Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Scheduling and planning”

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 703 records · Page 39
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1998

NASA Year 2000 (Y2K) Program Plan

NASA initiated the Year 2000 (Y2K) program in August 1996 to address the challenges imposed on Agency software, hardware, and firmware systems by the new millennium. The Agency program is centrally managed by the NASA Chief Information Officer, with decentralized execution of program requirements at each of the nine NASA Centers, Headquarters and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The purpose of this Program Plan is to establish Program objectives and performance goals; identify Program requirements; describe the management structure; and detail Program resources, schedules, and controls. Project plans are established for each NASA Center, Headquarters, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2021

Concept of Operations for OSIRIS-REx Optical Navigation Image Planning

Optical navigation (OpNav) is a critical subsystem of the OSIRIS-REx asteroid sample return mission, which operated in the vicinity of near-Earth asteroid (101955) Bennu from August 2018 through April 2021. A substantial amount of mission resources across multiple subsystems and institutions is required to ensure that the OpNav data are successfully acquired. The KinetX OpNav team, part of the Flight Dynamics System (FDS), is responsible for performing required analysis to develop the OpNav operations plans; requesting, reviewing and verifying the plans; and ultimately using the image data for critical navigation operations. The FDS team, responsible for the mission navigation, is operated by KinetX Aerospace with management and operations support from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. The Science Processing and Operations Center (SPOC), located at the University of Arizona’s Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, is responsible for generating the planning products for all science and most OpNav data. These plans are integrated into the spacecraft sequences, tested, and commanded by the Mission Support Area (MSA) at Lockheed Martin Space. To ensure mission-critical navigation image data are successfully acquired, the plan is developed through a waterfall of planning cycles over the course of 3 months prior to onboard plan execution. During the initial strategic planning for a mission phase, detailed analysis is performed by the OpNav team to conceptualize the concept of operations (ConOps) for image data collection. This phase OpNav Narrative is included along with other strategic planning documents for the key ground segment stakeholders to review and provide feedback. The detailed OpNav plans get defined in the tactical planning cycle, which spans 8 to 3 weeks before the week-long integrated sequence is executed on-board the spacecraft. During the tactical cycle, the initial OpNav Request is submitted along with the science requests, kicking off development of the science and OpNav plans. Once the initial plan is drafted, interfaces are exercised so that the plan can be reviewed and iterated, if necessary. A rigorous schedule is followed by the planning teams during the implementation cycle, spanning the last 18 days before uplink, to ensure all the necessary integration, testing, and reviewing can occur on time. The development of the OpNav planning ConOps, including responsibilities, interfaces, timelines, and procedures, took extensive collaboration across mission elements and institutions. The process was robust throughout the 137 weeks of continuous Optical Navigation Operations at Bennu, which concluded on April 9th, 2021.

Coralie D. Adam↗
NASA NTRS1985

Toward the fully capable AI space mission planner

The necessity of expending numerous ground-side manhours to write extremely concise command codes for deep-space probes in-flight, which carry limited on-board processing capabilities, is encouraging the development of AI modules to perform the same task. An experimental automated sequence planner, Deviser, has proven successful enough, when used on a mainframe computer, to continue with the next generation of the concept, PLAN-IT, an expert scheduler for spacecraft observation targets. The new system will provide the ground-based user with interactive graphic displays for choosing targets and generates an expected time-line. An updated Deviser, using the new modules, will be tested after the Voyager Uranus encounter, and PLAN-IT will be employed to formulate Spacelab activity schedules.

