SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Risk Management Space Projects”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2017

Update on NASA Microelectronics Activities

Mission Statement: The NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program provides NASA's leadership for developing and maintaining guidance for the screening, qualification, test. and usage of EEE parts by NASA as well as in collaboration with other government Agencies and industry. NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) "STMD rapidly develops, demonstrates, and infuses revolutionary, high-payoff technologies through transparent, collaborative partnerships, expanding the boundaries of the aerospace enterprise." Mission Statement: The Space Environments Testing Management Office (SETMO) will identify, prioritize, and manage a select suite of Agency key capabilities/assets that are deemed to be essential to the future needs of NASA or the nation, including some capabilities that lack an adequate business base over the budget horizon. NESC mission is to perform value-added independent testing, analysis, and assessments of NASA's high-risk projects to ensure safety and mission success. NASA Space Environments and Avionics Fellows as well as Radiation and EEE Parts Community of Practice (CoP) leads.

NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP)↗

NASA NTRS2010

NASA Spacecraft Fault Management Workshop Results

Fault Management is a critical aspect of deep-space missions. For the purposes of this paper, fault management is defined as the ability of a system to detect, isolate, and mitigate events that impact, or have the potential to impact, nominal mission operations. The fault management capabilities are commonly distributed across flight and ground subsystems, impacting hardware, software, and mission operations designs. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Discovery & New Frontiers (D&NF) Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for 5 missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that 4 out of the 5 missions studied had significant overruns due to underestimating the complexity and support requirements for fault management. As a result of this and other recent experiences, the NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) Planetary Science Division (PSD) commissioned a workshop to bring together invited participants across government, industry, academia to assess the state of the art in fault management practice and research, identify current and potential issues, and make recommendations for addressing these issues. The workshop was held in New Orleans in April of 2008. The workshop concluded that fault management is not being limited by technology, but rather by a lack of emphasis and discipline in both the engineering and programmatic dimensions. Some of the areas cited in the findings include different, conflicting, and changing institutional goals and risk postures; unclear ownership of end-to-end fault management engineering; inadequate understanding of the impact of mission-level requirements on fault management complexity; and practices, processes, and tools that have not kept pace with the increasing complexity of mission requirements and spacecraft systems. This paper summarizes the findings and recommendations from that workshop, as well as opportunities identified for future investment in tools, processes, and products to facilitate the development of space flight fault management capabilities.

Newhouse, Marilyn↗

NASA NTRS2017

Medical Data Architecture Project Status

The Medical Data Architecture (MDA) project supports the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) risk to minimize or reduce the risk of adverse health outcomes and decrements in performance due to in-flight medical capabilities on human exploration missions. To mitigate this risk, the ExMC MDA project addresses the technical limitations identified in ExMC Gap Med 07: We do not have the capability to comprehensively process medically-relevant information to support medical operations during exploration missions. This gap identifies that the current International Space Station (ISS) medical data management includes a combination of data collection and distribution methods that are minimally integrated with on-board medical devices and systems. Furthermore, there are variety of data sources and methods of data collection. For an exploration mission, the seamless management of such data will enable an increasingly autonomous crew than the current ISS paradigm. The MDA will develop capabilities that support automated data collection, and the necessary functionality and challenges in executing a self-contained medical system that approaches crew health care delivery without assistance from ground support.To attain this goal, the first year of the MDA project focused on reducing technical risk, developing documentation and instituting iterative development processes that established the basis for the first version of MDA software (or Test Bed 1). Test Bed 1 is based on a nominal operations scenario authored by the ExMC Element Scientist. This narrative was decomposed into a Concept of Operations that formed the basis for Test Bed 1 requirements. These requirements were successfully vetted through the MDA Test Bed 1 System Requirements Review, which permitted the MDA project to begin software code development and component integration. This paper highlights the MDA objectives, development processes, and accomplishments, and identifies the fiscal year 2017 milestones and deliverables in the upcoming year.

