Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Mission Assurance Management”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1993

Mission Operations and Command Assurance: Automating an Operations TQM Task

Mission Operations and Command Assurance (MO&CA) is a Total Quality Management (TQM) task on JPL projects to instill quality into mission operations. The mission operations environment is inherently risky because each decision made is potentially mission critical. The flight operations environment generally requires operators to make rapid critical decisions and solve problems based on limited information, while closely following standard procedures. MO&CA's primary goal is to help improve the operational reliability and reduce risk of projects during flight. To achieve this goal, automation of the MO&CA task is required. MO&CA specifically embodies the TQM principle of continuous process improvement (CPI) in which processes are continually examined and analyzed for opportunities for improvement. The second way in which MO&CA implements CPI on JPL projects is on new projects or upgrades to existing projects.

mission↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Students Solving Problems for ISS and Beyond: Inspiring the Next-Generation

Students Solving Problems for ISS and Beyond: Inspiring the Next-Generation Session Title: Students Solving Problems for ISS and Beyond: Inspiring the Next-Generation Session Description: NASA High school students United with NASA to Create Hardware (HUNCH) mission is to empower and inspire students through a Project-Based Learning program where 7-12 grade students learn 21st century skills and can launch their careers through participation in the design and fabrication of real-world valued products for NASA. With six different tracks consisting of Design & Prototype, Culinary Challenge, Softgoods, Precision Machining, Software, and Video Challenge, students are given the opportunity to create solutions for the International Space Station (ISS), the Moon, and beyond. Many projects are requested by the Crew to help ease living conditions, giving students the opportunity to make an impact on the lives of Astronauts. Other projects come directly from NASA and its partners. Join our session to learn how NASA is working with teachers across the country to mentor the next generation of scientists and engineers to solve some of NASA’s greatest challenges. Learning Outcomes: 1. Describe the NASA HUNCH Program, including the program objectives, goals, and strategic partnerships for middle school and high school outreach and advocacy efforts. 2. Identify the innovative strategies NASA is using to work with middle and high school students to solve real-world problems 3. Use the knowledge gained to inspire the next generation of scientists and engineers Session Track: Advocacy & Outreach Specialized Focus Area: Women in Government and Military Learning Level: Foundational Session Format: Listen & Learn Speaker Qualifications: 1. Deboshri Sadhukhan • Current Job Title: Deputy Project Manager • Topic Experience (years of experience related to proposed topic): 1-5 years • Biography: Deboshri Sadhukhan is an engineer for NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC). She has worked on numerous projects — from International Space Station (ISS) fluid technologies, to Orion European Service Module propulsion, to planetary science missions and other game-changing technologies. Her roles have ranged from Project Manager to System Safety Lead. She currently serves as a GRC Regional Mentor for the High school students United with NASA to Create Hardware (HUNCH) program. She also serves as Deputy Project Manager for an ISS payload and Safety & Mission Assurance Lead for a Radioisotope Power Systems project. In these roles, she oversees each phase of a project from beginning to end and provides leadership to increase the reliability, maintainability and system safety of hardware and personnel throughout the system life cycle. She holds a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from The University of Akron. 2. Nancy Hall • Current Job Title: Project Manager • Topic Experience: 20+ years • Biography: Nancy Rabel Hall earned a B.S. degree in Space Sciences from Florida Institute of Technology and a M.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Toledo. She has been at NASA Glenn for over 30 years. She has led several International Space Station experiments that studied how the behavior of fluids and fluid systems behave differently in microgravity as compared to here on Earth. She is also the High school students United with NASA to Create Hardware (HUNCH) project manager, a program that allows students to design and fabricate hardware and softgoods for NASA as well as participate in a culinary and video challenge. She enjoys talking to the public and students about the work being done at NASA as well as showing students how math and science can be fun. She is an amateur radio operator, enjoys playing golf, and reading science fiction and fantasy books.

HUNCH↗
NASA NTRS1993

Mission operations and command assurance - Automating an operations TQM task

A long-term program is in progress at JPL to reduce cost and risk of mission operations through defect prevention and error management. A major element of this program, Mission Operations and Command Assurance (MO&CA), provides a system level function on flight projects to instill quality in mission operations. MO&CA embodies the total quality management TQM principle of continuous process improvement (CPI) and uses CPI in applying automation to mission operations to reduce risk and costs. MO&CA has led efforts to apply and has implemented automation in areas that impact the daily flight project work environment including Incident Surprise Anomaly tracking and reporting; command data verification, tracking and reporting; and command support data usage. MO&CA's future work in automation will take into account that future mission operations systems must be designed to avoid increasing error through the introduction of automation, while adapting to the demands of smaller flight teams.

