Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Negotiation”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2002

Simplify and Succeed

In the early 70's the management at the American Stock Exchange wanted a set of automated displays installed on the trading floor. The purpose of the displays was to announce to the public all changes related to the trading of equities. I had exactly three months to get the work done. Because of local building codes, I was told that the displays that met the specifications would not be available until nine months after the order was placed. This was not acceptable to the Exchange's management. The project team was in a quandary. I called a meeting to discuss the situation and develop a report explaining why we needed more time. Jokingly, I suggested, 'Why not use picket signs?' The Exchange had just gone through some painful labor negotiations. To anyone who had been involved in those negotiations, the thought of a picket sign should have sounded, I thought, like gallows humor. This was not acceptable to the Exchange's management. To my surprise, the rest of the project team took the idea seriously.

Levine, Art↗
NASA NTRS2002

The Mars Exploration Rover/Collaborative Information Portal

Astrology has long argued that the alignment of the planets governs human affairs. Science usually scoffs at this. There is, however, an important exception: sending spacecraft for planetary exploration. In late May and early June, 2003, Mars will be in position for Earth launch. Two Mars Exploration Rovers (MER) will rocket towards the red planet. The rovers will perform a series of geological and meteorological experiments, seeking to examine geological evidence for water and conditions once favorable for life. Back on earth, a small army of surface operations staff will work to keep the rovers running, sending directions for each day's operations and receiving the files encoding the outputs of the Rover's six instruments. (Mars is twenty light minutes from Earth. The rovers must be robots.) The fundamental purpose of the project is, after all, Science. Scientists have experiments they want to run. Ideally, scientists want to be immediately notified when the data products of their experiments have been received, so that they can examine their data and (collaboratively) deduce results. Mars is an unpredictable environment. We may issue commands to the rovers but there is considerable uncertainty in how the commands will be executed and whether what the rovers sense will be worthy of further pursuit. The steps of what is, to a scientist, conceptually an individual experiment may be scattered over a large number of activities. While the scientific staff has an overall strategic idea of what it would like to accomplish, activities are planned daily. The data and surprises of the previous day need to be integrated into the negotiations for the next day's activities, all synchronized to a schedule of transmission windows . Negotiations is the operative term, as different scientists want the resources to run possibly incompatible experiments. Many meetings plan each day's activities.

Walton, Joan↗
NASA NTRS2004

Argumentation for coordinating shared activities

an increasing need for space missions to be able to collaboratively (and competitively) develop plans both within and across missions. In addition, interacting spacecraft that interleave onboard planning and execution must reach consensus on their commitments to each other prior to execution. In domains where missions have varying degrees of interaction and different constraints on communication and computation, the missions will require different coordination protocols in order to efficiently reach consensus with in their imposed deadlines. We describe a Shared Activity Coordination (SHAC) framework that provides a decentralized algorithm for negotiating the scheduling of shared activities over the lifetimes of multiple agents and a foundation for customizing protocols for negotiating planner interactions. We investigate variations of a few simple protocols based on argumentation and distributed constraints satisfaction techniques and evaluate their abilities to reach consistent solutions according to computation, time, and communication costs in an abstract domain where spacecraft propose joint measurements.

Mars↗
NASA NTRS2003

Continual coordination through shared activities

Interacting agents that interleave planning and execution must reach consensus on their commitments to each other. In domains where agents have varying degrees of interaction and different constraints on communication and computation, agents will require different coordination protocols in order to efficiently reach consensus in real time. We briefly describe a largely unexplored class of realtime, distributed planning problems (inspired by interacting spacecraft missions), new challenges they pose, and a general approach to solving the problems. These problems involve self-interested agents that have infrequent communication but collaborate on joint activities. We describe a Shared Activity Coordination (SHAC) framework that provides a decentralized algorithm for negotiating the scheduling of shared activities over the lifetimes of separate missions, a soft, real-time approach to reaching consensus during execution with limited communication, and a foundation for customizing protocols for negotiating planner interactions. We apply SHAC to a realistic simulation of interacting Mars missions and illustrate the simplicity of protocol development.

