SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “checklist”

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 109 records · Page 6

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2016

Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy Challenge Home Program Certification of Production Builders - Chicago, IL and Devens, MA

TO4 Task 3.1 - K Hovnanian Chicago, IL DOE Challenge Home Program Certified Home Constructed and Verified Specifications DOE Challenge Home Building envelope Ceiling R-49 blown fiberglass, Grade I Walls 2x4 framing @ 16 o.c. with R-13 fiberglass batts, Grade I and 1"" R-5 extruded polystyrene (XPS) insulating sheathing Frame Floors R-38 blown fiberglass, Grade I Basement Walls R-19 fiberglass batts draped full height, Grade I Basement Slab uninsulated Windows Above Grade: ENERGY STAR certified, U=0.29, SHGC=0.28 Basement: Non ENERGY STAR certified, U=0.29, SHGC=0.24 Infiltration 2 ACH 50 Mechanical systems Heat 95% AFUE sealed combustion natural gas furnace in conditioned space Goodman GMH950703BXAF Cooling 13 SEER split system Goodman GSX130301BC DHW AO Smith Vertex 100 0.96 EF natural gas tank water heater in 2nd floor utility closet Hot Water Distribution Redesigned trunk and branch Compliant with EPA WaterSense Efficient Distribution Requirements Ducts Located 100% in conditioned space via floor joists leak free to outside (5% or less) Ventilation Central Fan Integrated Supply (CFIS) ventilation with 6"" insulated outside air duct Fan Controller: Air Cycler FRV, with 6"" motorized damper 50 CFM outside air flow, 33% duty cycle (10 minutes on, 20 minutes off); ASHRAE 62.2-2010 compliance via an exhaust fan - Panasonic FV-08VQ5 WhisperCeiling Rerturn Pathways Active Return at Master Bedroom Transfer Grilles in Secondary Bedrooms Appliances, Lighting, MELs Lights 80% ENERGY STAR certified CFL Appliances ENERGY STAR certified refrigerator, dishwasher, and clothes washer; Natural gas range/oven and clothes dryer" STRUCTURE - Test House Lot 145 - 2013 DOE Challenge Test House Task 3.1 Bolingbrook, IL 60490 House is constructed and is DOE Challenge Verified by Don Nelson, a local rater. The purpose of this project was to evaluate integrated packages of advanced measures in individual test homes to assess their performance with respect to Building America Program goals, specifically compliance with the DOE Challenge Home Program. To that end, Building Science Corporation (BSC) consulted on the construction of five test houses by three cold climate production builders in three separate U.S. cities. (1) K. Hovnanian Homes, Chicago, Illinois (2) David Weekley Homes, Denver, Colorado (3) Transformations, Inc., Devens, Massachusetts. Overall, the builders have concluded that the energy related upgrades (either through the prescriptive or performance path) represent reasonable upgrades. The builders commented that while not every improvement in specification was cost effective (as in a reasonable payback period), many were improvements that could improve the marketability of the homes and serve to attract more energy efficiency discerning prospective homeowners. However, the builders did express reservations about the associated checklists and added certifications. An increase in administrative time was observed with all builders. The checklists and certifications also inherently increase cost due to: (1) Adding services to the scope of work for various trades, such as HERS Rater and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning contractor. (2) Increased material costs related to the checklists, especially the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Indoor airPLUS and WaterSense Efficient Hot Water Distribution requirement. Ceiling - 18" cellulose Walls - 12" open cell spray foam in double stud walls Foundation - R-10 under slab, 3 1/2" closed-cell spray foam at walls Windows - Harvey U=0.20, SHGC=0.22 Infiltration - 1.0 sq in per 100 sq ft Heating - Mini split heat pump, 10.6 HSPF, 23 SEER Cooling - Mini split heat pump, 10.6 HSPF, 23 SEER DHW - 0.97 EF instantaneous propane water heater Ventilation - bathroom exhaust fans as basic option, HRV upgrade option Adams Circle Devens MA 01434 Cavite Street Devens, MA 01434

Array↗

NASA NTRS1976

Ambulance Handbook

Johnson Space Center has devised a checklist for the skylab inflight medical support system that has been transferred for public emergencies. The checklist illustrates a procedure for diagnosis, treatment, and stabilization of a wide variety of emergencies. Handbook presents comprehensive ordered description of emergency medical equipment and its use in treating victims. Paramedics assigned to the Houston Fire Department are now using the checklist.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2008

Are Current SEE Test Procedures Adequate for Modern Devices and Electronics Technologies?

