Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “CONTRACTORS”

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 1,333 records · Page 74

SOFIA Program SE and I Lessons Learned

Once a "Troubled Project" threatened with cancellation, the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA) Program has overcome many difficult challenges and recently achieved its first light images. To achieve success, SOFIA had to overcome significant deficiencies in fundamental Systems Engineering identified during a major Program restructuring. This presentation will summarize the lessons learn in Systems Engineering on the SOFIA Program. After the Program was reformulated, an initial assessment of Systems Engineering established the scope of the problem and helped to set a list of priorities that needed to be work. A revised Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) was written to address the new Program structure and requirements established in the approved NPR7123.1A. An important result of the "Technical Planning" effort was the decision by the Program and Technical Leadership team to re-phasing the lifecycle into increments. The reformed SOFIA Program Office had to quickly develop and establish several new System Engineering core processes including; Requirements Management, Risk Management, Configuration Management and Data Management. Implementing these processes had to consider the physical and cultural diversity of the SOFIA Program team which includes two Projects spanning two NASA Centers, a major German partnership, and sub-contractors located across the United States and Europe. The SOFIA Program experience represents a creative approach to doing "System Engineering in the middle" while a Program is well established. Many challenges were identified and overcome. The SOFIA example demonstrates it is never too late to benefit from fixing deficiencies in the System Engineering processes.

Ray, Ronald J.↗

Ares I-X Flight Test Development Challenges and Success Factors

The NASA Constellation Program's Ares I-X rocket launched successfully on October 28, 2009 collecting valuable data and providing risk reduction for the Ares I project. The Ares I-X mission was formulated and implemented in less than four years commencing with the Exploration Systems Architecture Study in 2005. The test configuration was founded upon assets and processes from other rocket programs including Space Shuttle, Atlas, and Peacekeeper. For example, the test vehicle's propulsion element was a Shuttle Solid Rocket Motor. The Ares I-X rocket comprised a motor assembly, mass and outer mold line simulators of the Ares I Upper Stage, Orion Spacecraft and Launch Abort System, a roll control system, avionics, and other miscellaneous components. The vehicle was 327 feet tall and weighed approximately 1,800,000 pounds. During flight the rocket reached a maximum speed of Mach 4.8 and an altitude of 150,000 feet. The vehicle demonstrated staging at 130,000 feet, tested parachutes for recovery of the motor, and utilized approximately 900 sensors for data collection. Developing a new launch system and preparing for a safe flight presented many challenges. Specific challenges included designing a system to withstand the environments, manufacturing large structures, and re-qualifying heritage hardware. These and other challenges, if not mitigated, may have resulted in test cancellation. Ares I-X succeeded because the mission was founded on carefully derived objectives, led by decisive and flexible management, implemented by an exceptionally talented and dedicated workforce, and supported by a thorough independent review team. Other major success factors include the use of proven heritage hardware, a robust System Integration Laboratory, multi-NASA center and contractor team, concurrent operations, efficient vehicle assembly, effective risk management, and decentralized element development with a centralized control board. Ares I-X was a technically complex test that required creative thinking, risk taking, and a passion to succeed.

Askins, Bruce↗

Fluid Acquisition and Resupply Experiments on Space Shuttle Flights STS-53 and STS-57

The Fluid Acquisition and Resupply Experiment (FARE) program, managed by the Marshall Space Flight Center Space Propulsion Branch with Martin Marietta Civil Space and Communications as the contractor, consisted of two flights designated FARE I and FARE II. FARE I flew in December 1992 on STS-53 with a screen channel liquid acquisition device (LAD) and FARE II flew in June 1993 on STS-57 with a vane-type LAD. Thus, the FARE I and II flights represent the two basic LAD categories usually considered for in-space fluid management. Although both LAD types have been used extensively, the usefulness of the on-orbit data has been constrained by the lack of experimentation beyond predicted performance limits, including both propellant fill and expulsion. Therefore, the FARE tests were designed to obtain data that would satisfy two primary objectives: (1) Demonstrate the performance of the two types of LADs, screen channel and vane, and (2) support the anchoring of analytical models. Both flights were considered highly successful in meeting these two primary objectives.

