Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “operating experience”

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 595 records · Page 33
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Task Demand Variation in Air Traffic Control: Implications for Controller Workload, Fatigue, and Performance

In air traffic control, task demand and workload have important implications for the safety and efficiency of air traffic, and remain dominant considerations. Within air traffic control, task demand is dynamic. However, research on demand transitions and subsequent controller perception and performance is limited. This research uses an air traffic control simulation to investigate the effect of task demand transitions, and the direction of those transitions, on workload and fatigue and one efficiency performance measure. Results indicate that a change in task demand appears to affect both workload and fatigue ratings, although not necessarily performance. In addition, participants workload and fatigue ratings in equivalent task demand periods appear to change depending on the demand period preceding the time of the current ratings. Further research is needed to enhance understanding of demand transition and workload history effects on operator experience and performance, in both air traffic control and other safety-critical domains.

workload history↗
NASA NTRS2019

NASA’s Space Launch System: Enabling a New Generation of Lunar Exploration

Following two decades of operational experience in low-Earth orbit (LEO), NASA has turned its focus once again to deep space exploration. The Agency is building the Space Launch System (SLS) to take astronauts and cargo to the Moon and send robotic spacecraft deep into the solar system. Offering unmatched performance, departure energy and payload capacity, SLS is designed to evolve into progressively more powerful configurations, enabling a new generation of human exploration of the Moon in preparation for future missions to Mars. The first build of the Block 1 vehicle is nearly complete for Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), the first integrated flight of SLS and the Orion crew vehicle. EM-1 will send an uncrewed Orion to a distant retrograde lunar orbit in order to test and verify new systems, and along the way will deploy 13 6U-class CubeSats in deep space along the upper stage disposal trajectory after separation from Orion. The Agency’s current plans call for the first three missions on the SLS manifest to utilize the Block 1 vehicle in crew and cargo configurations. A more powerful evolved vehicle, Block 1B, will provide additional mass and volume performance using a new Exploration Upper Stage (EUS). Block 1B will lift 34 to 40 metric tons (t) to trans-lunar injection (TLI), depending on crew or cargo configuration. The Block 1B crew configuration will offer as much payload volume as industry-standard 5 m-diameter fairings to co-manifested payloads in a Universal Stage Adapter (USA). The Block 1B cargo variant will accommodate 8.4 meter-diameter fairings in 62.7-foot (19.1 meter) or 90-foot (27.4 meter) lengths. Adding smallsat secondary payloads to ride along with primary and co-manifested payloads on future flights may be possible, depending on mass margins. Leveraging a flight-proven, well-understood propulsion system, SLS’s flexible architecture, unmatched performance and expansive payload accommodations will open exciting new mission possibilities in deep space. Launches of habitat modules for NASA’s new Gateway lunar outpost, the next generation of robotic spacecraft to the far reaches of the solar system, large-aperture deep space telescopes, probes to interstellar space and the return of astronauts to the Moon are all possible with SLS.

Creech, Stephen D.↗
NASA NTRS2010

TPSAS-NF1676L-11132-DND

The Orion Pad Abort 1 Flight Test occurred on May 6th, 2010 at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. The test was the first for the Orion vehicle and was primarily a test of the Orion Launch Abort System’s ability to execute an abort from the launch pad. The test was successful, and, in most cases, results were well within predicted outcomes. For this test, the thermal control subsystem was an inherent part of the flight operations team. The thermal team provided pre-launch predictions of component temperatures, set component temperature limits, and monitored those limits during the flight operations process as part of the primary flight operations team. The thermal team was also responsible for day-of-flight predictions of the main abort motor’s propellant mean bulk temperature, a key launch constraint for the test. After the test, thermal data was collected, reviewed, and compared against pre-launch predictions showing very good agreement in most areas. Based on the pre-test and flight operations experience, a detailed list of lessons learned has been developed and will be reviewed prior to potential future Orion or other such flight tests.

Joseph F Gasbarre↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

TPSAS-NF1676L-11021-DND

The Orion Pad Abort 1 Flight Test occurred on May 6th, 2010 at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. The test was the first for the Orion vehicle and was primarily a test of the Orion Launch Abort System’s ability to execute an abort from the launch pad. The test was successful and in most cases results were well within predicted outcomes. For this test, the thermal control subsystem was an inherent part of the flight operations team. The thermal team provided pre-launch predictions of component temperatures, set component temperature limits, and monitored those limits during the flight operations process as part of the primary flight operations team. The thermal team was also responsible for day-of-flight predictions of the main abort motor’s propellant mean bulk temperature, a key launch constraint for the test. After the test, thermal data was collected, reviewed, and compared against pre-launch predictions showing very good agreement in most areas. Based on the pre-test and flight operations experience, a detailed list of lessons learned has been developed and will be reviewed prior to potential future Orion or other such flight tests.

