Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “office”

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 451 records · Page 25
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2002

Second Generation RLV Space Vehicle Concept

NASA has a long history of conducting development programs and projects in a consistent fashion. Systems Engineering within those programs and projects has also followed a given method outlined by such documents as the NASA Systems Engineering Handbook. The relatively new NASA Space Launch Initiative (SLI) is taking a new approach to developing a space vehicle, with innovative management methods as well as new Systems Engineering processes. With the program less than a year into its life cycle, the efficacy of these new processes has yet to be proven or disproven. At $776M for phase 1, SLI represents a major portion of the NASA focus; however, the new processes being incorporated are not reflected in the training provided by NASA to its engineers. The NASA Academy of Program and Project Leadership (APPL) offers core classes in program and project management and systems engineering to NASA employees with the purpose of creating a "knowledge community where ideas, skills, and experiences are exchanged to increase each other's capacity for strong leadership". The SLI program is, in one sense, a combination of a conceptual design program and a technology program. The program as a whole doesn't map into the generic systems engineering project cycle as currently, and for some time, taught. For example, the NASA APPL Systems Engineering training course teaches that the "first step in developing an architecture is to define the external boundaries of the system", which will require definition of the interfaces with other systems and the next step will be to "define all the components that make up the next lower level of the system hierarchy" where fundamental requirements are allocated to each component. Whereas, the SLI technology risk reduction approach develops architecture subsystem technologies prior to developing architectures. The higher level architecture requirements are not allowed to fully develop and undergo decomposition and allocation down to the subsystems before the subsystems must develop allocated requirements based on the highest level of requirements. In the vernacular of the project cycles prior to the mid 1990's, the architecture definition portion of the program appears to be at a generic Phase A stage, while the subsystems are operating at Phase B. Even the management structure of the SLI program is innovative in its approach to Systems Engineering and is not reflected in the APPL training modules. The SLI program has established a Systems Engineering office as an office separate from the architecture development or the subsystem technology development, while that office does have representatives within these other offices. The distributed resources of the Systems Engineering Office are co-located with the respective Project Offices. This template is intended to provide systems engineering as an integrated function at the Program Level. the program management of SLI and the MAT agree that "program/project managers and the systems engineering team must work closely together towards the single objective of delivering quality products that meet the customer needs". This paper will explore the differences between the methods being taught by NASA, which represent decades of ideas, and those currently in practice in SLI. Time will tell if the innovation employed by SLI will prove to be the model of the future. For now, it is suggested that the training of the present exercise the flexibility of recognizing the new processes employed by a major new NASA program.

