Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “NPR”

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 127 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) Handbook

An Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) is a review of a supplier?s Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB). It is conducted by Program/Project Managers and their technical staffs on contracts and in-house work requiring compliance with NASA Earned Value Management System (EVMS) policy as defined in program/project policy, NPR 7120.5, or in NASA Federal Acquisition Regulations. The IBR Handbook may also be of use to those responsible for preparing the Terms of Reference for internal project reviews. While risks may be identified and actions tracked as a result of the IBR, it is important to note that an IBR cannot be failed.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2013

Tailoring Systems Engineering Projects for Small Satellite Missions

NASA maintains excellence in its spaceflight systems by utilizing rigorous engineering processes based on over 50 years of experience. The NASA systems engineering process for flight projects described in NPR 7120.5E was initially developed for major flight projects. The design and development of low-cost small satellite systems does not entail the financial and risk consequences traditionally associated with spaceflight projects. Consequently, an approach is offered to tailoring of the processes such that the small satellite missions will benefit from the engineering rigor without overly burdensome overhead. In this paper we will outline the approaches to tailoring the standard processes for these small missions and describe how it will be applied in a proposed small satellite mission.

Horan, Stephen↗
NASA NTRS2014

A Systems Engineering Approach to Quality Assurance for Aerospace Testing

On the surface, it appears that AS9100 has little to say about how to apply a Quality Management System (QMS) to major aerospace test programs (or even smaller ones). It also appears that there is little in the quality engineering Body of Knowledge (BOK) that applies to testing, unless it is nondestructive examination (NDE), or some type of lab or bench testing associated with the manufacturing process. However, if one examines: a) how the systems engineering (SE) processes are implemented throughout a test program; and b) how these SE processes can be mapped to the requirements of AS9100, a number of areas for involvement of the quality professional are revealed. What often happens is that quality assurance during a test program is limited to inspections of the test article; what could be considered a manufacturing al fresco approach. This limits the quality professional and is a disservice to the programs and projects, since there are a number of ways that quality can enhance critical processes, and support efforts to improve risk reduction, efficiency and effectiveness. The Systems Engineering (SE) discipline is widely used in aerospace to ensure the progress from Stakeholder Expectations (the President, Congress, the taxpayers) to a successful, delivered product or service. Although this is well known, what is not well known is that these same SE processes are implemented in varying complexity, to prepare for and implement test projects that support research, development, verification and validation, qualification, and acceptance test projects. Although the test organization's terminology may vary from the SE terminology, and from one test service provider to another, the basic process is followed by successful, reliable testing organizations. For this analysis, NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 7123.1, NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements is used to illustrate the SE processes that are used for major aerospace testing. Many of these processes are also implemented for smaller test projects, and this set of processes will also look familiar to those who have participated in launch site activation and flight demonstrations.

Shepherd, Christena C.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Analyzing Risks and Vulnerabilities of Various Computer Systems and Undergoing Exploitation using Embedded Devices

Security is one of the most if not the most important areas today. After the several attacks on the United States, security everywhere has heightened from airports to communication among the military branches legionnaires. With advanced persistent threats (APTs) on the rise following Stuxnet, government branches and agencies are required, more than ever, to follow several standards, policies and procedures to reduce the likelihood of a breach. Attack vectors today are very advanced and are going to continue to get more and more advanced as security controls advance. This creates a need for networks and systems to be in an updated, patched and secured state in a launch control system environment. Attacks on critical systems are becoming more and more relevant and frequent. Nation states are hacking into critical networks that might control electrical power grids or water dams as well as carrying out advanced persistent threat (APTs) attacks on government entities. NASA, as an organization, must protect its self from attacks from all different types of attackers with different motives. Although the International Space Station was created, there is still competition between the different space programs. With that in mind, NASA might get attacked and breached for various reasons such as espionage or sabotage. My project will provide a way for NASA to complete an in house penetration test which includes: asset discovery, vulnerability scans, exploit vulnerabilities and also provide forensic information to harden systems. Completing penetration testing is a part of the compliance requirements of the Federal Information Security Act (FISMA) and NASA NPR 2810.1 and related NASA Handbooks. This project is to demonstrate how in house penetration testing can be conducted that will satisfy all of the compliance requirements of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), as outlined in FISMA. By the end of this project, I hope to have carried out the tasks stated above as well as gain an immense knowledge about compliance, security tools, networks and network devices, as well as policies and procedures.

