SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Risk Management Space Projects”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 145 records · Page 8

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2016

Leadership Development Program Final Project

TOSC is NASA's prime contractor tasked to successfully assemble, test, and launch the EM1 spacecraft. TOSC success is highly dependent on design products from the other NASA Programs manufacturing and delivering the flight hardware; Space Launch System(SLS) and Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle(MPCV). Design products directly feed into TOSC's: Procedures, Personnel training, Hardware assembly, Software development, Integrated vehicle test and checkout, Launch. TOSC senior management recognized a significant schedule risk as these products are still being developed by the other two (2) programs; SVE and ACE positions were created.

Design products required for Engineering↗

NASA NTRS2001

Deep Space 1 Ion Engine Completed a 3-Year Journey

A xenon ion engine and power processor system, which was developed by the NASA Glenn Research Center in partnership with the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and Boeing Electron Dynamic Devices, completed nearly 3 years of operation aboard the Deep Space 1 spacecraft. The 2.3-kW ion engine, which provided primary propulsion and two-axis attitude control, thrusted for more than 16,000 hr and consumed more than 70 kg of xenon propellant. The Deep Space 1 spacecraft was launched on October 24, 1998, to validate 12 futuristic technologies, including the ion-propulsion system. After the technology validation process was successfully completed, the Deep Space 1 spacecraft flew by the small asteroid Braille on July 29, 1999. The final objective of this mission was to encounter the active comet Borrelly, which is about 6 miles long. The ion engine was on a thrusting schedule to navigate the Deep Space 1 spacecraft to within 1400 miles of the comet. Since the hydrazine used for spacecraft attitude control was in short supply, the ion engine also provided two-axis attitude control to conserve the hydrazine supply for the Borrelly encounter. The comet encounter took place on September 22, 2001. Dr. Marc Rayman, project manager of Deep Space 1 at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory said, "Deep Space 1 plunged into the heart of the comet Borrelly and has lived to tell every detail of its spinetingling adventure! The images are even better than the impressive images of comet Halley taken by Europe's Giotto spacecraft in 1986." The Deep Space 1 mission, which successfully tested the 12 high-risk, advanced technologies and captured the best images ever taken of a comet, was voluntarily terminated on December 18, 2001. The successful demonstration of the 2-kW-class ion propulsion system technology is now providing mission planners with off-the-shelf flight hardware. Higher power, next generation ion propulsion systems are being developed for large flagship missions, such as outer planet explorers and sample-return missions.

Sovey, James S.↗

NASA NTRS2012

EPOXI and Stardust NExT: The Management Challenges of Two Comet Flybys in Three Months

The EPOXI and Stardust NExT missions were missions of opportunity utilizing the Deep Impact and Stardust spacecraft, respectively. These new missions took advantage of the cost savings of utilizing spacecraft that were already flying for new science investigations. Both were retargeted to fly by an additional comet. EPOXI visited Hartley 2, significantly smaller than the other Jupiter family comets visited previously. Stardust NExT flew by Tempel 1, providing a second look at the comet previously studied by Deep Impact in 2005. Both projects were part of NASA's Discovery Program. In order to further save costs, the projects were combined into a single project office at JPL. This provided some efficiencies due to the similarity of the missions, but having the flybys space only three months apart posed challenges for the project management team to ensure each project was ready for its critical event and ensuring each received the proper support from the management team. The project office relied on an integrated calendar for tracking and scheduling meetings, reviews, and other key events. The project management team also coordinated their availability for both projects to maintain involvement with each team to ensure effective risk identification and management.