Grenander, S.↗
NASA NTRS2021

Demonstrations of System-Level Autonomy for Spacecraft

System-level autonomy refers to autonomously meeting the crosscutting needs of a system through awareness and coordinated control spanning the system's breadth of capabilities. In contrast to function-level autonomy, which focuses on capabilities required to achieve a specific function such as surface navigation or image recognition, system-level autonomy addresses the needs to coordinate and manage activities and resources, and estimate the state, across subsystems. This paper describes demonstrations that were conducted on a spacecraft workstation testbed. The autonomy was provided by system-level planning and execution integrated with system-level estimators of orbit knowledge and spacecraft hardware health. These components are embedded in a system-level framework defining how goals are formed and executed, which elements exist, and how control authority is distributed among components. The planning and execution system at the heart of the framework has the capability to schedule, execute and monitor completion of tasks, as well as plan around unexpected events including new science opportunities and anomalies. The planning and scheduling system is the Multi-mission EXECutive (MEXEC), supported by the system-level health state estimator Model-Based Off-Nominal State Identification and Detection (MONSID), and Autonomous Navigation (AutoNav) algorithms, which determine the orbital system state based on optical observation of other targets. These components are applicable to many kinds of missions on different platforms. These demonstrations were elaborations of earlier experiments conducted on the ASTERIA (Arcsecond Space Telescope Enabling Research In Astrophysics) CubeSat, described in a companion submission [1]. The spacecraft’s extended mission served as an in-flight test platform, during which some individual autonomous capabilities were flown successfully. The autonomy experiments described here were performed on the ASTERIA workstation testbed.

Prather, Maurice↗
NASA NTRS2019

NASA Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Handbook

The purpose of this document is to provide program/project teams necessary instruction and guidance in the best practices for Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and WBS dictionary development and use for project implementation and management control. This handbook can be used for all types of NASA projects and work activities including research, development, construction, test and evaluation, and operations. The products of these work efforts may be hardware, software, data, or service elements (alone or in combination). The aim of this document is to assist project teams in the development of effective work breakdown structures that provide a framework of common reference for all project elements.

Formulation↗
NASA NTRS1989

Efficient scheduling algorithm for demand-assigned TDMA satellite systems

An efficient scheduling algorithm (stations burst plan) for demand-assigned time-division multiple-access (TDMA) satellite network systems is introduced. The total demand for transmitting data through a transponder may exceed the available bit-rate capacity, and a scheduler of the system wishes to utilize the system with minimum changes of slot allocations while maximizing throughputs. By implementing such a burst-plan algorithm, transmission of all demanded data traffic can be completed with minimum unused resources (idle slots). The underlying ideas adopted for the algorithm are that jobs with shorter remaining processing times should have higher priorities and that as many jobs are processed at a time as possible. The algorithm is particularly useful for deriving smooth burst plans for a satellite system with a large number of ground stations.

Durrani, Sajjad H.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Computing Bounds on Resource Levels for Flexible Plans

A new algorithm efficiently computes the tightest exact bound on the levels of resources induced by a flexible activity plan (see figure). Tightness of bounds is extremely important for computations involved in planning because tight bounds can save potentially exponential amounts of search (through early backtracking and detection of solutions), relative to looser bounds. The bound computed by the new algorithm, denoted the resource-level envelope, constitutes the measure of maximum and minimum consumption of resources at any time for all fixed-time schedules in the flexible plan. At each time, the envelope guarantees that there are two fixed-time instantiations one that produces the minimum level and one that produces the maximum level. Therefore, the resource-level envelope is the tightest possible resource-level bound for a flexible plan because any tighter bound would exclude the contribution of at least one fixed-time schedule. If the resource- level envelope can be computed efficiently, one could substitute looser bounds that are currently used in the inner cores of constraint-posting scheduling algorithms, with the potential for great improvements in performance. What is needed to reduce the cost of computation is an algorithm, the measure of complexity of which is no greater than a low-degree polynomial in N (where N is the number of activities). The new algorithm satisfies this need. In this algorithm, the computation of resource-level envelopes is based on a novel combination of (1) the theory of shortest paths in the temporal-constraint network for the flexible plan and (2) the theory of maximum flows for a flow network derived from the temporal and resource constraints. The measure of asymptotic complexity of the algorithm is O(N O(maxflow(N)), where O(x) denotes an amount of computing time or a number of arithmetic operations proportional to a number of the order of x and O(maxflow(N)) is the measure of complexity (and thus of cost) of a maximumflow algorithm applied to an auxiliary flow network of 2N nodes. The algorithm is believed to be efficient in practice; experimental analysis shows the practical cost of maxflow to be as low as O(N1.5). The algorithm could be enhanced following at least two approaches. In the first approach, incremental subalgorithms for the computation of the envelope could be developed. By use of temporal scanning of the events in the temporal network, it may be possible to significantly reduce the size of the networks on which it is necessary to run the maximum-flow subalgorithm, thereby significantly reducing the time required for envelope calculation. In the second approach, the practical effectiveness of resource envelopes in the inner loops of search algorithms could be tested for multi-capacity resource scheduling. This testing would include inner-loop backtracking and termination tests and variable and value-ordering heuristics that exploit the properties of resource envelopes more directly.