Believe it or not, this has been a simplistic look at starting a checklist for SEE testing. Given a memory that has 68 operating modes, when a SEU occurs that changes the mode, just how do you determine what's going on? Laser and microbeam tests can help, but not easily for modern packaged devices. Expanding this approach to other more complex devices such as ADCs or processors as well as analog devices should be considered. The recommendation is to use the existing text standards as the starting point. Just make your own checklist for the device/technology/issues being considered. At HEART 2007, we presented some of the burgeoning challenges associated with single event effect(SEE) testing of modern commercial memories: a) Package, device complexity, test fixture, and data analysis issues were discussed; b) "Complete" SEE Characterization would take 15 years; c) Qualification test costs have a greater than 4 times increase over the last decade. In this talk, we continue to explore the roles of technology with an emphasis on the existing SEE Test Procedures and some of the concerns related to modern devices. The primary objective of the briefing is to provide some overarching guidance concerning the many considerations involved in the formulation of a SEE test plan provided in a " Checklist" format.we note that there is no such thing as a complete check list and that the best approach is to develop a flexible test plan that takes into account the device type and functions, the device technology, circuit and package design, and, of course, test facility and beam characteristics.

LaBel, Kenneth A.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Common Cause Failure Modeling in Space Launch Vehicles

Common Cause Failures (CCFs) are a known and documented phenomenon that defeats system redundancy. CCFs are a set of dependent type of failures that can be caused for example by system environments, manufacturing, transportation, storage, maintenance, and assembly. Since there are many factors that contribute to CCFs, they can be reduced, but are difficult to eliminate entirely. Furthermore, failure databases sometimes fail to differentiate between independent and dependent CCF. Because common cause failure data is limited in the aerospace industry, the Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) Team at Bastion Technology Inc. is estimating CCF risk using generic data collected by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Consequently, common cause risk estimates based on this database, when applied to other industry applications, are highly uncertain. Therefore, it is important to account for a range of values for independent and CCF risk and to communicate the uncertainty to decision makers. There is an existing methodology for reducing CCF risk during design, which includes a checklist of 40+ factors grouped into eight categories. Using this checklist, an approach to produce a beta factor estimate is being investigated that quantitatively relates these factors. In this example, the checklist will be tailored to space launch vehicles, a quantitative approach will be described, and an example of the method will be presented.

Hark, Frank↗

NASA NTRS2019

Space Research Project Management Can Benefit from Engineering Technology Selection Methods

Many engineering methods have been developed to help management select technology for a system design or further research. The simplest way to compare technologies is to use a checklist containing all the more or less important selection criteria, so that nothing is overlooked. The criteria usually include cost, safety, reliability and maintainability, and potential problems such as noise generation and microgravity sensitivity. The next step typically is to weight and score all the criteria. The process of weighting and scoring is helpful in bringing out different priorities and reaching a shared point of view. Group technology selection methods are designed to highlight initial disagreements and produce a shared consensus. Often a frank discussion led by management rather than decision analysts can be more effective. The final selection depends on management and engineering judgment and may include programmatic and organizational factors that are beyond the engineering checklist. The objective of engineering technology selection methods is to provide engineering information to assist management in making sound decisions. Project management and technology selection are assumed to use rational engineering analytic methods, but they often do not. The reason is that human insight, intuition, and “gut feel,” rather than logic, more frequently determine our decisions. Project selection and management are strongly influenced by nonrational psychological influences, which can produce unjustified confidence and determination. Nevertheless, there is a strong need for space projects to do rational project analysis and selection. Demonstrating a rational spirit is necessary for a scientific and technical organization. Professional ethics at its best requires an open, honest, and fair process, without damaging politics. Rational analysis can help improve good projects and avoid selecting bad ones. A sanity check using rational analysis guided by a checklist can help avoid egregious and damaging errors.

Jones, Harry W.↗

NASA NTRS2020

Information Management to Mitigate Loss of Control Airline Accidents

Loss of control inflight continues to be the leading contributor to airline accidents worldwide and unreliable airspeed has been a contributing factor in many of these accidents. Airlines and the FAA developed training programs for pilot recognition of these airspeed events and many checklists have been designed to help pilots troubleshoot. In addition, new aircraft designs incorporate features to detect and respond in such situations. NASA has been using unreliable airspeed events while conducting research recommended by the Commercial Aviation Safety Team. Even after significant industry focus on unreliable airspeed, research and other evidence shows that highly skilled and trained pilots can still be confused by the condition and there is a lack of understanding of what the associated checklist(s) attempts to uncover. Common mode failures of analog sensors designed for measuring airspeed continue to confound both humans and automation when determining which indicators are correct. This paper describes failures that have occurred in the past and where/how pilots may still struggle in determining reliable airspeed when confronted with conflicting information. Two latest generation aircraft architectures will be discussed and contrasted. This information will be used to describe why more sensors used in classic control theory will not solve the problem. Technology concepts are suggested for utilizing existing synoptic pages and a new synoptic page called System Interactive Synoptic (SIS). SIS details the flow of flight critical data through the avionics system and how it is used by the automation. This new synoptic page as well as existing synoptics can be designed to be used in concert with a simplified electronic checklist (sECL) to significantly reduce the time to configure the flight deck avionics in the event of a system or sensor failure.

