Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “advisory service”

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.

85 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1991

Advancing automation and robotics technology for the Space Station Freedom and for the U.S. economy. Submitted to the Congress of the U.S. May 1991

In April 1985, as required by Public Law 98-371, the NASA Advanced Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) reported to Congress the results of its studies on advanced automation and robotics technology for use on Space Station Freedom. This material was documented in the initial report (NASA Technical Memorandum 87566). A further requirement of the law was that ATAC follow NASA's progress in this area and report to Congress semiannually. The report describes the progress made by Levels 1, 2 and 3 of the Office Space Station in developing and applying advanced automation and robotics technology. Emphasis has been placed upon the Space Station Freedom Program responses to specific recommendations made in ATAC Progress Report 11, the status of the Flight Telerobotic Servicer, and the status of the Advanced Development Program. In addition, an assessment is provided of the automation and robotics status of the Canadian Space Station Program.

Lum, Henry, Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2005

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Training Grant Supplement

The following section summarizes the impact of the Ohio Space Grant Consortium (OSGC) in Ohio and to NASA over the last four-year period (February 1, 2001 to April 30, 2005) and highlights the important accomplishments of the consortium. The strength of the OSGC network of universities, community colleges, government agencies, industry, and outreach affiliates is well-established and is growing. The OSGC Consortium Management Structure was designed and remains committed to using the talents and diversity of everyone within this collaborative network, and operational policies and procedures are such that all consortium members are active contributors resulting in quality OSGC programs in research, education and service, while receiving a relatively small amount of NASA funds. The number of quality activities, both on- and off-campus, and collaborations/partnerships that OSGC has established with NASA and government agencies, state and local government, educational institutions, and private industry, has been impressive. Further desired university affiliate expansion requires additional funds. Diversity is shown in the OSGC 12-member Executive Committee by the presence of three campus representatives from Central State University, Wilberforce University, and The Ohio State University (two underrepresented minority, one female). One additional female campus representative (Cleveland State University) is currently on sabbatical leave and a valuable alternate member attends. Other additional female and underrepresented minority members are on the larger OSGC Advisory committee. All committee members participate fully in all consortium management and policy decisions. The OSGC Executive Committee strives to achieve and communicate a culture of trust, respect, teamwork, open communication, creativity, and empowerment. These programs have shown results and impact by their visibility and importance to Ohio and to NASA, resulting in strategic alliances created throughout Ohio. These alliances have improved over the last 4 years.

DeWitt, Kenneth J.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Importance and Incorporation of User Feedback in Data Stewardship

Since August 1994, The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Earth Observation System Data and Information System (EOSDIS) has been serving a global community of over 3 million users with Earth science data in a variety of disciplines. During the entire life of EOSDIS, various mechanisms for user feedback have been extremely important and valuable to its evolution and proven performance. Some inputs from user groups have resulted in fundamental changes in the architecture, design and operations of EOSDIS, while others have provided ideas for incremental changes. The purpose of this paper is to share this experience and the benefits that have resulted from the user feedback.In early to mid-1990s, the EOSDIS Advisory Panel (a.k.a. Data Panel) provided significant inputs for the architecture and design of EOSDIS resulting in NASA's establishment of a set of Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAACs) and development of a "working prototype with operating elements" called Version 0 EOSDIS, which went into operation in August 1994. The Data Panel also participated in many of the requirement and design reviews and influenced the design of EOSDIS through their comments.In 1995, the U.S. National Research Council's Committee on Global Change Research conducted a review of the U.S. Global Change Research Program and NASA's Mission to Planet Earth/EOS, including the plans for EOSDIS. One of this committee's recommendations was that the "Responsibility for product generation and publication and for user services should be transferred to a federation of partners selected through a competitive process open to all". In response, NASA initiated an experiment with a "self-governing" federation called the Working Prototype ESIP (WP-ESIP) Federation. This federation, with support from NASA, NOAA and USGS, has now grown into the Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP) with over 140 member organizations.The EOSDIS DAACs' User Working Groups (UWGs) represent broad user communities served by the respective DAACs. As regular users of the DAACs and experts in their scientific disciplines, the UWG members provide valuable inputs for planning and prioritizing the services as well as addition of new datasets for the benefit of the community.

