SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Subject Matter Expert”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 37 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2016

Augmenting Conceptual Design Trajectory Tradespace Exploration with Graph Theory

Within conceptual design changes occur rapidly due to a combination of uncertainty and shifting requirements. To stay relevant in this fluid time, trade studies must also be performed rapidly. In order to drive down analysis time while improving the information gained by these studies, surrogate models can be created to represent the complex output of a tool or tools within a specified tradespace. In order to create this model however, a large amount of data must be collected in a short amount of time. By this method, the historical approach of relying on subject matter experts to generate the data required is schedule infeasible. However, by implementing automation and distributed analysis the required data can be generated in a fraction of the time. Previous work focused on setting up a tool called multiPOST capable of orchestrating many simultaneous runs of an analysis tool assessing these automated analyses utilizing heuristics gleaned from the best practices of current subject matter experts. In this update to the previous work, elements of graph theory are included to further drive down analysis time by leveraging data previously gathered. It is shown to outperform the previous method in both time required, and the quantity and quality of data produced.

Dees, Patrick D.↗

NASA NTRS2011

NASA Human Research Wiki - An Online Collaboration Tool

In preparation for exploration-class missions, the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of NASA's Human Research Program (HRP) has compiled a large evidence base, which previously was available only to persons within the NASA community. The evidence base is comprised of several types of data, for example: information on more than 80 medical conditions which could occur during space flight, derived from several sources (including data on incidence and potential outcomes of these medical conditions, as captured in the Integrated Medical Model's Clinical Finding Forms). In addition, approximately 35 gap reports are included in the evidence base, identifying current understanding of the medical challenges for exploration, as well as any gaps in knowledge and/or technology that would need to be addressed in order to provide adequate medical support for these novel missions. In an effort to make the ExMC information available to the general public and increase collaboration with subject matter experts within and outside of NASA, ExMC has developed an online collaboration tool, very similar to a wiki, titled the NASA Human Research Wiki. The platform chosen for this data sharing, and the potential collaboration it could generate, is a MediaWiki-based application that would house the evidence, allow "read only" access to all visitors to the website, and editorial access to credentialed subject matter experts who have been approved by the Wiki's editorial board. Although traditional wikis allow users to edit information in real time, the NASA Human Research Wiki includes a peer review process to ensure quality and validity of information. The wiki is also intended to be a pathfinder project for other HRP elements that may want to use this type of web-based tool. The wiki website will be released with a subset of the data described and will continue to be populated throughout the year.

Barr, Y. R.↗

NASA NTRS2015

[Determine and Implement Updates to Be Made to MODEAR (Mission Operations Data Enterprise Architecture Repository)]

My main project was to determine and implement updates to be made to MODEAR (Mission Operations Data Enterprise Architecture Repository) process definitions to be used for CST-100 (Crew Space Transportation-100) related missions. Emphasis was placed on the scheduling aspect of the processes. In addition, I was to complete other tasks as given. Some of the additional tasks were: to create pass-through command look-up tables for the flight controllers, finish one of the MDT (Mission Operations Directorate Display Tool) displays, gather data on what is included in the CST-100 public data, develop a VBA (Visual Basic for Applications) script to create a csv (Comma-Separated Values) file with specific information from spreadsheets containing command data, create a command script for the November MCC-ASIL (Mission Control Center-Avionics System Integration Laboratory) testing, and take notes for one of the TCVB (Terminal Configured Vehicle B-737) meetings. In order to make progress in my main project I scheduled meetings with the appropriate subject matter experts, prepared material for the meetings, and assisted in the discussions in order to understand the process or processes at hand. After such discussions I made updates to various MODEAR processes and process graphics. These meetings have resulted in significant updates to the processes that were discussed. In addition, the discussions have helped the departments responsible for these processes better understand the work ahead and provided material to help document how their products are created. I completed my other tasks utilizing resources available to me and, when necessary, consulting with the subject matter experts. Outputs resulting from my other tasks were: two completed and one partially completed pass through command look-up tables for the fight controllers, significant updates to one of the MDT displays, a spreadsheet containing data on what is included in the CST-100 public data, a tool to create a csv file with specific information from spreadsheets containing command data, a command script for the November MCC-ASIL testing which resulted in a successful test day identifying several potential issues, and notes from one of the TCVB meetings that was used to keep the teams up to date on what was discussed and decided. I have learned a great deal working at NASA these last four months. I was able to meet and work with amazing individuals, further develop my technical knowledge, expand my knowledge base regarding human spaceflight, and contribute to the CST-100 missions. My work at NASA has strengthened my desire to continue my education in order to make further contributions to the field, and has given me the opportunity to see the advantages of a career at NASA.

