SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Guideline documentation”

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 127 records · Page 7

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1991

Definition, technology readiness, and development cost of the orbit transfer vehicle engine integrated control and health monitoring system elements

An Integrated Control and Health Monitoring (ICHM) system was conceived for use on a 20 Klb thrust baseline Orbit Transfer Vehicle (OTV) engine. Considered for space used, the ICHM was defined for reusability requirements for an OTV engine service free life of 20 missions, with 100 starts and a total engine operational time of 4 hours. Functions were derived by flowing down requirements from NASA guidelines, previous OTV engine or ICHM documents, and related contracts. The elements of an ICHM were identified and listed, and these elements were described in sufficient detail to allow estimation of their technology readiness levels. These elements were assessed in terms of technology readiness level, and supporting rationale for these assessments presented. The remaining cost for development of a minimal ICHM system to technology readiness level 6 was estimated. The estimates are within an accuracy range of minus/plus 20 percent. The cost estimates cover what is needed to prepare an ICHM system for use on a focussed testbed for an expander cycle engine, excluding support to the actual test firings.

Cannon, I.↗

NASA NTRS1998

Issues in NASA Program and Project Management. Special Edition: A Collection of Papers on NASA Procedures and Guidance 7120.5A

A key aspect of NASA's new Strategic Management System is improving the way we plan, approve, execute and evaluate our programs and projects. To this end, NASA has developed the NASA Program and Project Management processes and Requirements-NASA Procedures and Guidelines (NPG) 7120.5A, which formally documents the "Provide Aerospace Products and Capabilities" crosscutting process, and defines the processes and requirements that are responsive to the Program/Project Management-NPD 7120.4A. The Program/Project Management-NPD 7120.4A, issued November 14, 1996, provides the policy for managing programs and projects in a new way that is aligned with the new NASA environment. An Agencywide team has spent thousands of hours developing the NASA Program and Project Management Processes and Requirements-NPG 7120.5A. We have created significant flexibility, authority and discretion for the program and project managers to exercise and carry out their duties, and have delegated the responsibility and the accountability for their programs and projects.

Edward J. Hoffman↗

NASA NTRS2008

Effects of Low Temperature on Charging of Spacecraft Dielectrics

Spacecraft dielectric charging, sometimes called deep-dielectric-charging or bulk-charging, occurs when high energy electrons imbed themselves in dielectric materials, and the charge density builds up, sometimes to breakdown levels. Charges usually bleed off slowly due to material conductivity. At very low (cryogenic) temperatures, the dielectric conductivity decreases until charges may remain and build up over weeks, months, or years. In those cases, the guidelines given in NASA and industry documents for when dielectric charging may become important are misleading. Arcing tests of spacecraft cables at liquid nitrogen temperatures and very low flux levels have been done at NASA MSFC for the JWST Project. In this paper, we describe the results of those tests and analyze their important implications for cryogenic spacecraft cable design and construction.

Ferguson, Dale C.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Effects of Low Temperature on Charging of Spacecraft Dielectrics

Ferguson, Dale C.↗

NASA NTRS1983

Assessment of the NASA Flight Assurance Review Program

The NASA flight assurance review program to develop minimum standard guidelines for flight assurance reviews was assessed. Documents from NASA centers and NASA headquarters to determine current design review practices and procedures were evaluated. Six reviews were identified for the recommended minimum. The practices and procedures used at the different centers to incorporate the most effective ones into the minimum standard review guidelines were analyzed and guidelines for procedures, personnel and responsibilies, review items/data checklist, and feedback and closeout were defined. The six recommended reviews and the minimum standards guidelines developed for flight assurance reviews are presented. Observations and conclusions for further improving the NASA review and quality assurance process are outlined.

