Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Quality Assurance”

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 NTRS2001

Analysis and Quality Assurance of the SKYMAP 4.0 Guidance and Tracking Star Catalog: The NASA SKY2000 Spacecraft Attitude Determination Star Catalog

An updated and improved NASA spacecraft attitude determination catalog, now called SKY2000, Version 3, has been prepared and quality assured. The highest priority goals were to replace the astrometric (positions and motions) and photometric (brightnesses and colors) data with the most recent and accurate data available. Quality assurance has been performed in a fairly straightforward manner, i.e., without extensive data checking and analysis, and many errors and Inconsistencies were corrected. Additional work should eventually be done on the variability and multiple-star data In the catalog, while certain other data can be significantly Improved. The current version of the catalog can be found at the GSFC Flight Dynamics website: http://cheli.gsfc.nasa.gov/dist/attitude/skymap.html. Supporting information and reference materials (published papers, format and data descriptions, etc.) can also be found at the website.

Warren, Wayne H., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Spacelab Data Processing Facility (SLDPF) quality assurance expert systems development

The Spacelab Data Processing Facility (SLDPF) is an integral part of the Space Shuttle data network for missions that involve attached scientific payloads. Expert system prototypes were developed to aid in the performance of the quality assurance function of the Spacelab and/or Attached Shuttle Payloads processed telemetry data. The Spacelab Input Processing System (SIPS) and the Spacelab Output Processing System (SOPS), two expert systems, were developed to determine their feasibility and potential in the quality assurance of processed telemetry data. The capabilities and performance of these systems are discussed.

Basile, Lisa R.↗
NASA NTRS1976

Quality assurance plan for Solar Maximum Mission (SSM) Instruments electronic assembly - HRUV spectrometer/polarimeter

The quality assurance program demonstrates recognition of the quality aspects and an organized approach to achieve them. It ensures that quality requirements are determined and satisfied throughout all phases of contract performance, including preliminary and engineering design, development, fabrication, processing, assembly, inspection, test, checkout, packaging, shipping, storage, maintenance field use, flight preparations, flight operations and post-flight analysis, as applicable.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2004

History of Reliability and Quality Assurance at Kennedy Space Center

This Kennedy Historical Document (KHD) provides a unique historical perspective of the organizational and functional responsibilities for the manned and un-manned programs at Kennedy Space Center, Florida. As systems become more complex and hazardous, the attention to detailed planning and execution continues to be a challenge. The need for a robust reliability and quality assurance program will always be a necessity to ensure mission success. As new space missions are defined and technology allows for continued access to space, these programs cannot be compromised. The organizational structure that has provided the reliability and quality assurance functions for both the manned and unmanned programs has seen many changes since the first group came to Florida in the 1950's. The roles of government and contractor personnel have changed with each program and organizational alignment has changed based on that responsibility. The organizational alignment of the personnel performing these functions must ensure independent assessment of the processes.

Childers, Frank M.↗
NASA NTRS1972

HELIOS Critical Design Review: Quality Assurance

The following is an account of the activities of the Quality Assurance (QA) department of the project management office highlighting some of the ways in which it controls QA of the subcontractors on one hand and reports on Quality to GfW (Gesellschaft fur Weltraumforschung) on the other hand. The basic document prepared by MBB (Messerschmitt-Bolkow-Blohm) for QA activities is 1. The QA plan based on GfW 002. The QA department is responsible moreover for monitoring and making decisions about the quality of parts and materials and the governing document for this activity is 2. The Parts and Materials Control Plan based on GfW 001 - the reliability program provisions, as well as GfW 002. A brief survey of the contents of the QA Plan is shown. It should be noted that QA activity dealing with parts procurement is partially covered in a separate presentation entitled "Hi-Rel Parts". Supplementary quality documents are shown.

Benoehr, H. C.↗
NASA NTRS2021

A Quality Assurance Framework for Satellite Earth Observation Missions

Presented is a new quality assurance (QA) framework for Earth Observation missions that has been developed as a joint initiative between ESA and NASA. It aims ensure the rigorous assessment of all aspects of relevant aspects of mission quality, verifying claimed mission performance and, where applicable, reviewing the extent to which the mission follows community best practice in a manner that is “fit for purpose”. The QA framework has potential for more general use in both institutional and commercial Earth Observation – helping mission providers to understand the information their users' needs and empowering users to make informed decisions about which data is fit for their purpose.

Samuel E Hunt↗
NASA NTRS2008

Guidance and Control Software Project Data - Volume 4: Configuration Management and Quality Assurance Documents

The Guidance and Control Software (GCS) project was the last in a series of software reliability studies conducted at Langley Research Center between 1977 and 1994. The technical results of the GCS project were recorded after the experiment was completed. Some of the support documentation produced as part of the experiment, however, is serving an unexpected role far beyond its original project context. Some of the software used as part of the GCS project was developed to conform to the RTCA/DO-178B software standard, "Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification," used in the civil aviation industry. That standard requires extensive documentation throughout the software development life cycle, including plans, software requirements, design and source code, verification cases and results, and configuration management and quality control data. The project documentation that includes this information is open for public scrutiny without the legal or safety implications associated with comparable data from an avionics manufacturer. This public availability has afforded an opportunity to use the GCS project documents for DO-178B training. This report provides a brief overview of the GCS project, describes the 4-volume set of documents and the role they are playing in training, and includes configuration management and quality assurance documents from the GCS project. Volume 4 contains six appendices: A. Software Accomplishment Summary for the Guidance and Control Software Project; B. Software Configuration Index for the Guidance and Control Software Project; C. Configuration Management Records for the Guidance and Control Software Project; D. Software Quality Assurance Records for the Guidance and Control Software Project; E. Problem Report for the Pluto Implementation of the Guidance and Control Software Project; and F. Support Documentation Change Reports for the Guidance and Control Software Project.

