Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “UML”

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 91 records · Page 5

Interface Generation and Compositional Verification in JavaPathfinder

We present a novel algorithm for interface generation of software components. Given a component, our algorithm uses learning techniques to compute a permissive interface representing legal usage of the component. Unlike our previous work, this algorithm does not require knowledge about the component s environment. Furthermore, in contrast to other related approaches, our algorithm computes permissive interfaces even in the presence of non-determinism in the component. Our algorithm is implemented in the JavaPathfinder model checking framework for UML statechart components. We have also added support for automated assume-guarantee style compositional verification in JavaPathfinder, using component interfaces. We report on the application of the presented approach to the generation of interfaces for flight software components.

Giannakopoulou, Dimitra↗

Towards Behavioral Reflexion Models

Software architecture has become essential in the struggle to manage today s increasingly large and complex systems. Software architecture views are created to capture important system characteristics on an abstract and, thus, comprehensible level. As the system is implemented and later maintained, it often deviates from the original design specification. Such deviations can have implication for the quality of the system, such as reliability, security, and maintainability. Software architecture compliance checking approaches, such as the reflexion model technique, have been proposed to address this issue by comparing the implementation to a model of the systems architecture design. However, architecture compliance checking approaches focus solely on structural characteristics and ignore behavioral conformance. This is especially an issue in Systems-of- Systems. Systems-of-Systems (SoS) are decompositions of large systems, into smaller systems for the sake of flexibility. Deviations of the implementation to its behavioral design often reduce the reliability of the entire SoS. An approach is needed that supports the reasoning about behavioral conformance on architecture level. In order to address this issue, we have developed an approach for comparing the implementation of a SoS to an architecture model of its behavioral design. The approach follows the idea of reflexion models and adopts it to support the compliance checking of behaviors. In this paper, we focus on sequencing properties as they play an important role in many SoS. Sequencing deviations potentially have a severe impact on the SoS correctness and qualities. The desired behavioral specification is defined in UML sequence diagram notation and behaviors are extracted from the SoS implementation. The behaviors are then mapped to the model of the desired behavior and the two are compared. Finally, a reflexion model is constructed that shows the deviations between behavioral design and implementation. This paper discusses the approach and shows how it can be applied to investigate reliability issues in SoS.

Ackermann, Christopher↗

Mission Simulation Toolkit

The Mission Simulation Toolkit (MST) is a flexible software system for autonomy research. It was developed as part of the Mission Simulation Facility (MSF) project that was started in 2001 to facilitate the development of autonomous planetary robotic missions. Autonomy is a key enabling factor for robotic exploration. There has been a large gap between autonomy software (at the research level), and software that is ready for insertion into near-term space missions. The MST bridges this gap by providing a simulation framework and a suite of tools for supporting research and maturation of autonomy. MST uses a distributed framework based on the High Level Architecture (HLA) standard. A key feature of the MST framework is the ability to plug in new models to replace existing ones with the same services. This enables significant simulation flexibility, particularly the mixing and control of fidelity level. In addition, the MST provides automatic code generation from robot interfaces defined with the Unified Modeling Language (UML), methods for maintaining synchronization across distributed simulation systems, XML-based robot description, and an environment server. Finally, the MSF supports a number of third-party products including dynamic models and terrain databases. Although the communication objects and some of the simulation components that are provided with this toolkit are specifically designed for terrestrial surface rovers, the MST can be applied to any other domain, such as aerial, aquatic, or space.

Pisaich, Gregory↗

Data-Flow Based Model Analysis

The concept of (meta) modeling combines an intuitive way of formalizing the structure of an application domain with a high expressiveness that makes it suitable for a wide variety of use cases and has therefore become an integral part of many areas in computer science. While the definition of modeling languages through the use of meta models, e.g. in Unified Modeling Language (UML), is a well-understood process, their validation and the extraction of behavioral information is still a challenge. In this paper we present a novel approach for dynamic model analysis along with several fields of application. Examining the propagation of information along the edges and nodes of the model graph allows to extend and simplify the definition of semantic constraints in comparison to the capabilities offered by e.g. the Object Constraint Language. Performing a flow-based analysis also enables the simulation of dynamic behavior, thus providing an "abstract interpretation"-like analysis method for the modeling domain.