Bailey, Michelle↗
NASA NTRS2014

ARES Biennial Report 2012 Final

Since the return of the first lunar samples, what is now the Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science (ARES) Directorate has had curatorial responsibility for all NASA-held extraterrestrial materials. Originating during the Apollo Program (1960s), this capability at Johnson Space Center (JSC) included scientists who were responsible for the science planning and training of astronauts for lunar surface activities as well as experts in the analysis and preservation of the precious returned samples. Today, ARES conducts research in basic and applied space and planetary science, and its scientific staff represents a broad diversity of expertise in the physical sciences (physics, chemistry, geology, astronomy), mathematics, and engineering organized into three offices (figure 1): Astromaterials Research (KR), Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation (KT), and Human Exploration Science (KX). Scientists within the Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office preserve, protect, document, and distribute samples of the current astromaterials collections. Since the return of the first lunar samples, ARES has been assigned curatorial responsibility for all NASA-held extraterrestrial materials (Apollo lunar samples, Antarctic meteorites - some of which have been confirmed to have originated on the Moon and on Mars - cosmic dust, solar wind samples, comet and interstellar dust particles, and space-exposed hardware). The responsibilities of curation consist not only of the longterm care of the samples, but also the support and planning for future sample collection missions and research and technology to enable new sample types. Curation provides the foundation for research into the samples. The Lunar Sample Facility and other curation clean rooms, the data center, laboratories, and associated instrumentation are unique NASA resources that, together with our staff's fundamental understanding of the entire collection, provide a service to the external research community, which relies on access to the samples. The curation efforts are greatly enhanced by a strong group of planetary scientists who conduct peerreviewed astromaterials research. Astromaterials Research Office scientists conduct peer-reviewed research as Principal or Co-Investigators in planetary science (e. g., cosmochemistry, origins of solar systems, Mars fundamental research, planetary geology and geophysics) and participate as Co-Investigators or Participating Scientists in many of NASA's robotic planetary missions. Since the last report, ARES has achieved several noteworthy milestones, some of which are documented in detail in the sections that follow. Within the Human Exploration Science Office, ARES is a world leader in orbital debris research, modeling and monitoring the debris environment, designing debris shielding, and developing policy to control and mitigate the orbital debris population. ARES has aggressively pursued refinements in knowledge of the debris environment and the hazard it presents to spacecraft. Additionally, the ARES Image Science and Analysis Group has been recognized as world class as a result of the high quality of near-real-time analysis of ascent and on-orbit inspection imagery to identify debris shedding, anomalies, and associated potential damage during Space Shuttle missions. ARES Earth scientists manage and continuously update the database of astronaut photography that is predominantly from Shuttle and ISS missions, but also includes the results of 40 years of human spaceflight. The Crew Earth Observations Web site (http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/Education/ESS/crew.htm) continues to receive several million hits per month. ARES scientists are also influencing decisions in the development of the next generation of human and robotic spacecraft and missions through laboratory tests on the optical qualities of materials for windows, micrometeoroid/orbital debris shielding technology, and analog activities to assess surface science operations. ARES serves as host to numerous students and visiting scientists as part of the services provided to the research community and conducts a robust education and outreach program. ARES scientists are recognized nationally and internationally by virtue of their success in publishing in peer-reviewed journals and winning competitive research proposals. ARES scientists have won every major award presented by the Meteoritical Society, including the Leonard Medal, the most prestigious award in planetary science and cosmochemistry; the Barringer Medal, recognizing outstanding work in the field of impact cratering; the Nier Prize for outstanding research by a young scientist; and several recipients of the Nininger Meteorite Award. One of our scientists received the Department of Defense (DoD) Joint Meritorious Civilian Service Award (the highest civilian honor given by the DoD). ARES has established numerous partnerships with other NASA Centers, universities, and national laboratories. ARES scientists serve as journal editors, members of advisory panels and review committees, and society officers, and several scientists have been elected as Fellows in their professional societies. This biennial report summarizes a subset of the accomplishments made by each of the ARES offices and highlights participation in ongoing human and robotic missions, development of new missions, and planning for future human and robotic exploration of the solar system beyond low Earth orbit.