Etherington, Timothy J.↗

NASA NTRS2020

Demonstrating Assurance of Model-Based Fault Diagnosis Systems on an Operational Mission

Developers of robotic scientific and commercial spacecraft are trending towards use of onboard autonomous capabilities for responding quickly to dynamic environments and rapidly changing situations. These capabilities need to know the state of the spacecraft’s health. Model-based fault diagnosis (MBFD) is an approach to estimating health by continuously verifying accurate behavior and diagnosing off-nominal behavior. Proper functioning of MBFD depends on 1) the quality of the diagnostic system model that is analyzed and compared to commands and onboard measurements to estimate a system’s health state, and 2) the correct functionality of the diagnosis engine interrogating the model and comparing its analyses to observed system behavior. Our goal is to develop Verification and Validation (V&V) techniques for MBFD to provide future missions sufficient confidence in its functionality and performance to deploy it on the systems they develop. Our work has been focused on infusing the techniques we developed earlier to an operational mission. First, we are constructing diagnostic models of a spacecraft attitude control system and updating our diagnostic engine so they can be demonstrated aboard the Arcsecond Space Telescope Enabling Research in Astrophysics (ASTERIA) mission, an operational spacecraft for which experiments in autonomy are being planned and executed, using the V&V techniques we have previously developed to assure they are both correct and complete. Since it is nearing the end of its life, ASTERIA provides a unique opportunity to demonstrate MBFD since the monitored components are expected to fail. Our demonstration will give system developers additional confidence to make timely, informed MBFD deployment decisions. Second, we will be completing performance assessments of the diagnostic engine/diagnostic model ensemble both on the flight system and ground-based testbeds to gain confidence in MBFD’s ability to run successfully in a spacecraft’s resource-constrained environment without adversely affecting other on-board activities. Finally, we are capturing our experience in preparing this demonstration in a set of checklists and guidance documents. Current practice includes high-level institutional guidance documents and standards, but at a high level of abstraction that does not necessarily address specific MBFD concerns. The purpose of the new checklists is to provide future mission developers clear, unambiguous, procedure-oriented guidance on assuring MBFD. This paper describes our work in these areas. For the first area, we describe the diagnostic models and updated diagnostic engine that will be used for the on-board demonstration. We describe how the V&V techniques we developed earlier are used to assure model and engine correctness and completeness. For the second area, we identify the performance measurement and assessment techniques used to characterize the diagnostic engine and diagnostic models, and discuss the effect of measured performance on overall mission operation. Finally, we present the checklist and guidance documents and describe how they meet the goals of providing system developers with clear, unambiguous, procedure-oriented guidance on MBFD assurance. We show how the techniques we have developed map into those artifacts.

Nikora, Allen↗

NASA NTRS2023

Know Before You Go: A Community-Derived Approach to Planning for and Preventing Sexual Harassment at Oceanographic Field Sites

Sexual harassment is a pervasive problem on oceanographic research vessels and while conducting fieldwork in general. A variety of factors contribute to inadequate protection against sexual harassment, such as poor training in prevention, support, and response; the remoteness of field sites; academic hierarchies that reinforce uneven power dynamics that extend to fieldwork; and multi-institutional teams with distinct policies or reporting structures that can lead to confusion in reporting and responding to incidents in the field. In compromising individuals’ physical and mental health, sexual harassment can negatively affect research expeditions. For example, harassed individuals may decide to refrain from working on complicated team-based tasks, which can be a safety issue. A broader concern is that sexual harassment deters talented people from pursing or maintaining employment in ocean science. Harassment must be treated with the same gravity as research misconduct and safety policy infringements. When planning a research expedition, science team leaders are responsible for the safety of their team and other colleagues aboard and would benefit from resources aimed at helping team leadership create a plan to ensure safety and inclusivity. To address this resource gap and support consistent safety preparedness, 18 participants in the Workshop to Promote Field Safety in Ocean Sciences, convened by the Consortium for Ocean Leadership and held May 17-18, 2022, in Washington, D.C., developed a checklist for use by scientific leaders and others to assist in planning for participant safety and to prevent harassment the field. The checklist specifies the timing of, and who is responsible for, specific actions that should be taken to improve safety while conducting fieldwork, whether on a research vessel or on land. It also provides additional resources and suggestions for leaders on how to amend the checklist to address their specific fieldwork situations.