Saad, Christian↗

NASA Tech Briefs, October 2010

Topics covered include: Hybrid Architecture Active Wavefront Sensing and Control; Carbon-Nanotube-Based Chemical Gas Sensor; Aerogel-Positronium Technology for the Detection of Small Quantities of Organic and/or Toxic Materials; Graphene-Based Reversible Nano-Switch/Sensor Schottky Diode; Inductive Non-Contact Position Sensor; High-Temperature Surface-Acoustic-Wave Transducer; Grid-Sphere Electrodes for Contact with Ionospheric Plasma; Enabling IP Header Compression in COTS Routers via Frame Relay on a Simplex Link; Ka-Band SiGe Receiver Front-End MMIC for Transponder Applications; Robust Optimization Design Algorithm for High-Frequency TWTs; Optimal and Local Connectivity Between Neuron and Synapse Array in the Quantum Dot/Silicon Brain; Method and Circuit for In-Situ Health Monitoring of Solar Cells in Space; BGen: A UML Behavior Network Generator Tool; Platform for Post-Processing Waveform-Based NDE; Electrochemical Hydrogen Peroxide Generator; Fabrication of Single, Vertically Aligned Carbon Nanotubes in 3D Nanoscale Architectures; Process to Create High-Fidelity Lunar Dust Simulants; Lithium-Ion Electrolytes Containing Phosphorous-Based, Flame-Retardant Additives; InGaP Heterojunction Barrier Solar Cells; Straight-Pore Microfilter with Efficient Regeneration; Determining Shear Stress Distribution in a Laminate; Self-Adjusting Liquid Injectors for Combustors; Handling Qualities Prediction of an F-16XL-Based Reduced Sonic Boom Aircraft; Tele-Robotic ATHLETE Controller for Kinematics - TRACK; Three-Wheel Brush-Wheel Sampler; Heterodyne Interferometer Angle Metrology; Aligning Astronomical Telescopes via Identification of Stars; Generation of Optical Combs in a WGM Resonator from a Bichromatic Pump; Large-Format AlGaN PIN Photodiode Arrays for UV Images; Fiber-Coupled Planar Light-Wave Circuit for Seed Laser Control in High Spectral Resolution Lidar Systems; On Calculating the Zero-Gravity Surface Figure of a Mirror; Optical Modification of Casimir Forces for Improved Function of Micro- and Nano-Scale Devices; Analysis, Simulation, and Verification of Knowledge-Based, Rule-Based, and Expert Systems; Core and Off-Core Processes in Systems Engineering; Digital Reconstruction Supporting Investigation of Mishaps; and Template Matching Approach to Signal Prediction.

Source record↗

NASA Tech Briefs, November 2005

Topics covered include: Laser System for Precise, Unambiguous Range Measurements; Flexible Cryogenic Temperature and Liquid-Level Probes; Precision Cryogenic Dilatometer; Stroboscopic Interferometer for Measuring Mirror Vibrations; Some Improvements in H-PDLCs; Multiple-Bit Differential Detection of OQPSK; Absolute Position Encoders With Vertical Image Binning; Flexible, Carbon-Based Ohmic Contacts for Organic Transistors; GaAs QWIP Array Containing More Than a Million Pixels; AutoChem; Virtual Machine Language; Two-Dimensional Ffowcs Williams/Hawkings Equation Solver; Full Multigrid Flow Solver; Doclet To Synthesize UML; Computing Thermal Effects of Cavitation in Cryogenic Liquids; GUI for Computational Simulation of a Propellant Mixer; Control Program for an Optical-Calibration Robot; SQL-RAMS; Distributing Data from Desktop to Hand-Held Computers; Best-Fit Conic Approximation of Spacecraft Trajectory; Improved Charge-Transfer Fluorescent Dyes; Stability-Augmentation Devices for Miniature Aircraft; Tool Measures Depths of Defects on a Case Tang Joint; Two Heat-Transfer Improvements for Gas Liquefiers; Controlling Force and Depth in Friction Stir Welding; Spill-Resistant Alkali-Metal-Vapor Dispenser; A Methodology for Quantifying Certain Design Requirements During the Design Phase; Measuring Two Key Parameters of H3 Color Centers in Diamond; Improved Compression of Wavelet-Transformed Images; NASA Interactive Forms Type Interface - NIFTI; Predicting Numbers of Problems in Development of Software; Hot-Electron Photon Counters for Detecting Terahertz Photons; Magnetic Variations Associated With Solar Flares; and Artificial Intelligence for Controlling Robotic Aircraft.