Stansbery, Eileen↗
NASA NTRS2018

The Importance of Contamination Knowledge - Insights into Mars Sample Return

The Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC), in Houston, TX (henceforth Curation Office) manages the curation of all past, present, and future extraterrestrial samples returned by NASA missions and shared collections from international partners, preserving their integrity for future scientific study while providing the samples to the international community in a fair and unbiased way. The Curation Office also curates all reference and witness materials for each mission (e.g., flight and non-flight hardware coupons; lubricants; non-flight, flight-like, and flown witness plates). These reference and witness materials provide the scientific community with the fundamental ability to reconstruct the contamination/alteration history of the sample collection through the course of the mission, with the overall goal of strengthening the scientific conclusions drawn from the study of returned materials. The information gained from characterizing the physical, biological, inorganic, and organic chemical properties of reference and witness materials is defined as the Contamination Knowledge (CK) of the sample collection. Unlike the data collected for Contamination Control (CC) and Planetary Protection (PP), CK is exclusively concerned with preserving reference and witness materials for study by future scientists upon sample return. Although CC and PP data collected for sample integrity and forward contamination purposes can be complementary to CK, they are two separate data sets with distinct objectives. A robust collection of samples for CK is necessary to allow the extraterrestrial material in a returned sample to be distinguished from terrestrial contamination. Traditionally CK is utilized by sample scientists in order to accomplish the mission’s scientific objectives, however this information can also be utilized by the Office of Planetary Protection to help evaluate the presence of any back contamination. Mars 2020, the first phase of a potential multipart Mars Sample Return (MSR) campaign, is expected to contribute to NASA’s Mars Exploration Program Science Goals by filling in knowledge gaps concerning: 1) the existence of past or present life on Mars, 2) the past and present climate of Mars, 3) the geology of Mars, and 4) hazards associated with human exploration of Mars. Although there is debate concerning which samples will best answer these questions, the necessity for proper sample blanks is well-understood. The CC and PP requirements, driven by the restricted Class V mission designation, are the most stringent of any sample return mission in recent history. The extremely low levels of allowable terrestrial contamination on the spacecraft and rover can complicate these analyses given the detection limits of current analytical instrumentation, especially in the case of biological contamination. By collecting and curating unanalyzed samples specifically for CK, future sample scientists will not be relegated to: 1) relying on data collected using possibly obsolete tools and techniques for return sample blanks, or 2) using remnants of extracted and/or cultured samples from ATLO (Assembly, Test, and Launch Operations), which could be incompatible with the desired experimental endpoints or state-of-the-art techniques available at the time of sample return.The addition of biological experimental endpoints to a sample return campaign’s objectives broadens the requisite range in preservation environments (e.g. inert ultra-pure nitrogen gaseous environment at 18 degrees Centigrade versus less than or equal to minus 80 degrees Centigrade) and types of CK samples. As a result, the Curation Office will also curate the following CK samples at less than or equal to minus 80 degrees Centigrade for the Mars 2020 mission: 1) unanalyzed swabs and wipes in sterile containers, 2) all recirculation filters from the clean rooms used for sample and caching subsystem assembly and all filters from the laminar flow benches used to assemble sample intimate hardware, and 3) witness plates collecting airborne contamination within the assembly clean rooms. It has been Curation Office policy since the Apollo missions to preserve as many pristine samples as possible for future scientific research. Although CK is required to be collected for all stages of the MSR campaign, the CK for the Mars 2020 mission is the most critical for understanding contamination in the returned samples given the intimacy between the Martian samples and the Mars 2020 flight hardware. This presentation highlights the importance of CK for sample return missions as well as the traditional and novel types of CK samples required for a successful MSR campaign.

Harrington, A. D.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Atmospheric Research 2020 Technical Highlights

Welcome to the 2020 Atmospheres Highlights report. Here we summarize research and scientific communication/outreach accomplishments from the portion of atmospheric science activities at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) that comprises the Earth Science Division’s Atmospheres organization. As in previous years, this report is intended for a broad audience, including colleagues within NASA, scientists outside the Agency, science graduate students, and members of the public. Organizationally, the report covers research activities under the Office of Deputy Organizationally, the report covers research activities under the Office of Deputy Director for Atmospheres (610AT), which is within Earth Sciences Division (Code Director for Atmospheres (610AT), which is within Earth Sciences Division (Code 610) in the Sciences and Exploration Directorate (600). Laboratories and office within 610) in the Sciences and Exploration Directorate (600). Laboratories and office within 610AT include: Mesoscale Atmospheric Processes Laboratory (612), Climate and 610AT include: Mesoscale Atmospheric Processes Laboratory (612), Climate and Radiation Laboratory (613), Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Laboratory (614), Radiation Laboratory (613), Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Laboratory (614), and the Wallops Field Support Office (610.W). As of this writing, the 277 personnel and the Wallops Field Support Office (610.W). As of this writing, the 277 personnel in Code 610AT consist of 53 civil servants and 224 cooperative agreement associates, in Code 610AT consist of 53 civil servants and 224 cooperative agreement associates, postdoctoral fellows and contractors, postdoctoral fellows and contractors.