S M Dominick↗

Lessons Learned in Engineering

This Contractor Report (CR) is a compilation of Lessons Learned in approximately 55 years of engineering experience by each James C. Blair, Robert S. Ryan, and Luke A. Schutzenhofer. The lessons are the basis of a course on Lessons Learned that has been taught at Marshall Space Flight Center. The lessons are drawn from NASA space projects and are characterized in terms of generic lessons learned from the project experience, which are further distilled into overarching principles that can be applied to future projects. Included are discussions of the overarching principles followed by a listing of the lessons associated with that principle. The lesson with sub-lessons are stated along with a listing of the project problems the lesson is drawn from, then each problem is illustrated and discussed, with conclusions drawn in terms of Lessons Learned. The purpose of this CR is to provide principles learned from past aerospace experience to help achieve greater success in future programs, and identify application of these principles to space systems design. The problems experienced provide insight into the engineering process and are examples of the subtleties one experiences performing engineering design, manufacturing, and operations.

Blair, J. C.↗

Lessons Learned in Engineering

This Contractor Report (CR) is a compilation of Lessons Learned in approximately 55 years of engineering experience by each James C. Blair, Robert S. Ryan, and Luke A. Schutzenhofer. The lessons are the basis of a course on Lessons Learned that has been taught at Marshall Space Flight Center. The lessons are drawn from NASA space projects and are characterized in terms of generic lessons learned from the project experience, which are further distilled into overarching principles that can be applied to future projects. Included are discussions of the overarching principles followed by a listing of the lessons associated with that principle. The lesson with sub-lessons are stated along with a listing of the project problems the lesson is drawn from, then each problem is illustrated and discussed, with conclusions drawn in terms of Lessons Learned. The purpose of this CR is to provide principles learned from past aerospace experience to help achieve greater success in future programs, and identify application of these principles to space systems design. The problems experienced provide insight into the engineering process and are examples of the subtleties one experiences performing engineering design, manufacturing, and operations. The supplemental CD contains accompanying PowerPoint presentations.

Blair, James C.↗

Structural Verification of the First Orbital Wonder of the World - The Structural Testing and Analysis of the International Space Station (ISS)

The International Space Station (ISS) can be considered one of the structural engineering wonders of the world. On par with the World Trade Center, the Colossus of Rhodes, the Statue of Liberty, the Great Pyramids, the Petronas towers and the Burj Khalifa skyscraper of Dubai, the ambition and scope of the ISS structural design, verification and assembly effort is a truly global success story. With its on-orbit life projected to be from its beginning in 1998 to the year 2020 (and perhaps beyond), all of those who participated in its development can consider themselves part of an historic engineering achievement representing all of humanity. The structural design and verification of the ISS could be the subject of many scholarly papers. Several papers have been written on the structural dynamic characterization of the ISS once it was assembled on-orbit [1], but the ground-based activities required to assure structural integrity and structural life of the individual elements from delivery to orbit through assembly and planned on-orbit operations have never been totally summarized. This paper is intended to give the reader an overview of some of the key decisions made during the structural verification planning for the elements of the U.S. On-Orbit Segment (USOS) as well as to summarize the many structural tests and structural analyses that were performed on its major elements. An effort is made for this paper to be summarily comprehensive, but as with all knowledge capture efforts of this kind, there are bound to be errors of omission. Should the reader discover any of these, please feel free to contact the principal author. The ISS (Figure 1) is composed of pre-integrated truss segments and pressurized elements supplied by NASA, the Russian Federal Space Agency (RSA), the European Space Agency (ESA) and the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA). Each of these elements was delivered to orbit by a launch vehicle and connected to one another either robotically or autonomously. The primary structure of each element was assembled and verified by teams of responsible structural engineers within and among their respective agencies and agency contractors.