Fanourakis, Sofia↗

NASA NTRS2018

Human-in-the-Loop Evaluation of Dynamic Multi-Flight Common Route Advisories

Flights often experience large delays when they are routed around weather. Multi-flight common route advisories provide delay recovery by suggesting time-saving re-routes for groups of flights whose current weather-avoidance routes have become outdated because the weather has dissipated and/or moved away. A laboratory evaluation of these advisories was conducted by four subject matter experts having extensive experience in traffic flow management operations. These experts provided a total of 120 data points in the airspace of Houston Center. The multi-flight common route tool provides time-saving route change advisories taking into account flight plans, wind fields, and the spatio-temporal evolution of predicted convective weather. It is not designed to account for complex operational factors such as non-standard sector traversal and interactions with local traffic management initiatives; hence a relatively low percentage (37%) of advisories generated by the tool were rated as acceptable. However, a high percentage (81%) of advisories were rated as acceptable after the subject matter experts used the tool's user interface to make route modifications that accounted for relevant operational factors not considered by the tool. The workload associated with using the tool, as measured by the NASA Task Load Index, was quite low (1.1 on a scale of 0 to 10). The results of this evaluation make a good case for human-automation teaming to design operationally valid weather re-routes for delay recovery.

Traffic Flow Management↗

NASA NTRS2018

Human-in-the-Loop Evaluation of Dynamic Multi-Flight Common Route Advisories

Traffic Flow Management↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Spaceflight Medical Evacuation Risk Assessment Principles - A Qualitative Investigation

BACKGROUND Future human space exploration beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) will require innovative solutions in many areas, primarily those that provide direct medical support to crew on long-duration missions and optimize their health and performance. The associated challenges therein will be numerous, including but not necessarily limited to extended one-way or "asynchronous" communication delays, minimal to non-existent resupply, and a prolonged transit time to "definitive care" ranging from 3-days to 9-months. At the same time, long-duration exploration spacecraft and crew will face restrictions on mass, power, volume, and data far more significant than that seen in current LEO settings. Given these limitations, medical risk assessment is of primary importance, especially evaluating the implications of a medical evacuation of an ill or injured crewmember. Such evacuations are complicated, potentially dangerous, and well may be impossible in certain phases of the mission. Regardless, such issues must be weighed against the risks of the injured crew remaining aboard a spacecraft with limited medical resources. OBJECTIVE This qualitative study drew from the experiences of subject matter experts (SMEs) in spaceflight and appropriate analog environments (i.e., military, disaster, and extreme environment fields) to identify unique principles common amongst medical evacuation considerations helpful in informing future risk assessment tools. Appropriate analog environments included austere operational settings where multiple factors (weather, logistics/limited resupply, denied/extreme environments, and patient condition) resulted in a limited ability to provide definitive local medical care. The fundamental principles in question revolved around scenarios where evacuation became a complicating yet necessary consideration and where life-threatening medical concerns had to be weighed against critical mission objective(s). The primary authors collected semi-structured data gathered through in-depth interviews with 16 subject matter experts (SMEs). Interview questions investigated how these SMEs consider and weigh the attendant risks present in medical evacuation scenarios. Among the critical questions posed were those that sought to understand how the SME balanced the challenges and requirements of medical evacuation (or keeping an injured patient "on-site" aka: "prolonged field care") against the evacuation operation's risks on impacting overarching mission success. The team analyzed interview transcripts for common themes and principles using the qualitative methods of thematic analysis based on consensus, co-occurrence, and comparison. As a result, nine primary risk consideration themes and nine contributing factor themes emerged, all of which will ideally inform future medical evacuation decision-making tools and operational decision-making for exploration class missions. Specific aims for this study included: 1. Identification of common principles used to assess risks and benefits of medical evacuations in extreme environments 2. Identification of common points of friction or complication and challenges in extreme environment evacuations

