Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “ground”

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 145 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2000

Ground Data System Risk Mitigation Techniques for Faster, Better, Cheaper Missions

With the advent of faster, cheaper, and better missions, NASA Projects acknowledged that a higher level of risk was inherent and accepted with this approach. It was incumbent however upon each component of the Project whether spacecraft, payload, launch vehicle, or ground data system to ensure that the mission would nevertheless be an unqualified success. The Small Explorer (SMEX) program's ground data system (GDS) team developed risk mitigation techniques to achieve these goals starting in 1989. These techniques have evolved through the SMEX series of missions and are practiced today under the Triana program. These techniques are: (1) Mission Team Organization--empowerment of a closeknit ground data system team comprising system engineering, software engineering, testing, and flight operations personnel; (2) Common Spacecraft Test and Operational Control System--utilization of the pre-launch spacecraft integration system as the post-launch ground data system on-orbit command and control system; (3) Utilization of operations personnel in pre-launch testing--making the flight operations team an integrated member of the spacecraft testing activities at the beginning of the spacecraft fabrication phase; (4) Consolidated Test Team--combined system, mission readiness and operations testing to optimize test opportunities with the ground system and spacecraft; and (5). Reuse of Spacecraft, Systems and People--reuse of people, software and on-orbit spacecraft throughout the SMEX mission series. The SMEX ground system development approach for faster, cheaper, better missions has been very successful. This paper will discuss these risk management techniques in the areas of ground data system design, implementation, test, and operational readiness.

Catena, John J.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Ground Ice at the Phoenix Landing Site: A Preflight Assessment

One of the objectives of the Mars Scout mission, Phoenix, is to characterize the present state of water in the martian environment, in a location where water may play a significant role in the present and past habitability of Mars. Given the generally dry and cold climate of Mars today any substantial amount of water is expected to occur in the form of ground ice (subsurface ice) within the regolith. The Mars Odyssey Gamma Ray Spectrometer has indicated abundant subsurface hydrogen and inferred ground ice at high latitudes. Therefore, the Phoenix mission will be targeted to land in the northern high latitudes (approximately 65 degrees N - 75 degrees N) where ground ice is expected to be abundantly available for analysis. The lander will be capable of excavating, sampling, and analyzing, dry and water-rich/icy soils. The location and depth of excavation necessary to achieve the goals of sampling and analysis of icy material become important parameters to assess. In the present work we ask two key questions: 1) At what depth within the regolith do we expect to find ice? 2) How might this depth vary over the region of potential landing sites? Numerous lines of evidence can be employed to provide an indication of the presence or absence of shallow ground ice at the potential landing sites. For example geomorphology, neutrons, gamma rays, and theory each contribute clues to an overall understanding of the distribution of ice. Orbital observations provide information on a variety of spatial scales, typically 10 s of meters (patterned ground) to 100 s of kilometers (gamma rays). While information on all of these scales are important, of particular interest is how the presence and depth of ground ice might vary on spatial scales comparable to the lander and its work area. While ground ice may be stable (and present) on a regional scale, local-scale slopes and changes in the physical characteristics of soils can result in significant variations in the distribution of ice.

Mellon, M. T.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Determination of Ground-Laboratory to In-Space Effective Atomic Oxygen Fluence for DC 93?500 Silicone

The objective of this research was to calibrate the ground-to-space effective atomic oxygen fluence for DC 93-500 silicone in a thermal energy electron cyclotron resonance (ECR) oxygen plasma facility. Silicones, commonly used spacecraft materials, do not chemically erode with atomic oxygen attack like other organic materials but form an oxidized hardened silicate surface layer. Therefore, the effective atomic oxygen fluence in a ground test facility should not be determined based on mass loss measurements, as they are with organic polymers. A technique has been developed at the Glenn Research Center to determine the equivalent amount of atomic oxygen exposure in an ECR ground test facility to produce the same degree of atomic oxygen damage as in space. The approach used was to compare changes in the surface hardness of ground test (ECR) exposed DC 93-500 silicone with DC 93-500 exposed to low Earth orbit (LEO) atomic oxygen as part of a shuttle flight experiment. The ground to in-space effective atomic oxygen fluence correlation was determined based on the fluence in the ECR source that produced the same hardness for the fluence in-space. Nanomechanical hardness versus contact depth measurements were obtained for five ECR exposed DC 93-500 samples (ECR exposed for 18 to 40 hrs, corresponding to Kapton effective fluences of 4.2 x 10(exp 20) to 9.4 x 10(exp 20) atoms/sq cm, respectively) and for space exposed DC 93-500 from the Evaluation of Oxygen Interactions with Materials III (EOIM III) shuttle flight experiment, exposed to LEO atomic oxygen for 2.3 x 10(exp 20) atoms/sq cm. Pristine controls were also evaluated. A ground-to-space correlation value was determined based on correlation values for four contact depths (150, 200, 250, and 300 nm), which represent the near surface depth data. The results indicate that the Kapton effective atomic oxygen fluence in the ECR facility needs to be 2.64 times higher than in LEO to replicate equivalent exposure damage in the ground test silicone as occurred in the space exposed silicone.