Zipay, John J.↗

NASA TEERM Hexavalent Chrome Alternatives Projects

The overall objective of the Hex Chrome Free Coatings for Electronics project is to evaluate and test pretreatment coating systems not containing hexavalent chrome in avionics and electronics housing applications. This objective will be accomplished by testing strong performing coating systems from prior NASA and DoD testing or new coating systems as determined by the stakeholders. The technical stakeholders have agreed that this protocol will focus specifically on Class 3 coatings. Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), depots, and support contractors have to be prepared to deal with an electronics supply chain that increasingly provides parts with lead-free finishes, some labeled no differently and intermingled with their SnPb counterparts. Allowance of lead-free components presents one of the greatest risks to the reliability of military and aerospace electronics. The introduction of components with lead-free terminations, termination finishes, or circuit boards presents a host of concerns to customers, suppliers, and maintainers of aerospace and military electronic systems such as: 1. Electrical shorting due to tin whiskers 2. Incompatibility of lead-free processes and parameters (including higher melting points of lead-free alloys) with other materials in the system 3. Unknown material properties and incompatibilities that could reduce solder joint reliability

Kessel, Kurt R.↗

History of Reliability and Quality Assurance at Kennedy Space Center

This Kennedy Historical Document (KHD) provides a unique historical perspective of the organizational and functional responsibilities for the manned and un-manned programs at Kennedy Space Center, Florida. As systems become more complex and hazardous, the attention to detailed planning and execution continues to be a challenge. The need for a robust reliability and quality assurance program will always be a necessity to ensure mission success. As new space missions are defined and technology allows for continued access to space, these programs cannot be compromised. The organizational structure that has provided the reliability and quality assurance functions for both the manned and unmanned programs has seen many changes since the first group came to Florida in the 1950's. The roles of government and contractor personnel have changed with each program and organizational alignment has changed based on that responsibility. The organizational alignment of the personnel performing these functions must ensure independent assessment of the processes.

Childers, Frank M.↗

Range Information Systems Management (RISM) Phase 1 Report

RISM investigated alternative approaches, technologies, and communication network architectures to facilitate building the Spaceports and Ranges of the future. RISM started by document most existing US ranges and their capabilities. In parallel, RISM obtained inputs from the following: 1) NASA and NASA-contractor engineers and managers, and; 2) Aerospace leaders from Government, Academia, and Industry, participating through the Space Based Range Distributed System Working Group (SBRDSWG), many of whom are also; 3) Members of the Advanced Range Technology Working Group (ARTWG) subgroups, and; 4) Members of the Advanced Spaceport Technology Working Group (ASTWG). These diverse inputs helped to envision advanced technologies for implementing future Ranges and Range systems that builds on today s cabled and wireless legacy infrastructures while seamlessly integrating both today s emerging and tomorrow s building-block communication techniques. The fundamental key is to envision a transition to a Space Based Range Distributed Subsystem. The enabling concept is to identify the specific needs of Range users that can be solved through applying emerging communication tech

Bastin, Gary L.↗

Inside NanoSail-D: A Tiny Satellite with Big Ideas

"Small But Mighty" certainly describes the NanoSail-D experiment and mission. Its unique goals and designs were simple, but the implications of this technology are far reaching. From a tiny 3U CubeSat, NanoSail-D deployed a 10 square meter solar sail. This was the first sail vehicle to orbit the earth and was only the second time a sail was unfurled in space. The NanoSail-D team included: two NASA centers, Marshall and Ames, the universities of Alabama in Huntsville and Santa Clara in California, the Air Force Research Laboratory and many contractors including NeXolve, Gray Research and several others. The collaborative nature was imperative to the success of this project. In addition, the Army Space and Missile Defense Command, the Von Braun Center for Science and Innovation and Dynetics Inc. jointly sponsored the NanoSail-D project. This paper presents in-depth insight into the NanoSail-D development. Its design was a combination of left over space hardware coupled with cutting edge technology. Since this NanoSail-D mission was different from the first, several modifications were necessary for the second NanoSail-D unit. Unforeseen problems arose during refurbishment of the second unit and the team had to overcome these obstacles. Simple interfaces, clear responsibilities and division of effort allowed the team members to work independently on the common goal. This endeavor formed working relationships lasting well beyond the end of this mission. NanoSail-D pushed the technology envelop with future applications for all classes of satellites. NanoSail-D is truly a small but mighty satellite, which may cast a very big shadow for years to come.