Oceanography↗

DOE OSTI2014

Building America Case Study: Meeting DOE Challenge Home Program Certification, Chicago, Illinois; Denver, Colorado; Devens, Massachusetts (Fact Sheet)

The purpose of this project was to evaluate integrated packages of advanced measures in individual test homes to assess their performance with respect to Building America Program goals, specifically compliance with the DOE Challenge Home Program. BSC consulted on the construction of five test houses by three Cold Climate production builders in three separate US cities. BSC worked with the builders to develop a design package tailored to the cost-related impacts for each builder. Therefore, the resulting design packages do vary from builder to builder. BSC provided support through this research project on the design, construction and performance testing of the five test homes. Overall, the builders have concluded that the energy related upgrades (either through the prescriptive or performance path) represent reasonable upgrades. The builders commented that while not every improvement in specification was cost effective (as in a reasonable payback period), many were improvements that could improve the marketability of the homes and serve to attract more energy efficiency discerning prospective homeowners. However, the builders did express reservations on the associated checklists and added certifications. An increase in administrative time was observed with all builders. The checklists and certifications also inherently increase cost due to: 1. Adding services to the scope of work for various trades, such as HERS Rater, HVAC contractor. 2. Increased material costs related to the checklists, especially the EPA Indoor airPLUS and EPA WaterSense Efficient Hot Water Distribution requirement.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2018

CSP-Plant Modeling Guidelines and Compliance of the System Advisor Model (SAM): Preprint

Accurately modeling risks, costs, and electricity output is essential to the financing and advancement of concentrating solar power projects. To address this need, a group of CSP experts created a guideline document, titled SolarPACES Guideline for Bankable STE Yield Assessment (1). To make this information more accessible and allow stakeholders to test specific models against the recommendations, the guidelines have been condensed into a spreadsheet-based checklist. The checklist was applied to NREL's System Advisory Model (SAM) CSP modeling software, providing useful feedback to both the checklist group and the SAM development team. This study showed a strong agreement between SAM and the guidelines, demonstrated the use of the guidelines in model validation, and resulted in several recommended improvements to SAM.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2013

Integrated Design Team Guide to Realizing Over 75% Lighting Energy Savings in High-Performance Office Buildings (Fact Sheet)

This checklist packet is a team-focused guide to realizing energy savings in high-performance office buildings through carefully considered lighting and control design. The checklists should be distributed among the integrated project team members, including the owner, lighting designer and engineer, commissioning agent, and facility manager, at the beginning of a project and referred toregularly during design meetings and drawing reviews. The checklists are arranged by key design considerations (daylighting, occupancy, task) and key integration points (energy goal, sequence of operations). Each action or question is related to a design stage during which failure to act could jeopardize energy savings.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Simple Wins: Driving Effective Implementation of Energy Efficiency Projects

Small- and medium-sized manufacturers (SMMs) in the United States, making up over 98% of manufacturing firms, account for 48.3% of the sector’s energy consumption. Despite access to energy assessments and technical resources, such as those from the US Department of Energy’s Better Plants program and Industrial Training and Assessment Centers, implementation rates for identified energy-saving measures remain lower than expectations, averaging 47%. Some barriers were identified by other researchers as limited workforce capacity, inadequate training, and time constraints hinder progress. This article studied the development of customized checklists together with the energy assessment report as a practical solution to improve implementation rates for energy efficiency projects among SMMs. The framework for the checklists was grounded in five principles: short, precise, actionable, relevant, and codeveloped (SPARC). A case study of a 500,000-squarefoot SMM demonstrates how tailored checklists targeting significant energy users—such as heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC), lighting, and compressed air systems for this facility—can simplify the process for staff to do facility walkthroughs to monitor best practices and track the progress of energy efficiency project implementation.

