Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “NASA Process Requirements”

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 NTRSDate not supplied

Implementation of Human Systems Integration Technical and Management Process for the Lunar Gateway Program

NASA recognizes Human Systems Integration (HSI) as part of the overall systems engineering and acquisition strategy for space systems. The Lunar Gateway Program is implementing HSI technical and management process across the lifecycle of the mission, as required by NPR 7123.1C NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements, and led by the Gateway HSI team as required by NPR 8705.2C Human-Rating Requirements for Space Systems, now HEOMD-003 Crewed Deep Space Systems Human Rating Certification Requirements and Standards for NASA Missions. NASA has been using HSI principles for many years and has applied them to many of its previous human spaceflight Programs. As NASA returns to the Moon in a more sustainable manner, the Gateway Program is maturing the application of HSI by implementing it more visibly as part of Artemis, with guidance from the NASA/SP-20210010952 NASA HSI Handbook. This paper discusses how HSI is being implemented in the Gateway Program, challenges faced with its implementation during the development phase, and strategies/approaches used to overcome those. The paper also covers HSI implementation for flight systems, vehicle processing, and interfaces across the six identified NASA HSI Domains: human factors engineering, operations, safety, training, maintainability and supportability, habitability and environment. The goal is to provide an overview of the implementation process of HSI in the Gateway Program as an example for other Programs/Projects/Missionsthat are looking to implement HSI.

Jackelynne Silva-Martinez↗
NASA NTRS2021

NASA Human Systems Integration Handbook

This handbook is intended to provide general guidance and information on Human Systems Integration (HSI) for the NASA community and the applicability of HSI to NASA programs and projects. The primary goals are to increase awareness and consistency across the Agency, advance the practice and implementation of HSI principles, and provide invaluable information and guidance to HSI practitioners in the performance of their duties. Specific aims of this handbook are to define HSI, illustrate the value of HSI in programmatic decisions, demonstrate how HSI fits into the NASA project life cycle process, describe how HSI applies across all three NASA Technical Authorities, provide guidance on HSI processes and products, and provide helpful information on HSI resources within the NASA community. Largely within the engineering community, a system is thought of as the integration or assemblance of hardware and software that together perform a function. HSI considers a system to be the integration of hardware, software, humans, data, and processes, where the human in HSI refers to all personnel involved with a given system, including system owners, users/customers, operators, maintainers, assemblers, support personnel, logistics suppliers, training personnel, test personnel, and others. This handbook should be used as a companion for implementing NPR 7123.1, Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements, the NASA Systems Engineering Handbook, NASA directives, and any Center-specific handbooks and directives developed for implementing programs and projects. As of 2021, both NPR 7123.1 and NPR 7120.5 require HSI to be implemented within NASA technical efforts.

Lisa O Rippy↗
NASA NTRS2007

POLARIS: Helping Managers Get Answers Fast!

This viewgraph presentation reviews the Project Online Library and Resource Information System (POLARIS) system. It is NASA-wide, web-based system, providing access to information related to Program and Project Management. It will provide a one-stop shop for access to: a searchable, sortable database of all requirements for all product lines, project life cycle diagrams with reviews, project life cycle diagrams with reviews, project review definitions with products review information from NPR 7123.1, NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements, templates and examples of products, project standard WBSs with dictionaries, and requirements for implementation and approval, information from NASA s Metadata Manager (MdM): Attributes of Missions, Themes, Programs & Projects, NPR7120.5 waiver form and instructions and much more. The presentation reviews the plans and timelines for future revisions and modifications.

program management↗
NASA NTRS1976

Efficient detection, analysis and classification of lightning radiation fields

Modeling the large scale lightning flash structure is considered. Large scale flash data has been measured from strip charts of storms of August 5, August 26, and September 12, 1975. The data is being processed by a computer program called SASEV to estimate the large scale flash statistics. The program, experimental results, and conclusions for the large scale flash structure are described. The progress made in examining the internal flash structure consists mainly of developing the software required to process the NASA digital tape data. A FORTRAN program has been written for the statistical analysis of series of events. The statistics computed and tests performed are found to be particularly useful in the analysis of lightning data.

