SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “programmatic”

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 1,009 records · Page 56

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2015

Initial Sensorimotor and Cardiovascular Data Acquired from Soyuz Landings: Establishing a Functional Performance Recovery Time Constant

INTRODUCTION Testing of crew responses following long-duration flights has not been previously possible until a minimum of more than 24 hours after landing. As a result, it has not been possible to determine the trend of the early recovery process, nor has it been possible to accurately assess the full impact of the decrements associated with long-duration flight. To overcome these limitations, both the Russian and U.S. programs have implemented joint testing at the Soyuz landing site. This International Space Station research effort has been identified as the functional Field Test, and represents data collect on NASA, Russian, European Space Agency, and Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency crews. RESEARCH The primary goal of this research is to determine functional abilities associated with long-duration space flight crews beginning as soon after landing as possible on the day of landing (typically within 1 to 1.5 hours). This goal has both sensorimotor and cardiovascular elements. To date, a total of 15 subjects have participated in a 'pilot' version of the full 'field test'. The full version of the 'field test' will assess functional sensorimotor measurements included hand/eye coordination, standing from a seated position (sit-to-stand), walking normally without falling, measurement of dynamic visual acuity, discriminating different forces generated with the hands (both strength and ability to judge just noticeable differences of force), standing from a prone position, coordinated walking involving tandem heel-to-toe placement (tested with eyes both closed and open), walking normally while avoiding obstacles of differing heights, and determining postural ataxia while standing (measurement of quiet stance). Sensorimotor performance has been obtained using video records, and data from body worn inertial sensors. The cardiovascular portion of the investigation has measured blood pressure and heart rate during a timed stand test in conjunction with postural ataxia testing (quiet stance sway) as well as cardiovascular responses during sensorimotor testing on all of the above measures. We have also collected motion sickness data associated with each of the postflight tests. When possible rudimentary cerebellar assessment was undertaken. In addition to the immediate post-landing collection of data, postflight data has been acquired twice more within 24 hours after landing and measurements continue until sensorimotor and cardiovascular responses have returned to preflight normative values (approximately 60 days postflight). SUMMARY The level of functional deficit observed in the crew tested to date is more severe than expected, clearly triggered by the acquisition of gravity loads immediately after landing when the demands for crew intervention in response to emergency operations will be greatest. Measureable performance parameters such as ability to perform a seat egress, recover from a fall or the ability to see clearly when walking, and related physiologic data (orthostatic responses) are required to provide an evidence base for characterizing programmatic risks and the degree of variability among crewmembers for exploration missions where the crew will be unassisted after landing. Overall, these early functional and related physiologic measurements will allow the estimation of nonlinear sensorimotor and cardiovascular recovery trends that have not been previously captured.

Reschke, M. F.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Transfer Function Control for Biometric Monitoring System

A modular apparatus for acquiring biometric data may include circuitry operative to receive an input signal indicative of a biometric condition, the circuitry being configured to process the input signal according to a transfer function thereof and to provide a corresponding processed input signal. A controller is configured to provide at least one control signal to the circuitry to programmatically modify the transfer function of the modular system to facilitate acquisition of the biometric data.

Chmiel, Alan J.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Tool Use Within NASA Software Quality Assurance

As space mission software systems become larger and more complex, it is increasingly important for the software assurance effort to have the ability to effectively assess both the artifacts produced during software system development and the development process itself. Conceptually, assurance is a straightforward idea - it is the result of activities carried out by an organization independent of the software developers to better inform project management of potential technical and programmatic risks, and thus increase management's confidence in the decisions they ultimately make. In practice, effective assurance for large, complex systems often entails assessing large, complex software artifacts (e.g., requirements specifications, architectural descriptions) as well as substantial amounts of unstructured information (e.g., anomaly reports resulting from testing activities during development). In such an environment, assurance engineers can benefit greatly from appropriate tool support. In order to do so, an assurance organization will need accurate and timely information on the tool support available for various types of assurance activities. In this paper, we investigate the current use of tool support for assurance organizations within NASA, and describe on-going work at JPL for providing assurance organizations with the information about tools they need to use them effectively.

