Results for “lessons learned process” — Page 73

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Operating a Crewed Spacecraft in the Age of Commercial Space Using Private/Government Partnership

Fifty years after humans completed a large-scale United States government-funded and government-engineered effort of landing humans on the moon, human spaceflight has entered a new paradigm. Private companies are now investing their own money and taking on an ever-increasing role in human spaceflight, in partnership with the U.S. government. This paper will describe the development of one of these partnerships through the lens of its mission operations team. As part of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), NASA selected Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner as one of the next generation of crewed vehicles. Boeing opted to partner with the US Government for their Starliner operations by contracting with NASA’s Mission Control teams in the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) at the Johnson Space Center to create its own Mission Operations (MO) flight controllers. Partnering with FOD provided benefits to both Boeing and NASA while also creating new challenges. MO brought over 60 years of crewed spaceflight experience and infrastructure to Boeing’s new program. Within certain legal constraints, MO was able to work closely and efficiently with their FOD counterparts who were performing both integration duties and, under the auspices of the CCP, insight of the contractors, in this case Boeing. Involvement of NASA as the Boeing operations agent did lead to what management deemed a ‘healthy tension’ within FOD, challenging old processes and often creating better, more robust teamwork. Successful development of the framework and boundaries of both the legal aspects and the oversight tensions has been one of the keys to developing a successful corporate/government partnership. Due to the highly automated nature of the Starliner, the MO organization was designed to be much smaller than previous NASA’s flight control teams for past programs. NASA has learned through the decades that spacecraft design and operations need to be as flexible and forgiving as possible. NASA’s Commercial Crew Program was established to sponsor corporate development of economical vehicles that could get humans to and from low Earth orbit. These companies, of course, need to meet contractual obligations in providing a safe means of transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), but also need to do so in a manner that leads to the venture resulting in a profit at the same time. Through MO’s involvement in the development of this spaceflight paradigm shift, there are ample lessons to be conveyed to future teams and programs working to develop similar missions.

Robert C Dempsey↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Operating a Crewed Spacecraft in the Age of Commercial Space Using Private/Government Partnership

Fifty years after humans completed a large-scale United States government-funded and government-engineered effort of landing humans on the moon, human spaceflight has entered a new paradigm. Private companies are now investing their own money and taking on an ever-increasing role in human spaceflight, in partnership with the U.S. government. This paper will describe the development of one of these partnerships through the lens of its mission operations team. As part of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), NASA selected Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner as one of the next generation of crewed vehicles. Boeing opted to partner with the US Government for their Starliner operations by contracting with NASA’s Mission Control teams in the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) at the Johnson Space Center to create its own Mission Operations (MO) flight controllers. Partnering with FOD provided benefits to both Boeing and NASA while also creating new challenges. MO brought over 60 years of crewed spaceflight experience and infrastructure to Boeing’s new program. Within certain legal constraints, MO was able to work closely and efficiently with their FOD counterparts who were performing both integration duties and, under the auspices of the CCP, insight of the contractors, in this case Boeing. Involvement of NASA as the Boeing operations agent did lead to what management deemed a ‘healthy tension’ within FOD, challenging old processes and often creating better, more robust teamwork. Successful development of the framework and boundaries of both the legal aspects and the oversight tensions has been one of the keys to developing a successful corporate/government partnership. Due to the highly automated nature of the Starliner, the MO organization was designed to be much smaller than previous NASA’s flight control teams for past programs. NASA has learned through the decades that spacecraft design and operations need to be as flexible and forgiving as possible. NASA’s Commercial Crew Program was established to sponsor corporate development of economical vehicles that could get humans to and from low Earth orbit. These companies, of course, need to meet contractual obligations in providing a safe means of transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), but also need to do so in a manner that leads to the venture resulting in a profit at the same time. Through MO’s involvement in the development of this spaceflight paradigm shift, there are ample lessons to be conveyed to future teams and programs working to develop similar missions.