Penetration Testing↗
NASA NTRS2014

Real-Time, Single-Step Bioassay Using Nanoplasmonic Resonator With Ultra-High Sensitivity

A nanoplasmonic resonator (NPR) comprising a metallic nanodisk with alternating shielding layer(s), having a tagged biomolecule conjugated or tethered to the surface of the nanoplasmonic resonator for highly sensitive measurement of enzymatic activity. NPRs enhance Raman signals in a highly reproducible manner, enabling fast detection of protease and enzyme activity, such as Prostate Specific Antigen (paPSA), in real-time, at picomolar sensitivity levels. Experiments on extracellular fluid (ECF) from paPSA-positive cells demonstrate specific detection in a complex bio-fluid background in real-time single-step detection in very small sample volumes.

Zhang, Xiang↗
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 NTRS2015

Internal NASA Study: NASAs Protoflight Research Initiative

The NASA Protoflight Research Initiative is an internal NASA study conducted within the Office of the Chief Engineer to better understand the use of Protoflight within NASA. Extensive literature reviews and interviews with key NASA members with experience in both robotic and human spaceflight missions has resulted in three main conclusions and two observations. The first conclusion is that NASA's Protoflight method is not considered to be "prescriptive." The current policies and guidance allows each Program/Project to tailor the Protoflight approach to better meet their needs, goals and objectives. Second, Risk Management plays a key role in implementation of the Protoflight approach. Any deviations from full qualification will be based on the level of acceptable risk with guidance found in NPR 8705.4. Finally, over the past decade (2004 - 2014) only 6% of NASA's Protoflight missions and 6% of NASA's Full qualification missions experienced a publicly disclosed mission failure. In other words, the data indicates that the Protoflight approach, in and of it itself, does not increase the mission risk of in-flight failure. The first observation is that it would be beneficial to document the decision making process on the implementation and use of Protoflight. The second observation is that If a Project/Program chooses to use the Protoflight approach with relevant heritage, it is extremely important that the Program/Project Manager ensures that the current project's requirements falls within the heritage design, component, instrument and/or subsystem's requirements for both the planned and operational use, and that the documentation of the relevant heritage is comprehensive, sufficient and the decision well documented. To further benefit/inform this study, a recommendation to perform a deep dive into 30 missions with accessible data on their testing/verification methodology and decision process to research the differences between Protoflight and Full Qualification missions' Design Requirements and Verification & Validation (V&V) (without any impact or special request directly to the project).

Protoflight↗
NASA NTRS2015

Cryogenic Insulation Standard Data and Methodologies Project

Extending some recent developments in the area of technical consensus standards for cryogenic thermal insulation systems, a preliminary Inter-Laboratory Study of foam insulation materials was performed by NASA Kennedy Space Center and LeTourneau University. The initial focus was ambient pressure cryogenic boil off testing using the Cryostat-400 flat-plate instrument. Completion of a test facility at LETU has enabled direct, comparative testing, using identical cryostat instruments and methods, and the production of standard thermal data sets for a number of materials under sub-ambient conditions. The two sets of measurements were analyzed and indicate there is reasonable agreement between the two laboratories. Based on cryogenic boiloff calorimetry, new equipment and methods for testing thermal insulation systems have been successfully developed. These boiloff instruments (or cryostats) include both flat plate and cylindrical models and are applicable to a wide range of different materials under a wide range of test conditions. Test measurements are generally made at large temperature difference (boundary temperatures of 293 K and 78 K are typical) and include the full vacuum pressure range. Results are generally reported in effective thermal conductivity (ke) and mean heat flux (q) through the insulation system. The new cryostat instruments provide an effective and reliable way to characterize the thermal performance of materials under subambient conditions. Proven in through thousands of tests of hundreds of material systems, they have supported a wide range of aerospace, industry, and research projects. Boiloff testing technology is not just for cryogenic testing but is a cost effective, field-representative methodology to test any material or system for applications at sub-ambient temperatures. This technology, when adequately coupled with a technical standards basis, can provide a cost-effective, field-representative methodology to test any material or system for applications at sub-ambient to cryogenic temperatures. A growing need for energy efficiency and cryogenic applications is creating a worldwide demand for improved thermal insulation systems for low temperatures. The need for thermal characterization of these systems and materials raises a corresponding need for insulation test standards and thermal data targeted for cryogenic-vacuum applications. Such standards have a strong correlation to energy, transportation, and environment and the advancement of new materials technologies in these areas. In conjunction with this project, two new standards on cryogenic insulation were recently published by ASTM International: C1774 and C740. Following the requirements of NPR 7120.10, Technical Standards for NASA Programs and Projects, the appropriate information in this report can be provided to the NASA Chief Engineer as input for NASA's annual report to NIST, as required by OMB Circular No. A-119, describing NASA's use of voluntary consensus standards and participation in the development of voluntary consensus standards and bodies.