NExT (New Exploration of Tempel 1)↗

NASA NTRS2014

Passive Thermal Design Approach for the Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) Testbed Experiment on the International Space Station (ISS)

The Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) Program Office at NASA Headquarters oversees all of NASAs space communications activities. SCaN manages and directs the ground-based facilities and services provided by the Deep Space Network (DSN), Near Earth Network (NEN), and the Space Network (SN). Through the SCaN Program Office, NASA GRC developed a Software Defined Radio (SDR) testbed experiment (SCaN testbed experiment) for use on the International Space Station (ISS). It is comprised of three different SDR radios, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) radio, Harris Corporation radio, and the General Dynamics Corporation radio. The SCaN testbed experiment provides an on-orbit, adaptable, SDR Space Telecommunications Radio System (STRS) - based facility to conduct a suite of experiments to advance the Software Defined Radio, Space Telecommunications Radio Systems (STRS) standards, reduce risk (Technology Readiness Level (TRL) advancement) for candidate Constellation future space flight hardware software, and demonstrate space communication links critical to future NASA exploration missions. The SCaN testbed project provides NASA, industry, other Government agencies, and academic partners the opportunity to develop and field communications, navigation, and networking technologies in the laboratory and space environment based on reconfigurable, software defined radio platforms and the STRS Architecture.The SCaN testbed is resident on the P3 Express Logistics Carrier (ELC) on the exterior truss of the International Space Station (ISS). The SCaN testbed payload launched on the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV) and was installed on the ISS P3 ELC located on the inboard RAM P3 site. The daily operations and testing are managed out of NASA GRC in the Telescience Support Center (TSC).

Passive Thermal Design↗

NASA NTRS2022

Recommendations on the Use of Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts for NASA Missions - Phase II

This assessment had two Phases. Phase I captured NASA Centers’ current practices for commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts 1 used in spaceflight systems and ground support equipment (available at https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205011579) [ref. 1]. The Phase II report provides guidance for selecting and using COTS parts in NASA missions. The approaches proposed in this report differ from current agency practices. This top-level executive summary touches on these new approaches for using COTS parts but does not provide the detailed information that is critical in understanding the rationale behind these new approaches. Readers will need to read the entire report to gain full understanding and effectively use the recommendations herein. NASA’s historical approach to selecting and applying parts has been to define certain parts, primarily specific classes of military specification (MIL-SPEC) parts, as “standard”, leaving all others, including COTS parts, as nonstandard. Standard parts typically are used without further testing (“use-as-is”). Nonstandard parts are subjected to initial screening and subsequent lot acceptance testing of representative samples from each procured lot per MIL-SPEC or similar requirements. Decades later, top-tier commercial part manufacturers have evolved significant manufacturing, statistical control, and technological improvements that can now provide parts as reliable or more reliable than MIL-SPEC parts, when used within their datasheet limits. Concurrently, the space science and exploration community’s needs demand technological advances unavailable with MIL-SPEC parts. This ongoing change necessitates using COTS parts for space missions. Properly selected COTS parts in appropriate applications can offer performance and supply availability advantages compared to MIL-SPEC parts. Their utility and demonstrated reliability result from large volumes and automated production and testing processes. However, careful review and a thorough understanding of their specifications (i.e., datasheet limitations) is needed, and verifying that manufacturer specifications and