Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “operational processes”

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 NTRSDate not supplied

System Safety Analysis of Complex NASA Systems with Model Based Engineering

The emergence of model-based engineering is transforming design and analysis methodologies [5]. A recognized benefit of model-based engineering is the existence of a “single source of truth” about the system that becomes the authoritative source of data and information for designers, analysts, and developers. This promotes consistency and efficiency as the design emerges and can be used to further optimize the design. Integrating System Safety Engineers to the “single source of truth” will ensure that the outputs of their assessments and analyses are relevant to the design as it evolves. Use of an integrated system model enables near immediate evaluation of a design change as well as development of operational processes for risk assessment and communication. Such models can enable efficient and timely analysis of system hazards (e.g., hazard fault tree analysis and procedure simulations) and produce complete, accurate, and more consistent products (e.g., hazard reports and safety requirement evaluations). Therefore, an agency-sponsored team at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) recently completed a System Safety Study of modeling and testing capabilities as part of a Model-Based Safety and Mission Assurance Initiative (MBSMAI). Using an existing model developed for reliability analyses [1], GSFC modeling and system safety experts performed system safety analysis/modeling and produced safety products. The team evaluated model-based feasibility to support System Safety Engineering, developed safety analysis modeling processes, and identified tool capability advancement/development needs. These study results indicate model-based engineering is valid and useable for System

Model Based Engineering↗
NASA NTRS2022

Predicting Antarctic Net Snow Accumulation at the Kilometer Scale and Its Impact on Observed Height Changes

Sub-grid-scale processes occurring at or near the surface of an ice sheet have a potentially large impact on local and integrated net accumulation of snow via redistribution and sublimation. Given observational complexity, they are either ignored or parameterized over large-length scales. Here, we train random forest (RF) models to predict variability in net accumulation over the Antarctic Ice Sheet using atmospheric variables and topographic characteristics as predictors at 1 km resolution. Observations of net snow accumulation from both in situ and airborne radar data provide the input observable targets needed to train the RF models. We find that local net accumulation deviates by as much as 172% of the atmospheric model mean. The correlation in space between the predicted net accumulation variability and satellite-derived surface-height change indicates that surface processes operate differently through time, driven largely by the seasonal anomalies in snow accumulation.

Antarctic↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

System Safety Analysis of Complex NASA Systems with Model-Based Engineering (REV B)

The emergence of model-based engineering is transforming design and analysis methodologies. A recognized benefit of model-based engineering is the existence of a “single source of truth” about the system that becomes the authoritative source of data and information for designers, analysts, and developers. This promotes consistency and efficiency as the design emerges and can be used to further optimize the design. Integrating System Safety Engineers to the “single source of truth” will ensure that the outputs of their assessments and analyses are relevant to the design as it evolves. Use of an integrated system model enables near immediate evaluation of a design change as well as development of operational processes for risk assessment and communication. Such models can enable efficient and timely analysis of system hazards (e.g., hazard fault tree analysis and procedure simulations) and produce complete, accurate, and more consistent products (e.g., hazard reports and safety requirement evaluations). Therefore, an agency-sponsored team at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) recently completed a System Safety Study of modeling and testing capabilities as part of a Model-Based Safety and Mission Assurance Initiative (MBSMAI). Using an existing model developed for reliability analyses, GSFC modeling and system safety experts performed system safety analysis/modeling and produced safety products. The team evaluated model-based feasibility to support System Safety Engineering, developed safety analysis modeling processes, and identified tool capability advancement/development needs. These study results indicate model-based engineering is valid and useable for System Safety Engineering for NASA if adequate modeling processes and environment are established.