Harger, R. O.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA CARA Prelaunch Analysis and Process

NASA implemented an official Procedural Requirement (NPR) 8079.1 in June 2023, establishing the minimum collision avoidance requirements and associated operational protocols for NASA space flight programs, projects, and spacecraft to protect the space environment by reducing the risk of collision to an acceptable level. Part of the requirement employs a two-fold approach to analyze the satellite design process with conjunction assessment and risk mitigation in mind, during the pre-launch process, led by the Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis (CARA) Program for non-Human Space Flight (HSF) Missions. This presentation outlines CARA coordination with missions, informed by the NPR, that spans early mission development to operations. CARA is an Agency-level resource that provides support to all NASA non-HSF missions. CARA protects the orbital environment from collision between NASA non-HSF missions and other tracked on-orbit objects. During the pre-formulation and formulation phases, NASA missions undergo a series of conjunction assessment analyses captured in the Orbital Collision Avoidance Plan (OCAP) prior to transitioning to the implementation phase (typically at the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) or equivalent). The OCAP analyses consist of a thorough review of the spacecraft(s) orbit selection and placement, deployment, cataloguing performance, trackability, ephemeris generation, conjunction mitigation options, autonomous maneuvering, and risk assessment parameters which are performed by a dedicated CARA Analysis Team. The results of these analyses, CARA’s formal recommendations, and the mission’s methods for implementing them, are documented in the OCAP. The intent of engaging in this process so early in the mission design phase, is to ensure that conjunction assessment is considered from the outset, thus mitigating costly design changes and operational risks down the road. NASA missions are also required to coordinate their operational processes and conjunction mitigation procedures with CARA in a Conjunction Assessment Operations Implementation Agreement (CAOIA). The aim of this process is to document the conjunction assessment screening process, conjunction risk assessment parameters, conjunction mitigation steps, flight dynamics operations concepts and maneuvers, and the communication and coordination process between the mission’s project manager and CARA. The intent of the CAOIA document is for it to be completed iteratively, and as missions update these elements, corresponding changes are made in the CAOIA. With this process in place, the engagement and coordination between the missions and CARA from early in the design process into mission operations, helps to ensure that missions not only have a robust conjunction assessment concept of operations to reduce conjunction risk for space sustainability, but are also able to achieve their science goals and have a successful mission.

conjunction assessment↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA CARA Prelaunch Analysis and Process

NASA implemented an official Procedural Requirement (NPR) 8079.1 in June 2023, establishing the minimum collision avoidance requirements and associated operational protocols for NASA space flight programs, projects, and spacecraft to protect the space environment by reducing the risk of collision to an acceptable level. Part of the requirement employs a two-fold approach to analyze the satellite design process with conjunction assessment and risk mitigation in mind, during the pre-launch process, led by the Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis (CARA) Program for non-Human Space Flight (HSF) Missions. This presentation outlines CARA coordination with missions, informed by the NPR, that spans early mission development to operations. CARA is an Agency-level resource that provides support to all NASA non-HSF missions. CARA protects the orbital environment from collision between NASA non-HSF missions and other tracked on-orbit objects. During the pre-formulation and formulation phases, NASA missions undergo a series of conjunction assessment analyses captured in the Orbital Collision Avoidance Plan (OCAP) prior to transitioning to the implementation phase (typically at the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) or equivalent). The OCAP analyses consist of a thorough review of the spacecraft(s) orbit selection and placement, deployment, cataloguing performance, trackability, ephemeris generation, conjunction mitigation options, autonomous maneuvering, and risk assessment parameters which are performed by a dedicated CARA Analysis Team. The results of these analyses, CARA’s formal recommendations, and the mission’s methods for implementing them, are documented in the OCAP. The intent of engaging in this process so early in the mission design phase, is to ensure that conjunction assessment is considered from the outset, thus mitigating costly design changes and operational risks down the road. NASA missions are also required to coordinate their operational processes and conjunction mitigation procedures with CARA in a Conjunction Assessment Operations Implementation Agreement (CAOIA). The aim of this process is to document the conjunction assessment screening process, conjunction risk assessment parameters, conjunction mitigation steps, flight dynamics operations concepts and maneuvers, and the communication and coordination process between the mission’s project manager and CARA. The intent of the CAOIA document is for it to be completed iteratively, and as missions update these elements, corresponding changes are made in the CAOIA. With this process in place, the engagement and coordination between the missions and CARA from early in the design process into mission operations, helps to ensure that missions not only have a robust conjunction assessment concept of operations to reduce conjunction risk for space sustainability, but are also able to achieve their science goals and have a successful mission.

