Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “scheduling and coordination”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2002

Lessons Learned in Developing Multiple Distributed Planning Systems for the International Space Station

The planning processes for the International Space Station (ISS) Program are quite complex. Detailed mission planning for ISS on-orbit operations is a distributed function. Pieces of the on-orbit plan are developed by multiple planning organizations, located around the world, based on their respective expertise and responsibilities. The pieces are then integrated to yield the final detailed plan that will be executed onboard the ISS. Previous space programs have not distributed the planning and scheduling functions to this extent. Major ISS planning organizations are currently located in the United States (at both the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) and NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC)), in Russia, in Europe, and in Japan. Software systems have been developed by each of these planning organizations to support their assigned planning and scheduling functions. Although there is some cooperative development and sharing of key software components, each planning system has been tailored to meet the unique requirements and operational environment of the facility in which it operates. However, all the systems must operate in a coordinated fashion in order to effectively and efficiently produce a single integrated plan of ISS operations, in accordance with the established planning processes. This paper addresses lessons learned during the development of these multiple distributed planning systems, from the perspective of the developer of one of the software systems. The lessons focus on the coordination required to allow the multiple systems to operate together, rather than on the problems associated with the development of any particular system. Included in the paper is a discussion of typical problems faced during the development and coordination process, such as incompatible development schedules, difficulties in defining system interfaces, technical coordination and funding for shared tools, continually evolving planning concepts/requirements, programmatic and budget issues, and external influences. Techniques that mitigated some of these problems will also be addressed, along with recommendations for any future programs involving the development of multiple planning and scheduling systems. Many of these lessons learned are not unique to the area of planning and scheduling systems, so may be applied to other distributed ground systems that must operate in concert to successfully support space mission operations.

Maxwell, Theresa G.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Logistics and operations integration requirements to support Space Station servicing of free flying spacecraft - OMV flight operation

The logistics of OMV free-flyer servicing are examined, with emphasis on integrating the OMV operations into the overall STS-Space Station system. The depletion rate of consumables and lifetimes of free-flyer components are known quantities, which permits definition of a predictable maintenance schedule. Servicing with an OMV will depend on the position and capabilities of the OMV, Shuttle and Station when free-flyer maintenance is needed. Optimized orbital servicing of free-flyers will involve coordination of and resolution of schedule conflicts among STS, the OMV and the Station. The scheduled availability of any of the three components will be predicted in terms of probabilities that any one of the components will not be needed for another mission while performing the mission they are on.

Bell, Jerome A.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Continual coordination through shared activities

Interacting agents that interleave planning and execution must reach consensus on their commitments to each other. In domains where agents have varying degrees of interaction and different constraints on communication and computation, agents will require different coordination protocols in order to efficiently reach consensus in real time. We briefly describe a largely unexplored class of realtime, distributed planning problems (inspired by interacting spacecraft missions), new challenges they pose, and a general approach to solving the problems. These problems involve self-interested agents that have infrequent communication but collaborate on joint activities. We describe a Shared Activity Coordination (SHAC) framework that provides a decentralized algorithm for negotiating the scheduling of shared activities over the lifetimes of separate missions, a soft, real-time approach to reaching consensus during execution with limited communication, and a foundation for customizing protocols for negotiating planner interactions. We apply SHAC to a realistic simulation of interacting Mars missions and illustrate the simplicity of protocol development.

planning↗
NASA NTRS2004

Argumentation for coordinating shared activities

an increasing need for space missions to be able to collaboratively (and competitively) develop plans both within and across missions. In addition, interacting spacecraft that interleave onboard planning and execution must reach consensus on their commitments to each other prior to execution. In domains where missions have varying degrees of interaction and different constraints on communication and computation, the missions will require different coordination protocols in order to efficiently reach consensus with in their imposed deadlines. We describe a Shared Activity Coordination (SHAC) framework that provides a decentralized algorithm for negotiating the scheduling of shared activities over the lifetimes of multiple agents and a foundation for customizing protocols for negotiating planner interactions. We investigate variations of a few simple protocols based on argumentation and distributed constraints satisfaction techniques and evaluate their abilities to reach consistent solutions according to computation, time, and communication costs in an abstract domain where spacecraft propose joint measurements.