Joseph F Gasbarre↗
NASA NTRS2018

Cassini In-Flight Navigation Adaptations

In the nearly two decades of Cassini flight, adaptations to navigation processes were applied as characteristics unique to Cassini were identified and spacecraft configuration changes were implemented. Additionally, operational experience was leveraged into more efficient processes, better modeling, and more robust contingency strategies. Trajectory adjustments were implemented to allow further investigation of surprising science discoveries meriting more attention. Unique analyses were performed to determine how to best accomplish atypical science observations while maintaining acceptable risk levels. Descriptions of the most significant adaptations are organized according to the affected navigation subsystems: trajectory design, orbit determination, optical navigation, and maneuver design.

Wagner, Sean↗
NASA NTRS2018

Preparing to Assure Mission Success

Space flight missions are inherently risky. The mission operations assurance discipline grew out of strategies to control error and evolved into what today is an independent technical authority dedicated to achieving mission success. After the Mars Climate Orbiter loss, NASA made a set of recommendations for missions. Two of those recommendations led to the creation of today’s Mission Operations Assurance Manager role: (1) require an independent Mission Assurance representative during the operational phase of every flight project, and (2) require all flight projects to report and track post-launch anomalies. Since then, the MOAM role has been continually refined by lessons learned from its practice on more than 20 concurrent missions. The MOAM role requires significant operations experience as well as an additional set of skills. In the interests of developing a cadre of potential MOAMs, the MOAM training program was developed. It is a 14-unit set of presentations/discussions covering the 11 categories of MOAM tasks. It is offered to new MOAMs and interested systems engineers with an eye to preparing both types of personnel for present and future assignments, as well as building relationships among personnel of different organizations. MOAM training sessions include presentations on the various tools and processes employed by MOAMs, interspersed with mindset lessons illustrated via “war story” discussions of previous missions.

Bryant, Larry↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Evaluating the SAGE III/ISS Version 5.2 Water Vapor Retrieval in the Presence of Aerosol Loading

The Stratospheric Aerosol and Gas Experiment operating on the International Space Station (SAGE III/ISS) is an occultation instrument that retrieves aerosol extinction and ozone, water vapor, and other trace gas concentrations. Water vapor in the stratosphere plays a role in ozone depletion and global temperature regulation making it an important species to monitor. The SAGE III/ISS instrument provides high quality, vertically resolved profiles of water vapor throughout the stratosphere and upper troposphere. In previous versions of SAGE water vapor products, a dry bias was noted in comparison to other satellite retrievals in the presence of elevated aerosol optical depth. Several updates for the version 5.2 water vapor algorithm will be presented and compared with previous versions of the data and other satellite products during different periods of aerosol loading.

M Heitz↗
NASA NTRS2022

Regenerative Life Support Systems for Exploration Habitats: Unique Capabilities and Challenges to Enable Long-Duration-Mission Habitats Beyond Low Earth Orbit

The Artemis I launch of NASA’s Space Launch System and Orion crew vehicle will mark a major milestone in the agency’s efforts to return humans to the Moon. Work is underway on the Human Landing System that will carry the next astronauts to the lunar surface, and the lunar orbiting Gateway that will host science and serve as a platform to support sustained human presence on the Moon and ultimately crewed missions to Mars. Two decades of continuous human presence on the International Space Station has provided a wealth of experience operating, upgrading, and demonstrating advanced Regenerative Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (Regen ECLSS). However, habitats that enable sustained lunar surface presence and transit to Mars will encounter many unique conditions and challenges. System characteristics including reliability, maintainability, mass, and power become significantly more critical. Operating environments associated with lower total pressure, low gravity, contingency protocols, and extensive un-crewed and dormant periods impose additional functionality requirements and alter the performance of certain critical systems. Integration and combined operations with other elements such as orbiting outposts, logistics suppliers, and mobility platforms impact capability and interface requirements. Limits on allocated water and oxygen consumable mass influence the need for higher levels of water and oxygen recovery from waste products. Impacts and challenges these unique exploration circumstances impose on the suite of Regen ECLSS systems are explored and discussed herein.

