Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Timeline”

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 991 records · Page 55
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2008

Launching to the Moon, Mars, and Beyond

This viewgraph presentation reviews the planned launching to the Moon, and Mars. It is important to build beyond the capacity to ferry astronauts and cargo to low Earth orbit. NASA is starting to design new vehicles using the past lessons to minimize cost, and technical risks. The training and education of engineers that will continue the work of designing, testing and flying the vehicles is important to NASA. The following questions were addressed: 1) What is NASA's mission? 2) Why do we explore? 3) What is our timeline? 4) Why the Moon first? 5) What will the vehicles look like? 5) What progress have we made? 6) Who will be doing the work? and 7) What are the benefits of space exploration?

Shivers, C. Herbert↗
NASA NTRS2009

Apollo Recovery Operations

Objectives include: a) Describe the organization of recovery force command and control and landing areas; b) Describe the function and timeline use of the Earth Landing System (ELS); c) Describe Stable 1 vs Stable 2 landing configurations and the function of the Command Module Uprighting System; d) Explain the activities of the helicopter and swimmer teams in egress and recovery of the crew; e)Explain the activities of the swimmer teams and primary recovery ship in recovery of the Command Module; and f) Describe several landing incidents that occurred during Apollo.

Interbartolo, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2009

Lunar Surface Operations: Surface Duration - Part 2

The objectives of this slide presentation are to review the activities on the lunar surface during the stay. The objectives include (1) Summarize Lunar Module Basics emphasizing module layout and storage. (2) Identify the primary activities occurring during each of the lunar s urface timelines, (3) List the EVA Prep tasks, (4) Identify the EVA Objectives, (5) Identify the activities associated with Post EVA (6) Describe the lessons learned during both EVA and Non EVA activities. Included are overview drawings of the Lunar Roving Vehicle, pictures of the tools, and sample return containers. There are also time lines for the Apollo 11, and Apollo 12 through 14, Apollo 15, Apollo 16 and Apollo 17. Diagrams of the EVA suits are shown, including the Liquid Cooling Garment, and the Pressure Garment Assembly. The activity prior to the EVA are reviewed. The science mission assignments of each mission are viewed. The activities after the EVA are reviewed

Interbartolo, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2007

Technology Maturation and Flight Validation Experience for NASA's ST8 Mission

Background: a) Introduction to ST8 Project; b) ST8 Project timeline; c) ST8 technology payloads. Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) as interpreted by NASA's New Millennium Program (NMP). Role of Technology Review Boards (TRBs) in the evaluation of technology maturity for the NMP ST8 Project. Lessons learned from the ST8 TRB experience.

New Millennium Program (NMP)↗
NASA NTRS2009

NASA: Engineering Space Exploration - Launching to the Moon, Mars, and Beyond

This presentation reviews NASA's program of space exploration, including information about NASA's mission, the human urge to explore, the timeline for the development of the exploration, and what NASA plans to explore and prove during the return to the moon. Also include are views of the planned vehicles, and a review of progress to date in the design and construction of the vehicles. Some of the benefits of space exploration are also reviewed.

Malone, Roy↗
NASA NTRS2009

Area V: A National Launch Asset for the 21st Century

The goal of this presentation is to present an update on status and development of the Ares V launch vehicle. The Ares V is a heavy lift vehicle that is being designed to launch cargo into Low Earth Orbit and transfer Cargo and crews to the Moon. Slides show the commonalities between the Ares V, and the Ares I, and the Delta IV. The launch profile for a typical Lunar mission is reviewed. A timeline showing the progress from the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS) to the Lunar Capability Concept Review (LCCR) is presented. Other slides review the payload shroud, the payload vs altitude and inclination, the payload mass vs C3 Energy, projections of the performance for selected trajectories, and the planning calendar.

Sumrall, Phil↗
NASA NTRS2007

Thermal Design Validation of the Mars Scout Phoenix Payload

This slide presentation reviews the validation of the thermal design for the Mars Scout Phoenix Payload. It includes a description of the Phoenix Mission, the science objectives, the timeline, and the flight system and payloads that were on the lander. The initial responsibility for the development and validation the thermal design was with the developers. This process lacked overall system engineering, there was a difference of thermal expertise, and the number of institutions involved complicated the interactions. The revised approach for payload thermal design validation is described.

thermal design validation↗
NASA NTRS2008

Automated Planning and Scheduling for Orbital Express (151)

The challenging timeline for DARPA's Orbital Express mission demanded a flexible, responsive, and (above all) safe approach to mission planning. Because the mission was a technology demonstration, pertinent planning information was learned during actual mission execution. This information led to amendments to procedures, which led to changes in the mission plan. In general, we used the ASPEN planner scheduler to generate and validate the mission plans. We enhanced ASPEN to enable it to reason about uncertainty. We also developed a model generator that would read the text of a procedure and translate it into an ASPEN model. These technologies had a significant impact on the success of the Orbital Express mission.