A T Almand↗

NASA NTRS2009

An Effective Health and Medical Technical Authority

The NASA Governance model directed the formation of three Technical Authorities, Engineering; Safety and Mission Assurance; and Health and Medical, to ensure that risks are identified and adjudicated efficiently and transparently in concert with the spaceflight programs and projects. The Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) has been implemented at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) and consists of the Chief Medical Office (CMO), the Deputy CMO, and HMTA Delegates. The JSC HMTA achieves the goals of risk identification and adjudication through the discharge of the appropriate technical expertise to human space flight programs and projects and the escalation of issues within program and technical authority boards. The JSC HMTA relies on subject matter experts (SMEs) in the Space Life Sciences Directorate at JSC as well as experts from other Centers to work crew health and performance issues at the technical level, develop requirements, oversee implementation and validation of requirements, and identify risks and non-compliances. Once a risk or potential noncompliance has been identified and reported to the programs or projects, the JSC HMTA begins to track it and closely monitor the program's or project's response. As a risk is developed or a non-compliance negotiated, positions from various levels of decision makers are sought at the program and project control boards. The HMTA may support a program or project position if it is satisfied with the decision making and vetting processes (ex. the subject matter expert voiced his/her concerns and all dissenting opinions were documented) and finds that the position both acknowledges the risk and cost of the mitigation and resolves the issue without changing NASA risk posture. The HMTA may disagree with a program or project position if the NASA risk posture has been elevated or obfuscated. If the HMTA does disagree with the program or project position, it will appeal to successively higher levels of authority so that risk acceptance and risk trades will be acknowledged and sanctioned at the highest appropriate level; this includes Program Managers, Mission Directorate Associate Administrators and the Agency Administrator.

Fogarty, Jennifer A.↗

NASA NTRS2018

How Do You Go From a Concept Idea to a NASA Selected Mission? Formulating the Psyche Discovery Mission with JPL's Concurrent Engineering Teams

JPL’s Office of Formulation provides continuity of support and access to domain subject matter experts, as Principal Investigators mature their mission concepts from “cocktail napkin” ideas to Preliminary Design Reviews [1]. Using NASA’s Psyche mission as a case study, we describe JPL’s concurrent engineering A-Team and Team X support to the Psyche competed concept study team in the areas of 1) Initial Feasibility, 2) Trade Space Exploration, 3) Spacecraft Point Design and Cost Estimate, 4) Science, Technical, Management, and Cost Review, and 5) Strategy and Communication Development. NASA’s Psyche Discovery-class mission started as a grassroots idea from Principal Investigator L.T. ElkinsTanton. Is there a compelling Discovery mission to visit the interior of a body for the first time, by sending a mission to an iron metal asteroid? In less than five years the Psyche concept was selected as a mission under NASA’s Discovery Program. While Psyche had a dedicated concept development team [2], they utilized JPL’s concurrent engineering teams, methods, analysis tools, and subject matter experts throughout their mission concept formulation lifecycle

Ziemer, John↗

NASA NTRS2016

Decision Analysis Methods Used to Make Appropriate Investments in Human Exploration Capabilities and Technologies