Welz, Linda↗
NASA NTRS1993

Mission Operations and Command Assurance: Automating an Operations TQM Task

A long-term program is in progress at JPL to reduce cost and risk of mission operations through defect prevention and error management. A major element of this program, Mission Operations and Command Assurance (MO&QA), provides a system level function on flight projects to instill quality in mission operations. MO&CA embodies the Total Quality Management (TQM) principle of Continuous Process Inprovement (CPI) and uses CPI in applying automation to mission operations to reduce risk and costs. MO&CA has led efforts to apply and has implemented automation in areas that impact the daily flight project environment including Incident Surprise Anomoly tracking and reporting; command data verification, tracking, and reporting; and command support data usage. MO&CA's future work in automation will take into account that future missions systems must be designed to avoid increasing error through the introduction of automation, while adapting to the demands of smaller flight teams.

automation↗
NASA NTRS2024

Workshop on the Role of Design Assurance in System-Wide Safety’s Safety Demonstrator Series

This report summarizes a three-hour hybrid in-person/online workshop on June 7, 2024 on the topic of design assurance and the Safety Demonstrator Series (SDS), which was held at NASA Ames Research Center. The SDS provides an operational demonstration of, and recommendations for, requirements and standards necessary to monitor, assess, and mitigate risks to assure safety in disaster-oriented operations. Over sixty NASA personnel participated in the workshop. Four main topics were discussed: (1) assurance needs for the Safety Demonstrator Series, (2) assurance and the In-Time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS), (3) in-time assurance: existing efforts and future opportunities, and (4) demonstrating assurance tools in the Safety Demonstrators. Key takeaways are as follows: 1. Design assurance tools can be used to assure an In-Time Aviation Safety Management System, the systems that comprise it, and other systems or missions. Assurance must consider both systems and components and include the interactions between elements in both a systems/aircraft context and a systems-of-systems/airspace context. 2. Design-time assurance activities can support the identification of monitors needed for operational assurance activities (i.e., the “monitor” function in the monitor-assess-mitigate paradigm at the heart of the IASMS concept). 3. A major opportunity for design-time assurance tools to contribute to the IASMS concept is to support rapid re-validation of systems. This will be particularly important for (1) supporting novel operations in the IASMS, where operational data may disprove design-time assumptions (motivating re-analysis of system safety) and (2) adapting technologies (e.g., AI/ML for autonomous operations) to new operational domains, where there may be new or different safety considerations not included in the initial scope of operations. 4. There are several design assurance tools under development in the System-Wide Safety project that can support assurance of Services, Functions, and Capabilities (SFCs) in the Safety Demonstrators. Transitioning these tools from one-off research projects into a functioning part of IASMS assurance will require closer integration between these tools. 5. It is not clear whether the role of design assurance tools is primarily as a part of IASMS architecture or as an external check on IASMS. The workshop consisted of four discussion topics initiated via four lightning talks by System-Wide Safety researchers. Discussions utilized Mural to engage both in-person and online participants in the hybrid format. Polls and surveys were also utilized to gather participant input. The workshop closed with a reflection activity for participants, as well as new ideas for collaboration and coordination of ongoing System-Wide Safety research.

design assurance↗
NASA NTRS2014

Evaluation of Agency Non-Code Layered Pressure Vessels (LPVs)

In coordination with the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance and the respective Center Pressure System Managers (PSMs), the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) was requested to formulate a consensus draft proposal for the development of additional testing and analysis methods to establish the technical validity, and any limitation thereof, for the continued safe operation of facility non-code layered pressure vessels. The PSMs from each NASA Center were asked to participate as part of the assessment team by providing, collecting, and reviewing data regarding current operations of these vessels. This report contains the outcome of the assessment and the findings, observations, and NESC recommendations to the Agency and individual NASA Centers.