planning↗
NASA NTRS2007

Collaborative Resource Allocation

Collaborative Resource Allocation Networking Environment (CRANE) Version 0.5 is a prototype created to prove the newest concept of using a distributed environment to schedule Deep Space Network (DSN) antenna times in a collaborative fashion. This program is for all space-flight and terrestrial science project users and DSN schedulers to perform scheduling activities and conflict resolution, both synchronously and asynchronously. Project schedulers can, for the first time, participate directly in scheduling their tracking times into the official DSN schedule, and negotiate directly with other projects in an integrated scheduling system. A master schedule covers long-range, mid-range, near-real-time, and real-time scheduling time frames all in one, rather than the current method of separate functions that are supported by different processes and tools. CRANE also provides private workspaces (both dynamic and static), data sharing, scenario management, user control, rapid messaging (based on Java Message Service), data/time synchronization, workflow management, notification (including emails), conflict checking, and a linkage to a schedule generation engine. The data structure with corresponding database design combines object trees with multiple associated mortal instances and relational database to provide unprecedented traceability and simplify the existing DSN XML schedule representation. These technologies are used to provide traceability, schedule negotiation, conflict resolution, and load forecasting from real-time operations to long-range loading analysis up to 20 years in the future. CRANE includes a database, a stored procedure layer, an agent-based middle tier, a Web service wrapper, a Windows Integrated Analysis Environment (IAE), a Java application, and a Web page interface.

Wang, Yeou-Fang↗
NASA NTRS2006

Conflict-Aware Scheduling Algorithm

conflict-aware scheduling algorithm is being developed to help automate the allocation of NASA s Deep Space Network (DSN) antennas and equipment that are used to communicate with interplanetary scientific spacecraft. The current approach for scheduling DSN ground resources seeks to provide an equitable distribution of tracking services among the multiple scientific missions and is very labor intensive. Due to the large (and increasing) number of mission requests for DSN services, combined with technical and geometric constraints, the DSN is highly oversubscribed. To help automate the process, and reduce the DSN and spaceflight project labor effort required for initiating, maintaining, and negotiating schedules, a new scheduling algorithm is being developed. The scheduling algorithm generates a "conflict-aware" schedule, where all requests are scheduled based on a dynamic priority scheme. The conflict-aware scheduling algorithm allocates all requests for DSN tracking services while identifying and maintaining the conflicts to facilitate collaboration and negotiation between spaceflight missions. These contrast with traditional "conflict-free" scheduling algorithms that assign tracks that are not in conflict and mark the remainder as unscheduled. In the case where full schedule automation is desired (based on mission/event priorities, fairness, allocation rules, geometric constraints, and ground system capabilities/ constraints), a conflict-free schedule can easily be created from the conflict-aware schedule by removing lower priority items that are in conflict.

Wang, Yeou-Fang↗
NASA NTRS2010

Operating and Managing a Backup Control Center

Due to the criticality of continuous mission operations, some control centers must plan for alternate locations in the event an emergency shuts down the primary control center. Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas is the Mission Control Center (MCC) for the International Space Station (ISS). Due to Houston s proximity to the Gulf of Mexico, JSC is prone to threats from hurricanes which could cause flooding, wind damage, and electrical outages to the buildings supporting the MCC. Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) has the capability to be the Backup Control Center for the ISS if the situation is needed. While the MSFC Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) does house the BCC, the prime customer and operator of the ISS is still the JSC flight operations team. To satisfy the customer and maintain continuous mission operations, the BCC has critical infrastructure that hosts ISS ground systems and flight operations equipment that mirrors the prime mission control facility. However, a complete duplicate of Mission Control Center in another remote location is very expensive to recreate. The HOSC has infrastructure and services that MCC utilized for its backup control center to reduce the costs of a somewhat redundant service. While labor talents are equivalent, experiences are not. Certain operations are maintained in a redundant mode, while others are simply maintained as single string with adequate sparing levels of equipment. Personnel at the BCC facility must be trained and certified to an adequate level on primary MCC systems. Negotiations with the customer were done to match requirements with existing capabilities, and to prioritize resources for appropriate level of service. Because some of these systems are shared, an activation of the backup control center will cause a suspension of scheduled HOSC activities that may share resources needed by the BCC. For example, the MCC is monitoring a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico. As the threat to MCC increases, HOSC must begin a phased activation of the BCC, while working resource conflicts with normal HOSC activities. In a long duration outage to the MCC, this could cause serious impacts to the BCC host facility s primary mission support activities. This management of a BCC is worked based on customer expectations and negotiations done before emergencies occur. I.

