SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
This presentation will discuss in detail NASA Government Working Group government topics from NASA Electronic Parts Assurance Group (NEPAG) which require additional in-depth technical solutions.
This talk will provide the immediate drivers for broad introduction of COTS into NASA missions and the supporting new options for parts assurance that are being introduced into NASA policy, which build on the results of the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) COTS Phase 2 study. It will also provide a new approach at electronics development that will be necessary to align the agency with the current reality in manufacturing, technology, budgetary, and time limitations. It will also provide some of the highlights and drivers for the use of COTS and brief recommendations for how to successfully select and use COTS parts.
This presentation provides a history on the reliability of MIL-SPEC and COTS EEE parts along with a collection of major parts problems experienced under the traditional approach for parts assurance that set a baseline level of risk.
MIL/JEDEC standards play a vital role in electronic parts procurement and usage on all NASA missions. Through the NASA Electronic Parts Assurance Group (NEPAG) Program, NASA is an active participant in work related to the standards as they apply to electronic parts. This paper will provide an update on those activities.
A number of activities within NASA and the space community, as well as growing technology needs and supply chain changes have accelerated the need to expand the use of COTS parts within NASA. While the use of COTS has been formally institutionalized and deemed acceptable for Class D space missions and those with greater tolerance for risk, there is still a lack of understanding of how to most effectively use COTS in such high risk-tolerance missions, and no apparent path towards broad use in missions with much less tolerance for risk. However, the reality is that the fundamental limitations of technology associated with the military specification system combined with the need to fly newer technologies in upcoming flagship robotic missions and human space flight missions will ultimately demand a more expansive use of COTS. The infinite nature of COTS gives rise to numerous challenges in the selection, acceptance, testing, and usage of COTS when reliable operation is essential. This presentation will highlight some of the current artifacts of a NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) study on the use of COTS parts, as well as many of the historical through current facts about parts assurance within Agency to provide a path forward for reliable use of COTS for a range of space applications and risk postures.
QML stands for the Qualified Manufacturer List. It is maintained by DLA-Land and Maritime (formerly known as the Defense Supply Center Columbus, DSCC). This talk will address how we are bringing new technology products into the QML system. The focus will be on microcircuit parts used in space application. A new effort championed by NASA will be described. NASA EEE Parts Assurance Group (NEPAG) is making every effort to strengthen the MIL system and thereby support the space flight projects
This presentation will review some past NASA presentations that had identified challenges and future trends in the assurance of Electrical, Electronic and Electromechanical (EEE) parts for spaceflight applications. It will contrast the concerns expressed in those presentations with the challenges of today and identify trends that give insight into the future. Common themes include the use of commercial parts, limited technical and physical resources, the pace of technology change and the difficulties in handling and testing individual parts as they become smaller and more complex. Some options for dealing with these challenges will be suggested to accommodate increasing numbers of smallsats, cubesats, constellations and other disruptive concepts, as space becomes more and more commercialized.
As part of an ongoing research effort on separation assurance and functional allocation in NextGen, a controller- in-the-loop study with ground-based automation was conducted at NASA Ames' Airspace Operations Laboratory in August 2012 to investigate the potential impact of introducing self-separating aircraft in progressively advanced NextGen timeframes. From this larger study, the current exploratory analysis of controller-automation interaction styles focuses on the last and most far-term time frame. Measurements were recorded that firstly verified the continued operational validity of this iteration of the ground-based functional allocation automation concept in forecast traffic densities up to 2x that of current day high altitude en-route sectors. Additionally, with greater levels of fully automated conflict detection and resolution as well as the introduction of intervention functionality, objective and subjective analyses showed a range of passive to active controller- automation interaction styles between the participants. Not only did the controllers work with the automation to meet their safety and capacity goals in the simulated future NextGen timeframe, they did so in different ways and with different attitudes of trust/use of the automation. Taken as a whole, the results showed that the prototyped controller-automation functional allocation framework was very flexible and successful overall.