Muscvettola, Nicola↗
NASA NTRS1976

Payload crew activity planning integration. Task 2: Inflight operations and training for payloads

The primary objectives of the Payload Crew Activity Planning Integration task were to: (1) Determine feasible, cost-effective payload crew activity planning integration methods. (2) Develop an implementation plan and guidelines for payload crew activity plan (CAP) integration between the JSC Orbiter planners and the Payload Centers. Subtask objectives and study activities were defined as: (1) Determine Crew Activity Planning Interfaces. (2) Determine Crew Activity Plan Type and Content. (3) Evaluate Automated Scheduling Tools. (4) Develop a draft Implementation Plan for Crew Activity Planning Integration. The basic guidelines were to develop a plan applicable to the Shuttle operations timeframe, utilize existing center resources and expertise as much as possible, and minimize unnecessary data exchange not directly productive in the development of the end-product timelines.

Hitz, F. R.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Mission planning and analysis division development plan for STS-2 through STS-4

The baseline products, schedules, and resource requirements for the Mission Planning and Analysis Division's support of Space Transportation System flights 2, 3, and 4 are presented. Major functions addressed are: orbiter software, Mission Control Center software, flight design, flight operations support, simulation tools, and postflight analysis.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2003

Experiences with Testing the Largest Ground System NASA Has Ever Built

In the 1980s, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) embarked upon a major Earth-focused program called Mission to Planet Earth. The Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) was selected to manage and develop a key component - the Earth Observing System (EOS). The EOS consisted of four major missions designed to monitor the Earth. The missions included 4 spacecraft. Terra (launched December 1999), Aqua (launched May 2002), ICESat (Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite, launched January 2003), and Aura (scheduled for launch January 2004). The purpose of these missions was to provide support for NASA s long-term research effort for determining how human-induced and natural changes affect our global environment. The EOS Data and Information System (EOSDIS), a globally distributed, large-scale scientific system, was built to support EOS. Its primary function is to capture, collect, process, and distribute the most voluminous set of remotely sensed scientific data to date estimated to be 350 Gbytes per day. The EOSDIS is composed of a diverse set of elements with functional capabilities that require the implementation of a complex set of computers, high-speed networks, mission-unique equipment, and associated Information Technology (IT) software along with mission-specific software. All missions are constrained by schedule, budget, and staffing resources, and rigorous testing has been shown to be critical to the success of each mission. This paper addresses the challenges associated with the planning, test definition. resource scheduling, execution, and discrepancy reporting involved in the mission readiness testing of a ground system on the scale of EOSDIS. The size and complexity of the mission systems supporting the Aqua flight operations, for example, combined with the limited resources available, prompted the project to challenge the prevailing testing culture. The resulting success of the Aqua Mission Readiness Testing (MRT) program was due in no small measure to re-structuring the traditional programmatic and technical approach to a more efficient and robust program. Programmatically, it meant gaining the endorsement, commitment, and cooperation of the numerous subsystem element managers and other stakeholder organizations. Technically, it required an MRT program that was agile, could rapidly adapt to requirements changes, and was flexible in its overall approach. Furthermore, this paper addresses the following questions: 1. What are the key ingredients (e.g., test tools, organization) needed to conduct a successful MRT program? 2. What distinguishes EOS MRT from the traditional system testing approach? 3. Where should the focus of testing be since it is infeasible to test every element or subsystem? 4. How can MRT be applied effectively to other systems or missions? To provide answers to these questions, this paper relies heavily on real-life, hands-on experiences ("lessons learned") gained during mission readiness testing of the Terra ground system and, most recently, the Aqua and ICESat missions. Moreover, this paper explores how lessons learned were turned into lessons applied for the upcoming Aura mission. Although derived from the EOS missions, MRT techniques and strategies can be applied to enhance the testing of other missions.