Research Integrity↗
NASA NTRS2007

2004 Space Report: Environment and Strategy for Space Research at NATO's Research and Technology Organisation (RTO)

This report describes the motivation for and a strategy to enhance the NATO Research and Technology Organisation's (RTO) current space research effort to reflect NATO's growing military dependence on space systems. Such systems and services provided by these systems are critical elements of military operations. NATO uses space systems for operational planning and support, communication, radio navigation, multi-sensor and multi-domain demonstrations. Such systems are also used to promote regional stability. A quantitative analysis of work related to space in the NATO RTO showed that during the period of 1998 - 2004, 5% of the research pursued in the NATO RTO has been clearly focused on space applications. Challenging environmental and organizational barriers for increasing RTO space research were identified. In part, these include lack of sufficient space expertise representation on panels, the military sensitivity of space, current panel work loads and the need for specific technical recommendations from peers. A strategy for enhancing space research in the RTO is to create a limited-life Space Advisory Group (SAG) composed of Space Expert Consultants who are panel members with appropriate expertise and additional expertise from the nations. The SAG will recommend and find support in the nations for specific technical activities related to space in the areas of Space Science, Remote Sensing Data Analysis, Spacecraft Systems, Surveillance and Early Warning, Training and Simulation and Policy. An RTO Space Advisory Group will provide an organizational mechanism to gain recognition of RTO as a forum for trans-Atlantic defence space research and to enhance space research activities.

Woods-Vedeler, Jessica A.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Advancing automation and robotics technology for the Space Station Freedom and for the US economy: Submitted to the United States Congress

In April 1985, as required by Public Law 98-371, the NASA Advanced Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) reported to Congress the results of its studies on advanced automation and robotics technology for use on the Space Station Freedom. This material was documented in the initial report (NASA Technical Memorandum 87566). A further requirement of the law was that ATAC follow NASA's progress in this area and report to Congress semiannually. This report is the ninth in a series of progress updates and covers the period between February 24, 1989, and July 12, 1989. NASA has accepted the basic recommendation of ATAC for its Space Station Freedom efforts. ATAC and NASA agree that the thrust of Congress is to build an advanced automation and robotics technology base that will support an evolutionary Space Station program and serve as a highly visible stimulator, affecting the U.S. long-term economy. The work of NASA and the Freedom contractors, e.g., Work Packages, as well as the Flight Telerobotic Servicer is identified. Research in progress is also described and assessments of the advancement of automation and robotics technology on the Space Station Freedom are given.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2004

Office of Equal Opportunity Programs

The NASA Glenn Office of Equal Opportunity Programs works to provide quality service for all programs and/or to assist the Center in becoming a model workplace. During the summer of 2004, I worked with Deborah Cotleur along with other staff members to create and modify customer satisfaction surveys. This office aims to assist in developing a model workplace by providing functions as a change agent to the center by serving as an advisor to management to ensure equity throughout the Center. In addition, the office serves as a mediator for the Center in addressing issues and concerns. Lastly, the office provides assistance to employees to enable attainment of personal and organizational goals. The Office of Equal Opportunities is a staff office which reports and provides advice to the Center Director and Executive Leadership, implements laws, regulations, and presidential executive orders, and provides center wide leadership and assistance to NASA GRC employees. Some of the major responsibilities of the office include working with the discrimination complaints program, special emphasis programs (advisory groups), management support, monitoring and evaluation, contract compliance, and community outreach. During my internship in this office, my main objective was to create four customer satisfaction surveys based on EO retreats, EO observances, EO advisory boards, and EO mediation/counseling. I created these surveys after conducting research on past events and surveys as well as similar survey research created and conducted by other NASA centers, program for EO Advisory group members, leadership training sessions for supervisors, preventing sexual harassment training sessions, and observance events. I also conducted research on the style and format from feedback surveys from the Marshall Equal Opportunity website, the Goddard website, and the main NASA website. Using the material from the Office of Equal Opportunity Programs at Glenn Research Center along with my previous research, I created four customer satisfaction surveys. Additional information is included in the original extended abstract.

Chin, Jennifer L.↗
NASA NTRS1939

Investigation of an Electrically Heated Airplane Windshield for Ice Prevention, Special Report

A study was made at the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics Laboratory of the operation of an electrically heated glass panel, which simulated a segment of an airplane windshield, to determine if ice formations, which usually result in the loss of visibility, could be prevented. Tests were made in the 7- by 3-foot ice tunnel, and in flight, under artificially created ice-forming conditions. Ice was prevented from forming on the windshield model in the tunnel by 1.25 watts of power per square inch with the air temperature at 23 F and a velocity of 80 miles per hour. Using an improved model in flight, ice was prevented by 1.43 watts of power per square inch of protected area and 2 watts per inch concentrated in the rim, with the air temperature at 26 F and a velocity of 120 miles per hour. The removal of a preformed ice cap was effected to a limited extent in the tunnel by the use of 1.89 watts of power per square inch when the temperature and velocity were 25 F and 80 miles per hour, respectively. The results indicate that service tests with an improved design are justified.