deGroh, Kim K.↗
NASA NTRS2005

LEO Download Capacity Analysis for a Network of Adaptive Array Ground Stations

To lower costs and reduce latency, a network of adaptive array ground stations, distributed across the United States, is considered for the downlink of a polar-orbiting low earth orbiting (LEO) satellite. Assuming the X-band 105 Mbps transmitter of NASA s Earth Observing 1 (EO-1) satellite with a simple line-of-sight propagation model, the average daily download capacity in bits for a network of adaptive array ground stations is compared to that of a single 11 m dish in Poker Flats, Alaska. Each adaptive array ground station is assumed to have multiple steerable antennas, either mechanically steered dishes or phased arrays that are mechanically steered in azimuth and electronically steered in elevation. Phased array technologies that are being developed for this application are the space-fed lens (SFL) and the reflectarray. Optimization of the different boresight directions of the phased arrays within a ground station is shown to significantly increase capacity; for example, this optimization quadruples the capacity for a ground station with eight SFLs. Several networks comprising only two to three ground stations are shown to meet or exceed the capacity of the big dish, Cutting the data rate by half, which saves modem costs and increases the coverage area of each ground station, is shown to increase the average daily capacity of the network for some configurations.

Ingram, Mary Ann↗
NASA NTRS2008

Launch and Landing Effects Ground Operations (LLEGO) Model

LLEGO is a model for understanding recurring launch and landing operations costs at Kennedy Space Center for human space flight. Launch and landing operations are often referred to as ground processing, or ground operations. Currently, this function is specific to the ground operations for the Space Shuttle Space Transportation System within the Space Shuttle Program. The Constellation system to follow the Space Shuttle consists of the crewed Orion spacecraft atop an Ares I launch vehicle and the uncrewed Ares V cargo launch vehicle. The Constellation flight and ground systems build upon many elements of the existing Shuttle flight and ground hardware, as well as upon existing organizations and processes. In turn, the LLEGO model builds upon past ground operations research, modeling, data, and experience in estimating for future programs. Rather than to simply provide estimates, the LLEGO model s main purpose is to improve expenses by relating complex relationships among functions (ground operations contractor, subcontractors, civil service technical, center management, operations, etc.) to tangible drivers. Drivers include flight system complexity and reliability, as well as operations and supply chain management processes and technology. Together these factors define the operability and potential improvements for any future system, from the most direct to the least direct expenses.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2009

Partitioning the LIS/OTD Lightning Climatological Dataset into Separate Ground and Cloud Flash Distributions

Presently, it is not well understood how to best model nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from lightning because lightning is highly variable. Peak current, channel length, channel altitude, stroke multiplicity, and the number of flashes that occur in a particular region (i.e., flash density) all influence the amount of lightning NOx produced. Moreover, these 5 variables are not the same for ground and cloud flashes; e.g., cloud flashes normally have lower peak currents, higher altitudes, and higher flash densities than ground flashes [see (Koshak, 2009) for additional details]. Because the existing satellite observations of lightning (Fig. 1) from the Lightning Imaging Sensor/Optical Transient Detector (LIS/OTD) do not distinguish between ground and cloud fashes, which produce different amounts of NOx, it is very difficult to accurately account for the regional/global production of lightning NOx. Hence, the ability to partition the LIS/OTD lightning climatology into separate ground and cloud flash distributions would substantially benefit the atmospheric chemistry modeling community. NOx indirectly influences climate because it controls the concentration of ozone and hydroxyl radicals in the atmosphere. The importance of lightning-produced NOx is empasized throughout the scientific literature (see for example, Huntrieser et al. 1998). In fact, lightning is the most important NOx source in the upper troposphere with a global production rate estimated to vary between 2 and 20 Tg (N)yr(sup -1) (Lee et al., 1997), with more recent estimates of about 6 Tg(N)yr(sup -1) (Martin et al., 2007). In order to make accurate predictions, global chemistry/climate models (as well as regional air quality modells) must more accurately account for the effects of lightning NOx. In particular, the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) Model E (Schmidt et al., 2005) and the GEOS-CHEM global chemical transport model (Bey et al., 2001) would each benefit from a partitioning of the LIS/OTD lightning climatology. In this study, we introduce a new technique for retrieving the ground flash fraction in a set of N lightning observed from space and that occur within a specific latitude/longitude bin. The method is briefly described and applied to CONUS lightning that have already been partitioned into ground and cloud flashes using independent ground-based observations, in order to assess the accuracy of the retrieval method. The retrieval errors are encouragingly small.

