRA has been used at NASA for Human Space Flight for many years. PRA was initially adopted and implemented in the operational phase of manned space flight programs and more recently for the next generation human space systems. Since its first use at NASA, PRA has become recognized throughout the Agency as a method of assessing complex mission risks as part of an overall approach to assuring safety and mission success throughout project lifecycles. PRA is now included as a requirement during the design phase of both NASA next generation manned space vehicles as well as for high priority robotic missions. The influence of PRA on GOES-R design and operation concepts are discussed in detail. The GOES-R PRA is unique at NASA for its early implementation. It also represents a pioneering effort to integrate risks from both Spacecraft (SC) and Ground Segment (GS) to fully assess the probability of achieving mission objectives. PRA analysts were actively involved in system engineering and design engineering to ensure that a comprehensive set of technical risks were correctly identified and properly understood from a design and operations perspective. The analysis included an assessment of SC hardware and software, SC fault management system, GS hardware and software, common cause failures, human error, natural hazards, solar weather and infrastructure (such as network and telecommunications failures, fire). PRA findings directly resulted in design changes to reduce SC risk from micro-meteoroids. PRA results also led to design changes in several SC subsystems, e.g. propulsion, guidance, navigation and control (GNC), communications, mechanisms, and command and data handling (C&DH). The fault tree approach assisted in the development of the fault management system design. Human error analysis, which examined human response to failure, indicated areas where automation could reduce the overall probability of gaps in operation by half. In addition, the PRA brought to light many potential root causes of system disruptions, including earthquakes, inclement weather, solar storms, blackouts and other extreme conditions not considered in the typical reliability and availability analyses. Ultimately the PRA served to identify potential failures that, when mitigated, resulted in a more robust design, as well as to influence the program's concept of operations. The early and active integration of PRA with system and design engineering provided a well-managed approach for risk assessment that increased reliability and availability, optimized lifecyc1e costs, and unified the SC and GS developments.

Kalia, Prince↗
NASA NTRS2011

The Application of Lean Thinking Principles and Kaizen Practices for the Successful Development and Implementation of the Ares I-X Flight Test Rocket and Mission

On October 28, 2009 the Ares I-X flight test rocket launched from Kennedy Space Center and flew its suborbital trajectory as designed. The mission was successfully completed as data from the test, and associated development activities were analyzed, transferred to stakeholders, and well documented. A positive lesson learned from Ares I-X was that the application of lean thinking principles and kaizen practices was very effective in streamlining development activities. Ares I-X, like other historical rocket development projects, was hampered by technical, cost, and schedule challenges and if not addressed boldly could have resulted in cancellation of the test. The mission management team conducted nine major meetings, referred to as lean events, across its elements to assess plans, procedures, processes, requirements, controls, culture, organization, use of resources, and anything that could be changed to optimize schedule or reduce risk. The preeminent aspect of the lean events was the focus on value added activities and the removal or at least reduction in non-value added activities. Trained Lean Six Sigma facilitators assisted the Ares I-X developers in conducting the lean events. They indirectly helped formulate the mission s own unique methodology for assessing schedule. A core team was selected to lead the events and report to the mission manager. Each activity leveraged specialized participants to analyze the subject matter and its related processes and then recommended alternatives and solutions. Stakeholders were the event champions. They empowered and encouraged the team to succeed. The keys to success were thorough preparation, honest dialog, small groups, adherence to the Ares I-X ground rules, and accountability through disciplined reporting and tracking of actions. This lean event formula was game-changing as demonstrated by Ares I-X. It is highly recommended as a management tool to help develop other complex systems efficiently. The key benefits for Ares I-X were obtaining unambiguous schedule margin, defining enabling options for risk reduction, and most importantly a stronger more unified team.

Askins, B. R.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

LISA EDU Status

LISA will be the first space-based gravitational wave observatory, enabling orders of magnitude greater sensitivity than the state-of-the-art LIGO facility. L3Harris is developing an engineering development unit (EDU) telescope in support of NASA, ESA and the LISA Consortium. The LISA EDU telescope validates a flight-like telescope design and reduces risks associated with stability, materials, assembly, integration, and testing. Mission requirements are unlike any other and require picometer-level stability across the entire telescope’s beam path, even in the presence of temperature variation and jitter. As a result, an all-glass telescope design was developed. The brittle structure represents a new state of the art for stable telescopes, but also introduces challenges with managing assembly, manufacturability, and survivability. From 2019-2024, the LISA EDU project has increased manufacturing readiness and technology readiness for the optical telescope element.