reliability meet space hardware application needs are necessary. This report recommends MIL-SPEC screening and non-radiation-related lot acceptance testing be reduced or eliminated in cases where evidence of sufficient quality and reliability exists for COTS parts. The extent of NASA's insight into COTS manufacturers and the amount and nature of the needed evidence will differ by mission and will likely be driven by a mission's resources and associated risk posture. To facilitate this goal, two new terminologies have been defined and described: “Industry Leading Parts Manufacturer (ILPM)” and “Established COTS parts.” An ILPM is a COTS manufacturer that produces high quality and reliable parts. Some parts produced by ILPMs, defined as Established COTS parts, do not need any additional MIL-SPEC or NASA screening and lot acceptance testing to be used in space applications. This report provides guidance for selecting, procuring, and applying COTS parts and for performing part-, board-, and system-level COTS parts verification. The recommendation to select Established COTS parts from ILPMs will assure those COTS parts will have comparable quality to corresponding MIL-SPEC parts. Selecting, applying, and verifying Established COTS parts from ILPMs requires a holistic team approach, engaging parts engineers, circuit designers, quality, reliability, and systems engineers, procurement specialists, radiation specialists, avionics leads, and program/project managers. A mission-specific approach tailored to a project’s Mission, Environment, Applications and Lifetime (MEAL) [ref. 2] requirements should be developed and approved by program/project managers. Any associated risks should be clearly identified, quantified, mitigated, and/or accepted. Different approaches are recommended according to program/project Risk Classes A, B, C, and D [ref. 3] and human-rated missions [ref. 4]: 1. Recommend Classes A and B and human-rated missions consider a “MIL-SPEC parts- based design” approach. ”MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach is one in which most parts are MIL-SPEC parts and Established COTS parts from ILPMs are used only when an equivalent MIL-SPEC part does not meet functional or size, weight, and power (SWaP) or performance requirements, or is not available. 2. Recommend Classes D and Sub-D missions consider a “System of COTS” approach. “System of COTS” approach is one which most parts are Established COTS parts from ILPMs. 3. Recommend Class C missions determine which approach is the best for their projects; that is, use either a “MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach, “System of COTS” approach, or a combined approach utilizing elements of both. This report intends to provide guidance in using COTS parts for NASA missions with risk classifications of A through D and human-rated missions; but it does not address the costs of using COTS parts. Costs of using COTS parts in different NASA mission classes can vary significantly even if the same parts are used in different risk postures, due to differing verification levels needed. The guidance does not distinguish between critical or non-critical systems, and a given project will need to apply the appropriate guidance based on their risk posture. The intended audience of this report are NASA personnel and commercial practitioners who support NASA’s spaceflight missions, including spaceflight program or project managers, parts engineers, parts manufacturers, radiation engineers, avionics engineers, system engineers, circuit design engineers, reliability engineers, safety and mission assurance (SMA) personnel, and parts procurement specialists. The NEPP Program will perform a pathfinder study to explore implementing the guidance in this NESC report. An ILPM verification process is not the same as conventional vendor qualification processes performed according to military standards and specifications. This NESC report intends to provide guidance in utilizing available parts data from ILPM manufacturers for parts assurance assessments needed for NASA missions. The report also captured the current practices from DoD and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in Section 10. Note each DoD and FAA report was provided by the corresponding agencies regarding their practices, which are independent from the NESC recommendations in the report.