NASA is transforming human spaceflight. The Agency is shifting from an exploration-based program with human activities in low Earth orbit (LEO) and targeted robotic missions in deep space to a more sustainable and integrated pioneering approach. Through pioneering, NASA seeks to address national goals to develop the capacity for people to work, learn, operate, live, and thrive safely beyond Earth for extended periods of time. However, pioneering space involves daunting technical challenges of transportation, maintaining health, and enabling crew productivity for long durations in remote, hostile, and alien environments. Prudent investments in capability and technology developments, based on mission need, are critical for enabling a campaign of human exploration missions. There are a wide variety of capabilities and technologies that could enable these missions, so it is a major challenge for NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) to make knowledgeable portfolio decisions. It is critical for this pioneering initiative that these investment decisions are informed with a prioritization process that is robust and defensible. It is NASA's role to invest in targeted technologies and capabilities that would enable exploration missions even though specific requirements have not been identified. To inform these investments decisions, NASA's HEOMD has supported a variety of analysis activities that prioritize capabilities and technologies. These activities are often based on input from subject matter experts within the NASA community who understand the technical challenges of enabling human exploration missions. This paper will review a variety of processes and methods that NASA has used to prioritize and rank capabilities and technologies applicable to human space exploration. The paper will show the similarities in the various processes and showcase instances were customer specified priorities force modifications to the process. Specifically, this paper will describe the processes that the NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) Technology Assessment and Integration Team (TAIT) has used for several years and how those processes have been customized to meet customer needs while staying robust and defensible. This paper will show how HEOMD uses these analyses results to assist with making informed portfolio investment decisions. The paper will also highlight which human exploration capabilities and technologies typically rank high regardless of the specific design reference mission. The paper will conclude by describing future capability and technology ranking activities that will continue o leverage subject matter experts (SME) input while also incorporating more model-based analysis.

Williams-Byrd, Julie↗

NASA NTRS2024

Alignment of NASA’s Human System Risks with Technological Capability Gaps to Enable Integrated Research and Technology Development Strategic Planning

BACKGROUND: Radiation, reduced gravity, distance from earth, isolation and confinement, and habitation within artificially created and controlled life support environments are hazards that present risk to human space explorers. NASA’s Human System Risk Board (HSRB) maintains a set of twenty-nine different Human System Risks with subject matter experts from across the agency providing regular updates to the estimated likelihood and consequence associated with each risk. The Human Research Program (HRP) has historically used these risk classifications as a primary basis for identifying and prioritizing human research investments aimed at characterizing and/or mitigating the respective human system risks. In many cases, technology development is required to mature and validate risk mitigation strategies, however, NASA’s primary technology development programs have not typically used Human System Risks as a basis for strategic planning. A primary function of the Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS) – Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System Capability Leadership Team (SCLT) is to continually identify, review, and update technological capability gaps and to establish and oversee multiyear strategic roadmaps aimed at guiding NASA’s technology development priorities in these areas. These roadmaps are intended to be agency-wide and independent of any program, directorate, or other organization within NASA. DESCRIPTION: The SCLT and HRP collaborated to establish a set of Human System Capability Gaps, which establish a formal linkage between the capability gaps used to prioritize investments across much of NASA, and the Human System Risks that are primarily used to inform and prioritize human research. This set of twenty-eight gaps was developed by subject matter experts, and each gap mapped to the primary associated Human System Risks. The gaps and risk mapping were then reviewed and approved via the HSRB, thereby formally aligning the research-focused Human System Risks with the technology-focused capability gaps. DISCUSSION: This effort has enabled development of integrated roadmaps and budget coordination with research and technology development activities that are formally linked to agency-recognized capability gaps and Human System Risks. Close and ongoing coordination between the SCLT, HRP, Mars Campaign Office, and the Health & Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) is essential to ensure alignment and prioritization of CHP-related research and technology development to enable NASA’s future exploration missions.

Andrew F J Abercromby↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Advancing Wildland Fire Response with NASA’s Second Shift Capabilities

Novel “Second-Shift” capabilities—leveraging Uncrewed Aerial Systems and Optionally Piloted Vehicles—are identified that could extend wildfire aerial logistics support into night or low-visibility conditions. Expert elicitations with subject-matter experts informed the development of these conceptual capabilities and identified key challenges in wildfire logistics operations. Furthermore, the potential of these capabilities could extend beyond aerial logistics support, encompassing aerial suppression, observation, and emergency extraction support for wildland firefighting. An approach to development, implementation and validation of the novel capabilities is described.