Brian VanRensselaer↗
NASA NTRS2008

Web Monitoring of EOS Front-End Ground Operations, Science Downlinks and Level 0 Processing

This paper addresses the efforts undertaken and the technology deployed to aggregate and distribute the metadata characterizing the real-time operations associated with NASA Earth Observing Systems (EOS) high-rate front-end systems and the science data collected at multiple ground stations and forwarded to the Goddard Space Flight Center for level 0 processing. Station operators, mission project management personnel, spacecraft flight operations personnel and data end-users for various EOS missions can retrieve the information at any time from any location having access to the internet. The users are distributed and the EOS systems are distributed but the centralized metadata accessed via an external web server provide an effective global and detailed view of the enterprise-wide events as they are happening. The data-driven architecture and the implementation of applied middleware technology, open source database, open source monitoring tools, and external web server converge nicely to fulfill the various needs of the enterprise. The timeliness and content of the information provided are key to making timely and correct decisions which reduce project risk and enhance overall customer satisfaction. The authors discuss security measures employed to limit access of data to authorized users only.

Cordier, Guy R.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Strategy for Developing Technologies for Megawatt-class Nuclear Electric Propulsion Systems

In late fiscal year 2020, the Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project began the process of formulating an investment strategy to support development of the technologies required for a high-power (megawatt-class) nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) system capable of performing human-scale missions. This activity was initiated concurrent with several high-level studies and assessments were either under way or had just concluded. Studies of human-scale Mars missions have been performed several times over the past two decades. One of the most recent studies examined opposition-class human Mars missions to occur in the late 2030s timeframe [1,2]. The mission architecture assumed a hybrid NEP/chem-propelled vehicle that used a high specific impulse (Isp) NEP-system and a liquid oxygen (LOx)-liquid methane high thrust chemical stage (two 110 kN (25 klbf) thrust, 365 s Isp engines) for maneuvers performed to enter and exit gravity wells. Trajectory analyses performed in this study showed that such a mission could be performed with 2-4 MWe directed into the electric propulsion system (operating for 20,000+ hours), with the large range representing different opposition-class Mars mission opportunities and permutations on the trajectory design, concept of operations, and technology choices. In 2020, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) performed a study to evaluate the maturity of the different technologies required for nuclear propulsion systems [3]. The executive summary of this report provided the following top-level conclusions: • “The majority of critical technologies for… NEP/Chem… systems are relatively immature” • “TRLs [technology readiness levels] in the literature are often overestimated” • “The majority of critical technologies… for NEP/Chem… systems are at a relatively high level of advancement degree of difficulty (AD2 > 4) for maturation, requiring a dual development approach” • “The proper assessment of baseline TRL and AD2 values and the estimation of requirements and resources required for advancement have been consistent issues for NEP,” • “Non-advocate reviews should occur at the start of a technology program and at all key milestones.” In 2021, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) issued a separate report [4] identifying the “primary technical and programmatic challenges, merits, and risks for maturing space nuclear propulsion technologies of interest to a future human Mars exploration mission.” That work contained several important findings, including: • “Developing a MWe-class NEP system for the baseline mission would require increasing power by orders of magnitude relative to NEP system flight- or ground-based technology demonstrations completed to date.” • “Subscale in-space flight testing of NEP systems cannot address many of the risks and potential failure modes associated with the baseline mission NEP system. With sufficient M&S [modeling & simulation] and ground testing, including modular subsystem tests at full scale and power, flight qualification requirements can be met by the cargo missions that will precede the first crewed mission to Mars. Fully integrated ground testing may not be required.” • “As a result of low and intermittent investment over the past several decades, it is unclear if even an aggressive program would be able to develop an NEP system capable of executing the baseline mission in 2039.” These efforts motivated the SNP project to investigate the technologies available for a megawatt-class high power nuclear electric propulsion system. That system is illustrated schematically in Figure 1 and is comprised of five separate top-level critical technology elements (CTEs). 1. Nuclear Reactor – Thermal power source for the system, utilizing high-assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) as the nuclear fuel. Reactor radiation shielding is also included in this CTE. 2. Power Conversion – Operates as a thermodynamic cycle, accepting nuclear reactor thermal power as an input and converting it to mechanical power. 3. Power Management and Distribution (PMAD) – Accepts as an input mechanical power from the power conversion system, which is used to generate electrical power. The PMAD system also distributes the generated electrical power to all other parts of the spacecraft, including the high-power EP system. The PMAD system may also perform duties such as isolation, fault detection, and power transformation/rectification for different spacecraft systems, including the thrusters. 4. Electric Propulsion (EP) – Accepts as an input electrical power, which is used to accelerate a propellant to high speeds to produce thrust. This system includes the power processing unit (PPU), which converts the power it receives to the correct current and voltage required by the thrusters, and the propellant storage and feed systems, which contain and meter the flow of propellant to the thrusters. 5. Thermal Management (Radiators/Heat Rejection) – The cold side of the thermodynamic power conversion cycle, accepts thermal power from the power conversion system and radiatively rejects that heat to space. In this paper, we describe the SNP project formulation and investment strategy that aims to accomplish the research and development required to advance the technology readiness for each CTE. The strategy relies heavily upon experimental testing supported by modeling and simulation to yield realistic assessments of the technologies, which in turn will be used to inform future NEP system-level design decisions and any potential technology downselects.