software assurance↗

NASA NTRS2012

JPL Innovation Foundry

Space science missions are increasingly challenged today: in ambition, by increasingly sophisticated hypotheses tested; in development, by the increasing complexity of advanced technologies; in budgeting, by the decline of flagship-class mission opportunities; in management, by expectations for breakthrough science despite a risk-averse programmatic climate; and in planning, by increasing competition for scarce resources. How are the space-science missions of tomorrow being formulated? The paper describes the JPL Innovation Foundry, created in 2011, to respond to this evolving context. The Foundry integrates methods, tools, and experts that span the mission concept lifecycle. Grounded in JPL's heritage of missions, flight instruments, mission proposals, and concept innovation, the Foundry seeks to provide continuity of support and cost-effective, on-call access to the right domain experts at the right time, as science definition teams and Principal Investigators mature mission ideas from "cocktail napkin" to PDR. The Foundry blends JPL capabilities in proposal development and concurrent engineering, including Team X, with new approaches for open-ended concept exploration in earlier, cost-constrained phases, and with ongoing research and technology projects. It applies complexity and cost models, projectformulation lessons learned, and strategy analyses appropriate to each level of concept maturity. The Foundry is organizationally integrated with JPL formulation program offices; staffed by JPL's line organizations for engineering, science, and costing; and overseen by senior Laboratory leaders to assure experienced coordination and review. Incubation of each concept is tailored depending on its maturity and proposal history, and its highest leverage modeling and analysis needs.

mission development↗

NASA NTRS2011

The Development of NASA's Fault Management Handbook

Disciplined approach to Fault Management (FM) has not always been emphasized by projects, contributing to major schedule and cost overruns: (1) Often faults aren't addressed until nominal spacecraft design is fairly stable. (2) Design relegated to after-the-fact patchwork, Band-Aid approach. Progress is being made on a number of fronts outside of Handbook effort: (1) Processes, Practices and Tools being developed at some Centers and Institutions (2) Management recognition. Constellation FM roles, Discovery/New Frontiers mission reviews (3) Potential Technology solutions. New approaches could avoid many current pitfalls (3a) New FM architectures, including model-based approach integrated with NASA's MBSE (Model-Based System Engineering) efforts (3b) NASA's Office of the Chief Technologist: FM identified in seven of NASA's 14 Space Technology Roadmaps. Opportunity to coalesce and establish thrust area to progressively develop new FM techniques. FM Handbook will help ensure that future missions do not encounter same FM-related problems as previous missions. Version 1 of the FM Handbook is a good start: (1) Still need Version 2 Agency-wide FM Handbook to expand Handbook to other areas, especially crewed missions. (2) Still need to reach out to other organizations to develop common understanding and vocabulary. Handbook doesn't/can't address all Workshop recommendations. Still need to identify how to address programmatic and infrastructure issues.

Fault Management↗

NASA NTRS2013

Exploring Mission Concepts with the JPL Innovation Foundry A-Team

The JPL Innovation Foundry has established a new approach for exploring, developing, and evaluating early concepts called the A-Team. The A-Team combines innovative collaborative methods with subject matter expertise and analysis tools to help mature mission concepts. Science, implementation, and programmatic elements are all considered during an A-Team study. Methods are grouped by Concept Maturity Level (CML), from 1 through 3, including idea generation and capture (CML 1), initial feasibility assessment (CML 2), and trade space exploration (CML 3). Methods used for each CML are presented, and the key team roles are described from two points of view: innovative methods and technical expertise. A-Team roles for providing innovative methods include the facilitator, study lead, and assistant study lead. A-Team roles for providing technical expertise include the architect, lead systems engineer, and integration engineer. In addition to these key roles, each A-Team study is uniquely staffed to match the study topic and scope including subject matter experts, scientists, technologists, flight and instrument systems engineers, and program managers as needed. Advanced analysis and collaborative engineering tools (e.g. cost, science traceability, mission design, knowledge capture, study and analysis support infrastructure) are also under development for use in A-Team studies and will be discussed briefly. The A-Team facilities provide a constructive environment for innovative ideas from all aspects of mission formulation to eliminate isolated studies and come together early in the development cycle when they can provide the biggest impact. This paper provides an overview of the A-Team, its study processes, roles, methods, tools and facilities.