Guo, Wei [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Oa↗

NASA NTRS2016

Designing Flightdeck Procedures

The primary goal of this document is to provide guidance on how to design, implement, and evaluate flight deck procedures. It provides a process for developing procedures that meet clear and specific requirements. This document provides a brief overview of: 1) the requirements for procedures, 2) a process for the design of procedures, and 3) a process for the design of checklists. The brief overview is followed by amplified procedures that follow the above steps and provide details for the proper design, implementation and evaluation of good flight deck procedures and checklists.

checklists↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Holistic Approach to Procedures

Aviation is a dynamic industry which is constantly changing. These changes require the continuous update of people’s knowledge and skills. A fundamental part of that knowledge and skill is procedures, because procedures form the backbone of aviation operations. On the flightdeck, on the ramp, and in the maintenance shop, procedures and checklists help support pilots, line crews, and mechanics in performing their work effectively, efficiently, and thus -- safely. To design effective and efficient procedures and checklists, one must take into account the full operational context within which these procedures are embedded. This context is defined by the requirements of the technology, the capabilities and limitations of the human operators, and the constraints and affordances of the operational environment. The complexity of this context arises from the interactions of the human, machine, and environment. Procedures are in place to govern those interactions. We present a model of that operational context, namely THE Model (Technology, Human, Environment in the context of a Mission), that lays a foundation for the analysis of each of these elements and their interactions. But procedures have their limitations, and there are risks involved in over-proceduralizing. To understand these limitations and risks, and to determine when to proceduralize and when not, we present the 4P Framework (Practice, Procedures, Policies, Philosophy) as a holistic approach to procedures. This approach brings together the understanding of human behavior, of organizational and operational factors, and of the technologies involved.

procedures↗

DOE OSTI2022

Preparacion de Sistemas Solares Fotovoltaicos Contra Tormentas

Through funding provided by the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has used subject matter experts to compile a set of checklists to help Puerto Rico and other communities prepare for storms. Renewable energy and distributed energy systems have the potential to provide power to neighborhoods, vulnerable residents, and certain facilities within a community, if those systems are designed to provide power during a grid disruption. The storm-hardening checklists provide storm preparation actions that can increase the chances that solar photovoltaic (PV) systems are available when communities need them most. This resource was translated from English to Spanish for greater acessibility.

hurricane↗

DOE OSTI2022

Preparing Solar Photovoltaic Systems Against Storms

hurricane↗

DOE OSTI2014

Assessment of health risks of policies

The assessment of health risks of policies is an inevitable, although challenging prerequisite for the inclusion of health considerations in political decision making. The aim of our project was to develop a so far missing methodological guide for the assessment of the complex impact structure of policies. The guide was developed in a consensual way based on experiences gathered during the assessment of specific national policies selected by the partners of an EU project. Methodological considerations were discussed and summarized in workshops and pilot tested on the EU Health Strategy for finalization. The combined tool, which includes a textual guidance and a checklist, follows the top-down approach, that is, it guides the analysis of causal chains from the policy through related health determinants and risk factors to health outcomes. The tool discusses the most important practical issues of assessment by impact level. It emphasises the transparent identification and prioritisation of factors, the consideration of the feasibility of exposure and outcome assessment with special focus on quantification. The developed guide provides useful methodological instructions for the comprehensive assessment of health risks of policies that can be effectively used in the health impact assessment of policy proposals. - Highlights: • Methodological guide for the assessment of health risks of policies is introduced. • The tool is developed based on the experiences from several case studies. • The combined tool consists of a textual guidance and a checklist. • The top-down approach is followed through the levels of the full impact chain. • The guide provides assistance for the health impact assessment of policy proposals.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

MISIP: a data standard for the reuse and reproducibility of any stable isotope probing-derived nucleic acid sequence and experiment

DNA/RNA-stable isotope probing (SIP) is a powerful tool to link in situ microbial activity to sequencing data. Every SIP dataset captures distinct information about microbial community metabolism, process rates, and population dynamics, offering valuable insights for a wide range of research questions. Data reuse maximizes the information derived from the labor and resource-intensive SIP approaches. Yet, a review of publicly available SIP sequencing metadata showed that critical information necessary for reproducibility and reuse was often missing. Here, we outline the Minimum Information for any Stable Isotope Probing Sequence (MISIP) according to the Minimum Information for any (x) Sequence (MIxS) framework and include examples of MISIP reporting for common SIP experiments. Our objectives are to expand the capacity of MIxS to accommodate SIP-specific metadata and guide SIP users in metadata collection when planning and reporting an experiment. The MISIP standard requires 5 metadata fields—isotope, isotopolog, isotopolog label, labeling approach, and gradient position—and recommends several fields that represent best practices in acquiring and reporting SIP sequencing data (e.g., gradient density and nucleic acid amount). The standard is intended to be used in concert with other MIxS checklists to comprehensively describe the origin of sequence data, such as for marker genes (MISIP-MIMARKS) or metagenomes (MISIP-MIMS), in combination with metadata required by an environmental extension (e.g., soil). The adoption of the proposed data standard will improve the reuse of any sequence derived from a SIP experiment and, by extension, deepen understanding of in situ biogeochemical processes and microbial ecology.

Simpson, Abigayle↗