Rodert, Lewis A.↗
NASA NTRS1961

Post University On-the-Job Training for Engineers

Our national need for qualified scientists and engineers is greater now than at any other time in our history. Fortunately, we can point with pride to this need as a measure of the impact of science and technology on our way of life. In effect, we have made such rapid strides In advancing established sciences and in opening new technological fields that we have proved the value of the scientist and engineer to society, and, as a-result, have created an expanding demand for their services which we must now attempt to satisfy. This demand we face is also due to the changing skills and high degree of specialization required to perform in these new technological fields. The colleges and universities are doing their part to provide current graduates with a modern technical foundation, but we cannot afford to ignore the thousands of experienced engineers and scientists already employed by private industry and government. As employers, we have an obligation to these men and women to see that they are provided with an understanding of the latest advances that modern technology has to offer; that we develop them in particular specialty areas characteristic of a given field of work; and, equally important, that we assist them in the transition from one field to another as the technological emphasis shifts. Practically all technological industries have experienced and continue to experience rapid changes in their activities. The aerospace business, in particular, has been characterized by extremely rapid, in fact revolutionary, changes during the relatively short period of its existence0 At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, successor to the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, for example, we have encountered the fun impact of a changing science and technology. Indeed, as a research organization, we have undoubtedly contributed, in some measure, to this change. Within the NASAs Lewis Research Center, we have approximately 800 research scientists and engineers who have matured professionally in an environment which is essentially one of continuous learning - an experience which comes close to being a form of post graduate training in itself. This environment, in addition to providing continuous evolutionary changes, has also provided two major revolutions which have made this development picture more complex. We will describe these environmental changes which have occurred at the Lewis Research Center and discuss the various techniques and programs we have employed to provide for the professional development of our staff. The Lewis Research Center has had an Interesting and exciting l8-year history of aerospace propulsion research and development. It began during the early years of World War II as an expansion of the Power Plant Division of the NCA Langley Center with the mission of conducting research required for the development of improved reciprocating engines and to study the associated problems of subsonic propulsion aerodynamics, It was only a few years later, however, that turbojet and ramjet propulsion and supersonic flight research became our main concern. This transition to jet type engines and higher speeds was our first major technological change. The aerodynamics of propellers became the aerodynamics of high speed turbine and compressor blades; the fuel ignition and carbon deposition problems were transferred from a cyclical or Intermittent high compression combustion chamber to a continuous combustion zone within a thin-walled metal shell; aerodynamics problems were thrust into the supersonic range; and high temperature materials began to play an increasingly critical role. Although this transition still required the same basic knowledge and principles as before, the new engine types did involve a different emphasis and variety of consideration not generally familiar to our scientists and engineers.

Manganiello, Eugene J.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Academy Sharing Knowledge (ASK). The NASA Source for Project Management Magazine, Volume 11, March 2003

APPL is a research-based organization that serves NASA program and project managers, as well as project teams, at every level of development. In 1997, APPL was created from an earlier program to underscore the importance that NASA places on project management and project teams through a wide variety of products and services, including knowledge sharing, classroom and online courses, career development guidance, performance support, university partnerships, and advanced technology tools. ASK Magazine grew out of APPL's Knowledge Sharing Initiative. The stories that appear in ASK are written by the 'best of the best' project managers, primarily from NASA, but also from other government agencies and industry. Contributors to this issue include: Teresa Bailey, a librarian at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Roy Malone, Deputy Director in the Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) Office at the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), W. Scott Cameron, Capital Systems Manager for the Food and Beverage Global Business Unit of Procter and Gamble, Ray Morgan, recent retiree as Vice President of AeroVironment, Inc., Marty Davis, Program Manager of the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in Greenbelt, Maryland, Todd Post, editor of ASK Magazine, and works for EduTech Ltd. in Silver Spring, Maryland, Dr. Owen Gadeken, professor of Engineering Management at the Defense Acquisition University, Ken Schwer, currently the Project Manager of Solar Dynamics Observatory, Dr. Edward Hoffmwan, Director of the NASA Academy of Program and Project Leadership, Frank Snow, a member of the NASA Explorer Program at Goddard Space Flight Center since 1992, Dr. Alexander Laufer, Editor-in-Chief of ASK Magazine and a member of the Advisory Board of the NASA Academy of Program and Project Leadership, Judy Stokley, presently Air Force Program Executive Officer for Weapons in Washington, D.C. and Terry Little, Director of the Kinetic Energy Boost Office of the Missile Defense Agency.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA Unmanned Aircraft (UA) Control and Non-Payload Communication (CNPC) System Waveform Trade Studies