Commercial-Off-The-Shelf↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessing the Needs of NASA's Near Real-Time Earth Observation Products

"The 2017-2027 Decadal Survey for Earth Science and Applications from Space stated that NASA's Earth Science with planned implementation of applications provides sustained earth observations for societal benefits [1]. The Decadal Survey indicated that data latency is invaluable for time-sensitive applications including disaster risk reduction, wildland fire carbon emissions quantification, real-time measurements of the state of the hydrologic systems and many more. Data latency refers to the time between earth observation and data products available to users. During the past 13 years, NASA's Land, Atmosphere Near Real-Time Capability for Earth Observing Systems (LANCE) continues to provide free access to earth observation products that are made available much quicker than routine processing allows. The latency of most LANCE data products is Near Real-time (NRT) which is defined as less than three hours from satellite observations [2]. LANCE is managed by the Earth Science Data and Information System (ESDIS) Project at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center [3], and a User Working Group (UWG) is responsible for providing guidance to LANCE. LANCE data are used by direct users and brokers who add value to the data [4]. NASA Earth Applied Sciences Program (ASP) is one of the primary users of LANCE, which collaborates with partner organizations and provides support to scientists to solve problems in applications of earth observations. ASP promotes the use of LANCE NRT data products to demonstrate applications in decision making, facilitates end-user feedback to the science team to improve data products, and provides information on future demands for research. LANCE supports applications that need a rapid response including detecting wildland fires and volcanic eruptions, tracking smoke, ash and dust plumes, monitoring air quality and tracking extreme weather events such as hurricanes, landslides, and floods. To gather feedback regarding the availability, accessibility and actionability of NASA's NRT data products for societal benefit, three surveys and a few discussions with experts involved in the topic within ASP were conducted from the perspective of users. Feedback has been collected from users who are interested in using low latency NASA data within application communities of agriculture, disasters, water resources, health and air quality, ecological conservation, wildland fires and capacity building. Analysis-ready NRT data products in a variety of formats have been mentioned many times in the collected feedback, especially for applied users with little to no experience using research-grade earth observation products. Users prefer to have products that can be easily integrated into their existing workflows and take their analysis to the data. HDF5 is a commonly used data format for research, but typically requires some conversion to a more friendly format for applications and regular use in decision-making. Users prefer the GeoTIFF data format that can be directly ingested into a GIS mapping software and platform for data analysis and visualization. For example, LANCE’s fire, flood, SO2 and Black Marble Nighttime Blue/Yellow Composite data products have been integrated into NASA Disasters Mapping Portal, which is an GIS-based open data portal, for users in the disaster management community. There are 291 LANCE NRT layers available through GIBS and Worldview, where users can download a snapshot in GeoTIFF format. Operational users expect data to be processed as close to the user as possible. The collected feedback indicates that LANCE fire products within 3 hours latency would meet the needs of the wildland fire community. The ideal latency for volcanic application is 10-15 minutes. Users in Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers (VAAC) reported that the first forecast volcanic product should be issued within 75 minutes from the volcano eruption [5]. Overall, for disaster applications, data latency within 3 hours is useful while latency greater than 12 hours is not timely enough for operational use. Capacity building and training are critical for users to be able to access, interpret and use data products and tools for their decision making, especially for applied users with limited experience using earth observation products. LANCE data products have been used in a number of capacity building projects domestically and internationally [6]. As LANCE continues to bring new products into the system, users request training to utilize LANCE new and upcoming data products and capabilities in their applications. Due to the limitation of bandwidth and downstream flow paths, users in some developing countries need tools to select and download data for a specific area of interest instead of bulk downloads. The collected feedback also shows the lack of available SAR satellite low latency data products. The advantages of SAR to monitor conditions and changes on the ground through darkness, clouds, volcanic ash, and other atmospheric conditions, are appealing to low latency users. For example, terabytes of low latency but cloudy optical images are not helpful in rapidly identifying the extent of flood or fire impacts. LANCE could be complemented with low latency measurements via the upcoming NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR) mission [7]. Requests for higher spatial resolution products are expressed. A user from the wildland fire management community reported that products with 30-m spatial resolution could be used to detect small fires. The 30-m Landsat OLI fire data is now part of NASA’s Fire Information for Resource Management System (FIRMS) US/Canada [8]. Within the open and free NASA resources, LANCE disseminates NRT data products in a manner that allows them to be accessible and understandable to both scientific and applied users. In many application areas, latency plays an important or even decisive role where low latency earth observations help people to observe areas of interest, detect and track changes in the environment and make timely decisions. NASA’s Earth Applied Sciences Program promotes the use of LANCE NRT products and builds a bridge between application users and research teams. The collected feedback indicates data latency within 3 hours is useful for most of the applications, and shows the needs of user-friendly, analysis-ready products, and requests training on LANCE’s new and upcoming data products. User feedback has been provided to LANCE UWG for guidance and recommendations, and for translating findings into something actionable.