Source record↗

On Using SysML, DoDAF 2.0 and UPDM to Model the Architecture for the NOAA's Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS) Ground System (GS)

The JPSS Ground System is a lIexible system of systems responsible for telemetry, tracking & command (TT &C), data acquisition, routing and data processing services for a varied lIeet of satellites to support weather prediction, modeling and climate modeling. To assist in this engineering effort, architecture modeling tools are being employed to translate the former NPOESS baseline to the new JPSS baseline, The paper will focus on the methodology for the system engineering process and the use of these architecture modeling tools within that process, The Department of Defense Architecture Framework version 2,0 (DoDAF 2.0) viewpoints and views that are being used to describe the JPSS GS architecture are discussed. The Unified Profile for DoOAF and MODAF (UPDM) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), as ' provided by extensions to the MagicDraw UML modeling tool, are used to develop the diagrams and tables that make up the architecture model. The model development process and structure are discussed, examples are shown, and details of handling the complexities of a large System of Systems (SoS), such as the JPSS GS, with an equally complex modeling tool, are described

Hayden, Jeffrey L.↗

Toward a Model-Based Approach for Flight System Fault Protection

Use SysML/UML to describe the physical structure of the system This part of the model would be shared with other teams - FS Systems Engineering, Planning & Execution, V&V, Operations, etc., in an integrated model-based engineering environment Use the UML Profile mechanism, defining Stereotypes to precisely express the concepts of the FP domain This extends the UML/SysML languages to contain our FP concepts Use UML/SysML, along with our profile, to capture FP concepts and relationships in the model Generate typical FP engineering products (the FMECA, Fault Tree, MRD, V&V Matrices)

fault protection↗

Domain-Specific Languages and Diagram Customization for a Concurrent Engineering Environment

A major open question for advocates of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) is the question of how system and subsystem engineers will work together. The Systems Modeling Language (SysML), like any language intended for a large audience, is in tension between the desires for simplicity and for expressiveness. In order to be more expressive, many specialized language elements may be introduced, which will unfortunately make a complete understanding of the language a more daunting task. While this may be acceptable for systems modelers, it will increase the challenge of including subsystem engineers in the modeling effort. One possible answer to this situation is the use of Domain-Specific Languages (DSL), which are fully supported by the Unified Modeling Language (UML). SysML is in fact a DSL for systems engineering. The expressive power of a DSL can be enhanced through the use of diagram customization. Various domains have already developed their own schematic vocabularies. Within the space engineering community, two excellent examples are the propulsion and telecommunication subsystems. A return to simple box-and-line diagrams (e.g., the SysML Internal Block Diagram) are in many ways a step backward. In order allow subsystem engineers to contribute directly to the model, it is necessary to make a system modeling tool at least approximate in accessibility to drawing tools like Microsoft PowerPoint and Visio. The challenge is made more extreme in a concurrent engineering environment, where designs must often be drafted in an hour or two. In the case of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory's Team X concurrent design team, a subsystem is specified using a combination of PowerPoint for drawing and Excel for calculation. A pilot has been undertaken in order to meld the drawing portion and the production of master equipment lists (MELs) via a SysML authoring tool, MagicDraw. Team X currently interacts with its customers in a process of sharing presentations. There are several inefficiencies that arise from this situation. The first is that a customer team must wait two weeks to a month (which is 2-4 times the duration of most Team X studies themselves) for a finalized, detailed design description. Another is that this information must be re-entered by hand into the set of engineering artifacts and design tools that the mission concept team uses after a study is complete. Further, there is no persistent connection to Team X or institutionally shared formulation design tools and data after a given study, again reducing the direct reuse of designs created in a Team X study. This paper presents the underpinnings of subsystem DSLs as they were developed for this pilot. This includes specialized semantics for different domains as well as the process by which major categories of objects were derived in support of defining the DSLs. The feedback given to us by the domain experts on usability, along with a pilot study with the partial inclusion of these tools is also discussed.