NASA↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Multiple Probe Measurements at Uranus Motivated By Spatial Variability

Motivation: Spatial variations in the temperature field and composition of Uranus' atmosphere demonstrate a need for multiple entry probes to characterize vertical profiles in multiple locations. We will review variation of composition and temperature, which are produced by dynamical processes on a range of scales from global (polar anomalies, zonal bands) to regional (vortices, storms) [1–2]. In particular, the spatial variation of convective activity is not well understood based on existing remote sensing observations [3]. Understanding how these processes operate, and how they modulate variable composition, is key to constraining bulk atmospheric abundances. Abundances in turn provide cosmochemical constraints on planetary origins. Secondary probes at Uranus: Key measurements for secondary probes are temperature-pressure profiles, along with compositional profiles. Radio occultations are limited to shallow levels less than ~2 bar [4]. In situ temperature-pressure measurements (or atmospheric structure measurements) can unambiguously extend these results to deeper levels. Measurements with vertical resolution of at least 2 km are needed to characterize anomalies like the 1.2-bar feature from the Voyager 2 occultation at 2–6° S [4], which supports a range of temperature gradients depending on assumptions of composition. Simultaneous measurements of temperature, pressure, and composition are key to understanding this class of features. Species such as methane, hydrogen sulfide, and ammonia must be measured along a probe descent profile because they vary over several orders of magnitude due to the strong temperature dependence of their saturation vapor pressures [e.g., 5]. Results of these measurements can be interpreted to understand the potential for moist convective activity in the atmosphere. Lessons from the other giant planets: On Jupiter, the Galileo Probe's entry into a meteorologically distinct five-micron hot spot led many to interpret the local composition as column-stretched, so that well-mixed abundances were reached at deeper levels than in surrounding, unperturbed regions [6–8]. Ground-based microwave measurements and Juno data now indicate that the deep depletion of ammonia is a very widespread atmospheric characteristic not limited to 5-µm hot spots [9–11]. But in the absence of multiple probes, we do not know if the other volatiles H2S and H2O behave in the same way. The open questions for the Jupiter case strongly motivate sending multiple probes to Uranus. On Saturn, retrievals of NH3 and PH3 abundances at shallow levels vary with latitude [12], but it is unknown how deep these differences extend, which is why a Saturn probe (or probes) was a mission theme for NASA's New Frontiers 4 and 5 opportunities [13]. Challenges for secondary probes: Cost is an issue due to the perception that it involves sacrifices to other mission elements. Spacecraft trajectories may be constrained by needs for orbit insertion that limit probe deliveries to different latitudes, and additional limitations may be placed on communication windows for probe descent phases (particularly if multiple probes are released from the orbiter simultaneously) [14]. Finally, composition sensors for miniature secondary probes are not at the required technological maturity [15]. Mass spectrometers are typically too large, massive, and powerhungry, while smaller nanosensors are only beginning to be developed for planetary missions. Finally, the need for probe survival heating is most easily met by radioisotope heat sources, but these require regulatory approvals that are even more difficult to satisfy compared to standard environmental reviews [16], unless the secondary probe is designed as a core element of a mission. References: [1] Molter E.M., et al. (2021) PSJ, 2, 3. [2] Rowe-Gurney N., et al. (2021) Icar, 365, 114506. [3] Hueso R., Sánchez-Lavega A. (2019) SSRv, 215, 52. [4] Lindal G.F., et al. (1987) JGR, 92, 14987– 15001. [5] Simon A.A., et al. (2022) RemS, 14, 1518. [6] Atreya, S.K., et al. (1997) in The Three Galileos: The Man, the Spacecraft, the Telescope, pp. 249–260 (C. Barbieri et al., eds.). [7] Showman A.P., Ingersoll A.P. (1998) Icar, 132, 205–220. [8] Friedson A.J. (2005) Icar, 177, 1–17. [9] de Pater I., et al. (2001) Icar, 149, 66–78. [10] Li C., et al. (2017) GeoRL, 44, 5317–5325. [11] de Pater I., et al. (2019) Icar, 322, 168–191. [12] Fletcher L.N., et al. (2009) Icar, 202, 543–564. [13] National Research Council (2011) Vision and Voyages. [14] Sayanagi K.M., et al. (2020) SSRv, 216, 72. [15] Wong M.H. et al. (2021) BAAS, 53, 486. [16] Zide A., Mendoza-Hill A., Cheney D. (2022) COSPAR Abstracts H0.6-0012-22.