Robert C. Dempsey↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Operating a Crewed Spacecraft in the Age of Commercial Space Using Private/Government Partnership

Fifty years after humans completed a large-scale United States government-funded and government-engineered effort of landing humans on the moon, human spaceflight has entered a new paradigm. Private companies are now investing their own money and taking on an ever-increasing role in human spaceflight, in partnership with the U.S. government. This paper will describe the development of one of these partnerships through the lens of its mission operations team. As part of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), NASA selected Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner as one of the next generation of crewed vehicles. Boeing opted to partner with the US Government for their Starliner operations by contracting with NASA’s Mission Control teams in the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) at the Johnson Space Center to create its own Mission Operations (MO) flight controllers. Partnering with FOD provided benefits to both Boeing and NASA while also creating new challenges. MO brought over 60 years of crewed spaceflight experience and infrastructure to Boeing’s new program. Within certain legal constraints, MO was able to work closely and efficiently with their FOD counterparts who were performing both integration duties and, under the auspices of the CCP, insight of the contractors, in this case Boeing. Involvement of NASA as the Boeing operations agent did lead to what management deemed a ‘healthy tension’ within FOD, challenging old processes and often creating better, more robust teamwork. Successful development of the framework and boundaries of both the legal aspects and the oversight tensions has been one of the keys to developing a successful corporate/government partnership. Due to the highly automated nature of the Starliner, the MO organization was designed to be much smaller than previous NASA’s flight control teams for past programs. NASA has learned through the decades that spacecraft design and operations need to be as flexible and forgiving as possible. NASA’s Commercial Crew Program was established to sponsor corporate development of economical vehicles that could get humans to and from low Earth orbit. These companies, of course, need to meet contractual obligations in providing a safe means of transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), but also need to do so in a manner that leads to the venture resulting in a profit at the same time. Through MO’s involvement in the development of this spaceflight paradigm shift, there are ample lessons to be conveyed to future teams and programs working to develop similar missions.

Robert C. Dempsey↗

DOE OSTI2024

Data Driven Commercial Building Energy Code Compliance and Technology Inventory for New York City

Building Performance Standards (BPS) are gaining national traction. A BPS will require new processes in the design, construction, and operation of buildings that take the occupants into account and enable predictive analysis to ensure compliance with current and future GHG emissions caps. In New York City, most buildings over 25,000 square feet will be regulated by a BPS starting in 2024, regardless of whether it is new construction permitted under current energy codes or an existing building. This research is one of the first to begin the evaluation of a long-term series of building policies in the context of an open data ecosystem, in cooperation with city agencies. Existing building policies enacted in NYC have ranged from building energy benchmarking and labeling to energy audits to the regulation of GHG emission in buildings. Through the development of a dataset related to building technologies and energy consumption, this project can help to evaluate if meaningful conclusions can be drawn for the data that has been largely self-reported in compliance with city regulations. This project will also provide lessons learned from a deep dive into these types of datasets to provide best practices for municipalities or states seeking to embark on policies like those enacted in NYC. In addition, a Building Automation System (BAS) Stretch Standard of Care (SSOC) for owners, designers, and building operators will enable the measurement and predictive analysis of energy consumption and GHG emissions at the plant, system, or component level, in anticipation of regulated GHG limits on buildings based on energy use. The SSOC is expected to be suitable for use on a national level. The primary feature of an SSOC is a standardized format for a set of BAS points that can be used to control and to gather data from individual plants, systems, or components that are related to building energy consumption. This project examined how measurements compare to prescriptive or simulation-based energy code targets, finding little correlation between predictive 8760-hour energy modeling and actual energy consumption for a small sample (n=27) of buildings constructed after 2015. Other analysis found that, while large multifamily housing (MFH) buildings showed a general trend similar to predicted reductions in energy use from the implementation of model commercial energy codes, this trend was not evident in the office, K-12 school, and hotel use groups in NYC. No upward or downward trends in energy consumption were found when buildings were grouped by size. Energy audit data were analyzed and it appears that there is bias by audit company on measures recommended to clients. Further research should be performed to cross-analyze this with other attributes, such as building size, vintage, and number of stories. Analysis found that for 281 buildings that were permitted and completed after 2015 and had submitted benchmarking data in 2022, between 81% and 96% (by use group) were found to be in compliance with the 2024 to 2029 NYC BPS emission caps, and between 55% and 89% were in compliance with the 2030-2034 caps. This work is beneficial to the public in helping policymakers and building stakeholders better understand the wide-ranging implications of a BPS.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The NASA DEVELOP Model: Multidisciplinary Teams Conduct Interdisciplinary Projects to Produce Transdisciplinary Outcomes

