Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “systems thinking”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2007

A Return to Innovative Engineering Design, Critical Thinking and Systems Engineering

I believe we are facing a critical time where innovative engineering design is of paramount importance to the success of our aerospace industry. However, the very qualities and attributes necessary for enhancing, educating, and mentoring a creative spirit are in decline in important areas. The importance of creativity and innovation in this country was emphasized by a special edition of the Harvard Business Review OnPoint entitled: "The Creative Company" which compiled a series of past and present articles on the subject of creativity and innovation and stressed its importance to our national economy. There is also a recognition of a lack of engineering, critical thinking and problem-solving skills in our education systems and a trend toward trying to enhance those skills by developing K-12 educational programs such as Project Lead the Way, "Science for All Americans", Benchmarks 2061 , etc. In addition, with respect to spacecraft development, we have a growing need for young to mid-level engineers with appropriate experience and skills in spacecraft design, development, analysis, testing, and systems engineering. As the Director of Engineering at NASA's Johnson Space Center, I realized that sustaining engineering support of an operational human spacecraft such as the Space Shuttle is decidedly different than engineering design and development skills necessary for designing a new spacecraft such as the Crew Exploration Vehicle of the Constellation Program. We learned a very important lesson post Columbia in that the Space Shuttle is truly an experimental and not an operational vehicle and the strict adherence to developed rules and processes and chains of command of an inherently bureaucratic organizational structure will not protect us from a host of known unknowns let alone unknown unknowns. There are no strict rules, processes, or procedures for understanding anomalous results of an experiment, anomalies with an experimental spacecraft like Shuttle, or in the conceptual design of a spacecraft. Engineering design is as much an art as it is a science. The critical thinking skills necessary to uncover lurking problems in an experimental design and creatively develop solutions are some of the same skills necessary to design a new spacecraft. Thus, I believe engineers unfamiliar with or removed from design and development need time to transition and develop the required skill set to be effective spacecraft designers. I believe the creative process necessary in design can be enhanced and even taught as early as grades K-12 and should continue to be nurtured and developed at the university level and beyond. I am going to present a strategy for developing learning teams to address complex multidisciplinary problems and to creatively develop solutions to those problems rapidly at minimal cost. I will frame a real problem, the development of on-orbit thermal protection system repair of the Space Shuttle, and step through the series of skills necessary to enhance the creative process. The case study I will illustrate is based on a real project, the R&D Reinforced Carbon-Carbon (RCC) Repair Team's development of on-orbit repair concepts for damaged Space Shuttle RCC nose cap and/or leading edges.

Camarda, Charles J.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Target Diagnostic Menu Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory SYSM-5620: Design Thinking and Systems Engineering

Target Diagnostic’s Engineering Science (TDES) currently supports over 80 diagnostic systems, all of which draw from a fixed budget that covers staff time and procurement. As the division continues to add new diagnostics, demand on these limited resources increases, yet the budget remains unchanged. Shot Responsible Individuals (RIs) have unrestricted freedom to select any number or type of diagnostics for each experiment, often by copying previous shot configurations with only minor modifications. This practice makes it easy to generate new shots but does not encourage critical evaluation of diagnostic necessity. As a result, many diagnostics are routinely included in a shot without a clear justification, and in practice, much of the data collected is not analyzed. The ever-growing arsenal of diagnostics also increases the burden on TDES personnel, requiring more staff for support, maintenance, and service. This environment creates challenges in focusing resources on diagnostics that provide the greatest value to the NIF mission and raises concerns about the continued justification for maintaining all existing systems. The static TDES budget cannot sustain the ongoing growth in demand for new diagnostic systems. Shot RIs currently face no constraints on the number or type of diagnostics they assign to each experiment, often defaulting to previous configurations without critically assessing the necessity of each diagnostic. This results in the routine inclusion of diagnostics whose data may not be analyzed or may no longer directly support the NIF mission. Consequently, TDES is required to maintain and support an expanding set of diagnostics, straining limited resources and risking inefficient use of staff and funding. There is a need for TDES to efficiently allocate limited resources by establishing a process that requires shot RIs to critically evaluate and justify the inclusion of each diagnostic in their experiments. This process should discourage the routine, unexamined inclusion of diagnostics, support the identification of underutilized or obsolete systems, and ensure that only those diagnostics providing the greatest value to the NIF mission are maintained and supported. Ultimately, this approach must enable TDES to operate within budget constraints while maximizing scientific impact and operational efficiency.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thinking in Systems