Michael H Wong↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessing Engine Hot Fire Data for Human Spaceflight Applications

Development and certification of liquid engine systems for human spaceflight missions requires exhaustive analysis to meet the NASA’s requirements for engine health, reliability, and performance. The techniques used to assess requirement conformance and test-to-test engine health pose many unique challenges including the unusually large scale of data, complex component and system analysis, and rigorous engineering judgement standards. To address these challenges, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center’s Engine Systems branch has developed and maintained a robust software suite and operational processes that satisfy programmatic requirements levied on engines and the 7 Elements of Flight Rationale. Analysis at a systems level includes subsystem assessment of components such as turbomachinery and combustion devices as well as structural and fluid dynamics and transient and steady-state assessment at a systems level. Some of the most important tools to accomplish this analysis are automated script databases, creation of historical and statistical comparisons, and parameters calculated at the full data rate. These tools greatly simplify the crucial processes of anomaly investigation, limit monitoring, health assessment, and timely communication of key conclusions drawn from hot fire testing and flight data analysis.

Data Assessment↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessing Engine Hot Fire Data for Human Spaceflight Applications

Development and certification of liquid engine systems for human spaceflight missions requires exhaustive analysis to meet the NASA’s requirements for engine health, reliability, and performance. The techniques used to assess requirement conformance and test-to-test engine health pose many unique challenges including the unusually large scale of data, complex component and system analysis, and rigorous engineering judgement standards. To address these challenges, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center’s Engine Systems branch has developed and maintained a robust software suite and operational processes that satisfy programmatic requirements levied on engines and the 7 Elements of Flight Rationale. Analysis at a systems level includes subsystem assessment of components such as turbomachinery and combustion devices as well as structural and fluid dynamics and transient and steady-state assessment at a systems level. Some of the most important tools to accomplish this analysis are automated script databases, creation of historical and statistical comparisons, and parameters calculated at the full data rate. These tools greatly simplify the crucial processes of anomaly investigation, limit monitoring, health assessment, and timely communication of key conclusions drawn from hot fire testing and flight data analysis.

Data Assessment↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessing Hot Fire Data with WinPlot

Development and certification of liquid engine systems for human spaceflight missions requires exhaustive analysis to meet the NASA’s requirements for engine health, reliability, and performance. The techniques used to assess requirement conformance and test-to-test engine health and performance pose many unique challenges including the unusually large scale of data, complex component and system analysis, and rigorous engineering judgement standards. To address these challenges, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center’s Engine Systems branch has developed and maintained a robust software suite and operational processes that satisfy programmatic requirements levied on engines and the 7 Elements of Flight Rationale. Analysis at a systems level includes subsystem assessment of components such as turbomachinery and combustion devices as well as structural and fluid dynamics and transient and steady-state assessment at a systems level. Some of the most important tools to accomplish this analysis are automated script databases, creation of historical and statistical comparisons, and parameters calculated at the full data rate. These tools greatly simplify the crucial processes of anomaly investigation, limit monitoring, health assessment, and timely communication of key conclusions drawn from hot fire testing and flight data analysis.

J. Davis Hunter↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Production of Flight Instruments for Multi-Satellite Constellations

Recent National Academy of Science Decadal Surveys in space and Earth-science have called for simultaneous, distributed multi-point measurements in and from space, requiring constellations of small spacecraft. Small satellites have demonstrated their utility for enabling high-quality science measurements and observations. NASA missions have leveraged advances in sensor miniaturization, technology innovations, and new small satellite mission architectures to enable meaningful measurement-based scientific investigations that operate on small satellites and that are responsive to science objectives described in National Academy of Science Decadal Surveys. The advent of high capability small spacecraft enables consideration of science missions involving multiple small spacecraft, constellations of a few or many for simultaneous distributed in situ observations or remote observations from a variety of viewpoints. The central challenge for fielding instrumented space-flight constellations is to provide the required multiple sets of fully verified and calibrated instrument hardware, software, and operational processes from within a one-off project-based scientific space flight culture. Although there are numerous commercial entities providing “off-the shelf” spacecraft and avionics, the challenge lies in the multi-unit production of the uniquely targeted instrumentation necessary to perform the specific measurements required for a particular science investigation. Traditionally, the cost of such instrumentation has represented a significant portion of the hardware cost for a mission and posed the highest risk area for implementation. A shift in paradigm from large science platforms to constellations of smaller satellites drives the challenge to build instruments in a quasi-production environment. This paper describes key aspects of, and challenges encountered in the development program for the successful production of instruments for the Fast-Plasma Investigation (FPI) instrument suite of 64 flight plasma spectrometers and supporting electronics on the NASA Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) 4 satellite constellation mission. Although the MMS mission was not composed of small satellites, there are key aspects of the instrument production that apply directly to constellations of small satellites.