Holmes, J.↗

NASA NTRS1993

California Student Get Away Special Payload GAS-450

The California Student Get Away Special Payload GAS-450, recently went into orbit on the STS-57 Mission, Space Shuttle, Endeavour, 21 June 1993, 6:14 AM and landed on the 29 June 1993 at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Fifty students from 13 California Central Coast Schools and one in San Francisco designed and built 13 active experiments (6 modules) for this mission. Preliminary analysis of our completely reusable payload bus system indicated that the structure, power system, microprocessor, and sensor systems in each experiment module worked flawlessly. The experiments themselves performed exceptionally well with a 60 percent success ratio. The students are thoroughly documenting their own experiments and results via a standard research paper guideline generated by the GAS-450 technical staff. Lessons learned (program management and technical) are documented at the end of the paper. If any other organization needs payload/experiment development or NASA documentation assistance, then please contact us. We can help make your idea a space tested reality. Three years of intense effort culminated on 3 February 1993, the GSFC field operations team at Kennedy Space Center performed the final pressure decay and electrical tests upon the fully integrated GAS-450 flight canister. Subsequently, the payload was integrated with its parent GAS Bridge Assembly in mid-February and the bridge was transferred to the KSC orbiter team in late February 1993. The STS-57 mission originally scheduled to launch on the 29 April 1993 slipped until 21 June 1993. Our Payload shared the cargo bay with ten other GAS Canisters, the EUREKA experiment, the SHOOT experiment, and the SPACEHAB-1 module. The SIL technical staff retrieved the GAS-450 payload after flight from the NASA Spin Test Facility at KSC and shipped it back to California on the 22 July 1993 for student analysis at Allan Hancock College this summer.

Ray, Glen↗

NASA NTRS2013

Space Mission Concept Development Using Concept Maturity Levels

Over the past five years, pre-project formulation experts at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) has developed and implemented a method for measuring and communicating the maturity of space mission concepts. Mission concept development teams use this method, and associated tools, prior to concepts entering their Formulation Phases (Phase A/B). The organizing structure is Concept Maturity Level (CML), which is a classification system for characterizing the various levels of a concept's maturity. The key strength of CMLs is the ability to evolve mission concepts guided by an incremental set of assessment needs. The CML definitions have been expanded into a matrix form to identify the breadth and depth of analysis needed for a concept to reach a specific level of maturity. This matrix enables improved assessment and communication by addressing the fundamental dimensions (e.g., science objectives, mission design, technical risk, project organization, cost, export compliance, etc.) associated with mission concept evolution. JPL's collaborative engineering, dedicated concept development, and proposal teams all use these and other CML-appropriate design tools to advance their mission concept designs. This paper focuses on mission concept's early Pre-Phase A represented by CMLs 1- 4. The scope was limited due to the fact that CMLs 5 and 6 are already well defined based on the requirements documented in specific Announcement of Opportunities (AO) and Concept Study Report (CSR) guidelines, respectively, for competitive missions; and by NASA's Procedural Requirements NPR 7120.5E document for Projects in their Formulation Phase.

Concept Maturity Levels (CMLs)↗

NASA NTRS2006

Recent Developments in Space Debris Mitigation Policy and Practices

In recent years, emphasis has shifted from national efforts to control the space debris population to international ones. Here, too, great progress has been made, most notably by the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC) and the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) of the United Nations. Today, a firm international consensus is rapidly building on the principal space debris mitigation measures. The IADC is an association of the space agencies of ten countries (China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Russia, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and the European Space Agency, representing 17 countries of which four (France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom) are also full IADC members. At the 17th meeting of the IADC in October 1999, a new Action Item (AI 17.2) was adopted to develop a set of consensus space debris mitigation guidelines. The purpose of the activity was to identify the most valuable space debris mitigation measures and to reach an international agreement on common directives. The IADC Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines (www.iadc-online.org/index.cgi?item=docs_pub) were formally adopted in October 2002 during the Second World Space Congress in Houston, Texas. Two years later a companion document, entitled Support to the IADC Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines, was completed to provide background and clarification for the guidelines.

Johnson, Nicholas L.↗

NASA NTRS1973

Phase 111A Crew Interface Specifications Development for Inflight Maintenance and Stowage Functions

This report presents the findings and data products developed during the Phase IIIA Crew Interface Specification Study for Inflight Maintenance and Stowage Functions, performed by General Electric for the NASA, Johnson Space Center with a set of documentation that can be used as definitive guidelines to improve the present process of defining, controlling and managing flight crew interface requirements that are related to inflight maintenance (including assembly and servicing) and stowage functions. During the Phase IIIA contract period, the following data products were developed: 1) Projected NASA Crew Procedures/Flight Data File Development Process. 2) Inflight Maintenance Management Process Description. 3) Preliminary Draft, General Specification, Inflight Maintenance Management Requirements. 4) Inflight Maintenance Operational Process Description. 5) Preliminary Draft, General Specification, Inflight Maintenance Task and Support Requirements Analysis. 6) Suggested IFM Data Processing Reports for Logistics Management The above Inflight Maintenance data products have been developed during the Phase IIIA study after review of Space Shuttle Program Documentation, including the Level II Integrated Logistics Requirements and other DOD and NASA data relative to Payloads Accommodations and Satellite On-Orbit Servicing. These Inflight Maintenance data products were developed to be in consonance with Space Shuttle Program technical and management requirements.