Annual Report↗
NASA NTRS2017

NASA Weather Support 2017

In the mid to late 1980's, as NASA was studying ways to improve weather forecasting capabilities to reduce excessive weather launch delays and to reduce excessive weather Launch Commit Criteria (LCC) waivers, the Challenger Accident occurred and the AC-67 Mishap occurred.[1] NASA and USAF weather personnel had advance knowledge of extremely high levels of weather hazards that ultimately caused or contributed to both of these accidents. In both cases, key knowledge of the risks posed by violations of weather LCC was not in the possession of final decision makers on the launch teams. In addition to convening the mishap boards for these two lost missions, NASA convened expert meteorological boards focusing on weather support. These meteorological boards recommended the development of a dedicated organization with the highest levels of weather expertise and influence to support all of American spaceflight. NASA immediately established the Weather Support Office (WSO) in the Office of Space Flight (OSF), and in coordination with the United Stated Air Force (USAF), initiated an overhaul of the organization and an improvement in technology used for weather support as recommended. Soon after, the USAF established a senior civilian Launch Weather Officer (LWO) position to provide meteorological support and continuity of weather expertise and knowledge over time. The Applied Meteorology Unit (AMU) was established by NASA, USAF, and the National Weather Service to support initiatives to place new tools and methods into an operational status. At the end of the Shuttle Program, after several weather office reorganizations, the WSO function had been assigned to a weather branch at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). This branch was dismantled in steps due to further reorganization, loss of key personnel, and loss of budget line authority. NASA is facing the loss of sufficient expertise and leadership required to provide current levels of weather support. The recommendation proposed herein is to re-establish the WSO under a high level office, with funding set at about the same levels as today, with a revitalized charter and focus to allow for the WSO to operate as originally intended.

lessons learned↗
NASA NTRS1985

NASA Space controls research and technology program

The NASA technological organization is outlined. The Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST) is one of the four major technical offices that comprise NASA. The Office of Space Science and Applications administers programs directed towards using space-based or related techniques to further understanding of the total universe and to apply that understanding to practical applications in such areas as Astrophysics, Solar System exploration, Earth Sciences, Life Sciences, Communications and Information Systems. The Office of Space Flight administers the programs for all U.S. civil launch capability, plus Spacelab development and operations. The Office of Space Tracking & Data Systems administers the programs that operate and maintain a world-wide network of facilities for data acquisition, processing, and ground to spacecraft communications for all NASA missions. The OAST has primary responsibility within NASA for conducting space research and technology development to support commercial and military as well as NASA space interests.

Mciver, D. E.↗
NASA NTRS1990

The first meeting of the Advisory Committee on the Future of the US Space Program (C-FUSSP)

These are minutes of the Advisory Committee on the Future of the U.S. Space Program (C-FUSSP). From September 13-15, 1990, presentations were made by the major leaders at NASA as well as industry leaders. The presentations draw on previous studies of the future of NASA space programs. Allowance was made for plenty of questions. The minutes reflect the views of governmental units such as the National Space Council, the NASA Administrators Office, Office of Space Science and Applications, Office of Space Flight, Office of Space Operations, Office of Aeronautics, Exploration, and Technology as well as other pertinent units and outside organizations. Members of the committee are listed at the conclusion of the minutes.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1993

The Telecommunications and Data Acquisition Report

This quarterly publication provides archival reports on developments in programs managed by JPL's Office of Telecommunications and Data Acquisition (TDA) in the following areas: space communications, radio navigation, radio science, and ground-based radio and radar astronomy. This document also reports on the activities of the Deep Space Network (DSN) in planning, supporting research and technology, implementation, and operations. Also included are standards activity at JPL for space data and information systems and reimbursable DSN work performed for other space agencies through NASA. The preceding work is all performed for NASA's Office of Space Communications (OSC). The TDA Office also performs work funded by another NASA program office through and with the cooperation of OSC. This is the Orbital Debris Radar Program with the Office of Space Systems Development.