Arthur D Jacques↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Production of Flight Instruments for Multi-Satellite Constellations

Recent National Academy of Science Decadal Surveys in space and Earth-science have called for simultaneous, distributed multi-point measurements in and from space, requiring constellations of small spacecraft. Small satellites have demonstrated their utility for enabling high-quality science measurements and observations. NASA missions have leveraged advances in sensor miniaturization, technology innovations, and new small satellite mission architectures to enable meaningful measurement-based scientific investigations that operate on small satellites and that are responsive to science objectives described in National Academy of Science Decadal Surveys. The advent of high capability small spacecraft enables consideration of science missions involving multiple small spacecraft, constellations of a few or many for simultaneous distributed in situ observations or remote observations from a variety of viewpoints. The central challenge for fielding instrumented space-flight constellations is to provide the required multiple sets of fully verified and calibrated instrument hardware, software, and operational processes from within a one-off project-based scientific space flight culture. Although there are numerous commercial entities providing “off-the shelf” spacecraft and avionics, the challenge lies in the multi-unit production of the uniquely targeted instrumentation necessary to perform the specific measurements required for a particular science investigation. Traditionally, the cost of such instrumentation has represented a significant portion of the hardware cost for a mission and posed the highest risk area for implementation. A shift in paradigm from large science platforms to constellations of smaller satellites drives the challenge to build instruments in a quasi-production environment. This paper describes key aspects of, and challenges encountered in the development program for the successful production of instruments for the Fast-Plasma Investigation (FPI) instrument suite of 64 flight plasma spectrometers and supporting electronics on the NASA Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) 4 satellite constellation mission. Although the MMS mission was not composed of small satellites, there are key aspects of the instrument production that apply directly to constellations of small satellites.

Arthur D Jacques↗
NASA NTRS2004

Operating The Central Process Systems At Glenn Research Center

As a research facility, the Glenn Research Center (GRC) trusts and expects all the systems, controlling their facilities to run properly and efficiently in order for their research and operations to occur proficiently and on time. While there are many systems necessary for the operations at GRC, one of those most vital systems is the Central Process Systems (CPS). The CPS controls operations used by GRC's wind tunnels, propulsion systems lab, engine components research lab, and compressor, turbine and combustor test cells. Used widely throughout the lab, it operates equipment such as exhausters, chillers, cooling towers, compressors, dehydrators, and other such equipment. Through parameters such as pressure, temperature, speed, flow, etc., it performs its primary operations on the major systems of Electrical Dispatch (ED), Central Air Dispatch (CAD), Central Air Equipment Building (CAEB), and Engine Research Building (ERB). In order for the CPS to continue its operations at Glenn, a new contract must be awarded. Consequently, one of my primary responsibilities was assisting the Source Evaluation Board (SEB) with the process of awarding the recertification contract of the CPS. The job of the SEB was to evaluate the proposals of the contract bidders and then to present their findings to the Source Selecting Official (SSO). Before the evaluations began, the Center Director established the level of the competition. For this contract, the competition was limited to those companies classified as a small, disadvantaged business. After an industry briefing that explained to qualified companies the CPS and type of work required, each of the interested companies then submitted proposals addressing three components: Mission Suitability, Cost, and Past Performance. These proposals were based off the Statement of Work (SOW) written by the SEB. After companies submitted their proposals, the SEB reviewed all three components and then presented their results to the SSO. While the SEB does not select the company receiving the contract, they can make recommendations based on their findings to the SSO, who actually awards the contract. The SEB began work for this contract in July 2003 by writing the SOW and the selection will tentatively occur July 30, 2004. Contract awarding will take place Aug. 15. Following the awarding, the winning company has a 30-day Phase-in Period beginning Sept. 1,2004 and full performance will begin October 1.