autonomy↗
NASA NTRS2009

Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) Mission Commissioning Phase Orbit Determination Error Analysis

The Magnetospheric MultiScale (MMS) mission commissioning phase starts in a 185 km altitude x 12 Earth radii (RE) injection orbit and lasts until the Phase 1 mission orbits and orientation to the Earth-Sun li ne are achieved. During a limited time period in the early part of co mmissioning, five maneuvers are performed to raise the perigee radius to 1.2 R E, with a maneuver every other apogee. The current baseline is for the Goddard Space Flight Center Flight Dynamics Facility to p rovide MMS orbit determination support during the early commissioning phase using all available two-way range and Doppler tracking from bo th the Deep Space Network and Space Network. This paper summarizes th e results from a linear covariance analysis to determine the type and amount of tracking data required to accurately estimate the spacecraf t state, plan each perigee raising maneuver, and support thruster cal ibration during this phase. The primary focus of this study is the na vigation accuracy required to plan the first and the final perigee ra ising maneuvers. Absolute and relative position and velocity error hi stories are generated for all cases and summarized in terms of the ma ximum root-sum-square consider and measurement noise error contributi ons over the definitive and predictive arcs and at discrete times inc luding the maneuver planning and execution times. Details of the meth odology, orbital characteristics, maneuver timeline, error models, and error sensitivities are provided.

Chung, Lauren R.↗
NASA NTRS2009

The Integrated Medical Model: A Risk Assessment and Decision Support Tool for Space Flight Medical Systems

The Integrated Medical Model (IMM) is a decision support tool that is useful to mission planners and medical system designers in assessing risks and designing medical systems for space flight missions. The IMM provides an evidence based approach for optimizing medical resources and minimizing risks within space flight operational constraints. The mathematical relationships among mission and crew profiles, medical condition incidence data, in-flight medical resources, potential crew functional impairments, and clinical end-states are established to determine probable mission outcomes. Stochastic computational methods are used to forecast probability distributions of crew health and medical resource utilization, as well as estimates of medical evacuation and loss of crew life. The IMM has been used in support of the International Space Station (ISS) medical kit redesign, the medical component of the ISS Probabilistic Risk Assessment, and the development of the Constellation Medical Conditions List. The IMM also will be used to refine medical requirements for the Constellation program. The IMM outputs for ISS and Constellation design reference missions will be presented to demonstrate the potential of the IMM in assessing risks, planning missions, and designing medical systems. The implementation of the IMM verification and validation plan will be reviewed. Additional planned capabilities of the IMM, including optimization techniques and the inclusion of a mission timeline, will be discussed. Given the space flight constraints of mass, volume, and crew medical training, the IMM is a valuable risk assessment and decision support tool for medical system design and mission planning.

Kerstman, Eric↗
NASA NTRS2008

Jupiter System Observer

This slide presentation reviews the proposed mission for the Jupiter System Observer. The presentation also includes overviews of the mission timeline, science goals, and spacecraftspecifications for the satellite.

Io↗
NASA NTRS2010

A Comparison Between Orion Automated and Space Shuttle Rendezvous Techniques

The Orion spacecraft will replace the space shuttle and will be the first human spacecraft since the Apollo program to leave low earth orbit. This vehicle will serve as the cornerstone of a complete space transportation system with a myriad of mission requirements necessitating rendezvous to multiple vehicles in earth orbit, around the moon and eventually beyond . These goals will require a complex and robust vehicle that is, significantly different from both the space shuttle and the command module of the Apollo program. Historically, orbit operations have been accomplished with heavy reliance on ground support and manual crew reconfiguration and monitoring. One major difference with Orion is that automation will be incorporated as a key element of the man-vehicle system. The automated system will consist of software devoted to transitioning between events based on a master timeline. This effectively adds a layer of high level sequencing that moves control of the vehicle from one phase to the next. This type of automated control is not entirely new to spacecraft since the shuttle uses a version of this during ascent and entry operations. During shuttle orbit operations however many of the software modes and hardware switches must be manually configured through the use of printed procedures and instructions voiced from the ground. The goal of the automation scheme on Orion is to extend high level automation to all flight phases. The move towards automation represents a large shift from current space shuttle operations, and so these new systems will be adopted gradually via various safeguards. These include features such as authority-to-proceed, manual down modes, and functional inhibits. This paper describes the contrast between the manual and ground approach of the space shuttle and the proposed automation of the Orion vehicle. I will introduce typical orbit operations that are common to all rendezvous missions and go on to describe the current Orion automation architecture and contrast it with shuttle rendezvous techniques and circumstances. The shuttle rendezvous profile is timed to take approximately 3 days from orbit insertion to docking at the International Space Station (ISS). This process can be divided into 3 phases: far-field, mid-field and proximity operations. The far-field stage is characterized as the most quiescent phase. The spacecraft is usually too far to navigate using relative sensors and uses the Inertial Measurement Units (IMU s) to numerically solve for its position. The maneuvers are infrequent, roughly twice per day, and are larger than other burns in the profile. The shuttle uses this opportunity to take extensive ground based radar updates and keep high fidelity orbit states on the ground. This state is then periodically uplinked to the shuttle computers. The targeting solutions for burn maneuvers are also computed on the ground and uplinked. During the burn the crew is responsible for setting the shuttle attitude and configuring the propulsion system for ignition. Again this entire process is manually driven by both crew and ground activity. The only automatic processes that occur are associated with the real-time execution of the burn. The Orion automated functionality will seek to relieve the workload of both the crew and ground during this phase