conjunction assessment↗
NASA NTRS2016

The Evolution of the NASA Commercial Crew Program Mission Assurance Process

In 2010, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) established the Commercial Crew Program (CCP) in order to provide human access to the International Space Station and low Earth orbit via the commercial (non-governmental) sector. A particular challenge to NASA has been how to determine that the Commercial Provider's transportation system complies with programmatic safety requirements. The process used in this determination is the Safety Technical Review Board which reviews and approves provider submitted hazard reports. One significant product of the review is a set of hazard control verifications. In past NASA programs, 100% of these safety critical verifications were typically confirmed by NASA. The traditional Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) model does not support the nature of the CCP. To that end, NASA S&MA is implementing a Risk Based Assurance process to determine which hazard control verifications require NASA authentication. Additionally, a Shared Assurance Model is also being developed to efficiently use the available resources to execute the verifications.

Mission Assurance↗
NASA NTRS2010

The ICARE Method

The ICARE method is a flexible, widely applicable method for systems engineers to solve problems and resolve issues in a complete and comprehensive manner. The method can be tailored by diverse users for direct application to their function (e.g. system integrators, design engineers, technical discipline leads, analysts, etc.). The clever acronym, ICARE, instills the attitude of accountability, safety, technical rigor and engagement in the problem resolution: Identify, Communicate, Assess, Report, Execute (ICARE). This method was developed through observation of Space Shuttle Propulsion Systems Engineering and Integration (PSE&I) office personnel approach in an attempt to succinctly describe the actions of an effective systems engineer. Additionally it evolved from an effort to make a broadly-defined checklist for a PSE&I worker to perform their responsibilities in an iterative and recursive manner. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Systems Engineering Handbook states, engineering of NASA systems requires a systematic and disciplined set of processes that are applied recursively and iteratively for the design, development, operation, maintenance, and closeout of systems throughout the life cycle of the programs and projects. ICARE is a method that can be applied within the boundaries and requirements of NASA s systems engineering set of processes to provide an elevated sense of duty and responsibility to crew and vehicle safety. The importance of a disciplined set of processes and a safety-conscious mindset increases with the complexity of the system. Moreover, the larger the system and the larger the workforce, the more important it is to encourage the usage of the ICARE method as widely as possible. According to the NASA Systems Engineering Handbook, elements of a system can include people, hardware, software, facilities, policies and documents; all things required to produce system-level results, qualities, properties, characteristics, functions, behavior and performance. The ICARE method can be used to improve all elements of a system and, consequently, the system-level functional, physical and operational performance. Even though ICARE was specifically designed for a systems engineer, any person whose job is to examine another person, product, or process can use the ICARE method to improve effectiveness, implementation, usefulness, value, capability, efficiency, integration, design, and/or marketability. This paper provides the details of the ICARE method, emphasizing the method s application to systems engineering. In addition, a sample of other, non-systems engineering applications are briefly discussed to demonstrate how ICARE can be tailored to a variety of diverse jobs (from project management to parenting).