Technology Portfolio System↗
NASA NTRS2015

Human Systems Integration (HSI) Practitioner's Guide

The NASA/SP-2015-3709, Human Systems Integration (HSI) Practitioner's Guide, also known as the "HSIPG," provides a tool for implementing HSI activities within the NASA systems engineering framework. The HSIPG is written to aid the HSI practitioner engaged in a program or project (P/P), and serves as a knowledge base to allow the practitioner to step into an HSI lead or team member role for NASA missions. Additionally, this HSIPG is written to address the role of HSI in the P/P management and systems engineering communities and aid their understanding of the value added by incorporating good HSI practices into their programs and projects. Through helping to build a community of knowledgeable HSI practitioners, this document also hopes to build advocacy across the Agency for establishing strong, consistent HSI policies and practices. Human Systems Integration (HSI) has been successfully adopted (and adapted) by several federal agencies-most notably the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-as a methodology for reducing system life cycle costs (LCCs). These cost savings manifest themselves due to reductions in required numbers of personnel, the practice of human-centered design, decreased reliance on specialized skills for operations, shortened training time, efficient logistics and maintenance, and fewer safety-related risks and mishaps due to unintended human/system interactions. The HSI process for NASA establishes how cost savings and mission success can be realized through systems engineering. Every program or project has unique attributes. This HSIPG is not intended to provide one-size-fits-all recommendations for HSI implementation. Rather, HSI processes should be tailored to the size, scope, and goals of individual situations. The instructions and processes identified here are best used as a starting point for implementing human-centered system concepts and designs across programs and projects of varying types, including manned and unmanned, human spaceflight, aviation, robotics, and environmental science missions. The practitioner using this guide should have expertise in Systems Engineering or other disciplines involved in producing systems with anticipated human interactions. (See section 1.6 of this guide for further discussion on HSI discipline domains.) The HSIPG provides an "HSI layer" to the NASA Systems Engineering Engine (SEE), detailed in NASA Procedural Requirement (NPR) 7123.1B, NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements, and further explained in NASA/SP-2007-6105, Systems Engineering Handbook (see HSIPG Table 2.2-1, NASA Documents with HSI Content, for specific references and document versions).

Zumbado, Jennifer Rochlis↗
NASA NTRS2016

Systems Engineering and Management Applications of ISO 9001:2015 for Government

The manufacturing segment of the business world is busy assessing the impact of ISO 9001:2015, and updating their management systems to meet the required compliance date. What does the new revision mean for government agencies that deliver large engineering projects rather than mass production? In fact, the standard, especially the new revision, can be used quite readily for government agencies, or applied to specific projects, once it is understood in terms of the similarities with systems engineering and project management. From there it can be extrapolated to "mission realization" systems, and a Quality Management System (QMS) is a logical result that can bring order to processes and systems that likely already exist in some fashion. ISO 9001:2015 is less product-oriented than previous versions. It can be more broadly applied to public organizations as well as private; and to services (missions) as well as products. The emphasis on risk management in the revised standard provides the needed balance for weighing decisions with respect to cost, schedule, technical, safety, and regulatory compliance; so if this is not part of agency governance already, this is a good place to start, especially for large engineering projects. The Systems Engineering standard used for this analysis is from NASA's NPR 7123.1 NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements; however, those who are more familiar with ISO/IEC 26702 Systems Engineering-application and management of the systems engineering process, or SAE/EIA 632 Processes for Engineering a System will also recognize the similarities. In reality, the QMS outlined by ISO 9001 reinforces the systems engineering processes, and serves to ensure that they are adequately implemented, although most of the ISO 9001 literature emphasizes the production and process aspects of the standard. Rather than beginning with ISO 9001and getting lost in the vocabulary, it is useful to begin with the systems engineering lifecycle. Identification of stakeholder expectations, identifying solutions, creating specific product or service designs, production of the product or service, delivery to the public, and the associated management, planning, and control processes, are a familiar place to begin thinking of the overall system of identifying, designing, and competing a project or mission. Lining up this lifecycle with the ISO requirements (see Figure 1) illustrates how a quality management system is concerned with the same processes, and provides a governance and assurance function. If implemented properly, there are cost savings resulting from less rework, repair, reprocessing, failures, misplaced documents, and similar types of deficiencies1. Starting with an organization's systems engineering processes allows the organization to use their own terminology for a QMS plan, and tailor the plan to their own project or organization, so that it is more easily developed, understood, and implemented.