Kurt A Polzin↗
NASA NTRS2005

Tool for Ranking Research Options

Tool for Research Enhancement Decision Support (TREDS) is a computer program developed to assist managers in ranking options for research aboard the International Space Station (ISS). It could likely also be adapted to perform similar decision-support functions in industrial and academic settings. TREDS provides a ranking of the options, based on a quantifiable assessment of all the relevant programmatic decision factors of benefit, cost, and risk. The computation of the benefit for each option is based on a figure of merit (FOM) for ISS research capacity that incorporates both quantitative and qualitative inputs. Qualitative inputs are gathered and partly quantified by use of the time-tested analytical hierarchical process and used to set weighting factors in the FOM corresponding to priorities determined by the cognizant decision maker(s). Then by use of algorithms developed specifically for this application, TREDS adjusts the projected benefit for each option on the basis of levels of technical implementation, cost, and schedule risk. Based partly on Excel spreadsheets, TREDS provides screens for entering cost, benefit, and risk information. Drop-down boxes are provided for entry of qualitative information. TREDS produces graphical output in multiple formats that can be tailored by users.

Ortiz, James N.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of Additive Manufacturing Technologies for 3D Printing of Spacecraft Heat Shields

Ablative heat shields are an enabling technology for entry into planetary atmospheres. From the PICA heatshields used for several Mars rovers to the carbon phenolic material used for Galileo’s Jupiter entry probe, the heat shield manages the heat load transferred to the payload, protecting the sensitive scientific instruments carried on entry probes. The Additive Manufacturing of Thermal Protection Systems (AMTPS) project, an Early Career Initiative (ECI) funded by NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate and led by NASA Johnson Space Center, seeks to develop materials and processes for 3D printing ablative heat shields for spacecraft. Current methods for producing ablative heat shields are extremely labor intensive and require extensive hands-on processes and quality control characterization. Additive manufacturing (AM) offers the possibility of reduced production times, improved reliability, and enhanced performance via graded compositions. Costs will also be reduced by reducing the time and labor required for heat shield production. Direct integration of the heat shield onto the structure during processing simplifies integration and reduces risk.

Nathaniel Olson↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of Additive Manufacturing Technologies for 3D Printing of Spacecraft Heat Shields

Ablative heat shields are an enabling technology for entry into planetary atmospheres. From the PICA heatshields used for several Mars rovers to the carbon phenolic material used for Galileo’s Jupiter entry probe, the heat shield manages the heat load transferred to the payload, protecting the sensitive scientific instruments carried on entry probes. The Additive Manufacturing of Thermal Protection Systems (AMTPS) project, an Early Career Initiative (ECI) funded by NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate and led by NASA Johnson Space Center, seeks to develop materials and processes for 3D printing ablative heat shields for spacecraft. Current methods for producing ablative heat shields are extremely labor intensive and require extensive hands-on processes and quality control characterization. Additive manufacturing (AM) offers the possibility of reduced production times, improved reliability, and enhanced performance via graded compositions. Costs will also be reduced by reducing the time and labor required for heat shield production. Direct integration of the heat shield onto the structure during processing simplifies integration and reduces risk.

Nathaniel Olson↗
NASA NTRS1999

Aerospace Systems Design in NASA's Collaborative Engineering Environment

Past designs of complex aerospace systems involved an environment consisting of collocated design teams with project managers, technical discipline experts, and other experts (e.g. manufacturing and systems operations). These experts were generally qualified only on the basis of past design experience and typically had access to a limited set of integrated analysis tools. These environments provided less than desirable design fidelity, often lead to the inability of assessing critical programmatic and technical issues (e.g., cost risk, technical impacts), and generally derived a design that was not necessarily optimized across the entire system. The continually changing, modern aerospace industry demands systems design processes that involve the best talent available (no matter where it resides) and access to the best design and analysis tools. A solution to these demands involves a design environment referred to as collaborative engineering. The collaborative engineering environment evolving within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a capability that enables the Agency's engineering infrastructure to interact and use the best state-of-the-art tools and data across organizational boundaries. Using collaborative engineering, the collocated team is replaced with an interactive team structure where the team members are geographically distributed and the best engineering talent can be applied to the design effort regardless of physical location. In addition, a more efficient, higher quality design product is delivered by bringing together the best engineering talent with more up-to-date design and analysis tools. These tools are focused on interactive, multidisciplinary design and analysis with emphasis on the complete life cycle of the system, and they include nontraditional, integrated tools for life cycle cost estimation and risk assessment. NASA has made substantial progress during the last two years in developing a collaborative engineering environment. NASA is planning to use this collaborative engineering infrastructure to provide better aerospace systems life cycle design and analysis, which includes analytical assessment of the technical and programmatic aspects of a system from "cradle to grave." This paper describes the recent NASA developments in the area of collaborative engineering, the benefits (realized and anticipated) of using the developed capability, and the long-term plans for implementing this capability across the Agency.

Monell, Donald W.↗