Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Programming”

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 523 records · Page 29
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2016

Direct Feed Low Activity Waste Program Integration - 16638

The mission of Program Integration is to champion and steer the development and implementation of common and consistent programs between the Tank Operating Contract (TOC) contractor and the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) contractor. TOC is managed by Washington River Protection Solutions LLC (WRPS) and WTP is managed by Bechtel National, Inc. (BNI). The DOE Office of River Protection (DOE ORP) is the Program Owner. WRPS has been actively managing the TOC at the Hanford Site Tank Farms (TF) since 2008. Programs are already developed, verified, and in use for the TOC, whereas WTP is still in the construction phase. WTP Programs are established for construction only, but not developed for commissioning and future operations. An extensive effort is underway at WTP to develop commissioning programs. In order to drive consistency and minimize differences in program requirements between TF, which will feed the tank waste, and WTP, which will receive and treat the tank waste, DOE-ORP requires the two contractors to integrate and collaborate in program development. Advantages of integration are: - Achieves cost and time savings as WTP is able to review existing TOC programs as starting points in development of its programs. - Promotes interfaces with industry counterparts to share experiences, issues, and lessons learned. ? Minimizes difference in program requirements between the companies. - Helps prepare for and ultimately succeed in Operational Readiness Reviews (ORR). Program Integration is a priority for TOC and WTP, and in order to maintain the focus and drive to this effort, a unified One System Program Integration Council (OSPIC) was created in 2012. Membership of the OSPIC consists of senior managers from both companies and the OSPIC chair's report directly to their respective President. Thirty (30) programs are subject to integration, including but not limited to Conduct of Operations, Worker Safety and Health, Quality Assurance, Contractor Assurance, and Environmental Management. Progress of program development and integration efforts are tracked and monitored, and barriers to integration are resolved in a collaborative fashion within both companies. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS1992

NASA aerospace pyrotechnically actuated systems: Program plan

The NASA Aerospace Pyrotechnically Actuated Systems (PAS) Program, a focused technology program, is being initiated to enhance the reliability, safety, and performance of pyrotechnically actuated systems. In broad terms, this Program Plan presents the approach that helps to resolve concerns raised by the NASA/DOD/DOE Aerospace Pyrotechnic Steering Committee. This Plan reflects key efforts needed in PAS technology. The resources committed to implement the Program will be identified in the Program Implementation Plan (PIP). A top level schedule is included along with major Program milestones and products. Responsibilities are defined in the PIP. The Plan identifies the goals and detailed objectives which define how those goals are to be accomplished. The Program will improve NASA's capabilities to design, develop, manufacture, and test pyrotechnically actuated systems for NASA's programs. Program benefits include the following: advanced pyrotechnic systems technology developed for NASA programs; hands-on pyrotechnic systems expertise; quick response capability to investigate and resolve pyrotechnic problems; enhanced communications and intercenter support among the technical staff; and government-industry PAS technical interchange. The PAS Program produces useful products that are of a broad-based technology nature rather than activities intended to meet specific technology objectives for individual programs. Serious problems have occurred with pyrotechnic devices although near perfect performance is demanded by users. The lack of a program to address those problems in the past is considered a serious omission. The nature of problems experienced as revealed by a survey are discussed and the origin of the program is explained.

Schulze, Norman R.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Space Discovery: Teaching with Space. Evaluation: Summer, Fall 1998 Programs