The DEVELOP Program, part of NASA’s Earth Applied Sciences’ Capacity Building Program, conducts 50-70 feasibility studies each year that utilize Earth observations to address local decision-making challenges and help inform action. DEVELOP uses these projects as the mechanism to build skills in its participants and partner organizations to assess and apply satellite data insights to environmental decision-making processes. While organized by thematic focus (ex. water resource management, ecological forecasting, disaster management), projects use a multidisciplinary team approach with teams of students, recent graduates, early career professionals, and transitioning career professionals, bringing different disciplines, life experience, and perspectives to execute projects that have been collaboratively designed with end-user partner organizations (federal agencies, state and local governments, non-profit and for-profit organizations, and international organizations). Projects are interdisciplinary in nature as they integrate methods from multiple disciplines, with a focus on the incorporation of satellite data with other data sources such as socioeconomic and demographic data, in situ measurements, model outputs, and partners’ knowledge, and take place under the guidance of science advisors from NASA, academia, and other partner organizations. The culmination of these multidisciplinary teams working on projects that draw from interdisciplinary methods and approaches, is a transdisciplinary solution for the partner organizations to explore further for potential adoption. This presentation will highlight the DEVELOP model of co-production and collaboration, lessons learned integrating people and project methodologies, and impact assessment activities surrounding the program’s efforts.

Capacity Building↗

DOE OSTI2023

Developing Ultrahigh-Resolution E3SM Land Model for GPU Systems

Designing and refactoring complex scientific code, such as the E3SM land model (ELM), for new computing architectures is challenging. This paper presents design strategies and technical approaches to develop a data-oriented, GPU-ready ELM model using compiler directives (OpenACC/OpenMP). We first analyze the datatypes and processes in the original ELM code. Then we present design considerations for ultrahigh-resolution ELM (uELM) development for massive GPU systems. These techniques include the global data-oriented simulation workflow, domain partition, code porting and data copy, memory reduction, parallel loop restructure and flattening, and race condition detection. We implemented the first version of uELM using OpenACC targeting the NVidia GPUs in the Summit supercomputer at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. During the implementation, we developed a software tool (named SPEL) to facilitate code generation, verification, and performance tuning using these techniques. The first uELM implementation for Nvidia GPUs on Summit delivered promising results: 1) over 98% of the ELM code was automatically generated and tuned by scripts. Most ELM modules had better computational performances than the original ELM code for CPUs. The GPU-ready uELM is more scalable than the CPU code on fully-loaded Summit nodes. Example profiling results from several modules are also presented to illustrate the performance improvements and race condition detection. The lessons learned and toolkit developed in the study are also suitable for further uELM deployment using OpenMP on the first US exascale computer, Frontier, equipped with AMD CPUs and GPUs.

Schwartz, Peter↗

NASA NTRS2005

Lessons Learned in the Livingstone 2 on Earth Observing One Flight Experiment

The Livingstone 2 (L2) model-based diagnosis software is a reusable diagnostic tool for monitoring complex systems. In 2004, L2 was integrated with the JPL Autonomous Sciencecraft Experiment (ASE) and deployed on-board Goddard's Earth Observing One (EO-1) remote sensing satellite, to monitor and diagnose the EO-1 space science instruments and imaging sequence. This paper reports on lessons learned from this flight experiment. The goals for this experiment, including validation of minimum success criteria and of a series of diagnostic scenarios, have all been successfully net. Long-term operations in space are on-going, as a test of the maturity of the system, with L2 performance remaining flawless. L2 has demonstrated the ability to track the state of the system during nominal operations, detect simulated abnormalities in operations and isolate failures to their root cause fault. Specific advances demonstrated include diagnosis of ambiguity groups rather than a single fault candidate; hypothesis revision given new sensor evidence about the state of the system; and the capability to check for faults in a dynamic system without having to wait until the system is quiescent. The major benefits of this advanced health management technology are to increase mission duration and reliability through intelligent fault protection, and robust autonomous operations with reduced dependency on supervisory operations from Earth. The work-load for operators will be reduced by telemetry of processed state-of-health information rather than raw data. The long-term vision is that of making diagnosis available to the onboard planner or executive, allowing autonomy software to re-plan in order to work around known component failures. For a system that is expected to evolve substantially over its lifetime, as for the International Space Station, the model-based approach has definite advantages over rule-based expert systems and limit-checking fault protection systems, as these do not scale well. The model-based approach facilitates reuse of the L2 diagnostic software; only the model of the system to be diagnosed and telemetry monitoring software has to be rebuilt for a new system or expanded for a growing system. The hierarchical L2 model supports modularity and expendability, and as such is suitable solution for integrated system health management as envisioned for systems-of-systems.