Posner, Edward C.↗
NASA NTRS1994

The Telecommunications and Data Acquisition Report

This quarterly publication provides archival reports on developments in programs managed by JPL's Office of Telecommunications and Data Acquisition (TDA). In space communications, radio navigation, radio science, and ground-based radio and radar astronomy, it reports on activities of the Deep Space Network (DSN) in planning, supporting research and technology, implementation, and operations. Also included are standards activity at JPL for space data and information systems and reimbursable DSN work performed for other space agencies through NASA. The preceding work is all performed for NASA's Office of Space Communications (OSC). The TDA Office also performs work funded by other NASA program offices through and with the cooperation of OSC. Finally, tasks funded under the JPL Director's Discretionary Fund and the Caltech President's Fund that involve the TDA Office are included.

Yuen, Joseph H.↗
NASA NTRS1996

The Telecommunications and Data Acquisition Report

This quarterly publication provides archival reports on developments in programs managed by JPL's Telecommunications and Mission Operations Directorate (TMOD), which now includes the former Telecommunications and Data Acquisition (TDA) Office. In space communications, radio navigation, radio science, and ground-based radio and radar astronomy, it reports on activities of the Deep Space Network (DSN) in planning, supporting research and technology, implementation, and operations. Also included are standards activity at JPL for space data and information systems and reimbursable DSN work performed for other space agencies through NASA. The preceding work is all performed for NASA's Office of Space Communications (OSC). TMOD also performs work funded by other NASA program offices through and with the cooperation of OSC. The first of these is the Orbital Debris Radar Program funded by the Office of Space Systems Development. It exists at Goldstone only and makes use of the planetary radar capability when the antennas are configured as science instruments making direct observations of the planets, their satellites, and asteroids of our solar system. The Office of Space Sciences funds the data reduction and science analyses of data obtained by the Goldstone Solar System Radar. The antennas at all three complexes are also configured for radio astronomy research and, as such, conduct experiments funded by the National Science Foundation in the U.S. and other agencies at the overseas complexes. These experiments are either in microwave spectroscopy or very long baseline interferometry. Finally, tasks funded under the JPL Director's Discretionary Fund and the Caltech President's Fund that involve TMOD are included. This and each succeeding issue of 'The Telecommunications and Data Acquisition Progress Report' will present material in some, but not necessarily all, of the aforementioned programs.

Yuen, Joseph H.↗
NASA NTRS1997

Cultural Variability in Crew Communication

In this study we examined what linguistic strategies pilots use when they have to challenge the actions of a colleague, and how their communications balance the need for informativeness with the need for assuring the other's cooperation. Two strategies emerged for captains. They either gave commands or they made suggestions that referred to actions of the crew. Both strategies explicitly state what action should be taken but they differ in their social implications. Commands are direct insofar as they entail a strong obligation for the listener to comply with the speaker' s request. Suggestions are less direct in this respect. However, by using the collegial "Let's do," speakers appeal to the solidarity between themselves and their listeners and seek compliance in this way. Commands, in contrast, are inherently authoritative and imply an asymmetry in status. Speakers by giving a command, express their belief that they are socially more powerful than their listeners and that they are thus licensed to command. That is, speakers seek listener compliance by appeal to their status. Status-based commands were more frequent among male captains than among female captains. Female captains instead were likely to shift the motivation for their commands away from their status to some objective necessity by referring to some problem or goal It remains to be seen, however, how captains' strategies were affected by the severity of a problem situation. Results in a preliminary study involving only male participants, suggests that pilots increased the directness of their utterances in situations that they perceived to be risky. Thus the observation that male captains used complex communications half of the time while female captains did so 75% of the time, could indicate that male captains were more likely than female captains to change their strategies with the severity of situations. Both male and female first officers in this study were less direct than captains. The most common strategy of first officers was to point to some problem or to remind the captain of a given goal. What corrective action should be taken and by whom was not explicitly stated but implied and left to the captain. In their other strategies, permission seeking and confirmation-seeking questions, first officers were more explicit about a corrective action. In the first case, they volunteered to do some course of action but left the final decision to the captain. In the latter case, they inquired or confirmed whether the captain wanted some action. Although all three strategies seek the compliance of the listener by appeal to his authority, there are important differences: By asking permission seeking and confirmation-seeking questions, first officers specify the action for which they want the captain's compliance. Compliance, however, is not demanded but requested. By alerting to a problem or to a goal, in contrast, first of officers seek the captain's compliance only with their assessment of the situation but not with a particular course of action. That is, they place the captain under no explicit obligation to initiate a corrective action but do so only indirectly by assuming that a course of action is self-evident once the problem has been acknowledged.