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Katherine Dickenson↗
NASA NTRS2006

The Application of Architecture Frameworks to Modelling Exploration Operations Costs

Developments in architectural frameworks and system-of-systems thinking have provided useful constructs for systems engineering. DoDAF concepts, language, and formalisms, in particular, provide a natural way of conceptualizing an operations cost model applicable to NASA's space exploration vision. Not all DoDAF products have meaning or apply to a DoDAF inspired operations cost model, but this paper describes how such DoDAF concepts as nodes, systems, and operational activities relate to the development of a model to estimate exploration operations costs. The paper discusses the specific implementation to the Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) operational functions/activities currently being developed and presents an overview of how this powerful representation can apply to robotic space missions as well.

Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDA↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Trajectory Based Operations (TBO)

Today, the FAA is fully engaged in the development and deployment of TBO for the NAS. To realize TBO, the FAA and NAS user community recognize the importance of systems-of-systems thinking and of greater integration across systems, programs, teams, and between research and the field. The ATD-1 Operational Integration Assessment (OIA), helped blaze the trail for this important transition while moving TBFM Terminal Sequencing and Spacing (TSAS) down the path to deployment. Only a few years later, a comprehensive flight test of Flight Deck Interval Management (FIM) capabilities was executed, complementary and interoperable with traffic flow capabilities that were then emerging for TBO. Together, the ATD-1 tech transfers helped pave the way for the highly integrated systems-of-systems development and acquisition being undertaken for TBO. This session will chart that path to where we are today, and where we are going in the future.

ATD-1, TSAS, FIM, trajectory based operations↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Systemic Risk From the Perspective of Climate, Environmental and Disaster Risk Science and Practice

Understanding and managing systemic risk is more important than ever due to our immense global connectivity (e.g., between sectors, such as food-health-water-energy, countries and continents, down to individuals). Despite the fact that the notion of systemic risk is several decades old, the term is used in diverse ways across different disciplines (e.g., financial systems, medicine, earth system sciences, disaster risk research and climate science). Triggered by the repercussions of the global financial crisis of the late 2000s, and more recently the COVID-19 pandemic, which are clear realization of systemic risk, the perception of systemic risk has often been focused on global and catastrophic or even existential risks. Systemic risk, however, can be seen as a feature of systems at all possible scales (e.g., global, national, regional, local) with system boundaries varying depending on the context. Addressing current societal challenges, such as climate change, in terms of systemic risk requires integrating different systems perspectives and fostering system thinking, while implementing key intergovernmental agendas, such as the Paris Agreement, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Sustainable Development Goals. Based on insights gained and knowledge collected from an expert workshop, literature review and expert elicitation, we give an integrated perspective of climate, environmental and disaster risk science and practice on systemic risk as summarized in a Briefing Note to the International Science Council. We provide an overview of concepts of systemic risk that have evolved over time and identify commonalities across terminologies and perspectives associated with systemic risk used in different contexts. Key attributes of systemic risk are outlined without prescribing a single definition, and information and data requirements are discussed that are essential for a better and more actionable understanding of the systemic nature of risk. Finally, the opportunities to connect research and policy for addressing systemic risk are highlighted.

systemic risk↗
NASA NTRS2022

Systemic Risk

Systemic risk is the name given to impacts that spread within and across systems and sectors (e.g. ecosystems, health, infrastructure and the food sector) via the movements of people, goods, capital and information within and across boundaries (e.g. regions, countries and continents). The spread of these impacts can lead to potentially existential consequences and system collapse across a range of time horizons. Globalization contributes to systemic risk affecting people worldwide. The impacts of climate change or COVID-19 show how the challenges of addressing systemic risk go beyond conventional risk management and governance. Critical system interdependencies, amplified by underlying vulnerabilities, highlight that there is a growing need to better understand cascading impacts, systemic risks and the possible political (governance) and societal responses. This includes improving our understanding of the root causes of systemic risk, both biophysical and socio-economic, and related information needs. Addressing contemporary challenges in terms of systemic risk requires integrating different systems perspectives and fostering system thinking, while implementing key intergovernmental agendas, such as the Paris Agreement, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Sustainable Development Goals.

systemic risk↗
DOE OSTI2023

Alignment among environmental programs in higher education: What Food-Energy-Water Nexus concepts are covered in introductory courses?