Hayden, Sandra C.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Large Payload Ground Transportation and Test Considerations

During test and verification planning for the Altair lunar lander project, a National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) study team identified several ground transportation and test issues related to the large payload diameter. Although the entire Constellation Program-including Altair-has since been canceled, issues identified by the Altair project serve as important lessons learned for payloads greater than 7 m diameter being considered for NASA's new Space Launch System (SLS). A transportation feasibility study found that Altair's 8.97 m diameter Descent Module would not fit inside available aircraft. Although the Ascent Module cabin was only 2.35 m diameter, the long reaction control system booms extended nearly to the Descent Module diameter, making it equally unsuitable for air transportation without removing the booms and invalidating assembly workmanship screens or acceptance testing that had already been performed. Ground transportation of very large payloads over extended distances is not generally permitted by most states, so overland transportation alone would not be an option. Limited ground transportation to the nearest waterway may be possible, but water transportation could take as long as 66 days per production unit, depending on point of origin and acceptance test facility; transportation from the western United States would require transit through the Panama Canal to access the Kennedy Space Center launch site. Large payloads also pose acceptance test and ground processing challenges. Although propulsion, mechanical vibration, and reverberant acoustic test facilities at NASA's Plum Brook Station have been designed to accommodate large spacecraft, special handling and test work-arounds may be necessary, which could increase cost, schedule, and technical risk. Once at the launch site, there are no facilities currently capable of accommodating the combination of large payload size and hazardous processing such as hypergolic fuels, pyrotechnic devices, and high pressure gasses. Ironically, the limiting factor to a national heavy lift strategy may not be the rocket technology needed to throw a heavy payload, but rather the terrestrial infrastructure-roads, bridges, airframes, and buildings-necessary to transport, acceptance test, and process large spacecraft. Failure to carefully consider where and how large spacecraft are manufactured, tested, and launched could result in unforeseen cost to modify existing (or develop new) infrastructure, or incur additional risk due to increased handling operations or eliminating key verifications.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Ares Launch Vehicles Overview: Space Access Society

America is returning to the Moon in preparation for the first human footprint on Mars, guided by the U.S. Vision for Space Exploration. This presentation will discuss NASA's mission, the reasons for returning to the Moon and going to Mars, and how NASA will accomplish that mission in ways that promote leadership in space and economic expansion on the new frontier. The primary goals of the Vision for Space Exploration are to finish the International Space Station, retire the Space Shuttle, and build the new spacecraft needed to return people to the Moon and go to Mars. The Vision commits NASA and the nation to an agenda of exploration that also includes robotic exploration and technology development, while building on lessons learned over 50 years of hard-won experience. NASA is building on common hardware, shared knowledge, and unique experience derived from the Apollo Saturn, Space Shuttle, and contemporary commercial launch vehicle programs. The journeys to the Moon and Mars will require a variety of vehicles, including the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle, which transports the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, and the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle, which transports the Lunar Surface Access Module. The architecture for the lunar missions will use one launch to ferry the crew into orbit, where it will rendezvous with the Lunar Module in the Earth Departure Stage, which will then propel the combination into lunar orbit. The imperative to explore space with the combination of astronauts and robots will be the impetus for inventions such as solar power and water and waste recycling. This next chapter in NASA's history promises to write the next chapter in American history, as well. It will require this nation to provide the talent to develop tools, machines, materials, processes, technologies, and capabilities that can benefit nearly all aspects of life on Earth. Roles and responsibilities are shared between a nationwide Government and industry team. The Exploration Launch Projects Office at the Marshall Space Flight Center manages the design, development, testing, and evaluation of both vehicles and serves as lead systems integrator. A little over a year after it was chartered, the Exploration Launch Projects team is testing engine components, refining vehicle designs, performing wind tunnel tests, and building hardware for the first flight test of Ares I-X, scheduled for spring 2009. The Exploration Launch Projects team conducted the Ares I System Requirements Review (SRR) at the end of 2006. In Ares' first year, extensive trade studies and evaluations were conducted to refine the design initially recommended by the Exploration Systems Architecture Study, conceptual designs were analyzed for fitness, and the contractual framework was assembled to enable a development effort unparalleled in American space flight since the Space Shuttle. Now, the project turns its focus to the Preliminary Design Review (PDR), scheduled for 2008. Taking into consideration the findings of the SRR, the design of the Ares I is being tightened and refined to meet the safety, operability, reliability, and affordability goals outlined by the Constellation Program. The Ares V is in the early design stage, focusing its activities on requirements validation and ways to develop this heavy-lift system so that synergistic hardware commonality between it and the Ares I can reduce the operational footprint and foster sustained exploration across the decades ahead.