Mars↗
NASA NTRS1991

The Ames-Lockheed orbiter processing scheduling system

A general purpose scheduling system and its application to Space Shuttle Orbiter Processing at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) are described. Orbiter processing entails all the inspection, testing, repair, and maintenance necessary to prepare the Shuttle for launch and takes place within the Orbiter Processing Facility (OPF) at KSC, the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB), and on the launch pad. The problems are extremely combinatoric in that there are thousands of tasks, resources, and other temporal considerations that must be coordinated. Researchers are building a scheduling tool that they hope will be an integral part of automating the planning and scheduling process at KSC. The scheduling engine is domain independent and is also being applied to Space Shuttle cargo processing problems as well as wind tunnel scheduling problems.

Zweben, Monte↗
NASA NTRS2000

NPSS on NASA's IPG: Using CORBA and Globus to Coordinate Multidisciplinary Aeroscience Applications

Within NASA's High Performance Computing and Communication (HPCC) program, the NASA Glenn Research Center is developing an environment for the analysis/design of aircraft engines called the Numerical Propulsion System Simulation (NPSS). The vision for NPSS is to create a "numerical test cell" enabling full engine simulations overnight on cost-effective computing platforms. To this end, NPSS integrates multiple disciplines such as aerodynamics, structures, and heat transfer and supports "numerical zooming" between O-dimensional to 1-, 2-, and 3-dimensional component engine codes. In order to facilitate the timely and cost-effective capture of complex physical processes, NPSS uses object-oriented technologies such as C++ objects to encapsulate individual engine components and CORBA ORBs for object communication and deployment across heterogeneous computing platforms. Recently, the HPCC program has initiated a concept called the Information Power Grid (IPG), a virtual computing environment that integrates computers and other resources at different sites. IPG implements a range of Grid services such as resource discovery, scheduling, security, instrumentation, and data access, many of which are provided by the Globus toolkit. IPG facilities have the potential to benefit NPSS considerably. For example, NPSS should in principle be able to use Grid services to discover dynamically and then co-schedule the resources required for a particular engine simulation, rather than relying on manual placement of ORBs as at present. Grid services can also be used to initiate simulation components on parallel computers (MPPs) and to address inter-site security issues that currently hinder the coupling of components across multiple sites. These considerations led NASA Glenn and Globus project personnel to formulate a collaborative project designed to evaluate whether and how benefits such as those just listed can be achieved in practice. This project involves firstly development of the basic techniques required to achieve co-existence of commodity object technologies and Grid technologies; and secondly the evaluation of these techniques in the context of NPSS-oriented challenge problems. The work on basic techniques seeks to understand how "commodity" technologies (CORBA, DCOM, Excel, etc.) can be used in concert with specialized "Grid" technologies (for security, MPP scheduling, etc.). In principle, this coordinated use should be straightforward because of the Globus and IPG philosophy of providing low-level Grid mechanisms that can be used to implement a wide variety of application-level programming models. (Globus technologies have previously been used to implement Grid-enabled message-passing libraries, collaborative environments, and parameter study tools, among others.) Results obtained to date are encouraging: we have successfully demonstrated a CORBA to Globus resource manager gateway that allows the use of CORBA RPCs to control submission and execution of programs on workstations and MPPs; a gateway from the CORBA Trader service to the Grid information service; and a preliminary integration of CORBA and Grid security mechanisms. The two challenge problems that we consider are the following: 1) Desktop-controlled parameter study. Here, an Excel spreadsheet is used to define and control a CFD parameter study, via a CORBA interface to a high throughput broker that runs individual cases on different IPG resources. 2) Aviation safety. Here, about 100 near real time jobs running NPSS need to be submitted, run and data returned in near real time. Evaluation will address such issues as time to port, execution time, potential scalability of simulation, and reliability of resources. The full paper will present the following information: 1. A detailed analysis of the requirements that NPSS applications place on IPG. 2. A description of the techniques used to meet these requirements via the coordinated use of CORBA and Globus. 3. A description of results obtained to date in the first two challenge problems.