Interdisciplinary environmental and sustainability (IES) programs are different from other fields because they focus on a complex integration of humanities, social, and natural sciences concepts centered on the interactions of coupled human and natural systems. The interdisciplinary nature of IES programs does not lend itself to traditional discipline-specific concept inventory frameworks for critically evaluating preconceptions and learning. We discuss the results of the first phase of a research project to develop a next generation concept inventory for evaluating interdisciplinary concepts important for introductory IES courses. Using the Food-Energy-Water (FEW) Nexus (the intersections/interdependencies of food, energy, and water sectors) as our focus, we conducted a content analysis of eight representative college-level introductory environmental course syllabi and course materials (e.g., textbooks, journal articles, print media) to identify common interdisciplinary FEW Nexus concepts taught in introductory IES courses. Results demonstrate that all IES introductory course materials reference the FEW Nexus. Food, energy, and/or water resources as individual elements of the FEW Nexus are frequently described, but connections between these resource systems are included less often. Biology, energy systems, waste and pollution in the natural environment, agriculture, earth sciences and geology, climate change, behavioral social sciences, and economics concepts are most associated with FEW concepts, hinting at commonalities across IES topics that anchor systems thinking. Despite differences in IES programs, there appears to be some alignment between core concepts being taught at the FEW Nexus in introductory courses.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2004

Doing Systems Engineering Without Thinking About It at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center

When asked about his processes in designing a new airplane, Burt Rutan responded: ...there is always a performance requirement. So I start with the basic physics of an airplane that can get those requirements, and that pretty much sizes an airplane... Then I look at the functionality... And then I try a lot of different configurations to meet that, and then justify one at a time, throwing them out... Typically I'll have several different configurations... But I like to experiment, certainly. I like to see if there are other ways to provide the utility. This kind of thinking engineering as a total systems engineering approach is what is being instilled in all engineers at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center.

Bohn-Meyer, Marta↗
NASA NTRS2020

Broadening JPL’s Mission Formulation Paradigm with Human Centered Design

Within NASA’s highly competitive environment for funding, Human Centered Design (HCD) and cybernetics could provide advantages to proposers during the mission formulation phase. Opportunities are limited when it comes to funding new science missions. Proposers are challenged to make a compelling case about the scientific desirability, technical feasibility, and resource viability of their concepts. Organizations follow established processes for proposal development using teams that typically include scientists, engineers, and managers. These team members are highly experienced subject matter experts (SME) in their own disciplines, and can respond to requirements from the solicitation. However, they are typically not trained as designers and communicators. Their approach is rooted within NASA’s science and technology paradigm. How can we improve the proposal development process, refine workflow between team members, and deliver clear and appealing offerings to the stakeholders and evaluators? These questions have been addressed by today’s most innovative companies (e.g., Apple, Google, 3M, Dyson), where the design process is not limited simply to engineering and management, but involves an all-encompassing approach drawing from fields such as social sciences, design, and the arts. Like these commercial enterprises, NASA currently employs systems thinking and integrated design, but can benefit further by moving beyond its current practices, which are mostly driven by rigid engineering, technology, science, and project management considerations. At JPL’s Innovation Foundry and through the Solar System Mission Formulation Office, we broadened this paradigm by including HCD in the mission formulation workflow. Our goal was to create a proposal with improved clarity and appeal, thus helping our team to communicate its message and aid evaluators with their work. In this paper we provide examples and lessons learned from our recent proposal development effort using HCD. We discuss touch points where we infused non-linear designerly approaches and cybernetic circularity into the workflow. Implemented design topics include operational design for team building; process design throughout distinct phases of the proposal development and writing process; communication design for streamlined exchange of information within the team and to stakeholders; interaction design; graphic design; and creating boundary objects. While these approaches may feel new or foreign to SMEs and managers in the aerospace community, they produced significant benefits in this mission formulation effort. We will describe how such approaches can be used to broaden NASA’s technology-driven paradigm through design, thus creating an environment which fosters innovation, improved communication, and strategic advantage for proposers and their organizations.