Carl, John G.↗

NASA NTRS2010

NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Program: Generic Safety, Handling and Qualification Guidelines for Lithium-Ion (Li-Ion) Batteries; Availability of Source Materials for Lithium-Ion (Li-Ion) Batteries; Maintaining Technical Communications Related to Aerospace Batteries (NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop)

This NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Systems Working Group was chartered within the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC). The Battery Working Group was tasked to complete tasks and to propose proactive work to address battery related, agency-wide issues on an annual basis. In its first year of operation, this proactive program addressed various aspects of the validation and verification of aerospace battery systems for NASA missions. Studies were performed, issues were discussed and in many cases, test programs were executed to generate recommendations and guidelines to reduce risk associated with various aspects of implementing battery technology in the aerospace industry. This document contains Part 1 - Volume I: Generic Safety, Handling and Qualification Guidelines for Lithium-Ion (Li-Ion) Batteries, Availability of Source Materials for Lithium-Ion (Li-Ion) Batteries, and Maintaining Technical Communications Related to Aerospace Batteries (NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop).

Manzo, Michelle A.↗

NASA NTRS1989

NASA/NBS (National Aeronautics and Space Administration/National Bureau of Standards) standard reference model for telerobot control system architecture (NASREM)

The document describes the NASA Standard Reference Model (NASREM) Architecture for the Space Station Telerobot Control System. It defines the functional requirements and high level specifications of the control system for the NASA space Station document for the functional specification, and a guideline for the development of the control system architecture, of the 10C Flight Telerobot Servicer. The NASREM telerobot control system architecture defines a set of standard modules and interfaces which facilitates software design, development, validation, and test, and make possible the integration of telerobotics software from a wide variety of sources. Standard interfaces also provide the software hooks necessary to incrementally upgrade future Flight Telerobot Systems as new capabilities develop in computer science, robotics, and autonomous system control.

Albus, James S.↗

NASA NTRS1989

Minutes of the CD-ROM Workshop

The workshop described in this document had two goals: (1) to establish guidelines for the CD-ROM as a tool to distribute datasets; and (2) to evaluate current scientific CD-ROM projects as an archive. Workshop attendees were urged to coordinate with European groups to develop CD-ROM, which is already available at low cost in the U.S., as a distribution medium for astronomical datasets. It was noted that NASA has made the CD Publisher at the National Space Science Data Center (NSSDC) available to the scientific community when the Publisher is not needed for NASA work. NSSDC's goal is to provide the Publisher's user with the hardware and software tools needed to design a user's dataset for distribution. This includes producing a master CD and copies. The prerequisite premastering process is described, as well as guidelines for CD-ROM construction. The production of discs was evaluated. CD-ROM projects, guidelines, and problems of the technology were discussed.

King, Joseph H.↗

NASA NTRS1994

Model-based software process improvement

The activities of a field test site for the Software Engineering Institute's software process definition project are discussed. Products tested included the improvement model itself, descriptive modeling techniques, the CMM level 2 framework document, and the use of process definition guidelines and templates. The software process improvement model represents a five stage cyclic approach for organizational process improvement. The cycles consist of the initiating, diagnosing, establishing, acting, and leveraging phases.

Zettervall, Brenda T.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Risk of Performance Decrements and Adverse Health Outcomes Resulting from Sleep Loss, Circadian Desynchronization, and Work Overload