Koshak, W. J.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Constellation Ground Systems Launch Availability Analysis: Enhancing Highly Reliable Launch Systems Design

Success of the Constellation Program's lunar architecture requires successfully launching two vehicles, Ares I/Orion and Ares V/Altair, within a very limited time period. The reliability and maintainability of flight vehicles and ground systems must deliver a high probability of successfully launching the second vehicle in order to avoid wasting the on-orbit asset launched by the first vehicle. The Ground Operations Project determined which ground subsystems had the potential to affect the probability of the second launch and allocated quantitative availability requirements to these subsystems. The Ground Operations Project also developed a methodology to estimate subsystem reliability, availability, and maintainability to ensure that ground subsystems complied with allocated launch availability and maintainability requirements. The verification analysis developed quantitative estimates of subsystem availability based on design documentation, testing results, and other information. Where appropriate, actual performance history was used to calculate failure rates for legacy subsystems or comparative components that will support Constellation. The results of the verification analysis will be used to assess compliance with requirements and to highlight design or performance shortcomings for further decision making. This case study will discuss the subsystem requirements allocation process, describe the ground systems methodology for completing quantitative reliability, availability, and maintainability analysis, and present findings and observation based on analysis leading to the Ground Operations Project Preliminary Design Review milestone.

Gernand, Jeffrey L.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Constellation Ground Systems Launch Availability Analysis: Enhancing Highly Reliable Launch Systems Design

Success of the Constellation Program's lunar architecture requires successfully launching two vehicles, Ares I/Orion and Ares V/Altair, in a very limited time period. The reliability and maintainability of flight vehicles and ground systems must deliver a high probability of successfully launching the second vehicle in order to avoid wasting the on-orbit asset launched by the first vehicle. The Ground Operations Project determined which ground subsystems had the potential to affect the probability of the second launch and allocated quantitative availability requirements to these subsystems. The Ground Operations Project also developed a methodology to estimate subsystem reliability, availability and maintainability to ensure that ground subsystems complied with allocated launch availability and maintainability requirements. The verification analysis developed quantitative estimates of subsystem availability based on design documentation; testing results, and other information. Where appropriate, actual performance history was used for legacy subsystems or comparative components that will support Constellation. The results of the verification analysis will be used to verify compliance with requirements and to highlight design or performance shortcomings for further decision-making. This case study will discuss the subsystem requirements allocation process, describe the ground systems methodology for completing quantitative reliability, availability and maintainability analysis, and present findings and observation based on analysis leading to the Ground Systems Preliminary Design Review milestone.

Gernand, Jeffrey L.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Ground Processing Affordability for Space Vehicles

Launch vehicles and most of their payloads spend the majority of their time on the ground. The cost of ground operations is very high. So, why so often is so little attention given to ground processing during development? The current global space industry and economic environment are driving more need for efficiencies to save time and money. Affordability and sustainability are more important now than ever. We can not continue to treat space vehicles as mere science projects. More RLV's (Reusable Launch Vehicles) are being developed for the gains of reusability which are not available for ELV's (Expendable Launch Vehicles). More human-rated vehicles are being developed, with the retirement of the Space Shuttles, and for a new global space race, yet these cost more than the many unmanned vehicles of today. We can learn many lessons on affordability from RLV's. DFO (Design for Operations) considers ground operations during design, development, and manufacturing-before the first flight. This is often minimized for space vehicles, but is very important. Vehicles are designed for launch and mission operations. You will not be able to do it again if it is too slow or costly to get there. Many times, technology changes faster than space products such that what is launched includes outdated features, thus reducing competitiveness. Ground operations must be considered for the full product Lifecycle, from concept to retirement. Once manufactured, launch vehicles along with their payloads and launch systems require a long path of processing before launch. Initial assembly and testing always discover problems to address. A solid integration program is essential to minimize these impacts, as was seen in the Constellation Ares I-X test rocket. For RLV's, landing/recovery and post-flight turnaround activities are performed. Multi-use vehicles require reconfiguration. MRO (Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul) must be well-planned--- even for the unplanned problems. Defect limits and standard repairs need to be in-place as well as easily added. Many routine inspections and maintenance can be like an aircraft overhaul. Modifications and technology upgrades should be expected. Another factor affecting ground operations efficiency is trending. It is essential for RLV's, and also useful for ELV's which fly the same or similar models again. Good data analysis of technical and processing performance will determine fixes and improvements needed for safety, design, and future processing. Collecting such data on new or low-frequency vehicles is a challenge. Lessons can be learned from the Space Shuttle, or even the Concorde aircraft. For all of the above topics, efficient business systems must be established for comprehensive program management and good throughput. Drawings, specifications, and manuals for an entire launch vehicle are often in different formats from multiple vendors, plus they have proprietary constraints. Nonetheless, the integration team must ensure that all data needed is compatible and visible to each appropriate team member. Ground processing systems for scheduling, tracking, problem resolution, etc. must be well laid-out. The balance between COTS (commercial off the shelf) and custom software is difficult. Multiple customers, vendors, launch sites, and landing sites add to the complexity of efficient IT (Information Technology) tools.