Cole, Bjorn↗

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASAs Space Launch System

The engineering development of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS) requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The nominal and off-nominal characteristics of SLS's elements and subsystems must be understood and matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex systems engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model-based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model-based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through FSW certification are an important focus of SLS's development effort to further ensure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. To test and validate these M&FM algorithms a dedicated test-bed was developed for full Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing (VMET). For addressing fault management (FM) early in the development lifecycle for the SLS program, NASA formed the M&FM team as part of the Integrated Systems Health Management and Automation Branch under the Spacecraft Vehicle Systems Department at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). To support the development of the FM algorithms, the VMET developed by the M&FM team provides the ability to integrate the algorithms, perform test cases, and integrate vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle (LV) subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating the M&FM algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction. The flexibility of the VMET capabilities enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS, GNC, and others. One of the principal functions of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software test and validation processes. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts from requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development and regression testing lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM group but in particular by the Analysis Team working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission (LOM) and Loss of Crew (LOC) probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses to be tested in VMET to ensure reliable failure detection, and confirm responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - the ARINC 6535-partitioned Operating System, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by FSW. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure their effectiveness and performance in the exterior FSW development and test processes. This paper is outlined in a systematic fashion analogous to a lifecycle process flow for engineering development of algorithms into software and testing. Section I describes the NASA SLS M&FM context, presenting the current infrastructure, leading principles, methods, and participants. Section II defines the testing philosophy of the M&FM algorithms as related to VMET followed by section III, which presents the modeling methods of the algorithms to be tested and validated in VMET. Its details are then further presented in section IV followed by Section V presenting integration, test status, and state analysis. Finally, section VI addresses the summary and forward directions followed by the appendices presenting relevant information on terminology and documentation.

Trevino, Luis↗

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASA's Space Launch System

The engineering development of the new Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The characteristics of these spacecraft systems must be matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex system engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in specialized Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through Flight Software certification are an important focus of this development effort to further insure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. NASA formed a dedicated M&FM team for addressing fault management early in the development lifecycle for the SLS initiative. As part of the development of the M&FM capabilities, this team has developed a dedicated testbed that integrates specific M&FM algorithms, specialized nominal and off-nominal test cases, and vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating these algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction for the SLS program. The flexibility of the Vehicle Management End-to-end Testbed (VMET) enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS. The intent of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software development infrastructure and its related testing entities. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts into software through requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM analysis group working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, the Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission and Loss of Crew probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses that can be tested in VMET to ensure that failures can be detected, and confirm that responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - ARINC 653 partitioned OS, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by Flight Software. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure the effectiveness of M&FM algorithms performance in the FSW development and test processes.

Trevino, Luis↗

ISS Double-Gimbaled CMG Subsystem Simulation Using the Agile Development Method

This paper presents an evolutionary approach in simulating a cluster of 4 Control Moment Gyros (CMG) on the International Space Station (ISS) using a common sense approach (the agile development method) for concurrent mathematical modeling and simulation of the CMG subsystem. This simulation is part of Training systems for the 21st Century simulator which will provide training for crew members, instructors, and flight controllers. The basic idea of how the CMGs on the space station are used for its non-propulsive attitude control is briefly explained to set up the context for simulating a CMG subsystem. Next different reference frames and the detailed equations of motion (EOM) for multiple double-gimbal variable-speed control moment gyroscopes (DGVs) are presented. Fixing some of the terms in the EOM becomes the special case EOM for ISS's double-gimbaled fixed speed CMGs. CMG simulation development using the agile development method is presented in which customer's requirements and solutions evolve through iterative analysis, design, coding, unit testing and acceptance testing. At the end of the iteration a set of features implemented in that iteration are demonstrated to the flight controllers thus creating a short feedback loop and helping in creating adaptive development cycles. The unified modeling language (UML) tool is used in illustrating the user stories, class designs and sequence diagrams. This incremental development approach of mathematical modeling and simulating the CMG subsystem involved the development team and the customer early on, thus improving the quality of the working CMG system in each iteration and helping the team to accurately predict the cost, schedule and delivery of the software.