Wildfire logistics↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Advancing Wildland Fire Response with NASA’s Second Shift Capabilities

Wildfire logistics↗

NASA NTRS2008

Best Practices for Researching and Documenting Lessons Learned

Identification, resolution, and avoidance of technical and programmatic issues are important for ensuring safe and successful space missions. Although the importance of applying lessons learned to reduce risk is frequently stressed, there is little material available to help technical and management personnel research and document lessons learned. Collecting, researching, identifying, and documenting lessons learned that will be useful to current and future management and engineering personnel is not always a straightforward task. This white paper presents lessons learned and best practices concerning the research and documentation of technical and organizational lessons learned. It is intended to enable organizations to initiate or improve lessons learned research and documentation efforts. The content of this white paper is based on four technical lessons learned projects conducted by the United Space Alliance (USA) Flight Design and Dynamics Department, in support of the NASA/Johnson Space Center (JSC) Flight Design and Dynamics Division. Each project published a report, titled as follows: (1) GPS Lessons Learned From the ISS, Space Shuttle and X-38; (2) Lessons Learned From Seven Space Shuttle Missions; (3) Space Shuttle Rendezvous and Proximity Operations Experience Report; and (4) Navigation Technical History with Lessons Learned. The four projects were different in availability of subject matter experts and primary source material, subject scope, and the level of effort required to produce the final report. However, generic lessons can be drawn from all of them. The best practices will be discussed by the phases of report research and development: (1) Defining Report Requirements, Project Organization, and Schedule; (2) Collection and Analysis of Source Material; (3) Writing and Integrating the Report; and (4) Review and Revision of the Report.

Goodman, John L.↗

NASA NTRS1993

System Diagnostic Builder - A rule generation tool for expert systems that do intelligent data evaluation

Consideration is given to the System Diagnostic Builder (SDB), an automated knowledge acquisition tool using state-of-the-art AI technologies. The SDB employs an inductive machine learning technique to generate rules from data sets that are classified by a subject matter expert. Thus, data are captured from the subject system, classified, and used to drive the rule generation process. These rule bases are used to represent the observable behavior of the subject system, and to represent knowledge about this system. The knowledge bases captured from the Shuttle Mission Simulator can be used as black box simulations by the Intelligent Computer Aided Training devices. The SDB can also be used to construct knowledge bases for the process control industry, such as chemical production or oil and gas production.

Nieten, Joseph↗

NASA NTRS2016

Machine Learning Technologies and Their Applications for Science and Engineering Domains Workshop -- Summary Report

The fields of machine learning and big data analytics have made significant advances in recent years, which has created an environment where cross-fertilization of methods and collaborations can achieve previously unattainable outcomes. The Comprehensive Digital Transformation (CDT) Machine Learning and Big Data Analytics team planned a workshop at NASA Langley in August 2016 to unite leading experts the field of machine learning and NASA scientists and engineers. The primary goal for this workshop was to assess the state-of-the-art in this field, introduce these leading experts to the aerospace and science subject matter experts, and develop opportunities for collaboration. The workshop was held over a three day-period with lectures from 15 leading experts followed by significant interactive discussions. This report provides an overview of the 15 invited lectures and a summary of the key discussion topics that arose during both formal and informal discussion sections. Four key workshop themes were identified after the closure of the workshop and are also highlighted in the report. Furthermore, several workshop attendees provided their feedback on how they are already utilizing machine learning algorithms to advance their research, new methods they learned about during the workshop, and collaboration opportunities they identified during the workshop.