Team Eureka↗

NASA NTRS2013

Virtual Construction of Space Habitats: Connecting Building Information Models (BIM) and SysML

Current trends in design, construction and management of complex projects make use of Building Information Models (BIM) connecting different types of data to geometrical models. This information model allow different types of analysis beyond pure graphical representations. Space habitats, regardless their size, are also complex systems that require the synchronization of many types of information and disciplines beyond mass, volume, power or other basic volumetric parameters. For this, the state-of-the-art model based systems engineering languages and processes - for instance SysML - represent a solid way to tackle this problem from a programmatic point of view. Nevertheless integrating this with a powerful geometrical architectural design tool with BIM capabilities could represent a change in the workflow and paradigm of space habitats design applicable to other aerospace complex systems. This paper shows some general findings and overall conclusions based on the ongoing research to create a design protocol and method that practically connects a systems engineering approach with a BIM architectural and engineering design as a complete Model Based Engineering approach. Therefore, one hypothetical example is created and followed during the design process. In order to make it possible this research also tackles the application of IFC categories and parameters in the aerospace field starting with the application upon the space habitats design as way to understand the information flow between disciplines and tools. By building virtual space habitats we can potentially improve in the near future the way more complex designs are developed from very little detail from concept to manufacturing.

space architecture↗

NASA NTRS2015

Techniques for Conducting Effective Concept Design and Design-to-Cost Trade Studies

Concept design plays a central role in project success as its product effectively locks the majority of system life cycle cost. Such extraordinary leverage presents a business case for conducting concept design in a credible fashion, particularly for first-of-a-kind systems that advance the state of the art and that have high design uncertainty. A key challenge, however, is to know when credible design convergence has been achieved in such systems. Using a space system example, this paper characterizes the level of convergence needed for concept design in the context of technical and programmatic resource margins available in preliminary design and highlights the importance of design and cost evaluation learning curves in determining credible convergence. It also provides techniques for selecting trade study cases that promote objective concept evaluation, help reveal unknowns, and expedite convergence within the trade space and conveys general practices for conducting effective concept design-to-cost studies.

Design To Cost↗

NASA NTRS2010

Managing the Development of the Wide-Field Infrared Survey Explorer Mission

The Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE), a NASA Medium-Class Explorer (MIDEX) mission, is surveying the entire sky in four bands from 3.4 to 22 microns with a sensitivity hundreds to hundreds of thousands times better than previous all-sky surveys at these wavelengths. The single WISE instrument consists of a 40 cm three-mirror anastigmatic telescope, a two-stage solid hydrogen cryostat, a scan mirror mechanism, and reimaging optics giving 6" resolution (full-width-half-maximum). WISE was placed into a Sun-synchronous polar orbit on a Delta II 7320 launch vehicle on December 14, 2009. NASA selected WISE as a MIDEX in 2002 following a rigorous competitive selection process. To gain further confidence in WISE, NASA extended the development period one year with an option to cancel the mission if certain criteria were not met. MIDEX missions are led by the principal investigator who in this case delegated day-to-day management to the project manager. With a cost cap and relatively short development schedule, it was essential for all WISE partners to work seamlessly together. This was accomplished with an integrated management team representing all key partners and disciplines. The project was developed on budget and on schedule in spite of the need to surmount significant technical challenges. This paper describes our management approach, key challenges and critical decisions made. Results are described from a programmatic, technical and scientific point of view. Lessons learned are offered for projects of this type.

cryogenic↗

NASA NTRS2010

The Quest for an OCO (Orbiting Carbon Observatory) Re-Flight

The objective of the OCO (Orbiting Carbon Observatory) mission was to make the first space-based measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide with the accuracy needed to quantify sources and sinks of this important greenhouse gas. Unfortunately, the observatory was lost as a result of a launch vehicle failure on 24 February 2009. The JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) was directed to assess the options for the re-flight of the OCO instrument and recovery of the carbon-related measurement, and to understand and quantitatively assess the cost, schedule, and technical and programmatic risks of the identified options. The two most likely solutions were (1) a shared platform with the TIRS (Thermal Infrared Sensor) instrument and (2) a dedicated OSC (Orbital Sciences Corporation) LEOStar-2 spacecraft bus similar to that utilized for the original OCO mission. A joint OCO-TIRS mission study was commissioned and two specific options were examined. However, each presented technical challenges that would drive cost. It was determined that the best option was to rebuild the OCO observatory to the extent possible including another LEOStar-2 spacecraft bus. This lowest risk approach leverages the original OCO design and provides the shortest path to launch, which is targeted for no later than the February 2013 timeframe.

carbon↗

NASA NTRS2011

Solar System Planetary Science Decadal Survey and Missions in the Next Decade, 2013-2022