Exploration medical system↗

NASA NTRS2017

Medical Data Architecture Project Status

The Medical Data Architecture (MDA) project supports the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) risk to minimize or reduce the risk of adverse health outcomes and decrements in performance due to in-flight medical capabilities on human exploration missions. To mitigate this risk, the ExMC MDA project addresses the technical limitations identified in ExMC Gap Med 07: We do not have the capability to comprehensively process medically-relevant information to support medical operations during exploration missions. This gap identifies that the current International Space Station (ISS) medical data management includes a combination of data collection and distribution methods that are minimally integrated with on-board medical devices and systems. Furthermore, there are variety of data sources and methods of data collection. For an exploration mission, the seamless management of such data will enable an increasingly autonomous crew than the current ISS paradigm. The MDA will develop capabilities that support automated data collection, and the necessary functionality and challenges in executing a self-contained medical system that approaches crew health care delivery without assistance from ground support. To attain this goal, the first year of the MDA project focused on reducing technical risk, developing documentation and instituting iterative development processes that established the basis for the first version of MDA software (or Test Bed 1). Test Bed 1 is based on a nominal operations scenario authored by the ExMC Element Scientist. This narrative was decomposed into a Concept of Operations that formed the basis for Test Bed 1 requirements. These requirements were successfully vetted through the MDA Test Bed 1 System Requirements Review, which permitted the MDA project to begin software code development and component integration. This paper highlights the MDA objectives, development processes, and accomplishments, and identifies the fiscal year 2017 milestones and deliverables in the upcoming year.

Data management↗

NASA NTRS2008

Integrated Circuit Chip Improves Network Efficiency

Prior to 1999 and the development of SpaceWire, a standard for high-speed links for computer networks managed by the European Space Agency (ESA), there was no high-speed communications protocol for flight electronics. Onboard computers, processing units, and other electronics had to be designed for individual projects and then redesigned for subsequent projects, which increased development periods, costs, and risks. After adopting the SpaceWire protocol in 2000, NASA implemented the standard on the Swift mission, a gamma ray burst-alert telescope launched in November 2004. Scientists and developers on the James Webb Space Telescope further developed the network version of SpaceWire. In essence, SpaceWire enables more science missions at a lower cost, because it provides a standard interface between flight electronics components; new systems need not be custom built to accommodate individual missions, so electronics can be reused. New protocols are helping to standardize higher layers of computer communication. Goddard Space Flight Center improved on the ESA-developed SpaceWire by enabling standard protocols, which included defining quality of service and supporting plug-and-play capabilities. Goddard upgraded SpaceWire to make the routers more efficient and reliable, with features including redundant cables, simultaneous discrete broadcast pulses, prevention of network blockage, and improved verification. Redundant cables simplify management because the user does not need to worry about which connection is available, and simultaneous broadcast signals allow multiple users to broadcast low-latency side-band signal pulses across the network using the same resources for data communication. Additional features have been added to the SpaceWire switch to prevent network blockage so that more robust networks can be designed. Goddard s verification environment for the link-and-switch implementation continuously randomizes and tests different parts, constantly anticipating situations, which helps improve communications reliability. It has been tested in many different implementations for compatibility.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2014