Lehtonen, Ken↗
NASA NTRS2005

A Model-based Approach to Controlling the ST-5 Constellation Lights-Out Using the GMSEC Message Bus and Simulink

Space Technology 5 (ST-5) is a three-satellite constellation, technology validation mission under the New Millennium Program at NASA to be launched in March 2006. One of the key technologies to be validated is a lights-out, model-based operations approach to be used for one week to control the ST-5 constellation with no manual intervention. The ground architecture features the GSFC Mission Services Evolution Center (GMSEC) middleware, which allows easy plugging in of software components and a standardized messaging protocol over a software bus. A predictive modeling tool built on MatLab's Simulink software package makes use of the GMSEC standard messaging protocol to interface to the Advanced Mission Planning System (AMPS) Scenario Scheduler which controls all activities, resource allocation and real-time re-profiling of constellation resources when non-nominal events occur. The key features of this system, which we refer to as the ST-5 Simulink system, are as follows: Original daily plan is checked to make sure that predicted resources needed are available by comparing the plan against the model. As the plan is run in real-time, the system re-profiles future activities in real-time if planned activities do not occur in the predicted timeframe or fashion. Alert messages are sent out on the GMSEC bus by the system if future predicted problems are detected. This will allow the Scenario Scheduler to correct the situation before the problem happens. The predictive model is evolved automatically over time via telemetry updates thus reducing the cost of implementing and maintaining the models by an order of magnitude from previous efforts at GSFC such as the model-based system built for MAP in the mid-1990's. This paper will describe the key features, lessons learned and implications for future missions once this system is successfully validated on-orbit in 2006.

Witt, Kenneth J.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Affordable Development and Demonstration of a Small NTR Engine and Stage: A Preliminary NASA, DOE, and Industry Assessment

In FY11, NASA formulated a plan for Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) development that included Foundational Technology Development followed by system-level Technology Demonstrations. The ongoing NTP project, funded by NASA's Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) program, is focused on Foundational Technology Development and includes 5 key task activities: (1) Fuel element fabrication and non-nuclear validation testing of heritage fuel options; (2) Engine conceptual design; (3) Mission analysis and engine requirements definition; (4) Identification of affordable options for ground testing; and (5) Formulation of an affordable and sustainable NTP development program. Performance parameters for Point of Departure designs for a small criticality-limited and full size 25 klb (sub f) (kip, or 1000 pound-force)-class engine were developed during FYs 13-14 using heritage fuel element designs for both Rover NERVA (Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Applications) Graphite Composite (GC) and Ceramic Metal (Cermet) fuel forms. To focus the fuel development effort and maximize use of its resources, the AES program decided, in FY14, that a leader-follower down-selection between GC and cermet fuel was required. An Independent Review Panel (IRP) was convened by NASA and tasked with reviewing the available fuel data and making a recommendation to NASA. In February 2015, the IRP recommended and the AES program endorsed GC as the leader fuel In FY14, a preliminary development schedule DDTE (Design Development Test and Evaluation) plan was produced by GRC (Glenn Research Center), DOE (Department of Energy) and industry for the AES program. Assumptions, considerations and key task activities are presented here. At the direction of NASA HQ (32515), NASA and DOE are to work together to formulate a detailed development plan and schedule allowing the affordable development of a small (7.5-16.5 klbf) GC engine for possible flight technology demonstration (FTD) mission within a 10-year timeframe.