Fischer, Ute↗
NASA NTRS1997

An Exposure Prevention Plan for an Anhydrous Ammonia Handling System

In July of 1996, the Industrial Hygiene Team of the Environmental Management Office at NASA Lewis Research Center was contacted by the Space Station Program Office to conduct ammonia awareness training for a team of engineers and technicians. The team was tasked with assembling and operating an ammonia handling system for testing of a photovoltaic radiator at the NASA Plum Brook Station Space Power Facility. The ammonia handling system supports a radiator designed to radiate excess heat from a photovoltaic array module used to provide power to the International Space Station. The system would consist of a hazardous materials trailer equipped with an anhydrous ammonia tank, heater, accumulator, chiller, and flow bench. Meetings were held with representatives from the Space Station Program Office, the engineers and Plum Brook safety personnel. Guidance was also provided by representatives from Kennedy Space Center. Determinations were made concerning the locations and types of potential exposures and a plan was developed which included training, personal protective equipment, engineering controls and emergency response. Various organizations including the Plum Brook Safety Committee, the Lewis Environmental Management Office, the Test Readiness Review Board and the Program Office all had requirements that had to be met in order to satisfy themselves that all personnel involved in the operation of the system would be safe. What resulted was a comprehensive plan that provided more than adequate safety measures and succeeded in protecting all personnel from the hazards of the ammonia system. Testing of the photovoltaic radiator was successful and although ammonia leaks were detected and maintenance of the system was ongoing, no one was injured. It was felt that the training and controls in place allowed for a comfort level that did not interfere with the operations.

Cathy L Padolewski↗
NASA NTRS1993

Mars Observer Orbit Insertion Briefing

Steve Wall is the host of this video entitled, "Return to the Red Planet". Live animation of the Mars Observer orbiting Mars is presented. Steve Wall explains the spacecraft insertion maneuver and also explains the purpose for the Mars Observer launch. Live coverage of the Cape Canaveral launch of the Mars Observer is also presented. Suzanne Dodd, Chief of the Mission Planning team describes the burn start and how the spacecraft will be captured by Mars' gravity. Glenn Cunningham, Mars Observer Project Manager, gives background information on the Mars Observer and describes the organizations behind the Mars Observer Spacecraft, such as the Deep Space Network, the Mission Operation Support Office, Science Investigators, the Flight Engineering Office, Operations Office, and the Ground Data System Office. Dr. William Piotrowski, Acting Director, Solar System Exploration Division, NASA, talks about the purpose of the Mars Pathfinder which is to develop the technology and systems for landing small science packages on Mars. Mr. Roger Gibbs, Former Mars Observer Spacecraft Systems Engineer, tells us how the Mars Observer was built and describes the structural elements on the Mars Observer. The 11-month cruise period for the spacecraft is given by Joseph Beerer, Manager of the Engineering office. The thrust for the Mars Orbit Insertion is described by Ronald Klemetson, Technical Manager, Propulsion Subsystem Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). George Chen, Lead Engineer Attitude and Articulation Subsystem Spacecraft Team, explains the importance of the attitude control engines on the Spacecraft. Marvin Traxler, Manager of Tracking and Data Acquisition, describes how searching for a signal from the Mars Observer works. See NONP-NASA-VT-2000081555 for a continuation of this discussion with Marvin Traxler.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2001