Turner, Neal↗
DOE OSTI2020

Document Management: A Focused Analysis on the Configuration Management Process at Y-12 National Security Complex

The configuration management process at Y-12 is a crucial process to ensure safe operations and compliance with Department of Energy (DOE) regulations and requirements. This process is evaluated utilizing systems-thinking methodology in order to understand the current operational flow, with the ultimate goal of building an easily understandable, representative model. This model offers insights on key areas of waste and provides a potential solution by modernizing rate limiting steps: a software implementation to update the traditional document management system and make it paperless. Stakeholders of the software implementation are identified in order to define characteristic requirements of an effective product and the anticipated benefit is evaluated. Ultimately, this project is an effort to increase the quality of life for all stakeholders, while improving the capacity, throughput, and effectiveness of a necessary process at Y-12.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Bioeconomy Scenario Analysis

The Bioeconomy Scenario Analysis (BSA) project uses systems thinking and analysis to assess how techno economics, research and development, deployment strategies, policy, and market conditions affect the potential development trajectories of the developing bioenergy industry. This project informs researchers, decision makers, and industry by identifying opportunities for and constraints to industrial development and quantifying important industry metrics (e.g., energy, economic, environmental) towards a sustainable domestic bioenergy system. One of the tools used in this project, the Bioenergy Scenario Model (BSM) is a publicly-available, unique, validated, state-of-the-art, award-winning, fourth-generation model of the domestic biofuels supply chain which explicitly focuses on how and under what conditions biofuel technologies might be deployed to contribute to the U.S. transportation energy sector. Analysis products from this effort enable the development of the bioenergy industry by (1) encouraging policy-makers to explore multiple levers simulating outside impacts on biofuels production, identifying policy actions; (2) improving industry's understanding of growth potential under different market conditions, better targeting their development efforts; and (3) providing universities and other interested stakeholders with analysis tools and analyses that can be adapted to meet research and teaching objectives, thus connecting students with careers that build the industry.

bioenergy↗
DOE OSTI2020

Post Conference Activities for the NCSE 2019 Annual Conference: Sustainable Infrastructure & Resilience

The National Council for Science and the Environment (NCSE) held its 19th Annual Conference from January 7-10, 2019. The NCSE 2019 Annual Conference: Sustainable Infrastructure & Resilience explored how systems thinking that includes tools, data, and synthesis effectively supports the increasingly urgent need to advance a more resilient, sustainable society. Nearly 600 participants from a range of scientific disciplines and sectors including natural and social science, humanities, engineering, government, business, and civil society attended the conference. Post-conference activities planned through this project were planned to extend the impact of the Annual Conference and were made possible through support from the Department of Energy. These efforts included: 1) developing and producing a research pilot on Energy Systems and Resilient Infrastructure, which advances research focused on the better alignment of education and workforce needs with respect to energy resilience; 2) facilitating dialogue and in-person convenings with the Energy Education Community of Practice across the broader NCSE research community; and 3) designing and hosting a webinar series focused on the role of science in infrastructure and resilience. This report summarizes the outcomes of the proposed activities and additional work made possible by support from the Department of Energy.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

The circular bioeconomy: a driver for system integration

Background: Human and earth system modeling, traditionally centered on the interplay between the energy system and the atmosphere, are facing a paradigm shift. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s mandate for comprehensive, cross-sectoral climate action emphasizes avoiding the vulnerabilities of narrow sectoral approaches. Our study explores the circular bioeconomy, highlighting the intricate interconnections among agriculture, forestry, aquaculture, technological advancements, and ecological recycling. Collectively, these sectors play a pivotal role in supplying essential resources to meet the food, material, and energy needs of a growing global population. We pose the pertinent question of what it takes to integrate these multifaceted sectors into a new era of holistic systems thinking and planning. Results: The foundation for discussion is provided by a novel graphical representation encompassing statistical data on food, materials, energy flows, and circularity. This representation aids in constructing an inventory of technological advancements and climate actions that have the potential to significantly reshape the structure and scale of the economic metabolism in the coming decades. In this context, the three dominant mega-trends—population dynamics, economic developments, and the climate crisis—compel us to address the potential consequences of the identified actions, all of which fall under the four categories of substitution, efficiency, sufficiency, and reliability measures. Substitution and efficiency measures currently dominate systems modeling. Including novel bio-based processes and circularity aspects might require only expanded system boundaries. Conversely, paradigm shifts in systems engineering are expected to center on sufficiency and reliability actions. Effectively assessing the impact of sufficiency measures will necessitate substantial progress in inter- and transdisciplinary collaboration, primarily due to their non-technological nature. In addition, placing emphasis on modeling the reliability and resilience of transformation pathways represents a distinct and emerging frontier that highlights the significance of an integrated network of networks. Conclusions: Existing and emerging circular bioeconomy practices can serve as prime examples of system integration. These practices facilitate the interconnection of complex biomass supply chain networks with other networks encompassing feedstock-independent renewable power, hydrogen, CO 2 , water, and other biotic, abiotic, and intangible resources. Elevating the prominence of these connectors will empower policymakers to steer the amplification of synergies and mitigation of tradeoffs among systems, sectors, and goals.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Designing interagency responses to wicked problems: A viable system model board game