Cook, Steve↗

DOE OSTI2021

Performance Portability in the Exascale Computing Project: Exploration Through a Panel Series

Performance portability is a critical issue for the Exascale Computing Project (ECP) because of nontrivial architectural differences between machines available today and those expected at exascale. Many ECP project teams are working toward performance portability, and would expect to benefit from sharing lessons learned, identifying gaps, and discovering opportunities for partnerships. To facilitate this communication, the IDEAS-ECP project partnered with the three focus areas of ECP (application development, software technology, and hardware and integration), and Department of Energy computing facilities, to lead a series of panel discussions on performance portability. The panels were organized around broadly common themes of algorithmic and data locality challenges. In this article, we describe the panel series, its objectives, and perspectives from the various areas of the project. Finally, we also discuss use cases that are distinctive, as well as conclusions drawn from the collective experience of the participants.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

NASA NTRS2015

Systems Engineering Lessons Learned for Class D Missions

One of NASA's goals within human exploration is to determine how to get humans to Mars safely and to live and work on the Martian surface. To accomplish this goal, several smaller missions act as stepping-stones to the larger end goal. NASA uses these smaller missions to develop new technologies and learn about how to survive outside of Low Earth Orbit for long periods. Additionally, keeping a cadence of these missions allows the team to maintain proficiency in the complex art of bringing spacecraft to fruition. Many of these smaller missions are robotic in nature and have smaller timescales, whereas there are others that involve crew and have longer mission timelines. Given the timelines associated with these various missions, different levels of risk and rigor need to be implemented to be more in line with what is appropriate for the mission. Thus, NASA has four different classifications that range from Class A to Class D based on the mission details. One of these projects is the Resource Prospector (RP) Mission, which is a multi-center and multi-institution collaborative project to search for volatiles in the polar regions of the Moon. The RP mission is classified as a Class D mission and as such, has the opportunity to more tightly manage, and therefore accept, greater levels of risk. The requirements for Class D missions were at the forefront of the design and thus presented unique challenges in vehicle development and systems engineering processes. This paper will discuss the systems engineering process at NASA and how that process is tailored for Class D missions, specifically the RP mission.

Rojdev, Kristina↗

DOE OSTI2023

29 th International Training Course on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials and Nuclear Facilities (Project Summary)

Sandia National Laboratories (Sandia) has hosted the International Training Course on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials and Nuclear Facilities since 1978. This course is the flagship training course of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). On behalf of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), Sandia manages, develops, and coordinates all course materials, and works closely with the IAEA to arrange all logistical details for the course ITC-29 incorporated some updates to the facility models, based on feedback received in ITC-28 and the ITC-29 dry run. In addition, all the graphics were refreshed after ITC-28 and implemented in the posters, data handbooks, etc. As in ITC-28, the ITC-29 staff worked closely with the IAEA on course materials, including a peer review process to ensure all course materials were aligned with Nuclear Security Series No. 13 and other relevant international guidance documentation from the IAEA. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, ITC-29 was postponed twice and eventually took place in the late summer/early fall of 2022. Due to ongoing COVID-19 restrictions and safety requirements, the number of participants was reduced by about 31 percent from 59 participants in ITC-28 to 41 in ITC-29. As a result, the number of subgroups also decreased from eight in ITC-28 to six for ITC-29. This enabled the Sandia team to implement more opportunities for social distancing, particularly in the large classrooms. Despite the challenges, ITC-29 still passed a significant milestone, with the one-thousandth participant of the international training course attending during this event. Finally, the ITC staff continued the use of its improved method of evaluation to capture participants’ satisfaction with the updated course and to gather feedback concerning future improvements. This document provides a brief description of ITC-29, including a summary of lessons learned and key recommendations for future development efforts.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