Lopez, Isaac↗
NASA NTRS2003

Abstract-Reasoning Software for Coordinating Multiple Agents

A computer program for scheduling the activities of multiple agents that share limited resources has been incorporated into the Automated Scheduling and Planning Environment (ASPEN) software system, aspects of which have been reported in several previous NASA Tech Briefs articles. In the original intended application, the agents would be multiple spacecraft and/or robotic vehicles engaged in scientific exploration of distant planets. The program could also be used on Earth in such diverse settings as production lines and military maneuvers. This program includes a planning/scheduling subprogram of the iterative repair type that reasons about the activities of multiple agents at abstract levels in order to greatly improve the scheduling of their use of shared resources. The program summarizes the information about the constraints on, and resource requirements of, abstract activities on the basis of the constraints and requirements that pertain to their potential refinements (decomposition into less-abstract and ultimately to primitive activities). The advantage of reasoning about summary information is that time needed to find consistent schedules is exponentially smaller than the time that would be needed for reasoning about the same tasks at the primitive level.

Clement, Bradley↗
NASA NTRS2004

Controlling Distributed Planning

A system of software implements an extended version of an approach, denoted shared activity coordination (SHAC), to the interleaving of planning and the exchange of plan information among organizations devoted to different missions that normally communicate infrequently except that they need to collaborate on joint activities and/or the use of shared resources. SHAC enables the planning and scheduling systems of the organizations to coordinate by resolving conflicts while optimizing local planning solutions. The present software provides a framework for modeling and executing communication protocols for SHAC. Shared activities are represented in each interacting planning system to establish consensus on joint activities or to inform the other systems of consumption of a common resource or a change in a shared state. The representations of shared activities are extended to include information on (1) the role(s) of each participant, (2) permissions (defined as specifications of which participant controls what aspects of shared activities and scheduling thereof), and (3) constraints on the parameters of shared activities. Also defined in the software are protocols for changing roles, permissions, and constraints during the course of coordination and execution.

Clement, Bradley↗
DOE OSTI2021

An Integrated Paradigm for the Management of Delivery Risk in Electricity Markets: From Batteries to Insurance and Beyond [Slides]

In wholesale electricity markets today, flexibility from a limited number of distributed energy resources (DERs) is offered daily, and the value of flexibility is not yet recognized for economic hedging of delivery risk. Under a three-year project funded by the ARPA-E PERFORM program, a collaborative team is working towards developing an integrated risk management framework that will leverage flexibility from distributed and bulk resources to cost-effectively and reliably manage delivery risk of intermittent resources. Two concepts are at the core of the proposed integrated risk management framework: (A) flexibility options, which are a novel type of options and enable wholesale electricity market participants to hedge uncertainty by buying flexibility. (B) DER flexibility scores, which provide a way for utilities or aggregators to classify assets in groups with different likelihood of delivering contracted flexibility. This report presentation will focus on the proposed ISO-product "flexibility options," which is complementary to ramp and other products being introduced by ISOs/RTOs to manage net load uncertainties. Participating resources with imbalance risk can buy flexibility options to hedge their production, whereas grid-connected resources that can provide physical flexibility can offer flexibility options. We will present basics of the formulation for a day-ahead ISO market that matches buyers and sellers of this hedge in coordination with existing capabilities to schedule energy and ancillary services, and outline how their settlements mitigate the impact of imbalance risk.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
NASA NTRS1991

Distributed scheduling with COMPASS

COMPASS (COMPuter Aided Scheduling System) is a sophisticated, interactive scheduling tool used within NASA. Like most existing tools, however, COMPASS is a single-user application. There is a large class of scheduling problems which may be better solved by allowing several people at various locations to build separate schedules with shared resources. DISCORS (DIStributed COmputer Resource Scheduling) is a set of services which support a distributed version of COMPASS. This architecture naturally accommodates the integration of user-defined resource models without modifying COMPASS. DISCORS services include the ability to establish and manage communications, to code messages in efficient formats, to provide fault detection and recovery, and to configure schedulers across a network. In its present form, DISCORS effectively supports distributed COMPASS, but fails to run fast and to guarantee efficient schedules. Further enhancements may allow several users to simultaneously and interactively work together to create complex schedules while COMPASS detects and coordinates the resolution of conflicting requests.