Shepherd, Christena C.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Femtosecond Laser Tagging Characterization of a Sweeping Jet Actuator Operating in the Compressible Regime

A sweeping jet (SWJ) actuator operating over a range of nozzle pressure ratios (NPRs) was characterized with femtosecond laser electronic excitation tagging (FLEET), single hot-wire anemometry (HWA) and high-speed/phase-averaged schlieren. FLEET velocimetry was successfully demonstrated in a highly unsteady, oscillatory flow containing subsonic through supersonic velocities. Qualitative comparisons between FLEET and HWA (which measured mass flux since the flow was compressible) showed relatively good agreement in the external flow profiles. The spreading rate was found to vary from 0.5 to 1.2 depending on the pressure ratio. The precision of FLEET velocity measurements in the external flow field was poorer (is approximately equal to 25 m/s) than reported in a previous study due to the use of relatively low laser fluences, impacting the velocity fluctuation measurements. FLEET enabled velocity measurements inside the device and showed that choking likely occurred for NPR ≥ 2.0, and no internal shockwaves were present. Qualitative oxygen concentration measurements using FLEET were explored in an effort to gauge the jet's mixing with the ambient. The jet was shown to mix well within roughly four throat diameters and mix fully within roughly eight throat diameters. Schlieren provided visualization of the internal and external flow fields and showed that the qualitative structure of the internal flow does not vary with pressure ratio and the sweeping mechanism observed for incompressible NPRs also probably holds for compressible NPRs.

Peters, Christopher J.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Preparing to Receive and Handle Martian Samples When They Arrive on Earth

The Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) is responsible for curating all of NASA's extraterrestrial samples. Under the governing document, NASA Policy Directive (NPD) 7100.10F+ derivative NPR 'Curation of Extraterrestrial Materials', JSC is charged with 'The curation of all extraterrestrial material under NASA control, including future NASA missions. 'The Directive goes on to define Curation as including'...documentation, preservation, preparation, and distribution of samples for research, education, and public outreach."

McCubbin, Francis M.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Expanded Guidance for NASA Systems Engineering. Volume 1: Systems Engineering Practices

This document is intended to provide general guidance and information on systems engineering that will be useful to the NASA community. It provides a generic description of Systems Engineering (SE) as it should be applied throughout NASA. A goal of the expanded guidance is to increase awareness and consistency across the Agency and advance the practice of SE. This guidance provides perspectives relevant to NASA and data particular to NASA. This expanded guidance should be used as a companion for implementing NPR 7123.1, Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements, the Rev 2 version of SP-6105, and the Center-specific handbooks and directives developed for implementing systems engineering at NASA. It provides a companion reference book for the various systems engineering-related training being offered under NASA's auspices.

Steven R Hirshorn↗
NASA NTRS2017

NASA Requirements for Ground-Based Pressure Vessels and Pressurized Systems (PVS)

The purpose of this document is to ensure the structural integrity of PVS through implementation of a minimum set of requirements for ground-based PVS in accordance with this document, NASA Policy Directive (NPD) 8710.5, NASA Safety Policy for Pressure Vessels and Pressurized Systems, NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 8715.3, NASA General Safety Program Requirements, applicable Federal Regulations, and national consensus codes and standards (NCS).

Greulich, Owen Rudolf↗
NASA NTRS2018

Next Steps in Planetary Protection for Human Spaceflight

Planetary protection is defined as: a) the prevention of contamination of extraterrestrial bodies by terrestrial microorganisms, and b) biohazard containment of returned samples from bodies in the Solar System that could harbor life.1 While the majority of interplanetary missions to date have involved robotic exploration, future missions will include human explorers. Current planetary protection requirements do not address the unique challenges associated with human exploration. The purpose of this abstract is to review planetary protection efforts for crewed missions and provide a forward plan for implementing them at the systems level. Article IX of the UN Outer Space Treaty of 1967 provides the definition of planetary protection, outlined above.1 COSPAR holds the international standard in line with this treaty2, while NASA's Planetary Protection Policy (NPD 8020.7G) outlines the U.S. implementation of the COSPAR standard. 3;4 NPI 8020.7 groups future human spaceflight planetary protection studies as follows: 1) microbial monitoring, 2) contamination mitigation and control, and 3) environmental effects. Additionally, a NPI 8020.7 outlines a five-step plan for forward work: 1) a literature review, 2) community inputs, 3) completion of recommended studies, 4) developing a draft NPR, and 5) implementation with NASA teams. The literature review was published in 2016.5 Inputs from the community were gathered at the Planetary Protection Knowledge Gaps for Human Extraterrestrial Missions, held in 2015.6 Johnson and Race (2016) outlined notional requirements and prioritized studies needed before final requirements can be produced. This prior work sets the stage for completing the necessary studies and finalizing planetary protection requirements for human spaceflight. We propose a continuation of the systems engineering approach adopted thus far. The challenges associated with the implementation of notional requirements will be quantified in detailed discussions with internal stakeholders. The status and results of high-priority studies that have been completed since 2016 or are ongoing will be incorporated into discussions with stakeholders. In this way, we plan to bridge the gap between the science behind planetary protection and the engineering development that will implement it, allowing finalized planetary protection requirements to be developed for future human space missions.