This is the final report of the 1998 NASA-sponsored evaluation of the effectiveness of the United States Space Foundation's five-day Space Discovery Standard Graduate Course (Living and Working in Space), the five-day Space Discovery Advanced Graduate Course (Advanced Technology and Biomedical Research), the five-day introductory course Aviation and Space Basics all conducted during the summer of 1998, and the Teaching with Space two-day Inservice program. The purpose of the program is to motivate and equip K- 12 teachers to use proven student-attracting space and technology concepts to support standard curriculum. These programs support the America 2000 National Educational Goals, encouraging more students to stay in school, increase in competence, and have a better opportunity to be attracted to math and science. The 1998 research program continues the comprehensive evaluation begun in 1992, this year studying five summer five-day sessions and five Inservice programs offered during the Fall of 1998 in California, Colorado, New York, and Virginia. A comprehensive research design by Dr. Robert Ewell of Creative Solutions and Dr. Darwyn Linder of Arizona State University evaluated the effectiveness of various areas of the program and its applicability on diverse groups. Preliminary research methodology was a set of survey instruments administered after the courses, and another to be sent in April-4-5 months following the last inservice involved in this study. This year, we have departed from this evaluation design in two ways. First, the five-day programs used NASA's new EDCATS on-line system and associated survey rather than the Linder/Ewell instruments. The Inservice programs were evaluated using the previously developed survey adapted for Inservice programs. Second, we did not do a follow-on survey of the teachers after they had been in the field as we have done in the past. Therefore, this evaluation captures only the reactions of the teachers to the programs immediately after the instruction. Although EDCATS is designed for teachers to enter their data logged onto the appropriate internet web site, most surveys were completed on a printed copy and entered into the EDCATS system by USSF personnel. The Aviation and Space Basics class were taken to a computer lab where they responded to the survey on-line. Data from the Inservice surveys were manually entered into a computer spreadsheet program by US Space Foundation personnel and processed using the statistical program SPSS for Windows. The raw data and copy of the EDCATS survey for the five-day programs are in Appendix 1. The raw data and copy of the Inservice survey are in Appendix 2. Comments from both programs are in Appendices 3 and 4, respectively.

Ewell, Bob↗
NASA NTRS2004

Initiating the 2002 Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) Technology Program

The Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) Project is an aggressive mission launching in 2009 to investigate the Martian environment and requires new capabilities that are currently are not available. The MSL Technology Program is developing a wide-range of technologies needed for this Mission and potentially other space missions. The MSL Technology Program reports to both the MSL Project and the Mars Technology Program (MTP). The dual reporting process creates a challenging management situation, but ensures the new technology meets both the specific MSL requirements and the broader Mars Program requirements. MTP is a NASA-wide technology development program managed by JPL and is divided into a Focused Program and a Base Program. The MSL Technology Program is under the focused program and is tightly coupled to MSL's mission milestones and deliverables. The technology budget is separate from the flight Project budget, but the technology's requirements and the development process are tightly coordinated with the Project. The MSL Technology Program combines the proven management techniques of flight projects with the commercial technology management strategies of industry and academia, to create a technology management program that meets the short-term requirements of MSL and the long-term requirements of MTP. This paper examines the initiation of 2002 MSL Technology program. Some of the areas discussed in this paper include technology definition, task selection, technology management, and technology assessment. This paper also provides an update of the 2003 MSL technology program and examines some of the drivers that changed the program from its initiation.

Caffrey, Robert T.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Initiating the 2002 Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) Focused Technology Program

The Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) Project is an aggressive mission launching in 2009 to deliver a new generation of rover safely to the surface of Mars and conduct comprehensive in situ investigations using a new generation of instruments. This system will be designed to land with precision and be capable of operating over a large percentage on the surface of Mars. It will have capabilities that will support NASA's scientific goals into the next decade of exphation. The MSL Technology program is developing a wide-range of technologies needed for this Mission and potentially other space missions. The MSL Technology Program reports to both the MSL Project and the Mars Technology Program (MTP). The dual reporting process creates a challenging management situation, but ensures the new technology meets both the specific MSL requirements and the broader Mars Program requirements. MTP is a NASA-wide technology development program managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and is divided into a Focused Program and a Base Program. The Focused Technology Program addresses technologies that are specific and critical to near-term missions, while the Base Technology Program addresses those technologies that are applicable to multiple missions and which can be characterized as longer term, higher risk, and high payoff technologies. The MSL Technology Program is under the Focused Program and is tightly coupled to MSL's mission milestones and deliverables. The technology budget is separate from the flight Project budget, but the technology s requirements and the development process are tightly coordinated with the Project. The Technology Program combines proven management techniques of flight projects with commercial and academic technology management strategies, to create a technology management program that meets the near-term requirements of MSL and the long-term requirements of MTP. This paper examines the initiation of 2002 MSL Technology program. Some of the areas discussed in this paper include technology definition, task selection, technology management, and technology assessment.