Inampudi, Ravi↗

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASA's Space Launch System

The development of the Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The characteristics of these systems must be matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large complex systems engineering challenge being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance. Using traditional model based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms are crafted and vetted in specialized Integrated Development Teams composed of multiple development disciplines. NASA also has formed an M&FM team for addressing fault management early in the development lifecycle. This team has developed a dedicated Vehicle Management End-to-End Testbed (VMET) that integrates specific M&FM algorithms, specialized nominal and off-nominal test cases, and vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle subsystem models. The flexibility of VMET enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models. The intent is to validate the algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to flight software test processes. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts into software through requirements and test processes. Risk reduction is addressed by working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, the Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission and Loss of Crew probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and detection and responses that can be tested in VMET and confirm that responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - ARINC 653 partitioned OS, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM. The plan for VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by Flight Software. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure the effectiveness of M&FM algorithms performance in the FSW development and test processes. This paper is outlined in a systematic fashion analogous to a lifecycle process flow for engineering development of algorithms into software and testing. Section I describes the NASA SLS M&FM context, presenting the current infrastructure, leading principles, methods, and participants. Section II defines the testing philosophy of the M&FM algorithms as related to VMET followed by section III, which presents the modeling methods of the algorithms to be tested and validated in VMET. Its details are then further presented in section IV followed by Section V presenting integration, test status, and state analysis. Finally, section VI addresses the summary and forward directions followed by the appendices presenting relevant information on terminology and documentation.

Trevino, Luis↗

Modeling in the State Flow Environment to Support Launch Vehicle Verification Testing for Mission and Fault Management Algorithms in the NASA Space Launch System

Analysis methods and testing processes are essential activities in the engineering development and verification of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS). Central to mission success is reliable verification of the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the SLS launch vehicle (LV) flight software. This is particularly difficult because M&FM algorithms integrate and operate LV subsystems, which consist of diverse forms of hardware and software themselves, with equally diverse integration from the engineering disciplines of LV subsystems. M&FM operation of SLS requires a changing mix of LV automation. During pre-launch the LV is primarily operated by the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) organization with some LV automation of time-critical functions, and much more autonomous LV operations during ascent that have crucial interactions with the Orion crew capsule, its astronauts, and with mission controllers at the Johnson Space Center. M&FM algorithms must perform all nominal mission commanding via the flight computer to control LV states from pre-launch through disposal and also address failure conditions by initiating autonomous or commanded aborts (crew capsule escape from the failing LV), redundancy management of failing subsystems and components, and safing actions to reduce or prevent threats to ground systems and crew. To address the criticality of the verification testing of these algorithms, the NASA M&FM team has utilized the State Flow environment6 (SFE) with its existing Vehicle Management End-to-End Testbed (VMET) platform which also hosts vendor-supplied physics-based LV subsystem models. The human-derived M&FM algorithms are designed and vetted in Integrated Development Teams composed of design and development disciplines such as Systems Engineering, Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), liquid engines, and the astronaut crew office. Since the algorithms are realized using model-based engineering (MBE) methods from a hybrid of the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), SFE methods are a natural fit to provide an in depth analysis of the interactive behavior of these algorithms with the SLS LV subsystem models. For this, the M&FM algorithms and the SLS LV subsystem models are modeled using constructs provided by Matlab which also enables modeling of the accompanying interfaces providing greater flexibility for integrated testing and analysis, which helps forecast expected behavior in forward VMET integrated testing activities. In VMET, the M&FM algorithms are prototyped and implemented using the same C++ programming language and similar state machine architectural concepts used by the FSW group. Due to the interactive complexity of the algorithms, VMET testing thus far has verified all the individual M&FM subsystem algorithms with select subsystem vendor models but is steadily progressing to assessing the interactive behavior of these algorithms with LV subsystems, as represented by subsystem models. The novel SFE applications has proven to be useful for quick look analysis into early integrated system behavior and assessment of the M&FM algorithms with the modeled LV subsystems. This early MBE analysis generates vital insight into the integrated system behaviors, algorithm sensitivities, design issues, and has aided in the debugging of the M&FM algorithms well before full testing can begin in more expensive, higher fidelity but more arduous environments such as VMET, FSW testing, and the Systems Integration Lab7 (SIL). SFE has exhibited both expected and unexpected behaviors in nominal and off nominal test cases prior to full VMET testing. In many findings, these behavioral characteristics were used to correct the M&FM algorithms, enable better test coverage, and develop more effective test cases for each of the LV subsystems. This has improved the fidelity of testing and planning for the next generation of M&FM algorithms as the SLS program evolves from non-crewed to crewed flight, impacting subsystem configurations and the M&FM algorithms that control them. SFE analysis has improved robustness and reliability of the M&FM algorithms by revealing implementation errors and documentation inconsistencies. It is also improving planning efficiency for future VMET testing of the M&FM algorithms hosted in the LV flight computers, further reducing risk for the SLS launch infrastructure, the SLS LV, and most importantly the crew.