Over the last two to three decades, the balance of influence within the electronics industry has shifted decisively towards the consumer electronics and information technology products, away from the defense or aerospace markets. This shift towards the commercial markets has changed certain ground rules in the electronics industry. Reliance of the aerospace industry, in particular, on components from supply chains dedicated to other products, or cross-vertical product integration, creates a supply web and introduces significant risks that are not necessarily present for volume-driven electronic products. Many of the unique risks in the aerospace industry emanate from the key characteristics of this industry. Although selection and usage of commercial electronics in NASA flight hardware is possible at a comparable (and in many cases lower) level of risk to that of employing parts that are screened to military or NASA specifications, for a large majority of flight projects it is difficult to distinguish the difference in on-orbit performance or reliability for parts screened at any level, or commercial parts that have no additional screening performed by the government. This paper identifies several bases for establishing context and developing unique or alternative approaches for successful parts selection and application within NASA and across the commercial space community.
This assessment had two Phases. Phase I captured NASA Centers’ current practices for commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts 1 used in spaceflight systems and ground support equipment (available at https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205011579) [ref. 1]. The Phase II report provides guidance for selecting and using COTS parts in NASA missions. The approaches proposed in this report differ from current agency practices. This top-level executive summary touches on these new approaches for using COTS parts but does not provide the detailed information that is critical in understanding the rationale behind these new approaches. Readers will need to read the entire report to gain full understanding and effectively use the recommendations herein. NASA’s historical approach to selecting and applying parts has been to define certain parts, primarily specific classes of military specification (MIL-SPEC) parts, as “standard”, leaving all others, including COTS parts, as nonstandard. Standard parts typically are used without further testing (“use-as-is”). Nonstandard parts are subjected to initial screening and subsequent lot acceptance testing of representative samples from each procured lot per MIL-SPEC or similar requirements. Decades later, top-tier commercial part manufacturers have evolved significant manufacturing, statistical control, and technological improvements that can now provide parts as reliable or more reliable than MIL-SPEC parts, when used within their datasheet limits. Concurrently, the space science and exploration community’s needs demand technological advances unavailable with MIL-SPEC parts. This ongoing change necessitates using COTS parts for space missions. Properly selected COTS parts in appropriate applications can offer performance and supply availability advantages compared to MIL-SPEC parts. Their utility and demonstrated reliability result from large volumes and automated production and testing processes. However, careful review and a thorough understanding of their specifications (i.e., datasheet limitations) is needed, and verifying that manufacturer specifications and reliability meet space hardware application needs are necessary. This report recommends MIL-SPEC screening and non-radiation-related lot acceptance testing be reduced or eliminated in cases where evidence of sufficient quality and reliability exists for COTS parts. The extent of NASA's insight into COTS manufacturers and the amount and nature of the needed evidence will differ by mission and will likely be driven by a mission's resources and associated risk posture. To facilitate this goal, two new terminologies have been defined and described: “Industry Leading Parts Manufacturer (ILPM)” and “Established COTS parts.” An ILPM is a COTS manufacturer that produces high quality and reliable parts. Some parts produced by ILPMs, defined as Established COTS parts, do not need any additional MIL-SPEC or NASA screening and lot acceptance testing to be used in space applications. This report provides guidance for selecting, procuring, and applying COTS parts and for performing part-, board-, and system-level COTS parts verification. The recommendation to select Established COTS parts from ILPMs will assure those COTS parts will have comparable quality to corresponding MIL-SPEC parts. Selecting, applying, and verifying Established COTS parts from ILPMs requires a holistic team approach, engaging parts engineers, circuit designers, quality, reliability, and systems engineers, procurement specialists, radiation specialists, avionics leads, and program/project managers. A mission-specific approach tailored to a project’s Mission, Environment, Applications and Lifetime (MEAL) [ref. 2] requirements should be developed and approved by program/project managers. Any associated risks should be clearly identified, quantified, mitigated, and/or accepted. Different approaches are recommended according to program/project Risk Classes A, B, C, and D [ref. 3] and human-rated missions [ref. 4]: 1. Recommend Classes A and B and human-rated missions consider a “MIL-SPEC parts- based design” approach. ”MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach is one in which most parts are MIL-SPEC parts and Established COTS parts from ILPMs are used only when an equivalent MIL-SPEC part does not meet functional or size, weight, and power (SWaP) or performance requirements, or is not available. 