SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “technical support”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 991 records · Page 55

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2009

Technology Infusion Challenges from a Decision Support Perspective

In a restricted science budget environment and increasingly numerous required technology developments, the technology investment decisions within NASA are objectively more and more difficult to make such that the end results are satisfying the technical objectives and all the organizational constraints. Under these conditions it is rationally desirable to build an investment portfolio, which has the highest possible technology infusion rate. Arguably the path to infusion is subject to many influencing factors, but here only the challenges associated with the very initial stages are addressed: defining the needs and the subsequent investment decision-support process. It is conceivable that decision consistency and possibly its quality suffer when the decision-making process has limited or no traceability. This paper presents a structured decision-support framework aiming to provide traceable, auditable, infusion- driven recommendations towards a selection process in which these recommendations are used as reference points in further discussions among stakeholders. In this framework addressing well-defined requirements, different measures of success can be defined based on traceability to specific selection criteria. As a direct result, even by using simplified decision models the likelihood of infusion can be probed and consequently improved.

Adumitroaie, V.↗

NASA NTRS2021

Standard Materials and Processes Requirements for Spacecraft

This NASA Technical Standard is directed toward materials and processes (M&P) used in the design, fabrication, and testing of space program flight hardware for NASA, including but not limited to crewed, uncrewed, robotic, launch vehicle, lander, in-space and surface systems, and spacecraft program/project hardware elements. All spaceflight hardware is covered by the M&P requirements of this document, including vendor-designed, off-the-shelf, and vendor-furnished items. M&P used in interfacing ground support equipment (GSE), test equipment, hardware processing equipment, hardware packaging, and hardware shipment is covered by the M&P requirements of this NASA Technical Standard only to the extent required to prevent damage to or contamination of spaceflight hardware (see section 4). M&P used in NASA aircraft and aircraft operations are not covered by the M&P requirements of this document.

Materials↗

NASA NTRS2012

KSC Tech Transfer News, Volume 5, No. 1

In October 2011, the White House released a presidential memorandum titled "Accelerating Technology Transfer and Commercialization of Federal Research in Support of High-Growth Businesses." It emphasized the importance of technology transfer as a driver of successful innovation to fuel economic growth, create jobs, and make U.S. industries more competitive in a global market. In response to this memorandum, NASA developed a 5-year plan for accelerating its own technology transfer activities. This plan outlines key objectives for enhancing NASA's ability to increase the rate, volume, and quality of technology transfers to industry, academia, and other Government agencies. By doing so, we are increasing the economic impact and public benefit of Federal technology investments. In addition, NASA established technology transfer as a key element of one of its Agency High Priority Performance Goals: "Enable bold new missions and make new technologies available to Government agencies and U.S. industry."What does this mean to you? In the broadest sense, NASA defines technology transfer as the utilization of NASA's technological assets- technologies, innovations, unique facilities and equipment, and technical expertise- by public and private sectors to benefit the Nation. So, if your job involves developing new technologies, writing new software, creating innovative ways to do business, performing research, or developing new technical capabilities, you could be contributing to Kennedy Space Center's (KSC) technology transfer activities by creating the technological assets that may one day be used by external partners. Furthermore, anytime you provide technical expertise to external partners, you're participating in technology transfer. The single most important step you can take to support the technology transfer process is to report new technologies and innovations ro the Technology Transfer Office. This is the critical first step in fueling the technology transfer pipeline. This is also a requirement for all Federal employees (see NPD 2091.1 B) and most NASA contractors. Detailed information on when, where, and how ro report new technology is provided on the following page. In addition, it's important that all detailed-oriented discussions about technology between NASA and external partners are documented or that they occur under formal agreements such as Space Act Agreements and Nondisclosure Agreements. Our office can assist you in putting these agreements into place, protecting NASA's interests, and providing the means to accurately measure the Agency's technology transfer activities. Technology transfer is everyone's responsibility. We need your help to ensure that NASA remains the leader in Federal technology transfer, and that the great work done at KSC provides the maximum economic and societal benefit to the Nation.

Buckingham, Bruce↗

NASA NTRS1994

Applying Costs, Risks and Values Evaluation (CRAVE) methodology to Engineering Support Request (ESR) prioritization