NASA NTRS2017

Hardware Assessment in Support of the Dynamic Power Convertor Development Effort

Stirling Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) are being developed by NASA's RPS Program in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Efforts ranging from 2001 to 2015 enabled development of the Technology Demonstration Convertor (TDC) for use in the 110-watt Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG-110) and the Advanced Stirling Convertor (ASC) for use in the Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator (ASRG). The DOE selected Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company (LMSSC) as the system integration contractor for both flight development efforts. The SRG-110 housed two TDCs fabricated by Infinia and resulted in the production of 16x demonstration units and 2x engineering units. The project was redirected in 2006 to make use of a more efficient and lower mass ASCs under development by Sunpower Inc. The DOE managed the flight contract with LMSSC and subcontractor Sunpower Inc. from 2007 to 2013 to build the ASRG, with support from NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC). Sunpower Inc. held two parallel contracts to produce ASCs, one with Lockheed Martin to produce ASC-F flight units and one with GRC for the production of ASC-E3 engineering unit pathfinders that were used to refine the flight design and production processes. The DOE initiated termination of the ASRG contract in late 2013. After ASRG had ended, GRC completed characterization testing of the ASRG Engineering Unit #2 (EU2) and the GRC contract with Sunpower was also completed. The NASA RPS Program Office has recently initiated a new Dynamic Power Conversion development effort which includes the potential maturation of Stirling, Brayton, and Rankine power convertors for the next generation of RPS. The effort started with the request for proposal and review of submits. Contracts are anticipated for release in 2017 and will initially focus on a design phase prior to fabrication and testing. This new effort will focus on robustness in addition to high efficiency, specific power, and reliability. Also, some requirements introduced during the ASRG contract have also been included in the new effort, such as constant lateral loading. Due to the focus on robustness and new requirements relative to the older TDC design, the Stirling Cycle Development Project has initiated an assessment of government owned hardware to help inform requirements evolution and evaluation of future designs. While lessons learned from the ASRG flight development project have been taken into consideration, the evaluation of the TDC design had not been completed for some existing environments or relatively new requirements. To further assess the TDC design, a series of tasks were initiated to evaluate degradation for units that have operated unattended for over 105,000 hours, demonstrate robustness to a random vibration environment, characterize and evaluate performance for varying lateral load profiles. The status for each task are described.

Wilson, Scott D.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Hardware Assessment in Support of the Dynamic Power Convertor Development Effort

Stirling Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) are being developed by NASAs RPS Program in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Efforts ranging from 2001 to 2015 enabled development of the Technology Demonstration Convertor (TDC) for use in the 110-watt Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG-110) and the Advanced Stirling Convertor (ASC) for use in the Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator (ASRG). The DOE selected Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company (LMSSC) as the system integration contractor for both flight development efforts. The SRG-110 housed two TDCs fabricated by Infinia and resulted in the production of 16x demonstration units and 2x engineering units. The project was redirected in 2006 to make use of a more efficient and lower mass ASCs under development by Sunpower Inc. The DOE managed the flight contract with LMSSC and subcontractor Sunpower Inc. from 2007 to 2013 to build the ASRG, with support from NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC). Sunpower Inc. held two parallel contracts to produce ASCs, one with Lockheed Martin to produce ASC-F flight units and one with GRC for the production of ASC-E3 engineering unit pathfinders that were used to refine the flight design and production processes. The DOE initiated termination of the ASRG contract in late 2013. After ASRG had ended, GRC completed characterization testing of the ASRG Engineering Unit 2 (EU2) and the GRC contract with Sunpower was also completed. The NASA RPS Program Office has recently initiated a new Dynamic Power Conversion development effort which includes the potential maturation of Stirling, Brayton, and Rankine power convertors for the next generation of RPS. The effort started with the request for proposal and review of submits. Contracts are anticipated for release in 2017 and will initially focus on a design phase prior to fabrication and testing. This new effort will focus on robustness in addition to high efficiency, specific power, and reliability. Also, some requirements introduced during the ASRG contract have also been included in the new effort, such as constant lateral loading. Due to the focus on robustness and new requirements relative to the older TDC design, the Stirling Cycle Development Project has initiated an assessment of government owned hardware to help inform requirements evolution and evaluation of future designs. While lessons learned from the ASRG flight development project have been taken into consideration, the evaluation of the TDC design had not been completed for some existing environments or relatively new requirements. To further assess the TDC design, a series of tasks were initiated to evaluate degradation for units that have operated unattended for over 105,000 hours, demonstrate robustness to a random vibration environment, characterize and evaluate performance for varying lateral load profiles. The status for each task are described.

Wilson, Scott D.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Evaluating Failures and Near Misses in Human Spaceflight History for Lessons for Future Human Spaceflight