2. Recommend Classes D and Sub-D missions consider a “System of COTS” approach. “System of COTS” approach is one which most parts are Established COTS parts from ILPMs. 3. Recommend Class C missions determine which approach is the best for their projects; that is, use either a “MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach, “System of COTS” approach, or a combined approach utilizing elements of both. This report intends to provide guidance in using COTS parts for NASA missions with risk classifications of A through D and human-rated missions; but it does not address the costs of using COTS parts. Costs of using COTS parts in different NASA mission classes can vary significantly even if the same parts are used in different risk postures, due to differing verification levels needed. The guidance does not distinguish between critical or non-critical systems, and a given project will need to apply the appropriate guidance based on their risk posture. The intended audience of this report are NASA personnel and commercial practitioners who support NASA’s spaceflight missions, including spaceflight program or project managers, parts engineers, parts manufacturers, radiation engineers, avionics engineers, system engineers, circuit design engineers, reliability engineers, safety and mission assurance (SMA) personnel, and parts procurement specialists. The NEPP Program will perform a pathfinder study to explore implementing the guidance in this NESC report. An ILPM verification process is not the same as conventional vendor qualification processes performed according to military standards and specifications. This NESC report intends to provide guidance in utilizing available parts data from ILPM manufacturers for parts assurance assessments needed for NASA missions. The report also captured the current practices from DoD and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in Section 10. Note each DoD and FAA report was provided by the corresponding agencies regarding their practices, which are independent from the NESC recommendations in the report.
NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program Overview and Technology Highlights – The NEPP Program provides NASA's leadership for developing and maintaining guidance for the screening, qualification, test, and reliable use of electrical, electronic, and electromechanical parts by NASA, in collaboration with other government agencies and industry. The NASA Electronic Parts Assurance Group (NEPAG) is a core portion of NEPP. This presentation highlights key focus areas for 2019.
Presents a methodology for modeling radiation hardness assurance activities into MBSE throughout the NASA project life cycle. Also includes information about quantitatively and qualitatively modeling radiation-induced failures with system models.
This presentation covers top-level total ionizing dose (TID) testing and evaluation of commercial CubeSat hardware modules from Arduino and RaspberryPi.
No abstract available
No abstract available
The aerospace and semiconductor industries lost approximately 2000 hours annually of research access when IUCF closed. An ad hoc team between the U.S. government and industry was formed to evaluate other facility options. In this presentation, we will discuss: 1) Why aerospace, semiconductor manufacturers, and others are interested in proton facility access, as well as, 2) Some of the basics of a typical tests for electronics, and 3) We'll conclude with the brief current status on progress.
This presentation includes NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program FY18 overview, key efforts, concerns, and current status.
Additive manufacturing (AM) is a very desirable manufacturing method for industries such as aerospace and automotive due to its ability to create internal features and complex geometries, however, these characteristics also present challenges for nondestructive evaluation (NDE) and defect detection. Dynamic analysis and modal analysis have shown promise for NDE and identifying flaws in AM parts. Frequency Domain Assurance Criterion (FDAC) is a method of dynamic evaluation that represents the degree of correlation between two sets of operational deflection shapes (ODS) at each spectral line. Using colormaps to display the results allows for quick and easy interpretation of parts’ similarities and differences. This method appears to show promise in identifying parts with minor defects and can be used to differentiate nominal and defective parts. This paper explores the use of FDAC on various AM parts with and without intentional defects.