Ruiz, Jose O,↗
NASA NTRS2010

Lessons Learned in Launching Ares I-X

The Ares I-X flight test, scheduled for 2009, is the first opportunity for the Constellation Program and Ares Projects to obtain important data on the in-flight loads, first stage recovery, and ground-handling characteristics of the Ares I crew launch vehicle. The flight test vehicle will incorporate a mix of flight and mockup hardware, reflecting an acceptable representation of the mass and outer mold line characteristics of the operational Ares I vehicle. It will be powered by a four-segment solid rocket motor from the Space Shuttle inventory and will include a fifth, inert spacer segment and new forward structures to make it the same shape as the Ares I first stage. The vehicle also includes mass simulators for the upper stage, Orion crew module, and launch abort system to match the outer mold line of Ares I; an active roll control system; and avionics derived from Shuttle and Atlas hardware. This suborbital mission will take the flight test vehicle from stacking in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) through liftoff, maximum dynamic pressure, first stage separation, and recovery. Ares I-X presented NASA with unique project management challenges. This presentation will address those unique challenges, including managing a virtual nationwide team under a constrained timeline; designing and building the launch vehicle and ground systems; working concurrently with Space Shuttle activities; and integrating technical and management functions. It also will identify key data collected and lessons learned from the flight that will be applied to future exploration missions.

Davis, Stephan R.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) Integrated Network Architecture Definition Document (ADD): Executive Summary - Volume 1

The SCaN Program has defined an integrated network architecture that fully meets the Administrator s mandate to the Program, and will result in a NASA infrastructure capable of providing the needed and enabling communications services to future space missions. The integrated network architecture will increase SCaN operational efficiency and interoperability through standardization, commonality and technology infusion. It will enable NASA missions requiring advanced communication and tracking capabilities such as: a. Optical communication b. Antenna arraying c. Lunar and Mars Relays d. Integrated network management (service management and network control) and integrated service execution e. Enhanced tracking for navigation f. Space internetworking with DTN and IP g. End-to-end security h. Enhanced security services Moreover, the SCaN Program has created an Integrated Network Roadmap that depicts an orchestrated and coherent evolution path toward the target architecture, encompassing all aspects that concern network assets (i.e., operations and maintenance, sustaining engineering, upgrade efforts, and major development). This roadmap identifies major NASA ADPs, and shows dependencies and drivers among the various planned undertakings and timelines. The roadmap is scalable to accommodate timely adjustments in response to Agency needs, goals, objectives and funding. Future challenges to implementing this architecture include balancing user mission needs, technology development, and the availability of funding within NASA s priorities. Strategies for addressing these challenges are to: define a flexible architecture, update the architecture periodically, use ADPs to evaluate options and determine when to make decisions, and to engage the stakeholders in these evaluations. In addition, the SCaN Program will evaluate and respond to mission need dates for technical and operational capabilities to be provided by the SCaN integrated network. In that regard, the architecture defined in this ADD is scalable to accommodate programmatic and technical changes.

Younes, Badri A.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Launch and Commissioning of the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO)

The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) launched on June 18, 2009 from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. LRO, designed, built, and operated by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, MD, is gathering crucial data on the lunar environment that will help astronauts prepare for long-duration lunar expeditions. To date, the Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) subsystem has operated nominally and met all requirements. However, during the early phase of the mission, the GN&C Team encountered some anomalies. For example, during the Solar Array and High Gain Antenna deployments, one of the safing action points tripped, which was not expected. Also, the spacecraft transitioned to its safe hold mode, SunSafe, due to encountering an end of file for an ephemeris table. During the five-day lunar acquisition, one of the star trackers triggered the spacecraft to transition into a safe hold configuration, the cause of which was determined. These events offered invaluable insight to better understand the performance of the system they designed. An overview of the GN&C subsystem will be followed by a mission timeline. Then, interesting flight performance as well as anomalies encountered by the GN&C Team will be discussed in chronological order.