There have been a number of studies done in the past drawn on lessons learned with regard to human loss-of-life events. Generally, the systemic causes and proximate causes for fatal events have both been examined in considerable detail. However, an examination of near-fatal accidents and failures that narrowly missed being fatal could be equally useful, not only in detecting causes, both proximate and systemic, but also for determining what factors averted disaster, what design decisions and/or operator actions prevented catastrophe. Additionally, review of risk factors for upcoming or future programs will often look at trending statistics, generally focusing on failure/success statistics. Unfortunately, doing so can give a skewed or misleading view of past reliability or a reliability that cannot be presumed to apply to a new program. One reason for this might be that failure/success criteria aren't the same across programs, but also that apparent success can hide systemic faults that, under other circumstances, can be fatal to a program with different parameters. A program with a number of near misses can look more reliable than a consistently healthy program with a single out-of-family failure and provide very misleading data if it is not examined in detail. This is particularly true for a manned space program where failure/success includes more than making a particular orbit. Augmenting reliability evaluations with this near miss data can provide insight and expand on the limitations of a strictly pass/fail evaluation. Even more importantly, a thorough understanding of these near miss events can identify conditions that prevented fatalities. Those conditions may be key to a programs reliability, but, without insight to the repercussions if such conditions were not in place, their importance may not be readily clear. As programs mature and political and fiscal responsibilities come to the fore, often there is considerable incentive to eliminate unnecessary conservatism, design margin, redundancy, operational support, testing, training, or safety oversight. An evaluation that demonstrates how these features and capabilities averted disaster can ensure processes that saved lives or missions are not discarded without appropriate review and understanding. Close examination of accidents that almost were can also highlight differences in design from one program to another, either justifying reliability comparisons or negating them. It can also provide considerable insight into how those saving factors were developed and implemented so that similar methods can be used to ensure appropriate life-saving and mission saving factors can be developed, even for a dissimilar space program. The lessons are appropriate for seasoned manned space programs and agencies, but crucial for untried agencies and organizations that are interested in sending man into space. The large body of publicly available near miss and accident data available provide invaluable insight into programmatic, technical, and even political issues that can be addressed before they impact safety. In this paper, we examine a number of these near misses and accidents and steps a program, agency, or potential spacefaring company might take to improve their chances of success and avoid mission or safety disasters using this data.

Barr, Stephanie↗

NASA NTRS1995

Developmental problems and their solution for the Space Shuttle main engine alternate liquid oxygen high-pressure turbopump: Anomaly or failure investigation the key

The Space Shuttle main engine (SSME) alternate high-pressure liquid oxygen pump experienced synchronous vibration and ball bearing life problems that were program threatening. The success of the program hinged on the ability to solve these development problems. The design and solutions to these problems are engirded in the lessons learned and experiences from prior programs, technology programs, and the ability to properly conduct failure or anomaly investigations. The failure investigation determines the problem cause and is the basis for recommending design solutions. For a complex problem, a comprehensive solution requires that formal investigation procedures be used, including fault trees, resolution logic, and action items worked through a concurrent engineering-multidiscipline team. The normal tendency to use an intuitive, cut-and-try approach will usually prove to be costly, both in money and time and will reach a less than optimum, poorly understood answer. The SSME alternate high-pressure oxidizer turbopump development has had two complex problems critical to program success: (1) high synchronous vibrations and (2) excessive ball bearing wear. This paper will use these two problems as examples of this formal failure investigation approach. The results of the team's investigation provides insight into the complexity of the turbomachinery technical discipline interacting/sensitivities and the fine balance of competing investigations required to solve problems and guarantee program success. It is very important to the solution process that maximum use be made of the resources that both the contractor and Government can bring to the problem in a supporting and noncompeting way. There is no place for the not-invented-here attitude. The resources include, but are not limited to: (1) specially skilled professionals; (2) supporting technologies; (3) computational codes and capabilities; and (4) test and manufacturing facilities.

Ryan, R.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Promoting a Culture of Tailoring for Systems Engineering Policy Expectations

NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) has developed an integrated systems engineering approach to promote a culture of tailoring for program and project policy requirements. MSFC's culture encourages and supports tailoring, with an emphasis on risk-based decision making, for enhanced affordability and efficiency. MSFC's policy structure integrates the various Agency requirements into a single, streamlined implementation approach which serves as a "one-stop-shop" for our programs and projects to follow. The engineers gain an enhanced understanding of policy and technical expectations, as well as lesson's learned from MSFC's history of spaceflight and science missions, to enable them to make appropriate, risk-based tailoring recommendations. The tailoring approach utilizes a standard methodology to classify projects into predefined levels using selected mission and programmatic scaling factors related to risk tolerance. Policy requirements are then selectively applied and tailored, with appropriate rationale, and approved by the governing authorities, to support risk-informed decisions to achieve the desired cost and schedule efficiencies. The policy is further augmented by implementation tools and lifecycle planning aids which help promote and support the cultural shift toward more tailoring. The MSFC Customization Tool is an integrated spreadsheet that ties together everything that projects need to understand, navigate, and tailor the policy. It helps them classify their project, understand the intent of the requirements, determine their tailoring approach, and document the necessary governance approvals. It also helps them plan for and conduct technical reviews throughout the lifecycle. Policy tailoring is thus established as a normal part of project execution, with the tools provided to facilitate and enable the tailoring process. MSFC's approach to changing the culture emphasizes risk-based tailoring of policy to achieve increased flexibility, efficiency, and effectiveness in project execution, while maintaining appropriate rigor to ensure mission success.