In 2010, the National Research Council Space Studies Board established a decadal survey committee to develop a comprehensive science, mission, and technology strategy for planetary science that updates and extends the Board's 2003 Solar System Exploration Decadal Survey, "New Frontiers in the Solar System: An Integrated Exploration Strategy." The scope of the survey encompasses the inner planets (Mercury, Venus, and Mars), the Earth's Moon, the giant planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune), the moons of the giant planets, dwarf planets and small bodies, primitive bodies including comets and Kuiper Belt objects, and astrobiology. Over this past year, the decadal survey committee has interacted with the broad solar system science community to determine the current state of knowledge and to identify the most important scientific questions expected to face the community during the interval 2013-2022. The survey has identified candidate missions that address the most important science questions and has conducted, through NASA sponsorship, concept studies to assess the cost of such missions as well as technology needs. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the 2012 Solar System Planetary Science Decadal Survey study approach and missions that were studied for implementation in the upcoming decade. Final results of the decadal survey, including studies that were completed and the specific science, programmatic, and technology recommendations will be disclosed publically in the spring of 2011 and are not the subject of this paper.

Reh, Kim↗

NASA NTRS2010

Lessons Learned in Architecting Human Spaceflight Programs

This paper discusses the fundamentals of architecting a major human spaceflight program and the lessons that can be learned from Constellation. Constellation is/was NASA's program to implement a new generation of human exploration missions to the moon and beyond. It is/was a tightly-coupled program where a unique set of architectural challenges can be seen and evaluated to better understand how architecting of such systems can be improved upon in the future. While the specific issues discussed in this paper derive from the current Constellation architecture they share threads with previously-crewed systems including Apollo and Shuttle and are likely to be common to any human exploration system or system of significant technical and programmatic complexity.

Muirhead, Brian↗

NASA NTRS2012

NASA and ESA Partnership on the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Service Module

(1) ESA decided in its Council Meeting in March 2011 to partially offset the European ISS obligations after 2015 with different means than ATVs; (2) The envisioned approach is based on a barter element(s) that would generate cost avoidance on the NASA side; (3) NASA and ESA considered a number of Barter options, NASA concluded that the provision by ESA of the Service Module for the NASA Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) was the barter with the most interest;. (4) A joint ESA - NASA working group was established in May 2011 to assess the feasibility of Europe developing this Module based on ATV heritage; (5)The working group was supported by European and US industry namely Astrium, TAS-I and Lockheed-Martin; and (6) The project is currently in phase B1 with the objective to prepare a technical and programmatic proposal for an ESA MPCV-SM development. This proposal will be one element of the package that ESA plans submit to go forward for approval by European Ministers in November 2012.

Schubert, Kathleen E.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Experiences with Extra-Vehicular Activities in Response to Critical ISS Contingencies

The maturation of the International Space Station (ISS) design from the proposed Space Station Freedom to today's current implementation resulted in external hardware redundancy vulnerabilities in the final design. Failure to compensate for or respond to these vulnerabilities could put the ISS in a posture to where it could no longer function as a habitable space station. In the first years of ISS assembly, these responses were to largely be addressed by the continued resupply and Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) capabilities of the Space Shuttle. Even prior to the decision to retire the Space Shuttle, it was realized that ISS needed to have its own capability to be able to rapidly repair or replace external hardware without needing to wait for the next cargo resupply mission. As documented in a previous publicatoin5, in 2006 development was started to baseline Extra- Vehicular Activity (EVA, or spacewalk) procedures to replace hardware components whose failure would expose some of the ISS vulnerabilities should a second failure occur. This development work laid the groundwork for the onboard crews and the ground operations and engineering teams to be ready to replace any of this failed hardware. In 2010, this development work was put to the test when one of these pieces of hardware failed. This paper will provide a brief summary of the planning and processes established in the original Contingency EVA development phase. It will then review how those plans and processes were implemented in 2010, highlighting what went well as well as where there were deficiencies between theory and reality. This paper will show that the original approach and analyses, though sound, were not as thorough as they should have been in the realm of planning for next worse failures, for documenting Programmatic approval of key assumptions, and not pursuing sufficient engineering analysis prior to the failure of the hardware. The paper will further highlight the changes made to the Contingency EVA preparation team structure, approach, goals, and the resources allocated to its work after the 2010 events. Finally, the authors will overview the implementation of these updates in addressing failures onboard the ISS in 2012, 2013, and 2014. The successful use of the updated approaches, and the application of the approaches to other spacewalks, will demonstrate the effectiveness of this additional work and make a case for putting significant time and resources into pre-failure planning and analysis for critical hardware items on human-tended spacecraft.