Alhorn, Dean C.↗

Development of Space Shuttle Rescue and Recovery Operations

As the first Space Shuttle launch was still in our future, many from NASA, the Department of Defense (DoD) and NASA contractors were busy planning for not only a nominal launch and return, but contingency operations at the launch pad and landing sites. Prior to the first launch, detailed coordination, planning and simulations were conducted at all three locations and internal rescue procedures were taught at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Later in the Program, the Transoceanic Abort Landing (TAL) sites were added in Europe and Africa. For the 51L mission a new TAL site was brought on line in Morocco. However, upon launch, the Shuttle Program experienced it's first lost. During the following months a complete review of all contingency operations (launch and landing) was completed. Many enhancements were made based on the reviews following. A Mode VIII water rescue was developed for NASA by the DoD before the STS-26 launch. Different concepts were explored and being debated by NASA. Training of the contingency forces was required before final decisions were made forcing the teaching of two different sets of procedures. To assist with training, a video was developed for the fire/crash/rescue personnel. This accompanied the detailed extraction procedures that were developed by a combination of KSC and DoD firemen. Training for the fire/crash/rescue personnel at Vandenberg AFB was also being planned before the accident happen. The fire/crash/rescue mockup that was being built at Chanute AFB was diverted to Edwards AFB. Educational Objectives: With the emphasis on Commercial Crew Programs for Space flight it is important that all involved understand what is required to prepare for contingencies. Cost effective means of being prepared for contingencies are needed. Questions: 1. When should planning for nominal and contingency operations begin? 2. What type of training aids are needed for contingency operations? 3. Who were the major contributors to Shuttle contingency operations?

Chandler, Michael↗

NASA-DoD Lead-Free Electronics Project

Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs). depots. and support contractors have to be prepared to deal with an electronics supply chain thaI increasingly provides parts with lead-free finishes. some labeled no differently and intenningled with their SnPb counterparts. Allowance oflead-free components presents one of the greatest risks to the reliability of military and aerospace electronics. The introduction of components with lead-free lenninations, tennination finishes, or circuit boards presents a host of concerns to customers. suppliers, and maintainers of aerospace and military electronic systems such as: 1. Electrical shorting due to tin whiskers; 2. Incompatibility oflead-free processes and parameters (including higher melting points of lead-free alloys) with other materials in the system; and 3. Unknown material properties and incompatibilities that could reduce solder joint re liability.

Kessel, Kurt↗

IT Project Management and Systems Engineering Internship

In the summer of 2009 I had the privilege of participating in the NASA INSPIRE program and during the summer of 2010 I was hired by ASRC Aerospace, a NASA contractor on the USTDC contract, as an Engineering Aide. These experiences combined inspired me to pursue a career in engineering and a goal to work as a NASA engineer and astronaut.

Cardamone, Lauren↗

Engineering the System and Technical Integration

Approximately 80% of the problems encountered in aerospace systems have been due to a breakdown in technical integration and/or systems engineering. One of the major challenges we face in designing, building, and operating space systems is: how is adequate integration achieved for the systems various functions, parts, and infrastructure? This Contractor Report (CR) deals with part of the problem of how we engineer the total system in order to achieve the best balanced design. We will discuss a key aspect of this question - the principle of Technical Integration and its components, along with management and decision making. The CR will first provide an introduction with a discussion of the Challenges in Space System Design and meeting the challenges. Next is an overview of Engineering the System including Technical Integration. Engineering the System is expanded to include key aspects of the Design Process, Lifecycle Considerations, etc. The basic information and figures used in this CR were presented in a NASA training program for Program and Project Managers Development (PPMD) in classes at Georgia Tech and at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). Many of the principles and illustrations are extracted from the courses we teach for MSFC.