Lower Stratospheric Temperature Differences Between Meteorological Analyses in two cold Arctic Winters and their Impact on Polar Processing Studies

A quantitative intercomparison of six meteorological analyses is presented for the cold 1999-2000 and 1995-1996 Arctic winters. The impacts of using different analyzed temperatures in calculations of polar stratospheric cloud (PSC) formation potential, and of different winds in idealized trajectory-based temperature histories, are substantial. The area with temperatures below a PSC formation threshold commonly varies by approximately 25% among the analyses, with differences of over 50% at some times/locations. Freie University at Berlin analyses are often colder than others at T is less than or approximately 205 K. Biases between analyses vary from year to year; in January 2000. U.K. Met Office analyses were coldest and National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) analyses warmest. while NCEP analyses were usually coldest in 1995-1996 and Met Office or NCEP[National Center for Atmospheric Research Reanalysis (REAN) warmest. European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasting (ECMWF) temperatures agreed better with other analyses in 1999-2000, after improvements in the assimilation model. than in 1995-1996. Case-studies of temperature histories show substantial differences using Met Office, NCEP, REAN and NASA Data Assimilation Office (DAO) analyses. In January 2000 (when a large cold region was centered in the polar vortex), qualitatively similar results were obtained for all analyses. However, in February 2000 (a much warmer period) and in January and February 1996 (comparably cold to January 2000 but with large cold regions near the polar vortex edge), distributions of "potential PSC lifetimes" and total time spent below a PSC formation threshold varied significantly among the analyses. Largest peaks in "PSC lifetime" distributions in January 2000 were at 4-6 and 11-14 days. while in the 1996 periods, they were at 1-3 days. Thus different meteorological conditions in comparably cold winters had a large impact on expectations for PSC formation and on the discrepancies between different meteorological analyses. Met Office. NCEP, REAN, ECMWF and DAO analyses are commonly used for trajectory calculations and in chemical transport models; the choice of which analysis to use can strongly influence the results of such studies.

Manney, Gloria L.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Clinical Core Competency Training for NASA Flight Surgeons

Introduction: The cohort of NASA flight surgeons (FS) is a very accomplished group with varied clinical backgrounds; however, the NASA Flight Surgeon Office has identified that the extremely demanding schedule of this cohort prevents many of these physicians from practicing clinical medicine on a regular basis. In an effort to improve clinical competency, the NASA FS Office has dedicated one day a week for the FS to receive clinical training. Each week, an FS is assigned to one of five clinical settings, one being medical patient simulation. The Medical Operations Support Team (MOST) was tasked to develop curricula using medical patient simulation that would meet the clinical and operational needs of the NASA FS Office. Methods: The MOST met with the Lead FS and Training Lead FS to identify those core competencies most important to the FS cohort. The MOST presented core competency standards from the American Colleges of Emergency Medicine and Internal Medicine as a basis for developing the training. Results: The MOST identified those clinical areas that could be best demonstrated and taught using medical patient simulation, in particular, using high fidelity human patient simulators. Curricula are currently being developed and additional classes will be implemented to instruct the FS cohort. The curricula will incorporate several environments for instruction, including lab-based and simulated microgravity-based environments. Discussion: The response from the NASA FS cohort to the initial introductory class has been positive. As a result of this effort, the MOST has identified three types of training to meet the clinical needs of the FS Office; clinical core competency training, individual clinical refresher training, and just-in-time training (specific for post-ISS Expedition landings). The MOST is continuing to work with the FS Office to augment the clinical training for the FS cohort, including the integration of Web-based learning.