Shah, Neerav↗
NASA NTRS2010

Developing a Logistics Data Process for Support Equipment for NASA Ground Operations

The United States NASA Space Shuttle has long been considered an extremely capable yet relatively expensive rocket. A great part of the roughly US $500 million per launch expense was the support footprint: refurbishment and maintenance of the space shuttle system, together with the long list of resources required to support it, including personnel, tools, facilities, transport and support equipment. NASA determined to make its next rocket system with a smaller logistics footprint, and thereby more cost-effective and quicker turnaround. The logical solution was to adopt a standard Logistics Support Analysis (LSA) process based on GEIA-STD-0007 http://www.logisticsengineers.org/may09pres/GEIASTD0007DEXShortIntro.pdf which is the successor of MIL-STD-1388-2B widely used by U.S., NATO, and other world military services and industries. This approach is unprecedented at NASA: it is the first time a major program of programs, Project Constellation, is factoring logistics and supportability into design at many levels. This paper will focus on one of those levels NASA ground support equipment for the next generation of NASA rockets and on building a Logistics Support Analysis Record (LSAR) for developing and documenting a support solution and inventory of resources for. This LSAR is actually a standards-based database, containing analyses of the time and tools, personnel, facilities and support equipment required to assemble and integrate the stages and umbilicals of a rocket. This paper will cover building this database from scratch: including creating and importing a hierarchical bill of materials (BOM) from legacy data; identifying line-replaceable units (LRUs) of a given piece of equipment; analyzing reliability and maintainability of said LRUs; and therefore making an assessment back to design whether the support solution for a piece of equipment is too much work, i.e., too resource-intensive. If one must replace or inspect an LRU too much, perhaps a modification of the design of the equipment can make such operational effort unnecessary. Finally, this paper addresses processes of tying resources to a timeline of tasks performed in ground operations: this enables various overarching analyses, e.g., a summarization of all resources used for a given piece of equipment. Quality Control of data will also be discussed: importing and exporting data from product teams, including spreadsheets-todatabase or data exchange between databases.

Chakrabarti, Suman↗
NASA NTRS2010

Simulation Training Versus Real Time Console Training for New Flight Controllers

For new flight controllers, the two main learning tools are simulations and real time console performance training. These benefit the new flight controllers in different ways and could possibly be improved. Simulations: a) Allow for mistakes without serious consequences. b) Lets new flight controllers learn the working style of other new flight controllers. c) Lets new flight controllers eventually begin to feel like they have mastered the sim world, so therefore they must be competent in the real time world too. Real time: a) Shows new flight controllers some of the unique problems that develop and have to be accounted for when dealing with certain payloads or systems. b) Lets new flight controllers experience handovers - gathering information from the previous shift on what the room needs to be aware of and what still needs to be done. c) Gives new flight controllers confidence that they can succeed in the position they are training for when they can solve real anomalies. How Sims could be improved and more like real-time ops for the ISS Operations Controller position: a) Operations Change Requests to review. b) Fewer anomalies (but still more than real time for practice). c) Payload Planning Manager Handover sheet for the E-1 and E-3 reviews. d) Flight note in system with at least one comment to verify for the E-1 and E-3 reviews How the real time console performance training could be improved for the ISS Operations Controller position: a) Schedule the new flight controller to be on console for four days but with a different certified person each day. This will force them to be the source of knowledge about every OCR in progress, everything that has happened in those few days, and every activity on the timeline. Constellation program flight controllers will have to learn entirely from simulations, thereby losing some of the elements that they will need to have experience with for real time ops. It may help them to practice real time console performance training in the International Space Station or Space Shuttle to gather some general anomaly resolution and day-to-day task management skills.

Heaton, Amanda↗
NASA NTRS2010

21st Century Connections: Making Sense of Social Media Tools

Twitter? Blog? Facebook? In an environment of complex project teams and demanding timelines, you may wonder whether any of these new-fangled social media tools that are in the news will help you and your team do a better job delivering project results. What in the world is Facebook and why would I ever want to use it? What does a blog have to do with a NASA project? Aside from my teenager, who cares about Twitter? This introduction to social media is a great way to get your feet wet with some of these new terms and tools. For example, we'll talk about what the difference is between a blog and Facebook. We'll look at some examples of NASA projects that benefit from using blogs, Facebook or Twitter. Most importantly, we'll spend some time talking about how a small or medium-sized project might evaluate whether to use one, many or none of these new ideas. Although there are many commercial tools available and in use across the agency, this talk emphasizes NASA-sponsored tools that are freely available within the Agency.

Fujiech, Maura C.↗