Blair, J. C.↗

Shaping NASA's Kennedy Space Center Safety for the Future

With the completion of the Space Shuttle Program, the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) safety function will be required to evolve beyond the single launch vehicle launch site focus that has held prominence for almost fifty years. This paper will discuss how that evolution is taking place. Specifically, we will discuss the future of safety as it relates to a site that will have multiple, very disparate, functions. These functions will include new business; KSC facilities not under the control of NASA; traditional payload and launch vehicle processing; and, operations conducted by NASA personnel, NASA contractors or a combination of both. A key element in this process is the adaptation of the current KSC set of safety requirements into a multi-faceted set that can address each of the functions above, while maintaining our world class safety environment. One of the biggest challenges that will be addressed is how to protect our personnel and property without dictating how other Non-NASA organizations protect their own employees and property. The past history of KSC Safety will be described and how the lessons learned from previous programs will be applied to the future. The lessons learned from this process will also be discussed as information for other locations that may undergo such a transformation.

Kirkpatrick, Paul↗

Structural Design Requirements and Factors of Safety for Spaceflight Hardware: For Human Spaceflight

This document establishes the structural requirements for human-rated spaceflight hardware including launch vehicles, spacecraft and payloads. These requirements are applicable to Government Furnished Equipment activities as well as all related contractor, subcontractor and commercial efforts. These requirements are not imposed on systems other than human-rated spacecraft, such as ground test articles, but may be tailored for use in specific cases where it is prudent to do so such as for personnel safety or when assets are at risk. The requirements in this document are focused on design rather than verification. Implementation of the requirements is expected to be described in a Structural Verification Plan (SVP), which should describe the verification of each structural item for the applicable requirements. The SVP may also document unique verifications that meet or exceed these requirements with NASA Technical Authority approval.

Bernstein, Karen S.↗

GSFC Supplier Surveillance

Topics covered include: Develop Program/Project Quality Assurance Surveillance Plans The work activities performed by the developer and/or his suppliers are subject to evaluation and audit by government-designated representatives. CSO supports project by selecting on-site supplier representative s by one of several methods: (1) a Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) person via a Letter Of Delegation (LOD), (2) an independent assurance contractor (IAC) via a contract Audits, Assessments, and Assurance (A3) Contract Code 300 Mission Assurance Support Contract (MASC)

Kelly, Michael P.↗

Thermal Integration of a Liquid Acquisition Device into a Cryogenic Feed System

Primary objectives of this effort were to define the following: (1) Approaches for quantification of the accumulation of thermal energy within a capillary screen liquid acquisition device (LAD) for a lunar lander upper stage during periods of up to 210 days on the lunar surface, (2) techniques for mitigating heat entrapment, and (3) perform initial testing, data evaluation. The technical effort was divided into the following categories: (1) Detailed thermal modeling of the LAD/feed system interactions using both COMSOL computational fluid device and standard codes, (2) FLOW-3D modeling of bulk liquid to provide interfacing conditions for the LAD thermal modeling, (3) condensation conditioning of capillary screens to stabilize surface tension retention capability, and (4) subscale testing of an integrated LAD/feed system. Substantial progress was achieved in the following technical areas: (1) Thermal modeling and experimental approaches for evaluating integrated cryogen LAD/feed systems, at both the system and component levels, (2) reduced gravity pressure control analyses, (3) analytical modeling and testing for capillary screen conditioning using condensation and wicking, and (4) development of rapid turnaround testing techniques for evaluating LAD/feed system thermal and fluid integration. A comprehensive effort, participants included a diverse cross section of representatives from academia, contractors, and multiple Marshall Space Flight Center organizations.

Hastings, L. J.↗