Lunar Flyby Mission↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mars Sample Return (MSR) Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) Assessment Study (MSAS)

NASA, in partnership with the European Space Agency (ESA), is seeking to return Martian geological and atmospheric samples to Earth for scientific study in the early 2030s. Due to the possibility that the samples could contain extraterrestrial life, Mars Sample Return (MSR) is classified as a Category V: Restricted Earth Return mission by the NASA Planetary Protection Office. As a result of this classification, a MSR Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) must not only provide a pristine environment to ensure samples are protected from terrestrial contamination for scientific investigations, it must also provide high-containment (biosafety level 4 [BSL-4]-equivalence) to isolate the samples from Earth’s biosphere until the samples are deemed safe for release and/or sterilized. The nominal utilization period for a SRF is anticipated to be 2-5 years and is intended to enable curation activities, biohazard assessment, select early science activities, and the rapid release of samples to the scientific community. However, to account for possible delays in schedule or the identification of extant life, this anticipated period of time must be flexible to accommodate schedule extensions and contingency plans. Due to requirements for high-level biological containment and cleanliness, a traditional receiving/curation facility cannot be utilized for MSR. Therefore, beginning in 2022, NASA Johnson Space Center is performing a MSR SRF Assessment Study (MSAS) to investigate the most optimal facility modality for a MSR SRF, as well as start to define programmatic early estimate of costs and schedules before the initial design phase begins. NASA is partnering with industry contractors (architectural and engineering firms with BSL-4 and cleanroom technology experience, as well as other contracted infrastructure and construction specialists) along with selected experts from NASA, ESA, existing U.S. BSL-4 facilities, and other U.S. government agencies, to carry out the assessment study. The MSAS should also aid in the future refinement of the science requirements (e.g., contamination control, equipment accommodations) before site-specific design would commence. As part of the MSAS, NASA is planning to assess an array of possibilities for a MSR SRF. One of the main considerations is the facility modality and whether an existing BSL-4 facility can be utilized (for some or all functions); or, if new constructure would be required, would a traditional fixed facility or a modular facility the best choice. MSAS will also investigate the ability of the modalities to accommodate two different facility capability endmembers: 1) a minimal facility focusing on biohazard assessment and curation tasks with a small footprint, and 2) an enhanced facility with additional capabilities to enable expedited processing and the completion of time-sensitive and (some) sterilization-sensitive science. The assessment is intended to generate information that will inform the selection of facility modalities for high-level conceptual design development. While the assessment study will focus on SRF requirements for accommodating curation, science, and sample safety assessment infrastructure, it will also consider an array of other factors, such as ease of access for international users, decommissioning, repurposing, future sale or lease following MSR’s use of the facility, and uncontained preparatory laboratory spaces. Upon completion of the study, the preferred modality and refined requirements would be utilized for site-specific design but will not be finalized until NASA’s completion of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process.

A.D. Harrington↗
NASA NTRS2003

Choosing Objectives in Over-Subscription Planning

Many NASA planning problems are over-subscription problems - that is, there are a large number of possible goals of differing value, and the planning system must choose a subset &it car! be accomplished within the limited time and resources available. Examples include planning for telescopes like Hubble, SIRTF, and SOFIA; scheduling for the Deep Space Network; and planning science experiments for a Mars rover. Unfortunately, existing planning systems are not designed to deal with problems like this - they expect a well-defined conjunctive goal and terminate in failure unless the entire goal is achieved. In this paper we develop techniques for over-subscription problems that assist a classical planner in choosing which goals to achieve, and the order in which to achieve them. These techniques use plan graph cost-estimation techniques to construct an orienteering problem, which is then used to provide heuristic advice on the goals and goal order that should considered by a planner.

Smith, David E.↗
NASA NTRS1971

Detailed Skylab ECS consumables analysis for the interim revision flight plan (November, 1972, SL-1 launch)

The consumables analysis was performed for the Skylab 2, 3, and 4 Preliminary Reference Interim Revision Flight Plan. The analysis and the results are based on the mission requirements as specified in the flight plan and on other available data. The results indicate that the consumables requirements for the Skylab missions allow for remaining margins (percent) of oxygen, nitrogen, and water nominal as follows: 83.5, 90.8, and 88.7 for mission SL-2; 57.1, 64.1, and 67.3 for SL-3; and 30.8, 44.3, and 46.5 for SL-4. Performance of experiment M509 as scheduled in the flight plan results in venting overboard the cluster atmosphere. This is due to the addition of nitrogen for propulsion and to the additional oxygen introduced into the cabin when the experiment is performed with the crewman suited.

Wells, C.↗