Government agencies struggle to address wicked problems because they are open-ended, highly interdependent issues that cross agency, stakeholder, jurisdictional, and geopolitical boundaries. While both quantitative modelling and qualitative problem structuring methodologies have been used to support interagency decision making in the past, co-designing an effective interagency organization to collaboratively tackle wicked problems is more challenging. Few approaches have been developed to enable such efforts. This paper explains how the viable system model (VSM) was implemented through a board game, which was employed to co-design an interagency meta-organization that would be capable of more effectively collaborating to jointly address a wicked problem: international organized drug crime and its interface with local gangs in Chicago, USA. The board game was developed to make the VSM easier for the participants to learn, given that the cybernetic language and engineering-influenced diagrams in the original literature can be off-putting to leaders and managers. The board game was used as the final stage of a multi-method, systemic approach, which involved boundary critique and problem structuring as well as deployment of the VSM. The research findings indicate that the VSM board game, used as part of a larger mixed-methods systemic intervention, contributes to building trust in the value of systems thinking amongst the participants, and sets up a rich context for collaboration on multi-agency co-design. The game therefore offers significant promise as part of the co-design of interagency responses to wicked problems because it creates an embodied process for stakeholders to learn about the VSM. It also reduces the work involved in this learning. Thus, the game enables an effective appropriation of the VSM language and criteria.

Business & Economics↗
DOE OSTI2021

BETO 2021 Peer Review - WBS 4.1.2.32: Bioeconomy Scenario Analysis

The Bioeconomy Scenario Analysis project uses systems thinking and analysis to assess current and/or prospective techno-economics, research and development, deployment strategies, policy, and market conditions and their impact on the potential development trajectories of the bioenergy industry over time. Results from this project include identification of opportunities and constraints to industrial development, quantification of multiple metrics (energy, economic, environmental) and informing researchers, decision makers, and industry of the steps needed for a sustainable, nationwide biofuels industry. Analyses from this project enable the creation of a bioenergy industry by (1) inciting policy-makers to explore scenarios for nationwide biofuels production, identifying policy actions consistent with pathways for growth; (2) improving industry’s understanding of industry growth potential under different technology and investment conditions, better targeting their development efforts; and (3) providing universities and other interested stakeholders with tools and analyses that can be adapted to meet research and teaching objectives, connecting students with careers that build the industry. One of the many modeling tools used in this project, the Biomass Scenario Model (BSM) is a publicly-available, unique, validated, state-of-the-art, award-winning, fourth-generation model of the domestic biofuels supply chain which explicitly focuses on how and under what conditions biofuel technologies might be deployed to contribute to the U.S. transportation energy sector. We use models like the BSM to examine the implications of policies and incentives as well as their potential side-effects. The BSM uses a system-dynamics simulation to model dynamic interactions and transitions across the supply chain; it tracks the deployment of biofuels given industrial learning and the reaction of the investment community in the context of land availability, projected oil markets, consumer demand for biofuels, and government policies over time. Under expected market conditions, analyses using the BSM suggest that the biofuels industry may require significant external actions in the early years to thrive. Interventions that accelerate the industrial learning process (e.g. operation of pre-commercial and commercial facilities) have been identified as having strong influence in starting the growth of a commercial biofuel industry. Policies which are coordinated across the whole supply chain in BSM foster the growth of the biofuels industry and production of tens of billions of gallons of biofuels may occur under sufficiently favorable conditions.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