Tian Yao↗

NASA NTRS2001

Methodology Development for Assessment of Spaceport Technology Returns and Risks

As part of Kennedy Space Center's (KSC's) challenge to open the space frontier, new spaceport technologies must be developed, matured and successfully transitioned to operational systems. R&D investment decisions can be considered from multiple perspectives. Near mid and far term technology horizons must be understood. Because a multitude of technology investment opportunities are available, we must identify choices that promise the greatest likelihood of significant lifecycle At the same time, the costs and risks of any choice must be well understood and balanced against its potential returns The problem is not one of simply rank- ordering projects in terms of their desirability. KSC wants to determine a portfolio of projects that simultaneously satisfies multiple goals, such as getting the biggest bang for the buck, supporting projects that may be too risky for private funding, staying within annual budget cycles without foregoing the requirements of a long term technology vision, and ensuring the development of a diversity of technologies that, support the variety of operational functions involved in space transportation. This work aims to assist in the development of in methods and techniques that support strategic technology investment decisions and ease the process of determining an optimal portfolio of spaceport R&D investments. Available literature on risks and returns to R&D is reviewed and most useful pieces are brought to the attention of the Spaceport Technology Development Office (STDO). KSC's current project management procedures are reviewed. It is found that the "one size fits all" nature of KSC's existing procedures and project selection criteria is not conducive to prudent decision-making. Directions for improving KSC's - procedures and criteria are outlined. With help of a contractor, STDO is currently developing a tool, named Change Management Analysis Tool (CMAT)/ Portfolio Analysis Tool (PAT), to assist KSC's R&D portfolio determination. A critical review of CMAT/PAT is undertaken. Directions for the improvement of this tool are provided. STDO and KSC intend to follow up on many, if not all, of the recommendations provided.

Joglekar, Prafulla↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Building Supply Chain Visibility for Risk Management: Illuminating the COVID-19 Pandemic Impact Upon NASA Suppliers

NASA mission projects rely upon global supply chains subject to an array of risks that threaten to disrupt or deny the timely, affordable provision of products and services as required for mission success. Visibility into these supply chains is key to the management of risks, such as those stemming from the coronavirus pandemic and its associated effects upon suppliers. Accordingly, the Supplier Research and Analysis (SRA) Program within Goddard Space Flight Center’s Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA) Directorate produced the COVID-19 pandemic/NASA suppliers dashboard as part of the NASA Meta Information System. The dashboard provides visibility and situational awareness to aid risk assessment, planning and decision-making over the course of the pandemic recovery phase. The approach of integrating data and information into visual dashboard displays has also been employed by the SRA Program to focus on specific risks pertaining to foreign-based suppliers. This webinar is presented by the NASA Office of SMA and its Supply Chain Risk Management Program, in collaboration with the NASA Safety Center and Goddard’s SMA Directorate.

supplier research and analysis, supply chain risk ↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An in-Time Aviation Safety Management System Concept of Operations and Modernization of the National Airspace System

The National Airspace System (NAS) is growing in complexity of aircraft, missions, and operations. In response, many organizations have published papers and concepts of operations (ConOps) for new and enhanced safety systems. The National Academies’ vision for an In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) is integral to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) modernization efforts. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) System-Wide Safety (SWS) project is conducting safety research, exploring solutions, and defining the safety needs of future missions, such as Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) and autonomous aircraft operating in a more connected, flexible, and dynamic airspace. IASMS enables and provides a path for bringing FAA’s operational vision to fruition through increasingly automated safety systems that integrate services, functions, and capabilities (SFCs). These SFCs provide the necessary responsiveness to monitor, assess, and mitigate known hazards and emergent risks. This paper describes how safety in today’s air transportation system will need to evolve, identifies key points regarding in-time safety, and explores the criticality of IASMS in the future NAS.

IASMS↗

NASA NTRS2014

Behavioral Health and Performance at NASA JSC: Recent Successes and Future Plan for BHP Research and Operations