Prosser, William H.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Evaluation of Agency Non-Code Layered Pressure Vessels (LPVs) : Appendices - Volume 2

In coordination with the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance and the respective Center Pressure System Managers (PSMs), the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) was requested to formulate a consensus draft proposal for the development of additional testing and analysis methods to establish the technical validity, and any limitation thereof, for the continued safe operation of facility non-code layered pressure vessels. The PSMs from each NASA Center were asked to participate as part of the assessment team by providing, collecting, and reviewing data regarding current operations of these vessels. This document contains the appendices to the main report.

Prosser, William H.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Evaluation of Agency Non-Code Layered Pressure Vessels (LPVs)

In coordination with the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance and the respective Center Pressure System Managers (PSMs), the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) was requested to formulate a consensus draft proposal for the development of additional testing and analysis methods to establish the technical validity, and any limitation thereof, for the continued safe operation of facility non-code layered pressure vessels. The PSMs from each NASA Center were asked to participate as part of the assessment team by providing, collecting, and reviewing data regarding current operations of these vessels. This report contains the outcome of the assessment and the findings, observations, and NESC recommendations to the Agency and individual NASA Centers.

Prosser, William H.↗
NASA NTRS2023

Propellant Mass Gauging in Microgravity with Electrical Capacitance Tomography

Advancements in microgravity propellant mass gauging will result in improvements to many areas of propellant management, which influences space vehicle performance and mission assurance. Propellant mass gauging technologies designed to work in an accelerated environment, where the propellant remains settled at one end of the propellant tank, do not always work well in a microgravity environment because the propellant is not necessarily settled. While some microgravity mass gauging technologies exist at various stages of development, most of them have major disadvantages. Electrical Capacitance Tomography (ECT) is a sensing technology that is able to reconstruct the liquid distribution inside of a tank, which can then be integrated to obtain mass. While ECT mass gauging will theoretically work during all phases of flight, it had not yet been tested in microgravity. The NASA Kennedy Space Center Launch Services Program, with support from the Flight Opportunities Program, successfully tested an ECT liquid mass gauging system experiment on a parabolic flight aircraft in May 2022. Basics of ECT measurement theory, details of the experiment setup, data processing, ground test results, and the flight test result will be discussed. The results suggest that ECT sensor systems will be useful as a propellant mass gauging technology in both accelerated and microgravity environments.

electrical capacitance tomography↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis Status Tracker for Real-time Awareness

Providers of Verification evidence for the Space Launch System (SLS) Program include Element Offices (SPIE, Stages, Engines, Booster) as well as Disciplines (Vehicle Management / GN&C, Loads & Environments, Safety and Mission Assurance, Systems Engineering, Integrated Avionics Software). These Elements and Disciplines rely on myriad inputs for their compliance evidence, from NASA and contractors alike, spanning testing and analysis to inspection and validation of records such as drawings and reports.

Braxton Lovett↗
NASA NTRS2010

Verification and Implementation of Operations Safety Controls for Flight Missions

There are several engineering disciplines, such as reliability, supportability, quality assurance, human factors, risk management, safety, etc. Safety is an extremely important engineering specialty within NASA, and the consequence involving a loss of crew is considered a catastrophic event. Safety is not difficult to achieve when properly integrated at the beginning of each space systems project/start of mission planning. The key is to ensure proper handling of safety verification throughout each flight/mission phase. Today, Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) operations engineers continue to conduct these flight product reviews across all open flight products. As such, these reviews help ensure that each mission is accomplished with safety requirements along with controls heavily embedded in applicable flight products. Most importantly, the S&MA operations engineers are required to look for important design and operations controls so that safety is strictly adhered to as well as reflected in the final flight product.

Smalls, James R.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Improving operations: Metrics to Results

As a result of the mission failure of the Mars Climate Orbiter (MCO) spacecraft in 1999, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) initiated the development of a Mission Operations Assurance (MOA) program to be implemented across all flight projects managed by JPL. One of the initiatives undertaken in 2001 was the collection of data on command file errors occurring in the operational phase of the mission. This paper defines command file errors and how and where they occur in the operations process. It also describes the problem reporting system (PRS) in use for mission operations at JPL. We examine the recent modifications to the PRS that enable the collection of metrics, specifically on command file errors. This paper discusses what the data show us since metrics have been collected for the operational missions conducted by JPL. We examine the evolution of an operational working group initiative to evaluate proximate, contributing, and root causes for the errors. As part of this discussion we see what the metrics have indicated over a decade. At the macro level, we can say that the aggregate command file error rate has been cut to roughly one third of the initial 2001 level by the end of 2011. Additionally, we explore efficient and innovative means to continually integrate the findings and recommendations from the working group back into the flight operations environment.