Marsh, Angela L.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Shared Activity Coordination

Interacting agents that interleave planning and execution must reach consensus on their commitments to each other. In domains where agents have varying degrees of interaction and different constraints on communication and computation, agents will require different coordination protocols in order to efficiently reach consensus in real time. We briefly describe a largely unexplored class of real-time, distributed planning problems (inspired by interacting spacecraft missions), new challenges they pose, and a general approach to solving the problems. These problems involve self-interested agents that have infrequent communication but collaborate on joint activities. We describe a Shared Activity Coordination (SHAC) framework that provides a decentralized algorithm for negotiating the scheduling of shared activities in a dynamic environment, a soft, real-time approach to reaching consensus during execution with limited communication, and a foundation for customizing protocols for negotiating planner interactions. We apply SHAC to a realistic simulation of interacting Mars missions and illustrate the simplicity of protocol development.

coordination↗
NASA NTRS2003

Small, Untethered, Mobile Robots for Inspecting Gas Pipes

Small, untethered mobile robots denoted gas-pipe explorers (GPEXs) have been proposed for inspecting the interiors of pipes used in the local distribution natural gas. The United States has network of gas-distribution pipes with a total length of approximately 109 m. These pipes are often made of iron and steel and some are more than 100 years old. As this network ages, there is a need to locate weaknesses that necessitate repair and/or preventive maintenance. The most common weaknesses are leaks and reductions in thickness, which are caused mostly by chemical reactions between the iron in the pipes and various substances in soil and groundwater. At present, mobile robots called pigs are used to inspect and clean the interiors of gas-transmission pipelines. Some carry magnetic-flux-leakage (MFL) sensors for measuring average wall thicknesses, some capture images, and some measure sizes and physical conditions. The operating ranges of pigs are limited to fairly straight sections of wide transmission- type (as distinguished from distribution- type) pipes: pigs are too large to negotiate such obstacles as bends with radii comparable to or smaller than pipe diameters, intrusions of other pipes at branch connections, and reductions in diameter at valves and meters. The GPEXs would be smaller and would be able to negotiate sharp bends and other obstacles that typically occur in gas-distribution pipes.

Wilcox, Brian↗
NASA NTRS2011

Defining Tolerance: Impacts of Delay and Disruption when Managing Challenged Networks

Challenged networks exhibit irregularities in their communication performance stemming from node mobility, power constraints, and impacts from the operating environment. These irregularities manifest as high signal propagation delay and frequent link disruption. Understanding those limits of link disruption and propagation delay beyond which core networking features fail is an ongoing area of research. Various wireless networking communities propose tools and techniques that address these phenomena. Emerging standardization activities within the Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) and the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) look to build upon both this experience and scalability analysis. Successful research in this area is predicated upon identifying enablers for common communication functions (notably node discovery, duplex communication, state caching, and link negotiation) and how increased disruptions and delays affect their feasibility within the network. Networks that make fewer assumptions relating to these enablers provide more universal service. Specifically, reliance on node discovery and link negotiation results in network-specific operational concepts rather than scalable technical solutions. Fundamental to this debate are the definitions, assumptions, operational concepts, and anticipated scaling of these networks. This paper presents the commonalities and differences between delay and disruption tolerance, including support protocols and critical enablers. We present where and how these tolerances differ. We propose a set of use cases that must be accommodated by any standardized delay-tolerant network and discuss the implication of these on existing tool development.