David F Howard↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Deep-Space Conjunction Assessment: Recent Developments and Future Evolution

The Multi-mission Automated Deep-space Conjunction Assessment Process (MADCAP) is a NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) capability used to perform conjunction assessment in shared deep-space environments. MADCAP began performing conjunction assessment at Mars and the Moon in 2011, with the Sun/Earth libration points added to its functionality in 2020. There has been an increasing number of missions operating in these environments in recent years, leading to an elevated frequency of close conjunction events, especially in the Lunar orbital environment. MADCAP provides this service not only to NASA missions, but to any operator who is willing to share ephemerides. Since there is no space surveillance network for deep space environments, ephemeris sharing is the only way in which spacecraft operators can ensure the safety of their spacecraft from collision in these orbit regimes. NASA published a set of conjunction assessment best practices in 2020 that cover the MADCAP process. This paper details recent MADCAP operational experience in the deep space environments, including statistics and process improvements. Updates to the MADCAP software and automation framework implemented to handle the recent growth in the number of deep space missions are also discussed. Future enhancements planned in anticipation of increasingly crowded deep-space environments, such as non-standard runs based on exploratory scenarios, are also discussed.

conjunction assessment↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assistive Detect and Avoid Technology in Urban Air Mobility Environments

The use of Assistive Detect and Avoid (Assistive DAA or ADAA) technology in Urban Air Mobility (UAM) environments poses potential benefits as well as challenges. Assistive DAA refers to the leveraged use of DAA technology, originally developed to replace see-and-avoid capabilities for remotely piloted aircraft, in onboard-piloted aircraft to augment (rather than replace) pilots’ see-and-avoid abilities and thus enhance the safety and efficiency of visual flight operations. ADAA is anticipated to be especially safety-enhancing in airspace where traffic density is high or traditional air traffic services are limited, such as in future UAM environments. ADAA may also enable higher-tempo UAM operations than with only see-and-avoid capabilities, while still maintaining acceptable levels of safety. UAM concepts under development by the FAA, NASA, and industry focus on operations moving people and cargo in urban and suburban areas using innovative technologies, operations, and aircraft, including electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft. Researchers at NASA Langley Research Center, in collaboration with FAA researchers at the William J. Hughes Technical Center in Atlantic City, NJ, have conducted a series of medium-fidelity, human-in-the-loop research simulations of potential future UAM operations and concepts in both Class C and Class B airspace environments. These simulations have included use of a Langley-developed ADAA research tool called DANTi, which enables configurable ADAA displays to be presented to pilots of simulated eVTOL aircraft participating in higher-density and higher-tempo UAM operations. Experience and observations made during testing of the NASA-developed DANTi ADAA capability in the UAM NFLITE simulation environment will be reported in this paper together with a discussion of airspace integration and regulatory topics.

Detect and Avoid↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assistive Detect and Avoid Technology in Urban Air Mobility Environments

The use of Assistive Detect and Avoid (Assistive DAA or ADAA) technology in Urban Air Mobility (UAM) environments poses potential benefits as well as challenges. Assistive DAA refers to the leveraged use of DAA technology, originally developed to replace see-and-avoid capabilities for remotely piloted aircraft, in onboard-piloted aircraft to augment (rather than replace) pilots’ see-and-avoid abilities and thus enhance the safety and efficiency of visual flight operations. ADAA is anticipated to be especially safety-enhancing in airspace where traffic density is high or traditional air traffic services are limited, such as in future UAM environments. ADAA may also enable higher-tempo UAM operations than with only see-and-avoid capabilities, while still maintaining acceptable levels of safety. UAM concepts under development by the FAA, NASA, and industry focus on operations moving people and cargo in urban and suburban areas using innovative technologies, operations, and aircraft, including electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft. Researchers at NASA Langley Research Center, in collaboration with FAA researchers at the William J. Hughes Technical Center in Atlantic City, NJ, have conducted a series of medium-fidelity, human-in-the-loop research simulations of potential future UAM operations and concepts in both Class C and Class B airspace environments. These simulations have included use of a Langley-developed ADAA research tool called DANTi, which enables configurable ADAA displays to be presented to pilots of simulated eVTOL aircraft participating in higher-density and higher-tempo UAM operations. Experience and observations made during testing of the NASA-developed DANTi ADAA capability in the UAM NFLITE simulation environment will be reported in this paper together with a discussion of airspace integration and regulatory topics.

Detect and Avoid↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Four Problematic Methods in Reliability Analysis

Some basic methods used in reliability analysis are problematic because they produce incorrect and overoptimistic predictions. Initially gratifying forecasts are often invalidated by testing and operational experience. The problematic methods in reliability analysis include estimating the system failure rate as the sum of component failure rates, assuming that reliability growth continues indefinitely during testing, overestimating the benefits of redundancy, and using the fault tolerance count instead of a detailed reliability analysis. Reliability analysis can produce more optimism than accuracy. This bug may now be a feature. The optimistic bias inevitable in project planning should be corrected by realistic reliability analysis that reflects relevant experience. That the repeated poor performance of reliability analysis is found to be surprising suggests willful blindness. Rigorous methods and impartial critical review are necessary to improve reliability analysis.