NMME Monthly / Seasonal Forecasts for NASA SERVIR Applications Science

This work details use of the North American Multi-Model Ensemble (NMME) experimental forecasts as drivers for Decision Support Systems (DSSs) in the NASA / USAID initiative, SERVIR (a Spanish acronym meaning "to serve"). SERVIR integrates satellite observations, ground-based data and forecast models to monitor and forecast environmental changes and to improve response to natural disasters. Through the use of DSSs whose "front ends" are physically based models, the SERVIR activity provides a natural testbed to determine the extent to which NMME monthly to seasonal projections enable scientists, educators, project managers and policy implementers in developing countries to better use probabilistic outlooks of seasonal hydrologic anomalies in assessing agricultural / food security impacts, water availability, and risk to societal infrastructure. The multi-model NMME framework provides a "best practices" approach to probabilistic forecasting. The NMME forecasts are generated at resolution more coarse than that required to support DSS models; downscaling in both space and time is necessary. The methodology adopted here applied model output statistics where we use NMME ensemble monthly projections of sea-surface temperature (SST) and precipitation from 30 years of hindcasts with observations of precipitation and temperature for target regions. Since raw model forecasts are well-known to have structural biases, a cross-validated multivariate regression methodology (CCA) is used to link the model projected states as predictors to the predictands of the target region. The target regions include a number of basins in East and South Africa as well as the Ganges / Baramaputra / Meghna basin complex. The MOS approach used address spatial downscaling. Temporal disaggregation of monthly seasonal forecasts is achieved through use of a tercile bootstrapping approach. We interpret the results of these studies, the levels of skill by several metrics, and key uncertainties.

Robertson, Franklin R.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Ares Launch Vehicles Lean Practices Case Study

The Ares launch vehicles team, managed by the Ares Projects Office (APO) at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, has completed the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle System Requirements Review and System Definition Review and early design work for the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle. This paper provides examples of how Lean Manufacturing, Kaizen events, and Six Sigma practices are helping APO deliver a new space transportation capability on time and within budget, while still meeting stringent technical requirements. For example, Lean philosophies have been applied to numerous process definition efforts and existing process improvement activities, including the Ares I-X test flight Certificate of Flight Readiness (CoFR) process, risk management process, and review board organization and processes. Ares executives learned Lean practices firsthand, making the team "smart buyers" during proposal reviews and instilling the team with a sense of what is meant by "value-added" activities. Since the goal of the APO is to field launch vehicles at a reasonable cost and on an ambitious schedule, adopting Lean philosophies and practices will be crucial to the Ares Project's long-term SUCCESS.

Doreswamy, Rajiv↗

NASA NTRS2011

Fission Surface Power Technology Development Update

Power is a critical consideration in planning exploration of the surfaces of the Moon, Mars, and places beyond. Nuclear power is an important option, especially for locations in the solar system where sunlight is limited or environmental conditions are challenging (e.g., extreme cold, dust storms). NASA and the Department of Energy are maintaining the option for fission surface power for the Moon and Mars by developing and demonstrating technology for a fission surface power system. The Fission Surface Power Systems project has focused on subscale component and subsystem demonstrations to address the feasibility of a low-risk, low-cost approach to space nuclear power for surface missions. Laboratory demonstrations of the liquid metal pump, reactor control drum drive, power conversion, heat rejection, and power management and distribution technologies have validated that the fundamental characteristics and performance of these components and subsystems are consistent with a Fission Surface Power preliminary reference concept. In addition, subscale versions of a non-nuclear reactor simulator, using electric resistance heating in place of the reactor fuel, have been built and operated with liquid metal sodium-potassium and helium/xenon gas heat transfer loops, demonstrating the viability of establishing system-level performance and characteristics of fission surface power technologies without requiring a nuclear reactor. While some component and subsystem testing will continue through 2011 and beyond, the results to date provide sufficient confidence to proceed with system level technology readiness demonstration. To demonstrate the system level readiness of fission surface power in an operationally relevant environment (the primary goal of the Fission Surface Power Systems project), a full scale, 1/4 power Technology Demonstration Unit (TDU) is under development. The TDU will consist of a non-nuclear reactor simulator, a sodium-potassium heat transfer loop, a power conversion unit with electrical controls, and a heat rejection system with a multi-panel radiator assembly. Testing is planned at the Glenn Research Center Vacuum Facility 6 starting in 2012, with vacuum and liquid-nitrogen cold walls to provide simulation of operationally relevant environments. A nominal two-year test campaign is planned including a Phase 1 reactor simulator and power conversion test followed by a Phase 2 integrated system test with radiator panel heat rejection. The testing is expected to demonstrate the readiness and availability of fission surface power as a viable power system option for NASA's exploration needs. In addition to surface power, technology development work within this project is also directly applicable to in-space fission power and propulsion systems.