Weiler, Carly P.↗
NASA NTRS1974

ERTS operations and data processing

The overall communications and data flow between the ERTS spacecraft and the ground stations and processing centers are generally described. Data from the multispectral scanner and the return beam vidicon are telemetered to a primary ground station where they are demodulated, processed, and recorded. The tapes are then transferred to the NASA Data Processing Facility (NDPF) at Goddard. Housekeeping data are relayed from the prime ground stations to the Operations Control Center at Goddard. Tracking data are processed at the ground stations, and the calculated parameters are transmitted by teletype to the orbit determination group at Goddard. The ERTS orbit has been designed so that the same swaths of the ground coverage pattern viewed during one 18-day coverage cycle are repeated by the swaths viewed on all subsequent cycles. The Operations Control Center is the focal point for all communications with the spacecraft. NDPF is a job-oriented facility which processes and stores all sensor data, and which disseminates large quantities of these data to users in the form of films, computer-compatible tapes, and data collection system data.

Gonzales, L.↗
NASA NTRS1977

Launch processing system transition from development to operation

The Launch Processing System has been under development at Kennedy Space Center since 1973. A prototype system was developed and delivered to Marshall Space Flight Center for Solid Rocket Booster checkout in July 1976. The first production hardware arrived in late 1976. The System uses a distributed computer network for command and monitoring and is supported by a dual large scale computer system for 'off line' processing. A high level of automation is anticipated for Shuttle and Payload testing and launch operations to gain the advantages of short turnaround capability, repeatability of operations, and minimization of operations and maintenance (O&M) manpower. Learning how to efficiently apply the system is our current problem. We are searching for more effective ways to convey LPS system performance characteristics from the designer to a large number of users. Once we have done this, we can realize the advantages of LPS system design.

Paul, H. C.↗
NASA NTRS1996

The Mars surveyor operations project command generation process

The methods employed by the Mars surveyor operations project (MSOP) flight team to accelerate the command generation process are described. The approach adopted was to develop a ground system which could simultaneously support as many as three spacecraft in various phases of flight and two in development. The uplink element of the MSOP is discussed, including the control of the science instruments and the spacecraft bus using real-time commands as well as time-tagged stored sequences. The non-interactive payload command process, the express command process, the coordinated command process and the stored sequence process are described. The automation of these processes resulted in flight operations cost savings while maintaining a minimum of risk.

Brooks, Robert N., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Operational support considerations in Space Shuttle prelaunch processing

This paper presents an overview of operational support for Space Shuttle payload processing at the John F. Kennedy Space Center. The paper begins with a discussion of the Shuttle payload processing operation itself. It discusses the major organizational roles and describes the two major classes of payload operations: Spacelab mission payload and vertically-installed payload operations. The paper continues by describing the Launch Site Support Team and the Payload Processing Test Team. Specific areas of operational support are then identified including security and access, training, transport and handling, documentation and scheduling. Specific references for further investigatgion are included.

Schuiling, Roelof L.↗
NASA NTRS1975

Verbalization and imagery in the process of formation of operator labor skills

Sensorimotor control tests show that mastering operational skills occurs under conditions that stimulate the operator to independent active analysis and summarization of current information with the goal of clarifying the signs and the integral images that are a model of the situation. Goal directed determination of such an image requires inner and external speech, activates and improves the thinking of the operator, accelerates the training process, increases its effectiveness, and enables the formation of strategies in anticipating the course of events.

Mistyuk, V. V.↗
NASA NTRS1977

Interface design in the process industries

Every operator runs his plant in accord with his own mental model of the process. In this sense, one characteristic of an ideal man-machine interface is that it be in harmony with that model. With this theme in mind, the paper first reviews the functions of the process operator and compares them with human operators involved in control situations previously studied outside the industrial environment (pilots, air traffic controllers, helmsmen, etc.). A brief history of the operator interface in the process industry and the traditional methodology employed in its design is then presented. Finally, a much more fundamental approach utilizing a model definition of the human operator's behavior is presented.

Beaverstock, M. C.↗