Sleep loss, circadian desynchronization, and work overload occur to some extent for ground and flight crews, prior to and during spaceflight missions. Ground evidence indicates that such risk factors may lead to performance decrements and adverse health outcomes, which could potentially compromise mission objectives. Efforts are needed to identify the environmental and mission conditions that interfere with sleep and circadian alignment, as well as individual differences in vulnerability and resiliency to sleep loss and circadian desynchronization. Specifically, this report highlights a collection of new evidence to better characterize the risk and reveals new gaps in this risk as follows: Sleep loss is apparent during spaceflight. Astronauts consistently average less sleep during spaceflight relative to on the ground. The causes of this sleep loss remain unknown, however ground-based evidence suggests that the sleep duration of astronauts is likely to lead to performance impairment and short and long-term health consequences. Further research is needed in this area in order to develop screening tools to assess individual astronaut sleep need in order to quantify the magnitude of sleep loss during spaceflight; current and planned efforts in BHP's research portfolio address this need. In addition, it is still unclear whether the conditions of spaceflight environment lead to sleep loss or whether other factors, such as work overload lead to the reduced sleep duration. Future data mining efforts and continued data collection on the ISS will help to further characterize factors contributing to sleep loss. Sleep inertia has not been evaluated during spaceflight. Ground-based studies confirm that it takes two to four hours to achieve optimal performance after waking from a sleep episode. Sleep inertia has been associated with increased accidents and reduced performance in operational environments. Sleep inertia poses considerable risk during spaceflight when emergency situations necessitate that crewmembers wake from sleep and make quick decisions. A recently completed BHP investigation assesses the effects of sleep inertia upon abrupt awakening, with and without hypnotics currently used in spaceflight; results from this investigation will help to inform strategies relative to sleep inertia effects on performance. Circadian desynchrony has been observed during spaceflight. Circadian desynchrony during spaceflight develops due to schedule constraints requiring non-24 operations or 'slam-shifts' and due to insufficient or mis-timed light exposure. In addition, circadian misalignment has been associated with reduced sleep duration and increased medication use. In ground-based studies, circadian desynchrony has been associated with significant performance impairment and increased risk of accidents when operations coincide with the circadian nadir. There is a great deal of information available on how to manage circadian misalignment, however, there are currently no easily collected biomarkers that can be used during spaceflight to determine circadian phase. Current research efforts are addressing this gap. Work overload has been documented during current spaceflight operations. NASA has established work hour guidelines that limit shift duration, however, schedule creep, where duty requirements necessitate working beyond scheduled work hours, has been reported. This observation warrants the documentation of actual work hours in order to improve planning and in order to ensure that astronauts receive adequate down time. In addition to concerns about work overload, ground based evidence suggests that work underload may be a concern during deep space missions, where torpor may develop and physically demanding workload will be exchanged for monitoring of autonomous systems. Given that increased automation is anticipated for exploration vehicles, fatigue effects in the context of such systems needs to be further understood. Performance metrics are needed to evaluate fitness-for-duty during spaceflight. Although ground-based evidence supports the notion that sleep loss, circadian desynchronization and work overload lead to performance impairment, inconsistency in the measures used to evaluate performance during spaceflight make it difficult to evaluate the magnitude of performance impairment during spaceflight. Work is underway to standardize measures of performance evaluation during spaceflight. Once established, such performance indicators need to be correlated with operational performance. Individual differences in sleep need and circadian preference, phase shifting ability and period have been documented in ground-based studies. Individual differences in response to sleep loss and circadian misalignment have also been documented and are presumed to be associated with genetic polymorphisms. No studies have systematically reported individual differences in sleep or circadian-related outcomes during spaceflight. More work is needed in this area in order to identify genetic or phenotypic biomarkers that predict resilience or vulnerability to sleep loss in order to personalize countermeasure strategies and mitigate performance impairment during spaceflight. Two laboratory and field investigations specific to this topic are currently ongoing; additional efforts, including an effort to mine existing biological data from spaceflight relative to sleep and circadian outcomes, are planned. Sex differences in sleep need and circadian period and phase have been reported in ground-based studies. The impact of these sex differences on performance is unclear. Sex differences in sleep need and circadian rhythms have not been systematically studied during spaceflight, presumably due to the small number of women that have flown in space. More research is needed in this area to evaluate whether any of the observed sex differences in physiology lead to altered performance in spaceflight and on the ground.

Flynn-Evans, Erin↗

NASA NTRS2005

C++ Coding Standards and Style Guide

This document is based on the "C Style Guide" (SEL-94-003). It contains recommendations for C++ implementations that build on, or in some cases replace, the style described in the C style guide. Style guidelines on any topics that are not covered in this document can be found in the "C Style Guide." An attempt has been made to indicate when these recommendations are just guidelines or suggestions versus when they are more strongly encouraged. Using coding standards makes code easier to read and maintain. General principles that maximize the readability and maintainability of C++ are: (1) Organize classes using encapsulation and information hiding techniques. (2) Enhance readability through the use of indentation and blank lines. (3) Add comments to header files to help users of classes. (4) Add comments to implementation files to help maintainers of classes. (5) Create names that are meaningful and readable.