Blankenship, Van A.↗

DOE OSTI2022

Potential State Regulatory Pathways to Facilitate Low-Carbon Fuels

States and the federal government are increasingly engaged in the challenges around decarbonizing the electric grid. In particular, regulators, consumers, stakeholders, and utilities recognize the need to carefully consider the role natural gas will play in a decarbonized future. A variety of technology and policy options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with natural gas use are available, including energy efficiency programs, demand reduction tools, strategic electrification, and strategies to reduce emissions from natural gas production, transportation, and consumption. Low-carbon fuels – mainly renewable natural gas (RNG) and clean hydrogen – are being considered an important component of decarbonization goals. RNG and hydrogen may be able to meaningfully reduce emissions from processes independent of geologic natural gas, displacing emissions of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. Although RNG and hydrogen are not cost-competitive today with geologic natural gas and are smaller in scale and potential than other decarbonization options, they can be explored as potential critical tools to decarbonize sectors that are difficult to electrify or shift off of natural gas entirely, such as air travel, industrial processes, maritime transport, long-distance trucking, space heating on cold days, and railroads (Nadel, 2022). The role of this report is to provide informational context for state utility regulators to understand the impacts of and challenges associated with broader integration of low-carbon fuels, followed by examples of state regulatory actions taken to date to facilitate the development of low-carbon fuels. Setting clear guidance to calculate the environmental benefits of low-carbon fuels and continuing federal and state investments in research and development to reduce costs relative to fossil fuels will be important steps to take to signal the desire to grow the market for these fuels. State public utility commissions may play a key role in setting regulatory frameworks for low-carbon fuels and ensuring that ratepayer funds, if utilized, are done so to further the public interest. This report is intended to summarize decisions that states have made to date on low-carbon fuels. In the spirit of understanding the current market and sharing information, this report provides success stories, and lessons learned across states as regulators implement varying strategies to achieve decarbonization objectives while maintaining their focus on affordability, safety, and reliability of the energy system. The report begins with an introduction of the role of natural gas in the U.S. economy (Section I) and background information on natural gas use, decarbonization, and low-carbon fuels (Section II). Next, the report describes the current market by discussing the scale of current production, emissions intensity, resource potential, and costs of low-carbon fuels compared to geologic natural gas (Section III). Following these sections, the report describes four strategies states have employed to facilitate low-carbon fuels: opening exploratory dockets, approving voluntary tariffs for customers, approving interconnection tariffs for producers, and considering portfolio-wide procurement targets (Section IV). This section lists states that have taken actions in each category, citing utility filings, commission decisions, stakeholder comments, and other relevant sources. Finally, the report concludes with suggested questions regulators may wish to consider regarding low-carbon fuels, in the interest of preparing to make decisions in the future (Section V). These questions include: Are there existing regulatory or technical barriers to voluntary purchases of low-carbon fuels? Can customers work with utilities to procure low-carbon fuels; are producers able to interconnect projects without significant barriers to entry? Should the infrastructure and/or commodity costs of low-carbon fuels be socialized among all ratepayers, or borne solely by the large commercial and industrial (C&I) customers currently driving the market? Should regulated natural gas and/or electric utilities own and operate low-carbon fuel production? How should regulators consider the unique decarbonization potential of low-carbon fuels, particularly for hard-to-abate sectors, in decision-making? Is additional direction or clarity from state policymakers needed? What no-regrets approaches can help facilitate both near-term RNG development and long-term development of hydrogen and other zero-carbon fuels? We collectively wish to express our gratitude to the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, for supporting this report and other technical assistance resources for state regulators on natural gas topics. State regulators operate under a variety of policy environments, and states have vastly different types of energy resources, infrastructure, and customers. While there is no optimal regulatory, policy, or technological solution that will be successful in every state, state regulators can benefit by exchanging lessons learned with their peers across the country. We look forward to continued engagement with our fellow commissioners, commission staff, NARUC, the U.S. Department of Energy, and other stakeholders to develop sound regulation in the public interest.

03 NATURAL GAS↗