Caffrey, Robert T.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Bolt Analysis Program

In designing and testing bolted joints there are multiple parameters to be considered and calculations that must be performed to predict the joint behavior. Each different set of parameters may call for a different set of equations. Determining every parameter in each bolted joint is impractical and in many cases impossible. On the other hand, it is much easier to reduce these calculations to a universal set that can be used for all bolted joints. This is the purpose of the Bolt Analysis Program. My project under the Mechanical and Rotating Systems branch of the Engineering Development and Analysis Division was to take the Bolt Analysis Program Version 2.0 and update the program to a modem and user-friendly format. Version 2.0 of the Bolt Analysis Program is a useful program, but lacks the dynamic capabilities that are needed for current applications. Version 2.0 of the Bolt Analysis Program was written in 1993 using the Pascal programming language in a DOS format. This program allows you to input data in a step-by-step format, calculates the data, and then on a final screen displays the input and the output fiom the calculations. Version 2.0 is still applicable for all bolted joint anaiysis, but has updates that are desired. First, the program runs in DOS format. With the applications available today, my mentor decided it would be best to update the program into Excel using Visual Basic for Applications (VBA). This would allow the program to have multiple Graphical User Interfaces (GUI s) while retaining all functions of the previous program. Version 2.0 only allows you to input data in a step-by-step process. If you make a mistake and need to go back, you must run through the entire program before you can return to fix your error. This becomes tedious when needing to change one parameter or test multiple sets of data. In Version 3.0, the program allows you to enter and change data at any time while displaying real-time output data. If you realize an error, it is as simple as scrolling back to your mistake and changing the data. Additional information is included in the original extended abstract.

Travis, Brandon E.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Infusing Stretch Goal Requirements into the Constellation Program

In 2004, the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE) was announced by the United States President's Administration in an effort to explore space and to extend a human presence across our solar system. Subsequently, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) established the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) to develop a constellation of new capabilities, supporting technologies, and foundational research that allows for the sustained and affordable exploration of space. Then, ESMD specified the primary mission for the Constellation Program to carry out a series of human expeditions, ranging from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) to the surface of Moon, Mars, and beyond for the purposes of conducting human exploration of space. Thus, the Constellation Program was established at the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (JSC) to manage the development of the flight and ground infrastructure and systems that can enable continued and extended human access to space. Constellation Program's "Design Objectives" call for an early attention to the program's life cycle costs management through the Program's Need, Goals, and Objectives (NGO) document, which provides the vision, scope, and key areas of focus for the Program. One general policy of the Constellation Program, found in the Constellation Architecture Requirements Document (CARD), states: "A sustainable program hinges on how effectively total life cycle costs are managed. Developmental costs are a key consideration, but total life cycle costs related to the production, processing, and operation of the entire architecture must be accounted for in design decisions sufficiently to ensure future resources are available for ever more ambitious missions into the solar system....It is the intent of the Constellation Program to aggressively manage this aspect of the program using the design policies and simplicity." To respond to the Program's strong desire to manage the program life cycle costs, special efforts were established to identify operability requirements to influence flight vehicle and ground infrastructure design in order to impact the life cycle operations costs, and stretch goal requirements were introduced to the Program. This paper will describe how these stretch goal requirements were identified, developed, refined, matured, approved, and infused into the CARD. The paper will also document several challenges encountered when infusing the stretch goal requirements into the Constellation Program.

Operability↗
DOE OSTI2018

Transition of Site Programs and Implementation of Decommissioning Agent Oversight - 18653

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS), acting as the Decommissioning Agent (DA), retained its NRC License and contracted a Decommissioning General Contractor (DGC) to manage plant programs and execute the Demolition and Dismantlement (D and D) of the site. To support this effort, over twenty-one programs transitioned to the DGC, including Occupational Health and Safety, Radiation Protection, Maintenance, and Engineering. In addition, SONGS effected a cultural shift from an operating station performing work to one of overseeing it. The framework and road map for this kind of D and D model is new to the industry. This presentation shares the SONGS' experience and lessons learned associated with this transition. SONGS and the DGC entered an Agreement that established the contractual requirements and responsibilities of the parties, the Scope of Work, and the mechanisms to ensure effective transition of DA programs. As a part of defining the Scope of Work, the contract established functional areas and divisions of responsibilities divided into the roles of Governance, Oversight, Support, and Performance (GOSP). SONGS, as the site licensee, retained the Oversight Role, with exception of those areas that, as the licensee, would be considered 'non-transferrable'. Examples of those programs were Quality Assurance, Regulatory Affairs and the Employee Concerns Program. While the Company retained responsibility for those programs the DGC developed their own 'parallel' programs that the Company provided Oversight for. In 2017, SONGS completed program transition within one-year following the notice-to-proceed. The overall strategy was driven by three high-level principles: - Allow the DGC the most unfettered execution of the Scope of Work with limited interference and maximum self-governance. With the overriding principle that transitioned programs have a direct link to a basis in regulation or law. - Identify safety and compliance risks, and then bridge the transition of programs from the SONGS to the DGC such that identified risks are minimized and/or mitigated. - Allow the SONGS organization to transition from a Performance role to a primarily Oversight role as the DA. Working collaboratively with the DGC, programs were strategically grouped and sequenced for turnover. Central to the success of transition was fostering a collaborative environment with the DGC, facilitating knowledge transfer, applying schedule rigor, and keeping the team horizontally and vertically aligned to management expectations. SONGS achieved this alignment by embedding the formal process with management expectations for review and acceptance of proposed programs. SONGS' transitioned core programs to a general contractor and transition from a 'perform' organization to an 'oversight' organization. Lessons learned from this experience may benefit other nuclear generating station owners currently evaluating options for site D and D. (author)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Use of Historical EM Practices and Policies for Management of Cleanup Program and Address GAO Concerns - 20222

As Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Management (EM) program policies and management practices are revised over time, it might be useful to periodically reflect on the DOE EM program's past to identify practices that have worked and those that might be appropriate for possible reuse in the future. An added impetus to examine alternative approaches is the recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report entitled 'Nuclear Waste Cleanup - DOE Could Improve Program and Project Management by Better Classifying Work and Following Leading Practices.' The February 2019 GAO report states that EM categorizes most of its work in a way that does not adequately involve independent experts and DOE senior leadership. It also noted that EM has not followed leading practices for program and project management that could help keep the cleanup efforts on schedule and control costs. The GAO report recommended that EM, working with DOE Office of Project Management (PM): - Establish requirements and then assess EM's ongoing operations activities to determine if some activities should be reclassified as capital asset projects based on these newly established requirements. - Review and revise EM's 2017 cleanup policy to include program management leading practices related to scope, cost, schedule performance, and independent reviews. - Update the cleanup policy to require that earned value management (EVM) systems be maintained and used in a way that follows EVM best practices. - Develop a policy to ensure that work is categorized as level of effort (LOE) only in appropriate, specified circumstances, such as when work is not measurable or when measurement is impractical. - Integrate EVM data into EM's performance metrics for operations activities. To assist with improving program performance and implementing audit recommendations, this paper reviewed past successful cleanups such as Weldon Springs, Rocky Flats, Fernald, Ashtabula, Battelle Columbus (abs, and other historical resources and people with experience during the early years of EM program. As such, there are several past practices which may well be suited for reuse today. Some of these practices include: - In 1990's, as the DOE EM cleanup program, known as Environmental Restoration came into effect, the known cleanup scope at each geographic location or site was organized into four levels ranging from overall site-wide cleanup effort to the individual 'release sites', providing high granularity to the program. - The cleanup program was organized by geography (Northwest, Southwest, Eastern Area Programs, etc.). These 'sub-program' managers provided a degree of Headquarters oversight and management allowing upper management (EM-1, 2, and 3) to focus on major decisions and issues. - Budget levels at selected cleanup sites were funded above 'minimum-safety' levels to accelerate actual cleanup work. - Past practice utilized EVM techniques and uniform EM oversight over all discrete project-like activities, providing for a coordinated cleanup effort. - EM managed LOE activities using benchmarking and best in class management practice techniques to help manage costs. - EM managed and reviewed entire site cleanup baselines, not only individual projects, focusing on a successful overall outcome. - Sites had a 'Road map' or 'Management Action Plan' that provided the overall strategy or plan for that site's cleanup - this helped with understanding and coordination of efforts. - EM had a robust lessons-learned program and database to capture and transmit worthy ideas. - EM had well-structured cleanup baseline change control policies to control cost and schedule changes, at the contractor and higher Headquarters levels. Finally, some of the GAO observations may be valid, however it is not clear as to their extent. For example, for some operation types of work, the use of the Level of Effort (LOE) earned value method to track progress may be appropriate. Also, to ensure independence of thought, and to obtain useful insight on past practices, it may be suitable to have former EM employees to assist with understanding past practices or to verify that activities have been properly identified. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS1989