Henke, Luke↗
NASA NTRS2011

Requirement Assurance: A Verification Process

Requirement Assurance is an act of requirement verification which assures the stakeholder or customer that a product requirement has produced its "as realized product" and has been verified with conclusive evidence. Product requirement verification answers the question, "did the product meet the stated specification, performance, or design documentation?". In order to ensure the system was built correctly, the practicing system engineer must verify each product requirement using verification methods of inspection, analysis, demonstration, or test. The products of these methods are the "verification artifacts" or "closure artifacts" which are the objective evidence needed to prove the product requirements meet the verification success criteria. Institutional direction is given to the System Engineer in NPR 7123.1A NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements with regards to the requirement verification process. In response, the verification methodology offered in this report meets both the institutional process and requirement verification best practices.

Alexander, Michael G.↗
NASA NTRS2017

International Space Station Requirement Verification for Commercial Visiting Vehicles

The COTS program demonstrated NASA could rely on commercial providers for safe, reliable, and cost-effective cargo delivery to ISS. The ISS Program has developed a streamlined process to safely integrate commercial visiting vehicles and ensure requirements are met Levy a minimum requirement set (down from 1000s to 100s) focusing on the ISS interface and safety, reducing the level of NASA oversight/insight and burden on the commercial Partner. Partners provide a detailed verification and validation plan documenting how they will show they've met NASA requirements. NASA conducts process sampling to ensure that the established verification processes is being followed. NASA participates in joint verification events and analysis for requirements that require both parties verify. Verification compliance is approved by NASA and launch readiness certified at mission readiness reviews.

Garguilo, Dan↗
NASA NTRS2019

History of NASA's Determination of Offgassed Products (Test 7)

NASA's Determination of Offgassed Products (Test 7) from materials and assembled articles for spaceflight has evolved since the Apollo program for over 50 years to meet various habitable spacecraft non-metallic programmatic requirements. Now mandated by NASA-STD-6016B Standard Materials and Processes Requirements for Spacecraft, all nonmetallic materials used in habitable flight compartments,with the exception of ceramics, metal oxides, inorganic glasses, and materials used in sealed containers must meet the offgassing requirements of in NASA-STD-6001B Test 7. This manuscript presents the history of Test 7 beginning with the Apollo spacecraft nonmetallic materials selection guidelines and test requirements in 1967

Greene, Benjamin↗
NASA NTRS1998

Computational Modeling Program

An Integrated Product Team (IPT) has been formed at NASA Ames Research Center which has set objectives to investigate devices and processes suitable for meeting NASA requirements on ultrahigh performance computers, fast and low power devices, and high temperature wide bandgap materials. These devices may ultimately be sub-100nm feature-size. Processes and equipment must meet the stringent demands posed by the fabrication of such small devices. Until now, the reactors for Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD) and plasma processes have been designed by trial and error procedures. Further, once the reactor is in place, optimum processing parameters are found through expensive and time-consuming experimentation. If reliable models are available that describe processes and the operation of the reactors, that chore would be reduced to a routine task while being a cost-effective option. The goal is to develop such a design tool, validate that tool using available data from current generation processes and reactors, and then use that tool to explore avenues for meeting NASA needs for ultrasmall device fabrication. Under the present grant, ARL/Penn State along with other IPT members has been developing models and computer code to meet IPT goals. Some of the accomplishments achieved during the first year of the grant are described in this report

Govindan, T. R.↗
NASA NTRS2010

NASA Human-Rating Requirements

NASA's Procedural Requirements 87052B defines the Human-Rating Certification process and related technical requirements for human spaceflight programs developed by and for NASA. The document specifies Agency-level responsibilities related to the certification, processes to be established by the program, and technical requirements.

