Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “lessons”

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 973 records · Page 54
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2019

Lessons from Modeling Flexible Aircraft for Active Flutter Suppression

These slides describe a method and technology of modeling flexible aircraft for active control of structural dynamics. Objective: Generate models useful for the design and evaluation of control laws for active structural control and flutter suppression that are able to accurately predict body freedom flutter.

Lessons Learned↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Morpheus and Ascent Abort-2 Lessons Learned in Lean SE&I

The purpose of this presentation is to describe key features of the streamlined systems engineering approach for two in-house NASA projects, the Morpheus lander (2010-2014) and Orion’s Ascent Abort 2 (AA-2) Crew Module and Separation Ring (CSR) project.

Lean development↗
NASA NTRS2021

Guidance and Lessons Learned from COVID-19 for Human-Subjects Research

The goal of this effort was to identify innovative strategies, approaches, and methods that have enabled researchers to continue doing meaningful human subjects research during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many organizations and recent literature primarily focus on efforts for future research in a post-COVID environment. Additionally, there have been no systematic efforts across the agency or broader human factors community to coordinate or share strategies. Therefore, the focus was on acquiring knowledge gained by researchers from experiences during COVID that could be valuable to continue human-subjects research under existing restrictions.

Coronavirus Disease 2019↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lessons Learned in Systems Engineering Availability and Recommendations for Mission Technical Leaders

In spaceflight missions at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), the Mission System Engineer (MSE) is the technical leader of the overall engineering team and also is the Independent Engineering Technical Authority. The responsibility of this role includes the definition of the mission design architecture, concept of operations, and mission requirements, management of risk throughout the development, and verification and validation of the final system performance and function amongst other duties. This responsibility inherently requires time management, enabling focus on a balanced development with appropriate risk. Time is the most valuable resource of the MSE. The system engineer’s availability to interact with the development team (often product or component design leads and technicians, often in different worksites) to discover and mitigate mission risks during development is key to mission success. This paper presents examples from Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, Landsat 9, and Neutron star Interior Composition ExploreR (NICER) which represent in-house and out-of-house hardware builds. These examples demonstrate how interactions between the Mission Systems Engineers and other project and partner engineers result in discovery of critical risks, leading to early mitigation with significant cost and performance savings. These three missions would have suffered test failures or on-orbit failures had their MSEs not set aside time to visit engineers and technicians that were working on key pieces of space flight hardware. Availability is more than just time; it is openness to listen to concerns and questions. It begins by building a level of trust in the team that it is safe to ask questions or share concerns without the fear of blame or additional workload. It also requires enabling informal conversations (over lunch, coffee, in the clean room, or at the team members desk, etc.) where key information can be exchanged, and team members may even provide an easy-to-implement mitigation idea for another subsystem. Availability is a highly valuable commodity and completely non-obvious to protect and optimize. The natural tendency of engineers is to keep themselves busy with solving problems that they know about. This paper is encouraging MSEs to resist this tendency to try and solve all the complex problems themselves and actively devote daily time to learning and solving problems that are found with informal communications with other team members.

Lessons Learned↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lessons Learned from NASA Goddard Space Flight Center’s Product Development Lead Training Schedule and Cost Development Workshop: Continuous Improvement

This presentation provides a status of the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) effort to increase foundational knowledge of Product Development Leads (PDLs) in schedule and cost management including earned value management (EVM). In 2012, GSFC’s Engineering and Technology Directorate (ETD) implemented an in-house training program to prepare PDLs for managing the technical, cost, schedule, and risk aspects of spaceflight systems to meet their subsystem commitments. Developed in-house, the PDL training program provides an integrated approach to requirements development, risk, schedule and cost management, EVM, performance tracking, and other areas. The program has been held twice yearly since its inception with 531 participating and 451 completing the curriculum. In 2017, the program won the Robert H. Goddard award for Quality and Process Improvement. Program development and evolution were presented in the 2018 NASA Schedule and Cost Symposium. The presentation was so well received that this year we focus on one workshop within the program: Schedule and Cost Development, including EVM. We examine the on-going logic modeling process and how participant and stakeholder data influence workshop content and design, and how the disciplines of schedule and cost contribute to mission success. In this presentation we refresh you on how the approach integrates lecture, small group discussion, estimating, case study exercises, and problem solving. We update you on the data collected from participants and stakeholders, and we discuss how we use these data to measure training effectiveness. Specific topics include: • How the logic model is used as the backbone for continuous program improvement, • How feedback influences implementation and curriculum updates, • How data collection and analysis inform workshop content and development, including participant discoveries of EVM data, • How including the resource analyst and planner in the product development team supports project success.

Lessons Learned↗