mobility drivers↗
NASA NTRS2012

Gigabit Ethernet Asynchronous Clock Compensation FIFO

Clock compensation for Gigabit Ethernet is necessary because the clock recovered from the 1.25 Gb/s serial data stream has the potential to be 200 ppm slower or faster than the system clock. The serial data is converted to 10-bit parallel data at a 125 MHz rate on a clock recovered from the serial data stream. This recovered data needs to be processed by a system clock that is also running at a nominal rate of 125 MHz, but not synchronous to the recovered clock. To cross clock domains, an asynchronous FIFO (first-in-first-out) is used, with the write pointer (wprt) in the recovered clock domain and the read pointer (rptr) in the system clock domain. Because the clocks are generated from separate sources, there is potential for FIFO overflow or underflow. Clock compensation in Gigabit Ethernet is possible by taking advantage of the protocol data stream features. There are two distinct data streams that occur in Gigabit Ethernet where identical data is transmitted for a period of time. The first is configuration, which happens during auto-negotiation. The second is idle, which occurs at the end of auto-negotiation and between every packet. The identical data in the FIFO can be repeated by decrementing the read pointer, thus compensating for a FIFO that is draining too fast. The identical data in the FIFO can also be skipped by incrementing the read pointer, which compensates for a FIFO draining too slowly. The unique and novel features of this FIFO are that it works in both the idle stream and the configuration streams. The increment or decrement of the read pointer is different in the idle and compensation streams to preserve disparity. Another unique feature is that the read pointer to write pointer difference range changes between compensation and idle to minimize FIFO latency during packet transmission.

Duhachek, Jeff↗
NASA NTRS2012

Automating Mid- and Long-Range Scheduling for NASA's Deep Space Network

NASA has recently deployed a new mid-range scheduling system for the antennas of the Deep Space Network (DSN), called Service Scheduling Software, or S(sup 3). This system is architected as a modern web application containing a central scheduling database integrated with a collaborative environment, exploiting the same technologies as social web applications but applied to a space operations context. This is highly relevant to the DSN domain since the network schedule of operations is developed in a peer-to-peer negotiation process among all users who utilize the DSN (representing 37 projects including international partners and ground-based science and calibration users). The initial implementation of S(sup 3) is complete and the system has been operational since July 2011. S(sup 3) has been used for negotiating schedules since April 2011, including the baseline schedules for three launching missions in late 2011. S(sup 3) supports a distributed scheduling model, in which changes can potentially be made by multiple users based on multiple schedule "workspaces" or versions of the schedule. This has led to several challenges in the design of the scheduling database, and of a change proposal workflow that allows users to concur with or to reject proposed schedule changes, and then counter-propose with alternative or additional suggested changes. This paper describes some key aspects of the S(sup 3) system and lessons learned from its operational deployment to date, focusing on the challenges of multi-user collaborative scheduling in a practical and mission-critical setting. We will also describe the ongoing project to extend S(sup 3) to encompass long-range planning, downtime analysis, and forecasting, as the next step in developing a single integrated DSN scheduling tool suite to cover all time ranges.