The Behavioral Health and Performance discipline at NASA Johnson Space Center is organized into two distinct Divisions (Biomedical Research and Environmental Science Division and Space and Clinical Operations Division) but is integrated and interrelated in its day‐to‐day work. Ongoing operations supporting NASA's spaceflight goals benefit from the research portfolios that address risks to mission success. Similarly, these research portfolios are informed by operations to ensure investigations stay relevant given the dynamic environment of spaceflight. There are many success stories that can be presented where initial work begun as a BHP Research project, and funded through the Human Research Program, was fully implemented in operations or addressed an operational need. Examples include improving effectiveness of the debriefings used within Mission Control by the Mission Operations Directorate and countermeasures for fatigue management. There is also ongoing collaboration with research and operations for developing selection methods for future generation astronauts, and to enhance and inform the current family support function. The objective of this panel is to provide examples of recent success stories, describe areas where close collaboration is benefitting ongoing research and operations, and summarize how this will come together as NASA plans for the one year ISS mission - a unique opportunity for both BHP operations and research to learn more about preparing and supporting crewmembers for extended missions in space. The proposed panel will be comprised of six presentations, each describing a unique aspect of research or operations and the benefits to current and future spaceflight.

Leveton, L. B.↗

NASA NTRS2020

History and Logic Model NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Instrument and Payload Systems Engineering Technical Performance Study

Historically, some NASA missions have exceeded schedule and cost commitments. Studies suggest technical performance is a contributor. The 1980 NASA Project Management Study concluded, "one of the most significant contributors to cost and schedule growth is inadequate definition of technical and management aspects of a program..." (as cited in GAO/NSIAD-93-97, p. 11). The 1991 NASA Roles and Missions Report identified a "need for increased emphasis on technological readiness and requirements on the front end of a program" (as cited in GAO/NSIAD-93-97, p. 11). The 1992 NASA Program Costs Report stated that NASA officials identified, among other things, "insufficient definition studies... [and] program redesigns and technical complexities" as reasons for cost and schedule overruns (GAO/NSAID-93-97, p. 11). The 2002 Task Force on Acquisition of National Security Space Programs found "requirements definition and control issues, unhealthy cost bias in proposal evaluation, widespread lack of budget reserves required to implement high risk programs on schedule, and an overall underappreciation of the importance of appropriately staffed and trained system engineering staff to manage the technologically demanding and unique aspects of space programs" (DoD, 2003, p.i.) In 2007, The NASA Office of the Chief Engineer chartered the NASA Instrument Capability Study (NICS) “to determine whether NASA instrument developers are facing challenges that impact the capability to design and build quality instruments or whether there are flaws in the acquisition strategy evidenced by schedule delays, cost overruns, and increased technical risk via design deficiencies. The... team was also chartered to determine if occurrences [are]... isolated cases or if there are generic issues... If the issues [are] found to be generic, the team [is] to offer solutions to recover such capability" (NICS Report, 2008, p. vi). The 2008 NICS Report, led by Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), identified challenges to instrument technical performance consistent with findings from previous reports. In 2017, the Instrument Project Division (IPD) Implementation Study was initiated to determine if there was a change in meeting schedule and cost commitments after implementing certain NICS recommendations. In 2018, the Instrument Technical Performance Study was initiated to determine the current state of Instrument Technical Performance in the GSFC Payload & Instrument Systems Engineering Branch. The purpose of the combined studies is to answer the question, "Is there a relationship between meeting NASA scientific instrument technical success and meeting schedule and cost commitments? If yes, what is the relationship?" References Department of Defense Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics. (2003). The report of the defense science board/ air force scientific advisory board joint task force on acquisition of national security space programs. Washington DC. Government Accounting Office. (1992). NASA program costs: Space missions require substantially more funding than initially estimated. GAO/NSIAD-93-97. Washington DC. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency, Department of Defense. (2008). The NASA instrument capability study final report. NP-2008-11-058-GSFC. Washington DC.

Robbins, Geraldine↗

NASA NTRS1991

Lessons learned from Space Shuttle flight software and Mission Control software

The techniques utilized by NASA to manage risk in the development and operations of flight software and Mission Control Center software for the Space Shuttle are reviewed. Particular attention is given to independent software in the backup flight system, structured requirements and design techniques, multiple levels of testing in development and production, independent testing following production, and independence of development and production, and the Mission Control Center model for Real Time Data System project.