Palac, Donald T.↗

NASA NTRS1998

Testing, Requirements, and Metrics

The criticality of correct, complete, testable requirements is a fundamental tenet of software engineering. Also critical is complete requirements based testing of the final product. Modern tools for managing requirements allow new metrics to be used in support of both of these critical processes. Using these tools, potential problems with the quality of the requirements and the test plan can be identified early in the life cycle. Some of these quality factors include: ambiguous or incomplete requirements, poorly designed requirements databases, excessive or insufficient test cases, and incomplete linkage of tests to requirements. This paper discusses how metrics can be used to evaluate the quality of the requirements and test to avoid problems later. Requirements management and requirements based testing have always been critical in the implementation of high quality software systems. Recently, automated tools have become available to support requirements management. At NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), automated requirements management tools are being used on several large projects. The use of these tools opens the door to innovative uses of metrics in characterizing test plan quality and assessing overall testing risks. In support of these projects, the Software Assurance Technology Center (SATC) is working to develop and apply a metrics program that utilizes the information now available through the application of requirements management tools. Metrics based on this information provides real-time insight into the testing of requirements and these metrics assist the Project Quality Office in its testing oversight role. This paper discusses three facets of the SATC's efforts to evaluate the quality of the requirements and test plan early in the life cycle, thus preventing costly errors and time delays later.

Rosenberg, Linda↗

NASA NTRS2016

Assurance of Fault Management: Risk-Significant Adverse Condition Awareness

Fault Management (FM) systems are ranked high in risk-based assessment of criticality within flight software, emphasizing the importance of establishing highly competent domain expertise to provide assurance for NASA projects, especially as spaceflight systems continue to increase in complexity. Insight into specific characteristics of FM architectures seen embedded within safety- and mission-critical software systems analyzed by the NASA Independent Verification Validation (IVV) Program has been enhanced with an FM Technical Reference (TR) suite. Benefits are aimed beyond the IVV community to those that seek ways to efficiently and effectively provide software assurance to reduce the FM risk posture of NASA and other space missions. The identification of particular FM architectures, visibility, and associated IVV techniques provides a TR suite that enables greater assurance that critical software systems will adequately protect against faults and respond to adverse conditions. The role FM has with regard to overall asset protection of flight software systems is being addressed with the development of an adverse condition (AC) database encompassing flight software vulnerabilities.Identification of potential off-nominal conditions and analysis to determine how a system responds to these conditions are important aspects of hazard analysis and fault management. Understanding what ACs the mission may face, and ensuring they are prevented or addressed is the responsibility of the assurance team, which necessarily should have insight into ACs beyond those defined by the project itself. Research efforts sponsored by NASAs Office of Safety and Mission Assurance defined terminology, categorized data fields, and designed a baseline repository that centralizes and compiles a comprehensive listing of ACs and correlated data relevant across many NASA missions. This prototype tool helps projects improve analysis by tracking ACs, and allowing queries based on project, mission type, domain component, causal fault, and other key characteristics. The repository has a firm structure, initial collection of data, and an interface established for informational queries, with plans for integration within the Enterprise Architecture at NASA IVV, enabling support and accessibility across the Agency. The development of an improved workflow process for adaptive, risk-informed FM assurance is currently underway.