Given limited budget, the problem of prioritization among Engineering Support Requests (ESR's) with varied sizes, shapes, and colors is a difficult one. At the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), the recently developed 4-Matrix (4-M) method represents a step in the right direction as it attempts to combine the traditional criteria of technical merits only with the new concern for cost-effectiveness. However, the 4-M method was not adequately successful in the actual prioritization of ESRs for the fiscal year 1995 (FY95). This research identifies a number of design issues that should help us to develop better methods. It emphasizes that given the variety and diversity of ESR's one should not expect that a single method could help in the assessment of all ESR's. One conclusion is that a methodology such as Costs, Risks, and Values Evaluation (CRAVE) should be adopted. It also is clear that the development of methods such as 4-M requires input not only from engineers with technical expertise in ESR's but also from personnel with adequate background in the theory and practice of cost-effectiveness analysis. At KSC, ESR prioritization is one part of the Ground Support Working Teams (GSWT) Integration Process. It was discovered that the more important barriers to the incorporation of cost-effectiveness considerations in ESR prioritization lie in this process. The culture of integration, and the corresponding structure of review by a committee of peers, is not conducive to the analysis and confrontation necessary in the assessment and prioritization of ESR's. Without assistance from appropriately trained analysts charged with the responsibility to analyze and be confrontational about each ESR, the GSWT steering committee will continue to make its decisions based on incomplete understanding, inconsistent numbers, and at times, colored facts. The current organizational separation of the prioritization and the funding processes is also identified as an important barrier to the pursuit of cost-effectiveness. Perhaps the greatest barrier is that, at the working level, KSC's culture is so preoccupied with technical concerns that it seems almost oblivious to any cost concerns, let alone cost-effectiveness concerns. It is recommended that we must urgently begin to change that culture and seek a better balance between these two concerns.

Joglekar, Prafulla N.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Multidisciplinary Dynamic Testing Challenges in Validating the NASA Artemis Architecture

NASA is in the midst of bold and exciting next steps in human exploration and spaceflight. The designs of the new Space Launch System (SLS), the Orion spacecraft and the Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) for vehicle processing and launch are essentially complete and there has been significant progress in manufacturing and assembly of specific hardware for the Artemis I and Artemis II missions. Equally as important, the program level and integrated system level testing and analyses are also well underway to support integrated verification, validation, and certificate of flight readiness (CoFR) for the first Artemis mission. Testing and analysis are key to addressing technical challenges that the Artemis missions offer. Building block approaches are required that provide the right balance between component, system, and/or element level testing that satisfies verification and validation objectives and where, uncertainties are quantified and minimized. Artemis I is a system of systems that requires a fusion of test and analysis that adeptly characterizes critical interfaces between major program elements. NASA is implementing new in-situ testing that fuse traditional aerospace structures with civil structures, such as the Integrated Modal Test for the Artemis I vehicle where the Mobile Launcher and Crawler Transporter serve as a support structure whose dynamics couple with that of the Artemis I vehicle. This new paradigm requires a closer inspection of structural behavior of the Crawler Transporter and the Mobile Launcher as they now serve multiple purposes. This requires a paradigm shift to look beyond experimental modal techniques and incorporates operational modal analysis techniques to validate dynamic models from data collected during rollout to the launch pad. A further complicating factor is the Crawler Transporter generated ground forces have numerous harmonics making extracting dynamic responses of the Artemis I, Mobile Launcher, and Crawler Transporter coupled system challenging. This discussion explores all these challenges with and attempts to understand how we best build confidence in systems and system-of-systems performance capabilities and margins and understand uncertainties.

Joel W Sills↗

NASA NTRS1971

A study of alternative methods for reclaiming oxygen from carbon dioxide and water by a solid-electrolyte process for spacecraft applications

Two alternative technical approaches were studied for application of an electrochemical process using a solid oxide electrolyte (zirconia stabilized by yttria or scandia) to oxygen reclamation from carbon dioxide and water, for spacecraft life support systems. Among the topics considered are the advisability of proceeding to engineering prototype development and fabrication of a full scale model for the system concept, the optimum choice of method or approach to be carried into prototype development, and the technical problem areas which exist.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1981

Aerospace Medicine and Biology: A continuing bibliography, supplement 216

One hundred twenty reports, articles, and other documents introduced into the NASA scientific and technical information system in January 1981 are listed. Topics include: sanitary problems; pharmacology; toxicology; safety and survival; life support systems; exobiology; and personnel factors.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1982

The aerospace technology laboratory (a perspective, then and now)

The physical changes that have taken place in aerospace facilities since the Wright brothers' accomplishment 78 years ago are highlighted. For illustrative purposes some of the technical facilities and operations of the NASA Lewis Research Center are described. These simulation facilities were designed to support research and technology studies in aerospace propulsion.

Connors, J. F.↗

NASA NTRS1990

The Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System - The next decade

As currently envisioned, NASA's Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS) will support the tracking and telecommunications requirements of LEO user satellites until the late 1990s, when existing TDRSS satellites will reach the end of their service lives. Spacecraft replacement is conceived as inseparable from network expansion for the accommodation of user population growth and the improvement of user services. The objective is to achieve a cost-effective/low-risk transition from TDRSS to Advanced TDRSS without interruption of user support. Attention is presently given to Advanced TDRSS architectural candidates studied and the choices which have emerged through technical tradeoff assessments.

Guion, William S.↗

NASA NTRS1992

Manufacturing Technology Information Analysis Center: Knowledge Is Strength

The Center's primary function is to facilitate technology transfer within DoD, other government agencies and industry. The DoD has recognized the importance of technology transfer, not only to support specific weapon system manufacture, but to strengthen the industrial base that sustains DoD. MTIAC uses an experienced technical staff of engineers and information specialists to acquire, analyze, and disseminate technical information. Besides ManTech project data, MTIAC collects manufacturing technology from other government agencies, commercial publications, proceedings, and various international sources. MTIAC has various means of disseminating this information. Much of the technical data is on user accessible data bases. The Center researches and writes a number of technical reports each year and publishes a newsletter monthly. Customized research is performed in response to specific inquiries from government and industry. MTIAC serves as a link between Government and Industry to strengthen the manufacturing technology base through the dissemination of advanced manufacturing information.