command file errors↗
DOE OSTI2024

Digital Assurance for High Consequence Systems: 2024 Mission Campaign White Paper

This Sandia National Laboratories Mission Campaign (MC) seeks to create the technical basis that allows national leaders to efficiently assess and manage the digital assurance of high consequence systems. We will call for transformative research that enables efficient (1) development of provably secure systems and secure integration of untrusted products, (2) intelligent threat mitigation, and (3) digital risk-informed engineering trade-offs. Ultimately, this MC will impact multiple national security missions; it will develop an informed Digital Assurance for High Consequence Systems (DAHCS) community and expand Sandia partnerships to build this national capability.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Implementing an Objectives-Driven, Risk-Informed, and Case-Assured Approach to Safety and Mission Success at NASA

NASA is developing a “Standard for Assurance of Space Flight Safety and Mission Success” that implements an objectives-driven, risk-informed, and case-assured approach to safety and mission success (S&MS) for NASA space flight programs and projects. The standard aligns with the philosophy of risk leadership that has recently been established in NASA policy to assure acceptable levels of flight crew safety and mission success risk. It is consistent with existing NASA risk management requirements and is compatible with NASA program management and systems engineering requirements. The methodology described in the standard is presented in terms of an S&MS assurance framework that is designed to allow substantial flexibility in the specific means by which programs and projects achieve acceptable mission S&MS risk. Such flexibility is necessary to accommodate the increasingly broad range of acquisition strategies employed by NASA, including commercial transportation services, as well as to accommodate the increasingly rapid evolution of space flight-related technologies and practices. A key feature of the S&MS assurance framework is the specification of S&MS success criteria for each life-cycle review (LCR). The S&MS assurance case is structured around these criteria, the satisfaction of which indicates that the program/project is adhering to the S&MS risk posture. This enables the evolving S&MS assurance case to be used as a fundamental program/project submittal at each LCR, where its inherent structure of argument, supported by evidence, directly supports the evaluation of the program/project with respect to the S&MS success criteria, and by extension, the S&MS risk posture. As such, the S&MS assurance case is integral to program/project systems engineering, risk management, and S&MS oversight activities, and provides the principal basis for S&MS risk acceptance by the Decision Authority throughout the program/project life cycle.

Risk Posture↗
DOE OSTI2024

Implementing an Objectives-Driven, Risk-Informed, and Case-Assured Approach to Safety and Mission Success at NASA

NASA is developing a “Standard for Assurance of Space Flight Safety and Mission Success” that implements an objectives-driven, risk-informed, and case-assured approach to safety and mission success (S&MS) for NASA space flight programs and projects. The standard aligns with the philosophy of risk leadership that has recently been established in NASA policy to assure acceptable levels of flight crew safety and mission success risk. It is consistent with existing NASA risk management requirements and is compatible with NASA program management and systems engineering requirements. The methodology described in the standard is presented in terms of an S&MS assurance framework that is designed to allow substantial flexibility in the specific means by which programs and projects achieve acceptable mission S&MS risk. Such flexibility is necessary to accommodate the increasingly broad range of acquisition strategies employed by NASA, including commercial transportation services, as well as to accommodate the increasingly rapid evolution of space flight-related technologies and practices. A key feature of the S&MS assurance framework is the specification of S&MS success criteria for each life-cycle review (LCR). The S&MS assurance case is structured around these criteria, the satisfaction of which indicates that the program/project is adhering to the S&MS risk posture. This enables the evolving S&MS assurance case to be used as a fundamental program/project submittal at each LCR, where its inherent structure of argument, supported by evidence, directly supports the evaluation of the program/project with respect to the S&MS success criteria, and by extension, the S&MS risk posture. As such, the S&MS assurance case is integral to program/project systems engineering, risk management, and S&MS oversight activities, and provides the principal basis for S&MS risk acceptance by the Decision Authority throughout the program/project life cycle.

42 ENGINEERING↗