Software Verification & Validation↗

NASA NTRS2019

Airborne Radar for sUAS Sense and Avoid

A primary challenge for the safe integration of small UAS operations into the National Airspace System (NAS) is traffic deconfliction, both from manned and unmanned aircraft. The UAS Traffic Management (UTM) project being conducted at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) considers a layered approach to separation provision, ranging from segregation of operations through airspace volumes (geofences) to autonomous sense and avoid (SAA) technologies for higher risk, densely occupied airspace. Cooperative SAA systems, such as Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) and/or vehicle-to-vehicle communication systems provide significant additional risk mitigation but they fail to adequately mitigate collision risks for non-cooperative (non-transponder equipped) airborne aircraft. The RAAVIN (Radar on Autonomous Aircraft to Verify ICAROUS Navigation) flight test being conducted by NASA and the Mid-Atlantic Aviation Partnership (MAAP) was designed to investigate the applicability and performance of a prototype, commercially available sUAS radar to detect and track non-cooperative airborne traffic, both manned and unmanned. The radar selected for this research was a Frequency Modulated Continuous Wave (FMCW) radar with 120 degree azimuth and 80 degree elevation field of view operating at 24.55GHz center frequency with a 200 MHz bandwidth. The radar transmits 2 watts of power thru a Metamaterial Electronically Scanning Array antenna in horizontal polarization. When the radar is transmitting, personnel must be at least 1 meter away from the active array to limit nonionizing radiation exposure. The radar physical dimensions are 18.7cm by 12.1cm by 4.1cm and it weighs less than 820 grams making it well suited for installation on small UASs. The onboard, SAA capability, known as ICAROUS, (Independent Configurable Architecture for Reliable Operations of Unmanned Systems), developed by NASA to support sUAS operations, will provide autonomous guidance using the traffic radar tracks from the onboard radar. The RAAVIN set of studies will be conducted in three phases. The first phase included outdoor, ground-based radar evaluations performed at the Virginia Tech’s Kentland Farm testing range in Blacksburg, VA. The test was designed to measure how well the radar could detect and track a small UAS flying in the radar’s field of view. The radar was used to monitor 5 test flights consisting of outbound, inbound and crossing routes at different ranges and altitudes. The UAS flown during the ground test was the Inspire 2, a quad copter weighing less than 4250 grams (10 pounds) at maximum payload. The radar was set up to scan and track targets over its full azimuthal field of view from 0 to 40 degrees in elevation. The radar was configured to eliminate tracks generated from any targets located beyond 2000 meters from the radar and moving at velocities under 1.45 meters per second. For subsequent phases of the study the radar will be integrated with a sUAS platform to evaluate its performance in flight for SAA applications ranging from sUAS to manned GA aircraft detections and tracking. Preliminary data analysis from the first outdoor ground tests showed the radar performed well at tracking the vehicle as it flew outbound and repeatedly maintained a track out to 1000 meters (maximum 1387 meters) until the vehicle slowed to a stop to reverse direction to fly inbound. As the Inspire flew inbound tracks from beyond 800 meters, a reacquisition time delay was consistently observed between when the Inspire exceeds a speed of 1.45 meters per second and when the radar indicated an inbound target was present and maintained its track. The time delay varied between 6 seconds to over 37 seconds for the inbound flights examined, and typically resulted in about a 200 meter closure distance before the Inspire track was maintained. The radar performed well at both acquiring and tracking the vehicle as it flew crossing routes out past 400 meters across the azimuthal field of view. The radar and ICAROUS software will be integrated and flown on a BFD-1400-SE8-E UAS during the next phase of the RAAVIN project. The main goal at the conclusion of this effort is to determine if this radar technology can reliably support minimum requirements for SAA applications of sUAS. In particular, the study will measure the range of vehicle detections, lateral and vertical angular errors, false and missed/late detections, and estimated distance at closest point of approach after an avoidance maneuver is executed. This last metric is directly impacted by sensor performance and indicates its suitability for the task.