Reliability analysis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Four Problematic Methods in Reliability Analysis

Some basic methods used in reliability analysis are problematic because they produce incorrect and overoptimistic predictions. Initially gratifying forecasts are often invalidated by testing and operational experience. The problematic methods in reliability analysis include estimating the system failure rate as the sum of component failure rates, assuming that reliability growth continues indefinitely during testing, overestimating the benefits of redundancy, and using the fault tolerance count instead of a detailed reliability analysis. Reliability analysis can produce more optimism than accuracy. This bug may now be a feature. The optimistic bias inevitable in project planning should be corrected by realistic reliability analysis that reflects relevant experience. That the repeated poor performance of reliability analysis is found to be surprising suggests willful blindness. Rigorous methods and impartial critical review are necessary to improve reliability analysis.

Reliability analysis↗
NASA NTRS2024

Updates to NASA’S Break-in-Prebreathe Flight Rules Due to Type II Decompression Sickness Risk Considerations

Investigation of a central neurological decompression sickness (DCS) case during hypobaric ground testing at Johnson Space Center (JSC) identified a ~3 min break-in-prebreathe (BiP) late in the prebreathe (13 min prior to depressurization) as the leading credible cause for the DCS case. This occurred despite applicable prebreathe payback rules being followed. Applicable NASA rules, for ground and flight, directed 2:1 payback of breaks up to 10 min in duration, regardless of when a break occurs relative to depress. Breaks lasting longer than 10 min require a complete restart of the prebreathe protocol. The adequacy of NASA’s BiP rules was evaluated prior to resuming any hypobaric ground testing or International Space Station (ISS) extravehicular activity (EVA). Of particular interest to the authors was the timing of the BiP in relation to the overall prebreathe timeline. Although there exists no agreed-upon definition, a ‘late’ BiP means towards the end of the prebreathe period, and in particular, the last hour prior to depressurization. The following information sources were reviewed prior to formulating recommendations: i) the type II DCS case report and findings from the investigation; ii) documented rationale for existing flight rules, iii) consultations with subject matter experts involved in definition of existing flight rules (several of whom had since left NASA); iv) relevant published literature; v) tissue gas loading model estimates; and vi) NASA’s operational experience with late breaks in prebreathe.

Andrew F J Abercromby↗
NASA NTRS2005

Glenn's Telescience Support Center Provided Around-the-Clock Operations Support for Space Experiments on the International Space Station

NASA Glenn Research Center s Telescience Support Center (TSC) allows researchers on Earth to operate experiments onboard the International Space Station (ISS) and the space shuttles. NASA s continuing investment in the required software, systems, and networks provides distributed ISS ground operations that enable payload developers and scientists to monitor and control their experiments from the Glenn TSC. The quality of scientific and engineering data is enhanced while the long-term operational costs of experiments are reduced because principal investigators and engineering teams can operate their payloads from their home institutions.

Malarik, Diane C.↗
NASA NTRS1975

National Aeronautics and Space Administration operations: Remote sensing experiments in the New York Bight, 7-17 April 1975

Results are given of remote sensing experiments conducted in the New York Bight between April 7-17, 1975, to evaluate the role of remote sensing technology to aid in monitoring ocean dumping. Remote sensors were flown on the C-54, U-2, and C-130 aircraft while the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration obtained concurrent in situ sea truth data using helicopters and surface platforms. The test site, aircraft platforms, experiments, and supporting sensors are described. The operation of each aircraft are discussed and aircraft flight lines, flight parameters, and data identification parameters are presented in figures and tables.

Usry, J. W.↗
NASA NTRS1996

Compendium of Information for Interpreting the Microgravity Environment of the Orbiter Spacecraft

Science experiments are routinely conducted on the NASA shuttle orbiter vehicles. Primarily, these experiments are operated on such missions to take advantage of the microgravity (low-level acceleration) environment conditions during on-orbit operations. Supporting accelerometer instruments are operated with the experiments to measure the microgravity acceleration environment in which the science experiments were operated. Tne Principal Investigator Microgravity Services (PIMS) Project at NASA Lewis Research Center interprets these microgravity acceleration data and prepares mission summary reports to aid the principal investigators of the scientific experiments in understanding the microgravity environment. Much of the information about the orbiter vehicle and the microgravity environment remains the same for each mission. Rather than repeat that information in each mission summary report, reference information is presented in this report to assist users in understanding the microgravity-acceleration data. The characteristics of the microgravity acceleration environment are first presented. The methods of measurement and common instruments used on orbiter missions are described. The coordinate systems utilized in the orbiter and accelerometers are described. Some of the orbiter attitudes utilized in microgravity related missions are illustrated. Methods of data processing are described and illustrated. The interpretation of the microgravity acceleration data is included with an explanation of common disturbance sources. Instructions to access some of the acceleration data and a description of the orbiter thrusters are explained in the appendixes. A microgravity environment bibliography is also included.

DeLombard, Richard↗