Rufat-Latre, Jorge↗
NASA NTRS1994

Teams and teamwork at NASA Langley Research Center

The recent reorganization and shift to managing total quality at the NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) has placed an increasing emphasis on teams and teamwork in accomplishing day-to-day work activities and long-term projects. The purpose of this research was to review the nature of teams and teamwork at LaRC. Models of team performance and teamwork guided the gathering of information. Current and former team members served as participants; their collective experience reflected membership in over 200 teams at LaRC. The participants responded to a survey of open-ended questions which assessed various aspects of teams and teamwork. The participants also met in a workshop to clarify and elaborate on their responses. The work accomplished by the teams ranged from high-level managerial decision making (e.g., developing plans for LaRC reorganization) to creating scientific proposals (e.g., describing spaceflight projects to be designed, sold, and built). Teams typically had nine members who remained together for six months. Member turnover was around 20 percent; this turnover was attributed to heavy loads of other work assignments and little formal recognition and reward for team membership. Team members usually shared a common and valued goal, but there was not a clear standard (except delivery of a document) for knowing when the goal was achieved. However, members viewed their teams as successful. A major factor in team success was the setting of explicit a priori rules for communication. Task interdependencies between members were not complex (e.g., sharing of meeting notes and ideas about issues), except between members of scientific teams (i.e., reliance on the expertise of others). Thus, coordination of activities usually involved scheduling and attendance of team meetings. The team leader was designated by the team's sponsor. This leader usually shared power and responsibilities with other members, such that team members established their own operating procedures for decision making. Sponsors followed a hands-off policy during team operations, but they approved and reviewed team products. Most teams, particularly high-level decision-making teams, had little or no authority to carry out their decisions. Team members had few interpersonal conflicts. They monitored each other respectfully about meeting deadlines. Feedback and backup behaviors were seen as desirable aspects of teamwork, wanted by the members, and done appropriately.

Dickinson, Terry L.↗
NASA NTRS1996

A global spacecraft control network for spacecraft autonomy research

The development and implementation of the Automated Space System Experimental Testbed (ASSET) space operations and control network, is reported on. This network will serve as a command and control architecture for spacecraft operations and will offer a real testbed for the application and validation of advanced autonomous spacecraft operations strategies. The proposed network will initially consist of globally distributed amateur radio ground stations at locations throughout North America and Europe. These stations will be linked via Internet to various control centers. The Stanford (CA) control center will be capable of human and computer based decision making for the coordination of user experiments, resource scheduling and fault management. The project's system architecture is described together with its proposed use as a command and control system, its value as a testbed for spacecraft autonomy research, and its current implementation.

Kitts, Christopher A.↗
NASA NTRS2004

The Training Process of the Organization Development and Training Office

The Organization Development and Training Office provides training and development opportunities to employees at NASA Glenn Research Center, as a division of the Office of Human Resources and Workforce Planning. Center-wide required trainings, new employee trainings, workshops and career development programs are organized by the OD&TO staff. They also arrange all academic, non-academic, headquarters, fellowship and learning center sponsored courses. They also service organizations wishing to work more effectively by facilitating teambuilding exercises. Equal Opportunity programs and upward mobility programs such as the STEP and GO programs for administrative staff. In working with my mentor I am very involved with Cuyahoga Community College classes, mandatory supervisory training and administrative staff workshops. My largest tasks are in the secretarial training category. The Supporting Organizations And Relationships workshop for administrative personnel, commonly known as SOAR, began last year and continued this summer with follow-up workshops. Months before a workshop or class is brought to Glenn, a need has to be realized. In this case, administrative staff did not feel they had an opportunity to receive relevant training and develop skills through teambuilding, networking and communication. A Statement of work is then created as several companies are contacted about providing the training. After the company best suited to meet the target group s needs is selected, the course is announced with an outline of all pertinent information. A reservation for a facility is made and applications or nominations, depending on the announcement s guidelines, are received from interested employees. Confirmations are sent to participants and final preparations are made but there are still several concluding steps. A training office staff member also assists the facilitator with setting up the facility and introducing the class. After the class, participants evaluations are read and summarized to determine the effectiveness of the class and instructor. In addition to the SOAR workshops, I have several projects and daily tasks to complete. Coding training applications, which require me to be familiar with Glenn s budgetary allocations and policies on training, is an ongoing process. It also requires verifying information reported by an employee via her C-478 form, more commonly known as the training application. I am also the point of contact for the Cuyahoga Community College Advising Sessions held here at NASA Glenn which involves coordinating counselors visits with employees schedules. Two databases had to be created. The first database holds information on administrative staff, and the other tracks supervisors training histories. Through these assignments I gained experience in Microsoft Access 2002 and spreadsheet creation, communicating with co-workers, and successfully facilitating a training to serve specific purposes. With trainings and evaluations to assessment them, the Organization Development and Training Office can assure a quality product and continued customer satisfaction.