Comparison study of gear dynamic computer programs at NASA Lewis Research Center

A comparison study was performed on four gear dynamic analysis computer programs developed under NASA/Army sponsorship. These programs are GRDYNMULT (a multimesh program applicable to a number of epicyclic systems), TELSGE (a single mesh program), PGT (a multimesh program applicable to a planetary system with three planets), and DANST (a single mesh program). The capabilities and features, input and output options, and technical aspects of the programs were reviewed and compared. Results are presented in a concise tabular form. Parametric studies of the program models were performed to investigate the predicted results of the programs as input parameters such as speed, torque, and mesh damping were varied. In general, the program models predicted similar dynamic load and stress levels as operating conditions were varied. Flash temperature predictions from programs GRDYNMULT and TELSGE indicated similar trends; however, actual values were not in close agreement. The program GRDYNMULT was found to be the most versatile in system size, type, and analysis capabilities. The programs DANST, TELSGE, and PGT are more specialized for specific systems; however, in specific areas they provide a more detailed treatment than GRDYNMULT.

Zakrajsek, James J.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Transformational derivation of programs using the Focus system

A program derivation support system called Focus is being constructed. It will formally derive programs using the paradigm of program transformation. The following issues are discussed: (1) the integration of validation and program derivation activities in the Focus system; (2) its tree-based user interface; (3) the control of search spaces in program derivation; and (4) the structure and organization of program derivation records. The inference procedures of the system are based on the integration of functional and logic programming principles. This brings about a synthesis of paradigms that were heretofore considered far apart, such as logical and executable specifications and constructive and transformational approaches to program derivation. A great emphasis has been placed, in the design of Focus, on achieving small search spaces during program derivation. The program manipulation operations such as expansion, simplification and rewriting were designed with this objective. The role of operations that are expensive in search spaces, such as folding, has been reduced. Program derivations are documented in Focus in a way that the high level descriptions of derivations are expressed only using program level information. All the meta-level information, together with dependencies between derivations of program components, is automatically recorded by the system at a lower level of description for its own use in replay.

Reddy, Uday S.↗
NASA NTRS1992

The 1992 NASA/ASEE Summer Faculty Fellowship Program

This is the administrative report for the 1992 NASA/ASEE Summer Faculty Fellowship Program which was held at the George C. Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) for the 28th consecutive year. The nominal starting and finishing dates for the ten week program were June 1, 1992 through August 7, 1992. The program was sponsored by NASA Headquarters, Washington, D.C., and operated under the auspices of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). The program was one of eight such programs at eight NASA centers sponsored and funded by NASA Headquarters. The basic objectives of the program are the following: (1) to further the professional knowledge of qualified engineering and science faculty members; (2) to stimulate an exchange of ideas between participants and NASA; (3) to enrich and refresh the research and teaching activities at the participants' institutions; and (4) to contribute to the research objectives of the NASA centers. The major activities of the 1992 program were the following: (1) recruitment, selection, and assignment of faculty fellows; (2) research performed by the participants in collaboration with the MSFC colleague; (3) a seminar and tour program aimed at providing information concerning activities at MSFC; (4) an activities program of a social/non-technical nature aimed at providing the fellows and their families a means of learning about the MSFC/Huntsville area; and (5) preparation of a volume containing the written reports of the details of the research performed by each of the summer faculty. The success of the 1992 program activities in meeting the stated objectives was measured through questionnaires, which were filled out by participants and their MSFC colleagues. The following sections describe the major activities in more detail and the results of the questionnaires are summarized showing that the 1992 program was highly successful. This year's program also included 19 participants in the Summer Teacher Enrichment Program (STEP) which is comprised of middle school and high school math and science teachers.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1993

The ParaScope parallel programming environment

The ParaScope parallel programming environment, developed to support scientific programming of shared-memory multiprocessors, includes a collection of tools that use global program analysis to help users develop and debug parallel programs. This paper focuses on ParaScope's compilation system, its parallel program editor, and its parallel debugging system. The compilation system extends the traditional single-procedure compiler by providing a mechanism for managing the compilation of complete programs. Thus, ParaScope can support both traditional single-procedure optimization and optimization across procedure boundaries. The ParaScope editor brings both compiler analysis and user expertise to bear on program parallelization. It assists the knowledgeable user by displaying and managing analysis and by providing a variety of interactive program transformations that are effective in exposing parallelism. The debugging system detects and reports timing-dependent errors, called data races, in execution of parallel programs. The system combines static analysis, program instrumentation, and run-time reporting to provide a mechanical system for isolating errors in parallel program executions. Finally, we describe a new project to extend ParaScope to support programming in FORTRAN D, a machine-independent parallel programming language intended for use with both distributed-memory and shared-memory parallel computers.