Szatkowski, George N.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Results from the NASA Spacecraft Fault Management Workshop: Cost Drivers for Deep Space Missions

Fault Management, the detection of and response to in-flight anomalies, is a critical aspect of deep-space missions. Fault management capabilities are commonly distributed across flight and ground subsystems, impacting hardware, software, and mission operations designs. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Discovery & New Frontiers (D&NF) Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for five missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that four out of the five missions studied had significant overruns due to underestimating the complexity and support requirements for fault management. As a result of this and other recent experiences, the NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) Planetary Science Division (PSD) commissioned a workshop to bring together invited participants across government, industry, and academia to assess the state of the art in fault management practice and research, identify current and potential issues, and make recommendations for addressing these issues. The workshop was held in New Orleans in April of 2008. The workshop concluded that fault management is not being limited by technology, but rather by a lack of emphasis and discipline in both the engineering and programmatic dimensions. Some of the areas cited in the findings include different, conflicting, and changing institutional goals and risk postures; unclear ownership of end-to-end fault management engineering; inadequate understanding of the impact of mission-level requirements on fault management complexity; and practices, processes, and tools that have not kept pace with the increasing complexity of mission requirements and spacecraft systems. This paper summarizes the findings and recommendations from that workshop, particularly as fault management development issues affect operations and the development of operations capabilities.

Newhouse, Marilyn E.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) Program Lessons Learned

This report has been developed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) Risk Management team in close coordination with the COTS Program. This document provides a point-in-time, cumulative, summary of actionable key lessons learned derived from the design project. Lessons learned invariably address challenges and risks and the way in which these areas have been addressed. Accordingly the risk management thread is woven throughout the document.

COTS↗

NASA NTRS2006

A New Heavy-Lift Capability for Space Exploration: NASA's Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is developing new launch systems in preparation for the retirement of the Space Shuttle by 2010, as directed in the United States (U.S.) Vision for Space Exploration. The Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) and the Ares V heavy-lift Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) systems will build upon proven, reliable hardware derived from the Apollo Saturn (1961 to 1975) and Space Shuttle (1972 to 2010) programs to deliver safe, reliable, affordable space transportation solutions. This approach leverages existing aerospace talent and a unique infrastructure, as well as the vast amount of legacy knowledge gained from almost a half-century of hard-won experience in the space enterprise. Beginning early next decade, the Ares I will launch the new Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) to the International Space Station (ISS) or to low-Earth orbit for trips to the Moon and, ultimately, Mars. Late next decade, the Ares V's Earth Departure Stage will carry larger payloads such as the lunar lander into orbit, and the Crew Exploration Vehicle will dock with it for missions to the Moon, where astronauts will explore new territories and conduct science and technology experiments. Both the Ares I and Ares V systems are being designed to support longer future trips to Mars. The Exploration Launch Projects Office, located at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, is designing, developing, testing, and evaluating both launch vehicle systems in partnership with other NASA Centers, Government agencies, and industry contractors. This paper provides top-level information regarding the genesis and evolution of the baseline configuration for the Ares V heavy-lift system. It also touches on risk-based management strategies, such as building on powerful hardware and promoting common features between the Ares I and Ares V systems to reduce technical, schedule, and cost risks, as well as development and operations costs. Finally, it gives a summary of several notable accomplishments over the past year, since the Exploration Launch Projects effort officially kicked off in October 2005, and looks ahead at work planned for 2007 and beyond.