Hughes, Steven↗

NASA NTRS2024

Applying Generative-AI to NASA Documentation and Processes

This research and development project leverages generative-AI to assist in the generation of software process documentation based on NASA standards. By utilizing fine-tuned AI models, the proposed system will analyze NASA's software guidelines, helping to translate them into well-structured, compliant process documents. This assistance can reduce the manual effort required to produce such documentation, enhance consistency, and assure alignment with NASA's stringent software development and operational requirements. In addition to assisting in the generation of software process documentation, the project explores how generative-AI can help create audit checklists as well as assess the compliance of NASA provider documentation against applicable NASA standards. This approach would support the compliance auditing process, providing real-time insights and assessments. The intended result will be a streamlined process, potentially including a Python-based tool and database, that improves audit efficiency, reduces human error, lowers manpower costs and required manhours, and assures continuous compliance with NASA and industry evolving standards for safety-critical software development. Future task might be to investigate the software industry approach and standards for potential collaboration.

NASA Standards↗

NASA NTRS1993

Human computer interface guide, revision A

The Human Computer Interface Guide, SSP 30540, is a reference document for the information systems within the Space Station Freedom Program (SSFP). The Human Computer Interface Guide (HCIG) provides guidelines for the design of computer software that affects human performance, specifically, the human-computer interface. This document contains an introduction and subparagraphs on SSFP computer systems, users, and tasks; guidelines for interactions between users and the SSFP computer systems; human factors evaluation and testing of the user interface system; and example specifications. The contents of this document are intended to be consistent with the tasks and products to be prepared by NASA Work Package Centers and SSFP participants as defined in SSP 30000, Space Station Program Definition and Requirements Document. The Human Computer Interface Guide shall be implemented on all new SSFP contractual and internal activities and shall be included in any existing contracts through contract changes. This document is under the control of the Space Station Control Board, and any changes or revisions will be approved by the deputy director.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2010

Planetary Geologic Mapping Handbook - 2010

Geologic maps present, in an historical context, fundamental syntheses of interpretations of the materials, landforms, structures, and processes that characterize planetary surfaces and shallow subsurfaces. Such maps also provide a contextual framework for summarizing and evaluating thematic research for a given region or body. In planetary exploration, for example, geologic maps are used for specialized investigations such as targeting regions of interest for data collection and for characterizing sites for landed missions. Whereas most modern terrestrial geologic maps are constructed from regional views provided by remote sensing data and supplemented in detail by field-based observations and measurements, planetary maps have been largely based on analyses of orbital photography. For planetary bodies in particular, geologic maps commonly represent a snapshot of a surface, because they are based on available information at a time when new data are still being acquired. Thus the field of planetary geologic mapping has been evolving rapidly to embrace the use of new data and modern technology and to accommodate the growing needs of planetary exploration. Planetary geologic maps have been published by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) since 1962. Over this time, numerous maps of several planetary bodies have been prepared at a variety of scales and projections using the best available image and topographic bases. Early geologic map bases commonly consisted of hand-mosaicked photographs or airbrushed shaded-relief views and geologic linework was manually drafted using mylar bases and ink drafting pens. Map publishing required a tedious process of scribing, color peel-coat preparation, typesetting, and photo-laboratory work. Beginning in the 1990s, inexpensive computing, display capability and user-friendly illustration software allowed maps to be drawn using digital tools rather than pen and ink, and mylar bases became obsolete. Terrestrial geologic maps published by the USGS now are primarily digital products using geographic information system (GIS) software and file formats. GIS mapping tools permit easy spatial comparison, generation, importation, manipulation, and analysis of multiple raster image, gridded, and vector data sets. GIS software has also permitted the development of projectspecific tools and the sharing of geospatial products among researchers. GIS approaches are now being used in planetary geologic mapping as well. Guidelines or handbooks on techniques in planetary geologic mapping have been developed periodically. As records of the heritage of mapping methods and data, these remain extremely useful guides. However, many of the fundamental aspects of earlier mapping handbooks have evolved significantly, and a comprehensive review of currently accepted mapping methodologies is now warranted. As documented in this handbook, such a review incorporates additional guidelines developed in recent years for planetary geologic mapping by the NASA Planetary Geology and Geophysics (PGG) Program's Planetary Cartography and Geologic Mapping Working Group's (PCGMWG) Geologic Mapping Subcommittee (GEMS) on the selection and use of map bases as well as map preparation, review, publication, and distribution. In light of the current boom in planetary exploration and the ongoing rapid evolution of available data for planetary mapping, this handbook is especially timely.

Tanaka, K. L.↗