Ambur, Manjula↗

NASA NTRS1990

Supplemental knowledge acquisition through external product interface for CLIPS

Traditionally, the acquisition of knowledge for expert systems consisted of the interview process with the domain or subject matter expert (SME), observation of domain environment, and information gathering and research which constituted a direct form of knowledge acquisition (KA). The knowledge engineer would be responsible for accumulating pertinent information and/or knowledge from the SME(s) for input into the appropriate expert system development tool. The direct KA process may (or may not) have included forms of data or documentation to incorporate from the SME's surroundings. The differentiation between direct KA and supplemental KA (indirect) would be the difference in the use of data. In acquiring supplemental knowledge, the knowledge engineer would access other types of evidence (manuals, documents, data files, spreadsheets, etc.) that would support the reasoning or premises of the SME. When an expert makes a decision in a particular task, one tool that may have been used to justify a recommendation, would have been a spreadsheet total or column figure. Locating specific decision points from that data within the SME's framework would constitute supplemental KA. Data used for a specific purpose in one system or environment would be used as supplemental knowledge for another, specifically a CLIPS project.

Saito, Tim↗

NASA NTRS2010

Structured Transition of Wind Tunnel Operations Skills from Government-to Contractor-Managed

In 2004, NASA awarded the Research, Operations, Maintenance, and Engineering (ROME) contract at NASA Langley Research Center to a team led by Jacobs Technology, Inc. A key component of the contract was the transitioning of the five large wind tunnel facilities from NASA managed and NASA or NASA/contractor workforces to fully contractor operated. The contractor would manage daily operations while NASA would continue to develop long-term strategies, make decisions regarding commitment of funds and commitment of facilities, and provide oversight of the contractor's performance. A major challenge would be the transition of knowledge of facility operations and maintenance from the incumbent civil servant workforce to the contractor workforce. While the contract has since been modified multiple times, resulting in a blended NASA/ROME workforce across the facilities, the processes developed and implemented to capture and document facility knowledge from the incumbent subject matter experts, build training and certification programs, and grow individual skills across subject areas and across facilities, are worthy of documentation. This is the purpose of this paper.

Dunn, Steven C.↗

NASA NTRS2021

GA-ASI Final Report and Program Wrap-up for NASA System Integration and Operationalization (SIO)

The NASA SIO demonstration flight of April 3, 2020 represents a successful culmination of 18 months of coordinated effort between GA-ASI, NASA, the FAA, Collins Aerospace, and Honeywell Aerospace to operate a Medium Altitude, Long Endurance (MALE) Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) safely in the National Airspace System (NAS) using industry leading prototype technologies. The GA-ASI team consisted of technical experts, program managers, engineers, mechanics, flight technicians, flight crews, and numerous other subject matter experts. This final report describes the most significant and potentially impactful aspects of the planning, integration, test, and flight aspects of this effort. GA-ASI successfully integrated the key technologies needed for UAS to fly in the NAS onto our prototype SkyGuardian UAS, which was designed to meet the most stringent airworthiness standards applicable to an aircraft of its size category. A proven Detect and Avoid (DAA) system, developed by GA-ASI and utilizing Honeywell Aerospace technology was integrated onto SkyGuardian for the first time, along with datalink radios from Collins Aerospace that meet the new civil standard for Control and Non-Payload Communication (CNPC) links. GA-ASI also obtained approvals from the FAA and FCC to operate the reconfigured UAS. The SIO demonstration flight represented a commercial aerial surveying operation conducted at medium altitude (>10,000ft above mean sea level). The aircraft’s onboard sensors were used to capture photographic, infrared and radar imagery of public and commercial infrastructure and land, and to subsequently produce the types of data products that would provide business value to potential customers. These survey services would supplement or replace services currently provided by manned airplanes and helicopters, small drones or satellites. A “virtual” mission was also planned, to show what additional survey data could have been captured during the flight if additional sensors had been installed on the aircraft’s external hardpoints. This revision of the final report focuses on information of value to the wider UAS community, and avoids propriety data to facilitate broad dissemination. It also includes a description of GA-ASI’s engagement with the FAA following the SIO flight, which led to the award of an updated Special Airworthiness Certificate in the Experimental Category (SAC-EC) and a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) allowing operation of the SkyGuardian UAS using its DAA system to satisfy right-of-way rules, instead of a chase plane. The associated operational limitations are described to illustrate the further steps that would be needed to remove those limitations for unhindered commercial operations.

Flight demonstration↗