Van Cise, E. A.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Mission Architecture and Technology Options for a Flagship Class Venus In Situ Mission

Venus, as part of the inner triad with Earth and Mars, represents an important exploration target if we want to learn more about solar system formation and evolution. Comparative planetology could also elucidate the differences between the past, present, and future of these three planets, and can help with the characterization of potential habitable zones in our solar system and, by extension, extrasolar systems. A long lived in situ Venus mission concept, called the Venus Mobile Explorer, was prominently featured in NASA's 2006 SSE Roadmap and supported in the community White Paper by the Venus Exploration Analysis Group (VEXAG). Long-lived in situ missions are expected to belong to the largest (Flagship) mission class, which would require both enabling and enhancing technologies beside mission architecture options. Furthermore, extreme environment mitigation technologies for Venus are considered long lead development items and are expected to require technology development through a dedicated program. To better understand programmatic and technology needs and the motivating science behind them, in this fiscal year (FY08) NASA is funding a Venus Flaghip class mission study, based on key science and technology drivers identified by a NASA appointed Venus Science and Technology Definition Team (STDT). These mission drivers are then assembled around a suitable mission architecture to further refine technology and cost elements. In this paper we will discuss the connection between the final mission architecture and the connected technology drivers from this NASA funded study, which - if funded - could enable a future Flagship class Venus mission and potentially drive a proposed Venus technology development program.

Balint, Tibor S.↗

NASA NTRS2015

A Year of Progress: NASA's Space Launch System Approaches Critical Design Review

NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) made significant progress on the manufacturing floor and on the test stand in 2014 and positioned itself for a successful Critical Design Review in mid-2015. SLS, the world's only exploration-class heavy lift rocket, has the capability to dramatically increase the mass and volume of human and robotic exploration. Additionally, it will decrease overall mission risk, increase safety, and simplify ground and mission operations - all significant considerations for crewed missions and unique high-value national payloads. Development now is focused on configuration with 70 metric tons (t) of payload to low Earth orbit (LEO), more than double the payload of the retired Space Shuttle program or current operational vehicles. This "Block 1" design will launch NASA's Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) on an uncrewed flight beyond the Moon and back and the first crewed flight around the Moon. The current design has a direct evolutionary path to a vehicle with a 130t lift capability that offers even more flexibility to reduce planetary trip times, simplify payload design cycles, and provide new capabilities such as planetary sample returns. Every major element of SLS has successfully completed its Critical Design Review and now has hardware in production or testing. In fact, the SLS MPCV-to-Stage-Adapter (MSA) flew successfully on the Exploration Flight Test (EFT) 1 launch of a Delta IV and Orion spacecraft in December 2014. The SLS Program is currently working toward vehicle Critical Design Review in mid-2015. This paper will discuss these and other technical and programmatic successes and challenges over the past year and provide a preview of work ahead before the first flight of this new capability.

Askins, Bruce↗

NASA NTRS2015

Techniques for Conducting Effective Concept Design and Design-to-Cost Trade Studies

Trade Studies↗

NASA NTRS2015

Probabilistic Survivability Versus Time Modeling

This technical paper documents Kennedy Space Centers Independent Assessment team work completed on three assessments for the Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) Program to assist the Chief Safety and Mission Assurance Officer (CSO) and GSDO management during key programmatic reviews. The assessments provided the GSDO Program with an analysis of how egress time affects the likelihood of astronaut and worker survival during an emergency. For each assessment, the team developed probability distributions for hazard scenarios to address statistical uncertainty, resulting in survivability plots over time. The first assessment developed a mathematical model of probabilistic survivability versus time to reach a safe location using an ideal Emergency Egress System at Launch Complex 39B (LC-39B); the second used the first model to evaluate and compare various egress systems under consideration at LC-39B. The third used a modified LC-39B model to determine if a specific hazard decreased survivability more rapidly than other events during flight hardware processing in Kennedys Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB).Based on the composite survivability versus time graphs from the first two assessments, there was a soft knee in the Figure of Merit graphs at eight minutes (ten minutes after egress ordered). Thus, the graphs illustrated to the decision makers that the final emergency egress design selected should have the capability of transporting the flight crew from the top of LC 39B to a safe location in eight minutes or less. Results for the third assessment were dominated by hazards that were classified as instantaneous in nature (e.g. stacking mishaps) and therefore had no effect on survivability vs time to egress the VAB. VAB emergency scenarios that degraded over time (e.g. fire) produced survivability vs time graphs that were line with aerospace industry norms.

Joyner, James J., Sr.↗