Johnson, Melissa S.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Automated Platform Management System Scheduling

The Platform Management System was established to coordinate the operation of platform systems and instruments. The management functions are split between ground and space components. Since platforms are to be out of contact with the ground more than the manned base, the on-board functions are required to be more autonomous than those of the manned base. Under this concept, automated replanning and rescheduling, including on-board real-time schedule maintenance and schedule repair, are required to effectively and efficiently meet Space Station Freedom mission goals. In a FY88 study, we developed several promising alternatives for automated platform planning and scheduling. We recommended both a specific alternative and a phased approach to automated platform resource scheduling. Our recommended alternative was based upon use of exactly the same scheduling engine in both ground and space components of the platform management system. Our phased approach recommendation was based upon evolutionary development of the platform. In the past year, we developed platform scheduler requirements and implemented a rapid prototype of a baseline platform scheduler. Presently we are rehosting this platform scheduler rapid prototype and integrating the scheduler prototype into two Goddard Space Flight Center testbeds, as the ground scheduler in the Scheduling Concepts, Architectures, and Networks Testbed and as the on-board scheduler in the Platform Management System Testbed. Using these testbeds, we will investigate rescheduling issues, evaluate operational performance and enhance the platform scheduler prototype to demonstrate our evolutionary approach to automated platform scheduling. The work described in this paper was performed prior to Space Station Freedom rephasing, transfer of platform responsibility to Code E, and other recently discussed changes. We neither speculate on these changes nor attempt to predict the impact of the final decisions. As a consequence some of our work and results may be outdated when this paper is published.

Hull, Larry G.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Scheduling and rescheduling with iterative repair

This paper describes the GERRY scheduling and rescheduling system being applied to coordinate Space Shuttle Ground Processing. The system uses constraint-based iterative repair, a technique that starts with a complete but possibly flawed schedule and iteratively improves it by using constraint knowledge within repair heuristics. In this paper we explore the tradeoff between the informedness and the computational cost of several repair heuristics. We show empirically that some knowledge can greatly improve the convergence speed of a repair-based system, but that too much knowledge, such as the knowledge embodied within the MIN-CONFLICTS lookahead heuristic, can overwhelm a system and result in degraded performance.

Zweben, Monte↗
NASA NTRS2013

Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) Final Report

After takeoff, aircraft must merge into en route (Center) airspace traffic flows that may be subject to constraints that create localized demand/capacity imbalances. When demand exceeds capacity, Traffic Management Coordinators (TMCs) and Frontline Managers (FLMs) often use tactical departure scheduling to manage the flow of departures into the constrained Center traffic flow. Tactical departure scheduling usually involves a Call for Release (CFR) procedure wherein the Tower must call the Center to coordinate a release time prior to allowing the flight to depart. In present-day operations release times are computed by the Center Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) decision support tool, based upon manual estimates of aircraft ready time verbally communicated from the Tower to the Center. The TMA-computed release time is verbally communicated from the Center back to the Tower where it is relayed to the Local controller as a release window that is typically three minutes wide. The Local controller will manage the departure to meet the coordinated release time window. Manual ready time prediction and verbal release time coordination are labor intensive and prone to inaccuracy. Also, use of release time windows adds uncertainty to the tactical departure process. Analysis of more than one million flights from January 2011 indicates that a significant number of tactically scheduled aircraft missed their en route slot due to ready time prediction uncertainty. Uncertainty in ready time estimates may result in missed opportunities to merge into constrained en route flows and lead to lost throughput. Next Generation Air Transportation System plans call for development of Tower automation systems capable of computing surface trajectory-based ready time estimates. NASA has developed the Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) concept that improves tactical departure scheduling by automatically communicating surface trajectory-based ready time predictions and departure runway assignments to the Center scheduling tool. The PDRC concept also incorporates earlier NASA and FAA research into automation-assisted CFR coordination. The PDRC concept reduces uncertainty by automatically communicating coordinated release times with seconds-level precision enabling TMCs and FLMs to work with target times rather than windows. NASA has developed a PDRC prototype system that integrates the Center's TMA system with a research prototype Tower decision support tool. A two-phase field evaluation was conducted at NASA's North Texas Research Station in Dallas/Fort Worth. The field evaluation validated the PDRC concept and demonstrated reduced release time uncertainty while being used for tactical departure scheduling of more than 230 operational flights over 29 weeks of operations. This paper presents research results from the PDRC research activity. Companion papers present the Concept of Operations and a Technology Description.