Muratore, John F.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Ares Launch Vehicles Overview

Since 2005, the Ares Projects have been building the nation s next generation of crew and cargo launch vehicles. As part of the Constellation Program, the Ares vehicles will enable astronauts in the Orion crew exploration vehicle and Altair lunar lander to reach the Moon and beyond. These vehicles draw upon hardware and experienced developed over 50 years of exploration, while also incorporating technology and management practices from today. Ares is concentrating on building the Ares I crew launch vehicle to ensure America s continued ability to send crews to the International Space Station. Progress has been made on design, fabrication, and testing for the first stage, upper stage, upper stage engine, and integrated vehicle. This presentation will provide an overview of the Ares launch vehicles architecture, milestone progress, and top project risks.

Vanhooser, Teresa↗

NASA NTRS2001

NASA Alternate Access to Station Service Concept

The evolving nature of the NASA space enterprise compels the agency to develop new and innovative space systems concepts. NASA, working with increasingly strained budgets and a declining manpower base, is attempting to transform from operational activities to procurement of commercial services. NASA's current generation reusable launch vehicle, the Shuttle, is in transition from a government owned and operated entity to a commercial venture to reduce the civil servant necessities for that program. NASA foresees its second generation launch vehicles being designed and operated by industry for commercial and government services. The "service" concept is a pioneering effort by NASA. The purpose the "service" is not only to reduce the civil servant overhead but will free up government resources for further research - and enable industry to develop a space business case so that industry can sustain itself beyond government programs. In addition, NASA desires a decreased responsibility thereby decreasing liability. The Second Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) program is implementing NASA's Space Launch Initiative (SLI) to enable industry to develop the launch vehicles of the future. The Alternate Access to Station (AAS) project office within this program is chartered with enabling industry to demonstrate an alternate access capability for the International Space Station (ISS). The project will not accomplish this by traditional government procurement methods, not by integrating the space system within the project office, or by providing the only source of business for the new capability. The project funds will ultimately be used to purchase a service to take re-supply cargo to the ISS, much the same as any business might purchase a service from FedEx to deliver a package to its customer. In the near term, the project will fund risk mitigation efforts for enabling technologies. AAS is in some ways a precursor to the 2nd Generation RLV. By accomplishing ISS resupply with existing technologies, not only will a new category of autonomous vehicles deliver cargo, but a commercial business base will be incubated that will improve the likelihood of commercial convergence with the next generation of RLVs. Traditional paradigms in government management and acquisition philosophy are being challenged in order to bring about the objective of the AAS project. The phased procurement approach is proving to be the most questionable aspect to date. This work addresses the fresh approach AAS is adopting in management and procurement through a study of the AAS history, current solutions, key technologies, procurement complications, and an incremental forward plan leading to the purchase of a service to deliver goods to ISS. Included in this work is a discussion of the Commercial Space Act of 1998 and how it affects government purchase of space launch and space vehicle services. Industry should find these topics pertinent to their current state of business.

Bailey, Michelle D.↗

NASA NTRS2002

Application of Risk Assessment Tools in the Continuous Risk Management (CRM) Process

Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is currently implementing the Continuous Risk Management (CRM) Program developed by the Carnegie Mellon University and recommended by NASA as the Risk Management (RM) implementation approach. The four most frequently used risk assessment tools in the center are: (a) Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), Hazard Analysis (HA), Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), and Probabilistic Risk Analysis (PRA). There are some guidelines for selecting the type of risk assessment tools during the project formulation phase of a project, but there is not enough guidance as to how to apply these tools in the Continuous Risk Management process (CRM). But the ways the safety and risk assessment tools are used make a significant difference in the effectiveness in the risk management function. Decisions regarding, what events are to be included in the analysis, to what level of details should the analysis be continued, make significant difference in the effectiveness of risk management program. Tools of risk analysis also depends on the phase of a project e.g. at the initial phase of a project, when not much data are available on hardware, standard FMEA cannot be applied; instead a functional FMEA may be appropriate. This study attempted to provide some directives to alleviate the difficulty in applying FTA, PRA, and FMEA in the CRM process. Hazard Analysis was not included in the scope of the study due to the short duration of the summer research project.