Groen, Frank↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Introduction of an Agile Systems Engineering Process to the NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center

This paper will provide background on the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) ARMD Test Data Portal (ATDP) effort along with the rationale that motivated the ATDP team to consider implementing an agile systems engineering (SE) process. The primary motivation for using this new SE process was based on the desire to mitigate a major risk to project success. Since the agile SE process had never been used before at the NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center (AFRC), utilizing this new SE process required a trailblazing effort to introduce it to NASA AFRC leadership. As a result, the ATDP team chose to adhere to the agile SE process in addition to the trusted classical waterfall SE process on ATDP. Through successful execution of this hybrid SE process during Phase I, along with demonstrating the value and rigor of the agile SE process, NASA AFRC leadership ultimately permitted the ATDP project to solely use the agile SE process for developments beyond Phase I. While it is the opinion of the authors that the classical SE process is more effective for most projects at NASA AFRC, some projects may deem that the agile SE process is more advantageous. Although this paper is focused on introducing the agile SE process to NASA AFRC, lessons learned will be valuable to other organizations as well. Details of how the ATDP team implemented the agile SE process during Phase I will be summarized, along with how the team met all required classical SE milestones. Lessons learned throughout Phase I of this effort will also be highlighted.

Daniel S. Jones↗
NASA NTRS2011

Multi-Center Implementation of NPR 7123.1A: A Collaborative Effort

Collaboration efforts between MSFC and GRC Engineering Directorates to implement the NASA Systems Engineering (SE) Engine have expanded over the past year to include other NASA Centers. Sharing information on designing, developing, and deploying SE processes has sparked further interest based on the realization that there is relative consistency in implementing SE processes at the institutional level. This presentation will provide a status on the ongoing multi-center collaboration and provide insight into how these NPR 7123.1A SE-aligned directives are being implemented and managed to better support the needs of NASA programs and projects. NPR 7123.1A, NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements, was released on March 26, 2007 to clearly articulate and establish the requirements on the implementing organization for performing, supporting, and evaluating SE activities. In early 2009, MSFC and GRC Engineering Directorates undertook a collaborative opportunity to share their research and work associated with developing, updating and revising their SE process policy to comply and align with NPR 7123.1A. The goal is to develop instructions, checklists, templates, and procedures for each of the 17 SE process requirements so that systems engineers will be a position to define work that is process-driven. Greater efficiency and more effective technical management will be achieved due to consistency and repeatability of SE process implementation across and throughout each of the NASA centers. An added benefit will be to encourage NASA centers to pursue and collaborate on joint projects as a result of using common or similar processes, methods, tools, and techniques.

Hall, Phillip B.↗
NASA NTRS2019

History of NASA's Determination of Offgassed Products (Test 7)

NASA's Determination of Offgassed Products (Test 7) from materials and assembled articles for spaceflight has evolved since the Apollo program for over 50 years to meet various habitable spacecraft nonmetallic programmatic requirements. Now mandated by NASA STD-6016A, Standard Materials and Processes Requirements for Spacecraft, all nonmetallic materials used in habitable flight compartments, with the exception of ceramics, metal oxides, inorganic glasses, and materials used in sealed containers, must meet the offgassing requirements in NASA-STD-6001B Test 7. This manuscript presents the history of Test 7, beginning with the Apollo spacecraft nonmetallic materials selection guidelines and test requirements in 1967, in which tests were performed in mostly oxygen atmospheres. It progresses through Skylab, Space Shuttle, International Space Station nonmetals testing, and acceptance requirements with milder test environments. This review of the history of Test 7 presents the reader with a perspective on the development and changes undergone since inception to the present. Related NASA standard tests (some now former, discontinued, combined, or supplemental) including Test 6, Odor Assessment, Test 16, Determination of Offgassed Products from Assembled Articles, and Test 12, Total Spacecraft Cabin Offgassing, are discussed in context

Greene, Benjamin↗
NASA NTRS2010

Johnson Space Center Health and Medical Technical Authority

1.HMTA responsibilities: a) Assure program/project compliance with Agency health and medical requirements at identified key decision points. b) Certify that programs/projects comply with Agency health and medical requirements prior to spaceflight missions. c) Assure technical excellence. 2. Designation of applicable NASA Centers for HMTA implementation and Chief Medical Officer (CMO) appointment. 3. Center CMO responsible for HMTA implementation for programs and projects at the center. JSC HMTA captured in "JSC HMTA Implementation Plan". 4. Establishes specifics of dissenting opinion process consistent with NASA procedural requirements.

Fogarty, Jennifer A.↗