Polk, J. D.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Summer Final Report

The summer of 2012 has been filled with many memorable events and activities. As an intern, I had responsibilities that had to be fulfilled. My tour of duty was completed as an administrative student trainee in the Information Technology and Communications Services Business Office (IT-A). In accordance with the Business Objectives and Agreement of the Business Office and my performance plan, I was to provide business office support, improve business, project management, and technical work processes. With this being stated, I supported a project called "The Big Move Project" (TBMP), which will take course over the next several years. The Big Move Project is the planning of the Information Technology (IT) Directorate's relocation to various buildings in the course of upcoming years, when designs and the building of Central Campus have been completed. Working directly with my supervisor and the project manager, I was responsible for gathering both administrative and operational area requirements for the Information Technology (IT) Directorate, along with its outsourced support and contractors, such as IMCS, NICS, and ACES. My first action was to create rubrics that will serve as a guideline for the information that should be given by each branch of IT. After receiving that information via a few KAITS actions, I was able to start the consolidation process, and begin working on a presentation. A SharePoint was created shortly after for others to view the progression of the project, which I managed. During the consolidation ofthis information, I would occasionally present to the IT Deputy Director and IT Chiefs. The draft of this presentation was shown to employees of Center Operations (T A) and stakeholders-IT Chief Officers and contractor managers-in the relocation of IT to make them aware of what requirements must be met that will enable IT to be accommodated appropriately in the design of Central Campus Phase 11-the time in which IT and its contractors are scheduled to be relocated. Besides supporting TBMP, I also supported the Section 508 Policy Compliance Coordinator, R. Liang. Section 508 is a policy that requires employers to implement accessibility assurance of information and technology to disabled communities. On Thursday, July 19, 2012, I was able to go to Camp Boggy Creek-a camp for disabled children-for an education outreach, in collaboration with the Education Office. We shared with them information about how astronauts live and work in space, they were able to ride hovercrafts, build paper rockets, and then launch them outside. Although this outreach was quite fun with the kids at the camp, this was a learning opportunity to gain some insight to those with cognitive and physical disabilities, the problems they typically face, and in tum, how to accommodate those with disabilities in the work environment. In the process of implementing accessibility and Section 508 compliance, I attended various teleconferences, did field runs to supply closed-caption call phones to employees with limited hearing, and helped with the development of the charter ofthe Section 508 Compliance Working Group.

Makidi, Nitou↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Managing HRP’S External Deliverables: The Process and the Customers

The Human Research Program’s (HRP) external deliverables (EDs) are the final outcomes of the research that the HRP Elements develop and execute. Four categories of HRP EDs exist: standards, requirements, countermeasures, and tools/technology. The NASA Human Health and Performance directorate’s primary stakeholders, i.e., the customers for the EDs, include the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) (Standards Team, Chief Health and Performance Officers and Chief Medical Officers, Human System Risk Board), and the agency’s System Capability Leadership Teams. The EDs may address the need of a specific customer, a specific design reference mission, or a vehicle lifecycle milestone. HRP’s Maturation and Integration Office External Programs facilitates the process of delivering the EDs to the targeted customers according to the customer’s expectations. This presentation describes this coordinated process and provides an overview of the nature of different types of EDs and how they impact the customers’ products. Successful transfer of the EDs to the customers will help mitigate the health and performance risks that crewmembers will face during NASA’s future exploration missions.

HRP research external deliverables↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Managing HRP's External Deliverables: The Process and the Customers

The Human Research Program’s (HRP) external deliverables (EDs) are the final outcomes of the research that the HRP Elements develop and execute. The NASA Human Health and Performance directorate’s primary stakeholders, i.e., the customers for the EDs, include the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) (Standards Team, Chief Health and Performance Officers and Chief Medical Officers, Human System Risk Board), and the agency’s System Capability Leadership Teams. The EDs may address the need of a specific customer, a specific design reference mission, or a vehicle lifecycle milestone. HRP’s Maturation and Integration Office External Programs facilitates the process of delivering the EDs to the targeted customers according to the customer’s expectations. This presentation describes this coordinated process and provides an overview of the nature of different types of EDs and how they impact the customers’ products. Successful transfer of the EDs to the customers will help mitigate the health and performance risks that crewmembers will face during NASA’s future exploration missions.

research↗