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the National Airspace System (NAS). To address this deficiency, NASA has established a project called UAS Integration in the NAS (UAS in the NAS), under the Integrated Systems Research Program (ISRP) of the Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD). This project provides an opportunity to transition concepts, technology, algorithms, and knowledge to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and other stakeholders to help them define the requirements, regulations, and issues for routine UAS access to the NAS. The safe, routine, and efficient integration of UAS into the NAS requires new radio frequency (RF) spectrum allocations and a new data communications system which is both secure and scalable with increasing UAS traffic without adversely impacting the Air Traffic Control (ATC) communication system. These data communications, referred to as Control and Non-Payload Communications (CNPC), whose purpose is to exchange information between the unmanned aircraft and the ground control station to ensure safe, reliable, and effective unmanned aircraft flight operation. A Communications Subproject within the UAS in the NAS Project has been established to address issues related to CNPC development, certification and fielding. The focus of the Communications Subproject is on validating and allocating new RF spectrum and data link communications to enable civil UAS integration into the NAS. The goal is to validate secure, robust data links within the allocated frequency spectrum for UAS. A vision, architectural concepts, and seed requirements for the future commercial UAS CNPC system have been developed by RTCA Special Committee 203 (SC-203) in the process of determining formal recommendations to the FAA in its role provided for under the Federal Advisory Committee Act. NASA intends to conduct its research and development in keeping with this vision and associated architectural concepts. The prototype communication systems developed and tested by NASA will be used to validate and update the initial SC-203 requirements in order to provide a foundation for SC-203's Minimum Aviation System Performance Standards (MASPS).

Aircraft Communications↗
NASA NTRS1983

Autonomy and the human element in space

NASA is contemplating the next logical step in the U.S. space program - the permanent presence of humans in space. As currently envisioned, the initial system, planned for the early 1990's, will consist of manned and unmanned platforms situated primarily in low Earth orbit. The manned component will most likely be inhabited by 6-8 crew members performing a variety of tasks such as materials processing, satellite servicing, and life science experiments. The station thus has utility in scientific and commercial enterprises, in national security, and in the development of advanced space technology. The technical foundations for this next step have been firmly established as a result of unmanned spacecraft missions to other planets, the Apollo program, and Skylab. With the shuttle, NASA inaugurates a new era of frequent flights and more routine space operations supporting a larger variety of missions. A permanently manned space system will enable NASA to expand the scope of its activities still further. Since NASA' s inception there has been an intense debate over the relative merits of manned and unmanned space systems. Despite the generally higher costs associated with manned components, astronauts have accomplished numerous essential, complex tasks in space. The unique human talent to evaluate and respond inventively to unanticipated events has been crucial in many missions, and the presence of crews has helped arouse and sustain public interest in the space program. On the other hand, the hostile orbital environment affects astronaut physiology and productivity, is dangerous, and mandates extensive support systems. Safety and cost factors require the entire station complex, both space and ground components, to be highly automated to free people from mundane operational chores. Recent advances in computer technology, artificial intelligence (AI), and robotics have the potential to greatly extend space station operations, offering lower costs and superior productivity. Extended operations can in turn enhance critical technologies and contribute to the competitive economic abilities of the United States. A high degree of automation and autonomy may be required to reduce dependence on ground systems, reduce mission costs, diminish complexity as perceived by the crew, increase mission lifetime and expand mission versatility. However, technologies dealing with heavily automated, long duration habitable spacecraft have not yet been thoroughly investigated by NASA. A highly automated station must amalgamate the diverse capabilities of people, machines, and computers to yield an efficient system which capitalizes on unique human characteristics. The station also must have an initial design which allows evolution to a larger and more sophisticated space presence. In the early years it is likely that AI-based subsystems will be used primarily in an advisory or planning capacity. As human confidence in automated systems grows and as technology advances, machines will take on more critical and interdependent roles. The question is whether, and how much, system autonomy will lead to improved station effectiveness.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1999

Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel

This report covers the activities of the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) for calendar year 1998-a year of sharp contrasts and significant successes at NASA. The year opened with the announcement of large workforce cutbacks. The slip in the schedule for launching the International Space Station (ISS) created a five-month hiatus in Space Shuttle launches. This slack period ended with the successful and highly publicized launch of the STS-95 mission. As the year closed, ISS assembly began with the successful orbiting and joining of the Functional Cargo Block (FGB), Zarya, from Russia and the Unity Node from the United States. Throughout the year, the Panel maintained its scrutiny of NASA's safety processes. Of particular interest were the potential effects on safety of workforce reductions and the continued transition of functions to the Space Flight Operations Contractor. Attention was also given to the risk management plans of the Aero-Space Technology programs, including the X-33, X-34, and X-38. Overall, the Panel concluded that safety is well served for the present. The picture is not as clear for the future. Cutbacks have limited the depth of talent available. In many cases, technical specialties are 'one deep.' The extended hiring freeze has resulted in an older workforce that will inevitably suffer significant departures from retirements in the near future. The resulting 'brain drain' could represent a future safety risk unless appropriate succession planning is started expeditiously. This and other topics are covered in the section addressing workforce. The major NASA programs are also limited in their ability to plan property for the future. This is of particular concern for the Space Shuttle and ISS because these programs are scheduled to operate well into the next century. In the case of the Space Shuttle, beneficial and mandatory safety and operational upgrades are being delayed because of a lack of sufficient present funding. Likewise, the ISS has little flexibility to begin long lead-time items for upgrades or contingency planning. For example, the section on computer hardware and software contains specific findings related to required longer range safety-related actions. NASA can be proud of its accomplishments this past year, but must remain ever vigilant, particularly as ISS assembly begins to accelerate. The Panel will continue to focus on both the short- and long-term aspects of risk management and safety planning. This task continues to be made manageable and productive by the excellent cooperation the Panel receives from both NASA and its contractors. Particular emphasis will continue to be directed to longer term workforce and program planning issues as well as the immediate risks associated with ISS assembly and the initial flights of the X-33 and X-34. Section 2 of this report presents specific findings and recommendations generated by ASAP activities during 1998. Section 3 contains more detailed information in support of these findings and recommendations. Appendix A is a current roster of Panel members, consultants, and staff. Appendix B contains NASA's response to the findings and recommendations from the 1997 ASAP Annual Report. Appendix C details the fact-finding activities of the Panel in 1998. During the year, Mr. Richard D. Blomberg was elected chair of the Panel and Vice Admiral (VADM) Robert F Dunn was elected deputy chair. VADM Bernard M. Kauderer moved from consultant to member. Mr. Charles J. Donlan retired from the Panel after many years of meritorious service. Ms. Shirley C. McCarty and Mr. Robert L. ('Hoot') Gibson joined the Panel as consultants.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1999

System Identification for Integrated Aircraft Development and Flight Testing [l'Identification Des Systemes Pour le Developpement Integre des Aeronefs et les Essais en Vol]

Over the last decades flight vehicles such as aircraft and helicopters entering service and requiring increased operational effectiveness have with few exceptions experienced prolonged flight test development to achieve full certification. In many cases the original requirements had later to be reduced to enable release to service. The impact on the customer, and manufacturer has been considerable leading to increased costs and or reduced operational capabilities. These costly experiences are largely a result of the flight vehicle not behaving as modelled and designed. The evaluation of flight test data can be used as a tool for validating windtunnel results and mathematical models describing the flight dynamical behaviour. In this sense the uncertainty of important aerodynamic stability and control parameters can be reduced and the confidence of aircraft mathematical models improved. An additional important factor comes from the implementation of active control systems offering the promise of significantly increased flight vehicle performance and operational capability. This approach extends the traditional trade-offs between aerodynamics, structures and propulsion systems to include full- time, full-authority fly-by-wire/light systems. It is imperative that the aerodynamic stability and control parameters of such integrated flight and propulsion control systems have to turn out inflight as predicted, since inherent stability margins will be lower and the flight control system must correct these deficiencies to provide flight critical redundancy and safety. With the methodology of system identification from flight tests it is possible to sense the control inputs and the flight vehicle reactions Such as accelerations, rates and attitudes. The mathematical model, e.g. the model structure and parameters, has to be determined from the relationship of the measured control inputs and the system's responses. The aim of this symposium was to review the present state of the art of flight vehicle system and parameter identification techniques, and to provide a critical appraisal of current methods developed and applied to flight test data in a number of NATO nations. Particular emphasis was placed on practical aspects and lessons learned in order to generate information useful to the flight test community in industry and government agencies. The technical papers share invaluable experience and emphasize the advances of flight vehicle system identification over the last years to the point where confidence and robustness level is now reasonably high. The symposium covered overviews of identification methodologies, flight test techniques, recent aircraft and helicopter application programs, and a session of short papers covering up-to-the-minute flight test results. A final discussion included prepared comments from experts and concluded with key issues learned in the application of system identification and future research needs. The essential benefits to NATO nations can be condensed as follows: More accurate mathematical models for high bandwidth flight control systems, Improved assessment and evaluation of flying qualities, High fidelity mathematical models for flight vehicle development and mission training simulators, and generally, Reduced flight test time and costs.

Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Developm↗