tactical departure scheduling↗
NASA NTRS2004

Coordinating Shared Activities

Shared Activity Coordination (ShAC) is a computer program for planning and scheduling the activities of an autonomous team of interacting spacecraft and exploratory robots. ShAC could also be adapted to such terrestrial uses as helping multiple factory managers work toward competing goals while sharing such common resources as floor space, raw materials, and transports. ShAC iteratively invokes the Continuous Activity Scheduling Planning Execution and Replanning (CASPER) program to replan and propagate changes to other planning programs in an effort to resolve conflicts. A domain-expert specifies which activities and parameters thereof are shared and reports the expected conditions and effects of these activities on the environment. By specifying these conditions and effects differently for each planning program, the domain-expert subprogram defines roles that each spacecraft plays in a coordinated activity. The domain-expert subprogram also specifies which planning program has scheduling control over each shared activity. ShAC enables sharing of information, consensus over the scheduling of collaborative activities, and distributed conflict resolution. As the other planning programs incorporate new goals and alter their schedules in the changing environment, ShAC continually coordinates to respond to unexpected events.

Clement, Bradley↗
NASA NTRS2013

Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC): NASA to FAA Research Transition

After takeoff, aircraft must merge into en route (Center) airspace traffic flows which may be subject to constraints that create localized demand-capacity imbalances. When demand exceeds capacity, Traffic Management Coordinators (TMCs) and Frontline Managers (FLMs) often use tactical departure scheduling to manage the flow of departures into the constrained Center traffic flow. Tactical departure scheduling usually involves use of a Call for Release (CFR) procedure wherein the Tower must call the Center to coordinate a release time prior to allowing the flight to depart. In present-day operations release times are computed by the Center Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) decision support tool based upon manual estimates of aircraft ready time verbally communicated from the Tower to the Center. The TMA-computed release time is verbally communicated from the Center back to the Tower where it is relayed to the Local controller as a release window that is typically three minutes wide. The Local controller will manage the departure to meet the coordinated release time window. Manual ready time prediction and verbal release time coordination are labor intensive and prone to inaccuracy. Also, use of release time windows adds uncertainty to the tactical departure process. Analysis of more than one million flights from January 2011 indicates that a significant number of tactically scheduled aircraft missed their en route slot due to ready time prediction uncertainty. Uncertainty in ready time estimates may result in missed opportunities to merge into constrained en route flows and lead to lost throughput. Next Generation Air Transportation System plans call for development of Tower automation systems capable of computing surface trajectory-based ready time estimates. NASA has developed the Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) concept that improves tactical departure scheduling by automatically communicating surface trajectory-based ready time predictions and departure runway assignments to the Center scheduling tool. The PDRC concept also incorporates earlier NASA and FAA research into automation-assisted CFR coordination. The PDRC concept reduces uncertainty by automatically communicating coordinated release times with seconds-level precision enabling TMCs and FLMs to work with target times rather than windows. NASA has developed a PDRC prototype system that integrates the Center's TMA system with a research prototype Tower decision support tool. A two-phase field evaluation was conducted at NASA's North Texas Research Station in Dallas-Fort Worth. The field evaluation validated the PDRC concept and demonstrated reduced release time uncertainty while being used for tactical departure scheduling of more than 230 operational flights over 29 weeks of operations.

ATM↗