Hayhurst, Kelly J.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Apollo experience report: Reliability and quality assurance

The reliability of the Apollo spacecraft resulted from the application of proven reliability and quality techniques and from sound management, engineering, and manufacturing practices. Continual assessment of these techniques and practices was made during the program, and, when deficiencies were detected, adjustments were made and the deficiencies were effectively corrected. The most significant practices, deficiencies, adjustments, and experiences during the Apollo Program are described in this report. These experiences can be helpful in establishing an effective base on which to structure an efficient reliability and quality assurance effort for future space-flight programs.

Sperber, K. P.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Spacelab Data Processing Facility (SLDPF) quality assurance expert systems development

Spacelab Data Processing Facility (SLDPF) expert system prototypes were developed to assist in the quality assurance of Spacelab and/or Attached Shuttle Payload (ASP) processed telemetry data. The SLDPF functions include the capturing, quality monitoring, processing, accounting, and forwarding of mission data to various user facilities. Prototypes for the two SLDPF functional elements, the Spacelab Output Processing System and the Spacelab Input Processing Element, are described. The prototypes have produced beneficial results including an increase in analyst productivity, a decrease in the burden of tedious analyses, the consistent evaluation of data, and the providing of concise historical records.

Kelly, Angelita C.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Spacelab Data Processing Facility (SLDPF) quality assurance expert systems development

Spacelab Data Processing Facility (SLDPF) expert system prototypes have been developed to assist in the quality assurance of Spacelab and/or Attached Shuttle Payload (ASP) processed telemetry data. SLDPF functions include the capturing, quality monitoring, processing, accounting, and forwarding of mission data to various user facilities. Prototypes for the two SLDPF functional elements, the Spacelab Output Processing System and the Spacelab Input Processing Element, are described. The prototypes have produced beneficial results including an increase in analyst productivity, a decrease in the burden of tedious analyses, the consistent evaluation of data, and the providing of concise historical records.

Kelly, Angelita C.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Quality assurance procedures for V378A matrix resin

A characterization methodology has been developed on which to base quality assurance procedures for U.S. Polymeric V378A bismaleimide matrix resin. Chemical composition is established by partition reverse phase and size exclusion liquid chromatography. Cure rheology behavior is quantitatively characterized by dynamic viscoelastic analysis using the parallel plate technique. The overall cure process is characterized by differential scanning calorimetry. The sensitivity of the procedures is evaluated by studying the effects of ambient out time on the chemical end behaviorial properties of the resin.

Hamermesh, C. L.↗
NASA NTRS2014

A Systems Engineering Approach to Quality Assurance for Aerospace Testing

On the surface, it appears that AS9100 has little to say about how to apply a Quality Management System (QMS) to major aerospace test programs (or even smaller ones). It also appears that there is little in the quality engineering Body of Knowledge (BOK) that applies to testing, unless it is nondestructive examination (NDE), or some type of lab or bench testing associated with the manufacturing process. However, if one examines: a) how the systems engineering (SE) processes are implemented throughout a test program; and b) how these SE processes can be mapped to the requirements of AS9100, a number of areas for involvement of the quality professional are revealed. What often happens is that quality assurance during a test program is limited to inspections of the test article; what could be considered a manufacturing al fresco approach. This limits the quality professional and is a disservice to the programs and projects, since there are a number of ways that quality can enhance critical processes, and support efforts to improve risk reduction, efficiency and effectiveness. The Systems Engineering (SE) discipline is widely used in aerospace to ensure the progress from Stakeholder Expectations (the President, Congress, the taxpayers) to a successful, delivered product or service. Although this is well known, what is not well known is that these same SE processes are implemented in varying complexity, to prepare for and implement test projects that support research, development, verification and validation, qualification, and acceptance test projects. Although the test organization's terminology may vary from the SE terminology, and from one test service provider to another, the basic process is followed by successful, reliable testing organizations. For this analysis, NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 7123.1, NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements is used to illustrate the SE processes that are used for major aerospace testing. Many of these processes are also implemented for smaller test projects, and this set of processes will also look familiar to those who have participated in launch site activation and flight demonstrations.

Shepherd, Christena C.↗
NASA NTRS2015

A Systems Engineering Approach to Quality Assurance for Aerospace Testing

On the surface, it appears that AS91001 has little to say about how to apply a Quality Management System (QMS) to major aerospace test programs (or even smaller ones). It also appears that there is little in the quality engineering Body of Knowledge (BOK)2 that applies to testing, unless it is nondestructive examination (NDE), or some type of lab or bench testing associated with the manufacturing process. However, if one examines: a) how the systems engineering (SE) processes are implemented throughout a test program; and b) how these SE processes can be mapped to the requirements of AS9100, a number of areas for involvement of the quality professional are revealed. What often happens is that quality assurance during a test program is limited to inspections of the test article; what could be considered a manufacturing al fresco approach. This limits the quality professional and is a disservice to the programs and projects, since there are a number of ways that quality can enhance critical processes, and support efforts to improve risk reduction, efficiency and effectiveness.

Shepherd, Christena C.↗