scheduling↗
NASA NTRS2014

Autonomous Spacecraft Communication Interface for Load Planning

Ground-based controllers can remain in continuous communication with spacecraft in low Earth orbit (LEO) with near-instantaneous communication speeds. This permits near real-time control of all of the core spacecraft systems by ground personnel. However, as NASA missions move beyond LEO, light-time communication delay issues, such as time lag and low bandwidth, will prohibit this type of operation. As missions become more distant, autonomous control of manned spacecraft will be required. The focus of this paper is the power subsystem. For present missions, controllers on the ground develop a complete schedule of power usage for all spacecraft components. This paper presents work currently underway at NASA to develop an architecture for an autonomous spacecraft, and focuses on the development of communication between the Mission Manager and the Autonomous Power Controller. These two systems must work together in order to plan future load use and respond to unanticipated plan deviations. Using a nominal spacecraft architecture and prototype versions of these two key components, a number of simulations are run under a variety of operational conditions, enabling development of content and format of the messages necessary to achieve the desired goals. The goals include negotiation of a load schedule that meets the global requirements (contained in the Mission Manager) and local power system requirements (contained in the Autonomous Power Controller), and communication of off-plan disturbances that arise while executing a negotiated plan. The message content is developed in two steps: first, a set of rapid-prototyping "paper" simulations are preformed; then the resultant optimized messages are codified for computer communication for use in automated testing.

Controls↗
NASA NTRS2015

Multilateral Research Opportunities in Ground Analogs

The global economy forces many nations to consider their national investments and make difficult decisions regarding their investment in future exploration. International collaboration provides an opportunity to leverage other nations' investments to meet common goals. The Humans In Space Community shares a common goal to enable safe, reliable, and productive human space exploration within and beyond Low Earth Orbit. Meeting this goal requires efficient use of limited resources and International capabilities. The International Space Station (ISS) is our primary platform to conduct microgravity research targeted at reducing human health and performance risks for exploration missions. Access to ISS resources, however, is becoming more and more constrained and will only be available through 2020 or 2024. NASA's Human Research Program (HRP) is actively pursuing methods to effectively utilize the ISS and appropriate ground analogs to understand and mitigate human health and performance risks prior to embarking on human exploration of deep space destinations. HRP developed a plan to use ground analogs of increasing fidelity to address questions related to exploration missions and is inviting International participation in these planned campaigns. Using established working groups and multilateral panels, the HRP is working with multiple Space Agencies to invite International participation in a series of 30- day missions that HRP will conduct in the US owned and operated Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) during 2016. In addition, the HRP is negotiating access to Antarctic stations (both US and non-US), the German :envihab and Russian NEK facilities. These facilities provide unique capabilities to address critical research questions requiring longer duration simulation or isolation. We are negotiating release of international research opportunities to ensure a multilateral approach to future analog research campaigns, hoping to begin multilateral campaigns in the latter facilities by 2017. Collaborative use of analog facilities and shared investment in the development of spaceflight countermeasures through multilateral campaigns or missions that leverage the global scientific community will focus high quality research and provide sufficient power to accelerate the development of countermeasures and drive sound recommendations for exploration missions. This panel will provide an overview of efforts to encourage and facilitate multilateral collaboration in analog missions or campaigns and describe the facilities currently under consideration to reach the common goal of enabling safe, reliable, and productive human space exploration.

Corbin, Barbara J.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Creating Innovative Frameworks to Spur Cultural Change at NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center