Sumrall, John P.↗

NASA NTRS2011

NASA Risk Management Handbook

The purpose of this handbook is to provide guidance for implementing the Risk Management (RM) requirements of NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) document NPR 8000.4A, Agency Risk Management Procedural Requirements [1], with a specific focus on programs and projects, and applying to each level of the NASA organizational hierarchy as requirements flow down. This handbook supports RM application within the NASA systems engineering process, and is a complement to the guidance contained in NASA/SP-2007-6105, NASA Systems Engineering Handbook [2]. Specifically, this handbook provides guidance that is applicable to the common technical processes of Technical Risk Management and Decision Analysis established by NPR 7123.1A, NASA Systems Engineering Process and Requirements [3]. These processes are part of the \Systems Engineering Engine. (Figure 1) that is used to drive the development of the system and associated work products to satisfy stakeholder expectations in all mission execution domains, including safety, technical, cost, and schedule. Like NPR 7123.1A, NPR 8000.4A is a discipline-oriented NPR that intersects with product-oriented NPRs such as NPR 7120.5D, NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements [4]; NPR 7120.7, NASA Information Technology and Institutional Infrastructure Program and Project Management Requirements [5]; and NPR 7120.8, NASA Research and Technology Program and Project Management Requirements [6]. In much the same way that the NASA Systems Engineering Handbook is intended to provide guidance on the implementation of NPR 7123.1A, this handbook is intended to provide guidance on the implementation of NPR 8000.4A. 1.2 Scope and Depth This handbook provides guidance for conducting RM in the context of NASA program and project life cycles, which produce derived requirements in accordance with existing systems engineering practices that flow down through the NASA organizational hierarchy. The guidance in this handbook is not meant to be prescriptive. Instead, it is meant to be general enough, and contain a sufficient diversity of examples, to enable the reader to adapt the methods as needed to the particular risk management issues that he or she faces. The handbook highlights major issues to consider when managing programs and projects in the presence of potentially significant uncertainty, so that the user is better able to recognize and avoid pitfalls that might otherwise be experienced.

Dezfuli, Homayoon↗

NASA NTRS2020

Technical Risks Associated with Heat Melt Compaction Systems

The processing of trash and waste is a welcome and valuable addition to humans living and working in space. Besides the obvious desire to have a pleasant and productive habitation environment, trash management has many practicalbenefits for crew health, resource recovery, and volume reclamation through garbage compaction. The Trash Compaction and Processing System (TCPS), which is a NASA project to develop a trash processing system for long-duration spaceflight, is currently undergoing concept development with engineering prototype validation through two contracted efforts. The development efforts are being supported with activities associated with the NASA Generation 2 Heat Melt Compactor (HMC). The HMC is a facility that compacts trash, recovers water, heats the trash to eliminate biological activity, and manages gas and vapor effluents. The resulting residual processed trash is a compact tile that is free of biological growth and that can be used for augmenting radiation shields. The work being conducted with the HMC focuses on high risk technical areas with respect to operations, subsystem performance, and ISS effluent management interface requirements. This paper gives an overview of the technical risks and the current use of the HMC as a facility for reducing risk.

HMC↗

NASA NTRS2005

Safety and Mission Assurance Performance Metric

The safety and mission assurance (S&MA) performance metric is a method that provides a process through which the managers of a large, complex program can readily understand and assess the accepted risk, the problems, and the associated reliability of the program. Conceived for original use in helping to assure the safety and success of the International Space Station (ISS) program, the S&MA performance metric also can be applied to other large and complex programs and projects. The S&MA-performance-metric data products comprise one or more tables (possibly also one or more graphs) that succinctly display all of the information relevant (and no information that is irrelevant) to management decisions that must be made to assure the safety and success of a program or project, thereby facilitating such decisions.

Holsomback, Jerry↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling NASA’s Procedural Requirement Processes - Implications for Digital Future

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has an ongoing Digital Transformation effort and to leverage and showcase the power of Digital Transformation, an effort is underway to develop an integrated, datacentric, model representing NASA’s key process requirements. The task was divided into three phases: As Is modeling, Analysis, and To Be Planning. As part of this effort, a team has completed the first Phase I of the modeling task and is nearing completion of the second phase. This effort will capture the key elements as requirements, responsibilities, allocations, roles, products, and associated lifecycle elements. The scope of modeling included NASA’s NPR 7120.5 (Project and Program Management), NPR 7123.1 (Systems Engineering) and NPRs 8705.2 (Risk classification for Robotic Missions) and 8705.4 (Human-Rating Requirements for Space Missions). This paper will summarize the approach, scope, parsing patterns applied, metamodel, and associated workflows for the As-Is modeling. It will also summarize the results and insights gleaned during that phase, including the review process. These insights have informed the analysis and will be discussed. The analysis modeling phase will also be summarized including how the stakeholders were engaged, how the common elements were handled and dispositioned, and will also describe some of the plans for the future of NASA NPDs and NPRs.

Systems Engineering↗