Mitchell, Julie↗
NASA NTRS2018

Computational and Experimental Study of Plume and Shock Interaction Effects on Sonic Boom in the NASA Ames 9x7 Supersonic Wind Tunnel

A wind tunnel test was performed in the NASA Ames 9x7 Supersonic Wind Tunnel focusing on the shock waves traveling through and interacting with an exhaust nozzle plume. This experimental study was conducted to develop and validate the CFD capability required to accurately include nozzle flow with impinging shock effects on near field and ground‐propagated sonic boom signatures. The model was made to be generic, and included a simple nozzle shape, two different aft decks, and a few generic horizontal tails. High pressure air was pumped through a nozzle at various nozzle pressure ratios (NPR) to represent the engine plume in flight. The three different aft body representations each created a different shock wave signature that passed through the plume. An aft deck configuration, where part of the aircraft shields the nozzle plume, was also tested. Retroreflective Background-Oriented Schlieren (RBOS) was used to obtain schlieren images of the flow field around the model and behind the model. This study compares wind tunnel data and numerical simulations conducted by the NASA Tetrahedral Unstructured Software System CFD code, USM3D.

Winski, Courtney S.↗
NASA NTRS2018

An Investigation of Risk Management Approaches for NASA Piloted X-Plane Projects

NASA is resuming X-plane research. It plans to build a low-boom supersonic flight demonstrator (LBFD), an all-electric general aviation aircraft (X-57), and possibly an ultra-efficient subsonic transport (UEST) demonstrator. In an attempt to define what levels of risk are appropriate in piloted X-plane research, the NASA Office of the Chief Engineer (OCE) evaluated numerous NASA, Department of Defense (DoD), and industry project management and risk assessment tools. Provided are the results of the evaluations of NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 7120.5, 7120.8, and 8705.4; Langley Research Center (LaRC) Procedural Requirement (LPR) 7120.5; Dryden (Armstrong) Center Procedures S-002 and X-009; and Military Handbook 516C. Some of these were applied to the LBFD and X-57 aircraft. The impacts on risk of budgeting decisions and specialized flight conditions were also considered. None of the evaluated processes were found to be fully appropriate for governing experimental aircraft projects, but many useful elements were found in some of them.

X-59↗
NASA NTRS2019

NASA Lunar Lander Reference Design

With increased emphasis on lunar exploration and scientific investigation, there is a desire to deliver a wide variety of payloads to the lunar surface. Many of these payloads will require the use of surface mobility capability such as a rover. NASA has combined spacecraft and subsystem engineers from across the Agency to develop a ‘pallet’ lander design intended to deliver and easily deploy a medium-sized payload (~300 kg) to the polar regions of the Moon. The lander provides power to the payload from transit soon after lunar landing. The lander is not intended to survive the lunar night. The design of the lander was based on a minimum set of level 1 requirements where traditional risk, mass, and performance trade parameters were weighed lower than cost. In other words, the team did not sacrifice ‘good enough’ for ‘better’ or ‘best.’ As a NASA class D spacecraft (as defined in NPR 8705.4, Risk Classification for NASA Payloads, the lander employs single-string (i.e., zero-fault-tolerant) systems as a baseline. The design utilizes existing technologies and components where possible, though some enhancements have been targeted in areas such as precision autonomous landing and low-cost structural design/fabrication. It is important to note that these and other derived technologies are extensible to other lander designs and missions. This TP describes the requirements and approaches upon which the lander design is based; discusses key design decisions, analyses, and trades used to derive the design; provides a snapshot of each major subsystem; and identifies open items, issues, and challenges for which work is continuing.

L D Kennedy↗