Changing the culture of an organization is a monumental task that often takes years and has no set formula. Steps can be taken, however, to spur cultural change by creating spaces and infrastructure to serve as the initial driving force. An innovation space and a bicycle sharing (bike share) program were implemented at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Armstrong Flight Research Center (AFRC) (Edwards, California) with a vision toward connecting Center personnel, fostering collaboration and innovation, retaining newer employees, promoting flexibility, and improving the culture and workplace atmosphere. This paper discusses the steps taken, challenges faced, novel culture-change-focused design elements, lessons learned, acquired metrics, and how these initiated cultural change at AFRC. For both the innovation space and the bike share program, funding was negotiated and provided through the NASA Convergent Aeronautics Solutions (CAS) project, which was seeking to improve the innovation and collaboration capabilities at each of the four NASA aeronautics Centers. Key stakeholders across AFRC from upper management, facilities, safety, engineering, and procurement were identified early in the process and were consulted and included throughout execution to ensure that any encountered roadblocks could be easily navigated. Research was then conducted by attending conferences and visiting culture-changing organizations both inside and outside United States Government agencies. Distilling the research, identifying available space, and deciding on specific design elements for the space was conducted by a subset of individuals of diverse backgrounds to enable quick, effective decision-making. Decisions were made with the intent to increase usage and diversity of users of the space; care was taken to ensure a well-crafted atmosphere that would foster the desired culture change. The allocated physical space required major structural modifications, new furniture, and new capabilities that would bring people in. Decisions and desires underwent a rapid reiterative process in order to stay within budget and short deadlines, while holding firm to what was seen as fundamental elements of an innovation space. The framework for cultural change being established, the more difficult task began: incubating the desired culture. Intentional workday use of the innovation space was encouraged, and organized events coordinated in order to truly foster culture change. Such incubation supports the organic spread of culture change to all areas of AFRC. This framework was complemented and expanded by the implementation of the bike share program. Steps for implementation included bike selection based on lessons learned, creating bike stations and signage, implementing bike share rules, and building a volunteer maintenance infrastructure. A novel user-reporting feedback system at each bike station is a low-impact method of capturing usage metrics. Due to the nature of the work conducted at AFRC, the bike share program and feedback system were negotiated and vetted through various organizations including legal, safety, and operations. The innovation space and the bike share program together are an effective initial framework for innovation and collaboration. Culture change takes time, but the innovation space and the bike share program are already showing signs of making a positive impact on the AFRC workforce.

rooms↗
NASA NTRS2019

Electronic Departure Approval Requests in ATD-2 Daily Operations

The NASA Air Traffic Management Demonstration 2 project is investigating Integrated Arrival-Departure-Surface (IADS) air traffic management through progressive refinement of a surface air traffic management system fielded at Charlotte-Douglas International Airport. Among the IADS areas under study are departure release-time approval request (APREQ) traffic management initiatives. This paper presents a review of APREQ operations and compliance data from daily electronic APREQ negotiations. It describes APREQ-compliance improvements observed as the ATD-2 electronic negotiation process has matured and discusses contributing factors.

call for release↗
NASA NTRS2019

Electronic Departure Approval Requests in ATD-2 Daily Operations

The NASA Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 project is investigating Integrated Arrival-Departure-Surface air traffic management through progressive refinement of a surface air traffic management system fielded at Charlotte-Douglas International Airport. Among the areas under study are departure release-time approval request (APREQ) traffic management initiatives. Scheduling departures at downstream points and complying with approved departure release times helps flights fit smoothly into busy traffic streams. This paper presents a review of APREQ operations and compliance data from daily electronic APREQ negotiations over fourteen months beginning in January 2018. It describes APREQ-compliance improvements observed as the electronic negotiation process has matured and discusses contributing factors, including renegotiation of departure release times.

Call for release↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Towards Persistent Space Observations through Autonomous Multi-Agent Formations

Sensing platforms must advance in scale and sophistication in order to support increasingly ambitious missions across Earth and space science; intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR); and planetary exploration. Distributed, persistent observation platforms have the potential to play a pivotal role in next generation missions through improved area coverage, enhanced situational awareness, and faster identification of trends and changes. The Multi-Agent Clusters for Persistent Observations from Space (MACPOS) project at NASA Langley Research Center is developing key technologies for the autonomous, heterogeneous formations that will comprise such platforms. Research thrusts include dynamic formation negotiation for self-assembling clusters of agents, distributed motion planning, and coordinated trajectory execution. Adaptive leader-follower formation negotiation allows agents to cluster and break off as necessary to adapt to both nominal and new mission objectives. Coordinated motion planning and execution maintain the formation while ensuring safe separation distances among agents and obstacles in the environment. These capabilities align MACPOS with NASA’s initiative for space and surface in-situ assembly through fundamental technology development for autonomous multi-agent systems. This paper presents an overview and early progress for the MACPOS project. We describe the system architecture for both individual agents and the overall fleet. Design considerations are given for the planning, control, and metrology subsystems. Finally, we discuss planned project milestones and the expected course of development.

Matthew P Vaughan↗