Cooper, Keith D.↗
NASA NTRS1995

Minority Engineering Program Pipeline: A Proposal to Increase Minority Student Enrollment and Retention in Engineering

The Cleveland State University Minority Engineering Program Pipeline consist of programs which foster engineering career awareness, academic enrichment, and professional development for historically underrepresented minority studies. The programs involved are the Access to Careers in Engineering (ACE) Program for high school pre-engineering students: the LINK Program for undergraduate students pursuing degree which include engineering; and the PEP (Pre-calculus Enrichment Program) and EPIC (Enrichment Program in Calculus) mathematics programs for undergraduate academic enrichment. The pipeline is such that high school graduates from the ACE Program who enroll at Cleveland State University in pursuit of engineering degrees are admitted to the LINK Program for undergraduate level support. LINK Program students are among the minority participants who receive mathematics enrichment through the PEP and EPIC Programs for successful completion of their engineering required math courses. THese programs are interdependent and share the goal of preparing minority students for engineering careers by enabling them to achieve academically and obtain college degree and career related experience.

Charity, Pamela C.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Institute for Scientific and Educational Technology (ISET)-Education, Research and Training Programs in Engineering and Sciences

The 'Institute for Scientific and Educational Technology' has been established to provide a mechanism through which universities and other research organizations may cooperate with one another and with different government agencies and industrial organizations to further and promote research, education, and training programs in science, engineering, and related fields. This effort has been undertaken consistent with the national vision to 'promote excellence in America s educational system through enhancing and expanding scientific and technological competence.' The specific programs are directed in promoting and achieving excellence for individuals at all levels (elementary and secondary schools, undergraduate and graduate education, and postdoctoral and faculty research). The program is consistent with the existing activities of the Institute for Computational and Applied Mechanics (ICAM) and the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) at NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC). The efforts will be directed to embark on other research, education, and training activities in various fields of engineering, scientific, and educational technologies. The specific objectives of the present program may be outlined briefly as follows: 1) Cooperate in the various research, education, and technology programs of the Office of Education at LaRC. 2) Develop procedures for interactions between precollege, college, and graduate students, and between faculty and students at all levels. 3) Direct efforts to increase the participation by women and minorities in educational programs at all levels. 4) Enhance existing activities of ICAM and ASEE in education, research, and training of graduate students and faculty. 5) Invite distinguished scholars as appropriate and consistent with ISET goals to spend their summers and/or sabbaticals at NASA Langley andor ODU and interact with different researchers and graduate students. Perform research and administrative activities as needed to carry out the above mentioned activities. 6) The implementation of various activities of the ISET programs is carried out through cooperative efforts between Old Dominion University (ODU) and the Office of Education at LaRC. At present, major efforts are directed on the following ISET Programs: ICAM Programs, Academic Programs, Educational Research, Outreach Programs, Educational Technology and Cooperative Programs. These programs are described in the following sections.

Tiwari, S. N.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Aspect-Oriented Programming

Computer science has experienced an evolution in programming languages and systems from the crude assembly and machine codes of the earliest computers through concepts such as formula translation, procedural programming, structured programming, functional programming, logic programming, and programming with abstract data types. Each of these steps in programming technology has advanced our ability to achieve clear separation of concerns at the source code level. Currently, the dominant programming paradigm is object-oriented programming - the idea that one builds a software system by decomposing a problem into objects and then writing the code of those objects. Such objects abstract together behavior and data into a single conceptual and physical entity. Object-orientation is reflected in the entire spectrum of current software development methodologies and tools - we have OO methodologies, analysis and design tools, and OO programming languages. Writing complex applications such as graphical user interfaces, operating systems, and distributed applications while maintaining comprehensible source code has been made possible with OOP. Success at developing simpler systems leads to aspirations for greater complexity. Object orientation is a clever idea, but has certain limitations. We are now seeing that many requirements do not decompose neatly into behavior centered on a single locus. Object technology has difficulty localizing concerns invoking global constraints and pandemic behaviors, appropriately segregating concerns, and applying domain-specific knowledge. Post-object programming (POP) mechanisms that look to increase the expressiveness of the OO paradigm are a fertile arena for current research. Examples of POP technologies include domain-specific languages, generative programming, generic programming, constraint languages, reflection and metaprogramming, feature-oriented development, views/viewpoints, and asynchronous message brokering. (Czarneclu and Eisenecker s book includes a good survey of many of these technologies).