Paul S. Ray↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Biological Research and Space Health Enabled by Machine Learning to Support Deep Space Missions

A key science goal of the NASA “Moon to Mars” campaign is to understand how biology responds to the Lunar, Martian, and deep space environments in order to advance fundamental knowledge, reduce risk, and support safe, productive human space missions. Through the powerful emerging computer science approaches of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML), a paradigm shift has begun in biomedical science and engineered astronaut health systems, to enable Earth-independence and autonomy of mission operations. We present a decadal view of AI/ML architecture to support deep space mission goals, developed in concert with leaders in the field. We describe current AI/ML methods to support 1) fundamental biology, 2) in situ analytics, 3) high performance computing hardware, 4) automated science, 5) self-driving labs, 6) remote data management, 7) integrated real-time mission biomonitoring, and 8) a Precision Space Health system. Cutting-edge AI/ML approaches that can be integrated to support these domains include active learning, explainable AI, adaptive learning, causal inference, knowledge graphs, federated learning, transfer learning, and large language models. Finally, we present results from several current ML projects that are underway in the field to address key challenges of small sample n, high feature count, heterogeneity, and sparse data. These include 1) connecting omics data to phenotypic data using an ensemble model to infer causality of spaceflight rodent liver health disruption, 2) usage of explainable ML to interrogate the muscular underpinnings of spaceflight muscle atrophy, 3) ML models analyzing and determining directed acyclic graphs of human space health risk leveraging rodent bone datasets, 4) usage of large pre-trained models connecting biomedical knowledgebases with small spaceflight datasets to understand gene-to-gene interaction networks, and 5) a suite of benchmarked open science datasets (spaceflight mouse liver; radiation DNA damage) enabling programmers to identify the best ML algorithms to answer space biological science questions.

space biology↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Biological Research and Space Health Enabled by Machine Learning to Support Deep Space Missions

space biology↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Incorporating UAS Traffic Management into Wildland Firefighting Operations: Initial Findings of Subject Matter Expert Interviews

Uncrewed Aircraft Systems (UASs) are being utilized throughout the disaster and emergency response domain, including in wildland firefighting operations. While UASs can offer safety benefits in comparison to crewed aircraft, such as removing the human pilot from the vehicle so that they are not exposed to the same risks and the ability to operate in low-visibility conditions, they are not without tradeoffs. For example, it can be challenging for UAS pilots (UASPs) to build situation awareness of the airspace in which their UAS is operating. In order to address some of the challenges associated with using UASs and provide greater assistance to the firefighters and incident personnel in the wildland firefighting environment, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) launched the Advanced Capabilities for Emergency Response Operations (ACERO) project. Building on previous NASA research, ACERO will explore the implementation of a traffic management system in the wildland fire environment to enhance safety and support situation awareness. ACERO draws on the UAS Traffic Management (UTM) system previously demonstrated in an urban environment. However, a traffic management system implemented in the wildland fire environment is expected to look and function much differently in order to meet the unique needs of this domain. At the outset of the ACERO project, interviews were conducted with five UASPs who operate UASs at wildland fire incidents. The interviews focused on exploring UASPs’ initial insights about the application of a traffic management system in wildland firefighting and understanding the unique needs of this environment. The UASPs discussed a range of topics including, the shape, size, and organization of UAS operations in the wildland fire environment, information needs for a user interface, such as traffic and map information, an alerting function when other traffic nears their operation area, and the importance of conformance monitoring. The UASPs also discussed their willingness to share operational information to support safety. In this paper, we describe the foundational work upon which ACERO will build and summarize the information and insights gathered during the UASP interviews, some of which have already informed the development of the ACERO work.

Uncrewed Aircraft System (UAS)↗