Safar, Michal↗

NASA NTRS1992

Space transfer concepts and analysis for exploration missions

The current technical effort is part of the third phase of a broad-scoped and systematic study of space transfer concepts for human lunar and Mars missions. The study addressed the technical issues relating to the First Lunar Outpost (FLO) habitation vehicle with emphasis on the structure, power, life support system, and radiation environment for a baseline habitat with specific alternatives for the baseline.

Woodcock, Gordon R.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Aerospace medicine and biology: A continuing bibliography with indexes (supplement 373)

This bibliography lists 206 reports, articles and other documents introduced into the NASA Scientific and Technical Information System during Feb. 1993. Subject coverage includes: aerospace medicine and physiology, pharmacology, toxicology, environmental effect, life support systems and man/system technology, protective clothing, exobiology and extraterrestrial life, planetary biology, and flight crew behavior and performance.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1992

Space transfer concepts and analyses for exploration missions

The current technical effort is part of the third phase of a broad-scoped and systematic study of space transfer concepts for human lunar and Mars missions. The study addressed the technical issues relating to the First Lunar Outpost (FLO) habitation vehicle with emphasis in the structure, power, life support system, and radiation environment.

Gordon R Woodcock↗

NASA NTRS2001

Use of System Safety Risk Assessments for the Space Shuttle Reusable Solid Rocket Motor (RSRM)

This paper discusses the System Safety approach used to assess risk for the Space Shuttle Reusable Solid Rocket Motor (RSRM). Previous to the first RSRM flight in the fall of 1988, all systems were analyzed extensively to assure that hazards were identified, assessed and that the baseline risk was understood and appropriately communicated. Since the original RSRM baseline was established, Thiokol and NASA have implemented a number of initiatives that have further improved the RSRM. The robust design, completion of rigorous testing and flight success of the RSRM has resulted in a wise reluctance to make changes. One of the primary assessments required to accompany the documentation of each proposed change and aid in the decision making process is a risk assessment. Documentation supporting proposed changes, including the risk assessments from System Safety, are reviewed and assessed by Thiokol and NASA technical management. After thorough consideration, approved changes are implemented adding improvements to and reducing risk of the Space Shuttle RSRM.

Greenhalgh, Phillip O.↗

NASA NTRS2006

Fabrication of 0.0075-Scale Orbiter Phosphor Thermography Test Models for Shuttle RTF Aeroheating Studies

This report details the techniques and fidelity associated with aeroheating models constructed in support of the return-to-flight boundary layer transition (BLT) activity for STS-114. This report provides technical descriptions of the methods, materials, and equipment used, as well as the surface quality results obtained with the cast ceramic phosphor thermography models.

Buck, Gregory M.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Investment and Return in International Space Life Sciences Research Cooperation

Today, a worldwide community of life scientists interested in space research is attempting to improve the understanding of general biological processes, aid the development of procedures to reduce the biomedically-related risks of space flight, and/or directly support the health care of people who fly in space. Unfortunately, limited resource and subject availability and the technical challenges of performing space experiments have all hampered the full growth and development of space life sciences research. For many years, international cooperation in this field has been considered an attractive approach towards overcoming some of these difficulties, since pooling resources and sharing results would enhance the knowledge of all cooperating partners. International cooperative activities, however, require an investment by each partner and, just as in many other endeavors, the research gain can be directly related to the investment made. In this paper, the authors will discuss three possible levels of cooperation: sharing of data from independent investigations, harmonious integration of pre-designed independent investigations, and de novo design of an integrated suite of investigations using a joint investigator team. The degree of investment and potential return for each level of cooperation will be described.

McPhee, Jancy C.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Overview of Avionics and Electrical Ground Support Equipment

Presents an overview of the Crew Module Avionics and the associated Electrical Ground Support Equipment for the Pad Abort 1 flight test of the Orion Program. A limited selection of the technical challenges and solutions are highlighted.

Clarke, Sean C.↗

NASA NTRS2020

The Use of the CCSDS Unified Space Data Link Protocol on All Space Links

NASA is actively pursuing the development of data link layer protocols for the human space program with the added intent of infusing the key capabilities of efficient space link security, support for inter-networking, and compatible operational modes with Optical Communications. There seems to be two divergent technical approaches on how to provide these capabilities: one associated with the use of a fixed length Protocol Data Unit (PDU) i.e., a fixed length transfer frame, and the other advocating the use of a variable length transfer frame. The objective of this paper is to evaluate the pros and cons of these two approaches within the context of existing Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) Space Data Link Protocols and Channel Coding Recommendations for all space links: space to ground (return) link, ground to space (forward) link and space to space (proximity) links.

Kazz, Greg J↗