Elrad, Tzilla↗
NASA NTRS2007

Science and the Constellation Systems Program Office

An underlying tension has existed throughout the history of NASA between the human spaceflight programs and the external scientific constituencies of the robotic exploration programs. The large human space projects have been perceived as squandering resources that might otherwise be utilized for scientific discoveries. In particular, the history of the relationship of science to the International Space Station Program has not been a happy one. The leadership of the Constellation Program Office, created in NASA in October, 2005, asked me to serve on the Program Manager s staff as a liaison to the science community. Through the creation of my position, the Program Manager wanted to communicate and elucidate decisions inside the program to the scientific community and, conversely, ensure that the community had a voice at the highest levels within the program. Almost all of my technical contributions at NASA, dating back to the Apollo Program, has been within the auspices of what is now known as the Science Mission Directorate. However, working at the Johnson Space Center, where human spaceflight is the principal activity, has given me a good deal of incidental contact and some more direct exposure through management positions to the structures and culture of human spaceflight programs. I entered the Constellation family somewhat naive but not uninformed. In addition to my background in NASA science, I have also written extensively over the past 25 years on the topic of human exploration of the Moon and Mars. (See, for example, Mendell, 1985). I have found that my scientific colleagues generally have little understanding of the structure and processes of a NASA program office; and many of them do not recognize the name, Constellation. In many respects, the international ILEWG community is better informed. Nevertheless, some NASA decision processes on the role of science, particularly with respect to the formulation of a lunar surface architecture, are not well known, even in ILEWG. At the recent annual Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, I reviewed the evolution of the program as a function of Agency leadership and the constraints put on NASA by the President in his 2004 announcement. I plan to continue my long-time ILEWG tradition of reporting a personal view of the state of development of human exploration of the solar system, this time coming from within the program office tasked to implement the vision for the United States. The current NASA implementation of the Vision for Space Exploration is consistent with certain classical scenarios that have been discussed extensively in the literature. I will discuss the role of science within the Vision, both from official policy and from a de facto interaction. While science goals are not officially driving the implementation of the Vision, the tools of scientific exploration are integral to defining the extraterrestrial design environments. In this respect the sharing of results from international missions to the Moon can make significant contributions to the success of the future human activities.

Mendell, Wendell↗
NASA NTRS2024

Moon to Mars (M2M) Cross Program Utilization Payload Safety Process

It is the goal of Moon to Mars (M2M) to establish a single consolidated set of safety requirements and a safety review process for utilization payloads that will cross program vehicle hatches or operate externally on multiple program vehicles during transport or operation that satisfies Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Orion, EVA, and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP), Gateway (GW), and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. This document defines the Cross Program Utilization Payload (xPUP) safety review process for mission effectivity of Artemis III and beyond. This review process will help ensure protection of the overall Moon to Mars integrated system from potential hazards created by cross program payloads that either cross a program vehicle hatch or can interface with more than one M2M lunar exploration program vehicle. The process will identify payload hazards and controls that will protect ground personnel, flight crew, the integrated vehicle, ground equipment, or facilities. This process is also applicable to samples that cross hatches between vehicles including for return to Earth. The xPUP safety review process will be led by one of the M2M programs' integration safety panels, chosen on a per-payload basis. After the lead integration safety panel is determined, the common safety process is established, based on pre-determined criteria, which includes ad-hoc members from other stakeholder programs. Stakeholder programs are those that interface with the utilization payload in any way (e.g., operating on a lunar exploration vehicle or crossing program vehicle hatches). The xPUP will execute this safety review process for flight and ground utilization payload hardware design, its ground support equipment, and landing and recovery in accordance with the applicable safety requirements as specified in M2M-30043: Moon to Mars Cross Program Utilization Payload Safety Requirements. The xPUP safety process will follow the lead integration safety panel’s safety process requirements. Formal agreements will be communicated with the payload developer using the payload integration processes documented in M2M-30037, Artemis Payload Integration Implementation Plan.

payloads↗