Trevino, Luis↗

Urban Air Mobility (UAM)

ARMD's urban air mobility strategy, including key activities of UMLs, Grand Challenge series, UAM ecosystem working groups, supply chain management, and modeling simulation tools.

Kopardekar, Parimal H.↗

ATM-X: Air Traffic Management – eXploration: Urban Air Mobility Overview

The UAM market is expected to be big in the billions of dollars. And, of course, UAM will need to be able to readily access and operate in the airspace for this to happen. In the ATM-X UAM sub-project, we are focused on NASA’s top-level goal of enabling UAM Maturity Level-4 (UML-4) operational density and complexity, with hundreds of simultaneous operations in a metropolitan area managed through a UTM-like architecture with third-party provided traffic management services. We are doing this by developing a concept of operations with the FAA and the UAM community that serves as a framework and guide for community research and development. We are also doing this by conducting research to define system requirements based on the concept and developing the UAM airspace management system for the AAM National Campaign.

urban air mobility↗

A Concept of Operations (ConOps) of an In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) for Advanced Air Mobility (AAM)

The growth of new emerging operations involving Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) necessitates developing a perspective for an In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS). This perspective advances from the National Academies report on IASMS and its recommendation for developing a Concept of Operations (ConOps) for IASMS. A ConOps has been developed for In-time System-Wide Safety Assurance (ISSA) from which the IASMS ConOps pivots to provide a robust scope commensurate with the broad vision defined by the National Academies. The IASMS ConOps focuses on emerging operations and spans innovations in Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) and an increasingly complex ecosystem comprised of a widening mix of vehicles and technologies, Urban Air Mobility (UAM) with industry-federated services, traditional operations, as well as new supersonic aircraft and space launch systems.The challenge for the IASMS ConOps is to be broad to encompass innovations in the coming years and decades while agile to ensure levels of safety compatible with operational and certification requirements of the National Airspace System (NAS). The IASMS ConOps interweaves increasing complexity of operational safety capabilities and unlocking UAS Maturity Levels (UMLs). The relationships between increased complexity of automation and automated systems, fewer operators who are not as traditionally higher skilled, more complex operational environments, and aviation operations management with mixed aircraft and equipage pose a multi-dimensional space for IASMS capabilities essential for safety assurance and risk management. Instantiating IASMS capabilities and how they would be integral to AAM operations and increasing maturity of UAM could be accomplished through a series of Safety Demonstrators. These Safety Demonstrators could provide increased understanding and insight into use of controls for risk mitigation, means of compliance for certification, and operational experience with safety services such as in relation to contingency management. The IASMS capabilities can be viewed as initially residing with the vehicle, airspace, and Supplemental Data Service Provider (SDSP). For example, vehicle capabilities include communications including the command and control link, Remote Identification (ID), conflict advisory/alerting, and UAS system monitoring. These capabilities monitor and assess data such as battery health, aircraft state, and human performance. Complexity of ISAMS capabilities depends on a number of factors. These factors are intendedonly as a notional categorization with the purpose being to reflect the complexity of the AAM ecosystem that would drive up the complexity of ISSA capabilities including systems, sensors, models, standards, and controls. Factors could include the Vehicle Flight Management, Environment, Airspace, and Contingency Management. Each of these factors can be comprised of multiple sub-factors that contribute to increasing complexity. For example, Airspace at a lower level of complexity could be dedicated to UTM operations that are unmonitored, and at a higher level of complexity could involve mixed UTM and ATM operations. The IASMS concept includes safety services that provide data and information to different participants in AAM. The roles and responsibilities of participants can be defined using the Responsible-Accountable-Consulted-Informed (RACI) analysis. For example, for the safety service involving the Remote ID, the Operator would be accountable for providing the data, the Vehicle would be responsible for transmitting it, and the USS, SDSP, Vertiports, FIMS (FAA), and Public Entities such as safety services would be informed by receiving the data. The IASMS ConOps identifies the capabilities needed for risk mitigation and safety assurance in the increasingly complex national airspace. The ConOps serves as a pathway for engaging with industry to gain operational experience including through the Safety Demonstrator series, the RACI analysis, and operational complexity factors. The ConOps serves to integrate these different perspectives to build a cohesive and cogent approach to an AAM safety management system.

In-Time Aviation Safety Management System↗