Ingalls, John↗
NASA NTRS2011

Standards and Specifications for Ground Processing of Space Vehicles: From an Aviation-Based Shuttle Project to Global Application

Proprietary or unique designs and operations are expected early in any industry's development, and often provide a competitive early market advantage. However, there comes a time when a product or industry requires standardization for the whole industry to advance...or survive. For the space industry, that time has come. Here, we will focus on standardization of ground processing for space vehicles and their ground systems. With the retirement of the Space Shuttle, and emergence of a new global space race, affordability and sustainability are more important now than ever. The growing commercialization of the space industry and current global economic environment are driving greater need for efficiencies to save time and money. More RLV's (Reusable Launch Vehicles) are being developed for the gains of reusability not achievable with traditional ELV's (Expendable Launch Vehicles). More crew/passenger vehicles are also being developed. All of this calls for more attention needed for ground processing-repeatedly before launch and after landing/recovery. RLV's should provide more efficiencies than ELV's, as long as MRO (Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul) is well-planned-even for the unplanned problems. NASA's Space Shuttle is a primary example of an RLV which was supposed to thrive on reusability savings with efficient ground operations, but lessons learned show that costs were (and still are) much greater than expected. International standards and specifications can provide the commonality needed to simplify design and manufacturing as well as to improve safety, quality, maintenance, and operability. There are standards organizations engaged in the space industry, but ground processing is one of the areas least addressed. Challenges are encountered due to various factors often not considered during development. Multiple vehicle elements, sites, customers, and contractors pose various functional and integration difficulties. Resulting technical publication structures and methods are incongruent. Some processing products are still done on paper, some electronic, and many being converted in between. Business systems then are not fully compatible, and paper as well as electronic conversions are time-consuming and costly. NASA and its Shuttle contractors setup rules and systems to handle what has produced over 130 RLV launches, but they have had many challenges. Attempts have been made to apply aviation industry specifications to make the Shuttle more efficient with its ground processing. One efficiency project example was to make a Shuttle Maintenance Manual (SMM) based on the commercial ATA (Air Transport Association of America) Spec 100 for technical publications. This industry standard, along with others, has been a foundation for efficient global MRO of commercial airlines for years. A modified version was also made for some military aircraft. The SMM project found many similarities in Spec 100 which apply to the Shuttle, and room for expansion for space systems/structures not in aircraft. The SMM project team met with the ATA and representatives from NASA's X-33 and X-34 programs to discuss collaboration on a national space standard based on Spec 100. A pilot project was enabled for a subset of Shuttle systems. Full implementation was not yet achieved, X-33 and X-34 were cancelled, and the Shuttles were then designated for retirement. Nonetheless, we can learn from this project how to expand this concept to all space vehicle products. Since then, ATA has joined with ASD (AeroSpace and Defence Industries Association of Europe) and AIA (Aerospace Industries Association) to form a much-enhanced and expanded international specification: Sl000D, International Specification for Technical Publications. It includes air, land, and sea vehicles, missiles, support equipment, ordnance, and communications. It is used by a growing number of countries for commercial and government products. Its modular design is supported by a Common Source Dabase (CSDB), and COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) software is available for production of IETP's (Interactive Electronic Technical Publications). A few space industry products in Europe have begun to apply Sl000D already. Also, there are other related standards/specifications which have global implications. We have an opportunity to adapt Sl000D and possibly other standards for use with space vehicles and ground systems. Sl000D has plenty of flexibility to apply to any product needed. To successfully grow the viability of the space industry, all members, commercial and government, will need to engage cooperatively in developing and applying standards to move toward interoperability. If we leverage and combine the best existing space standards and specifications, develop new ones to address known gaps, and adapt the best applicable features from other industries, we can establish an infrastructure to not only accelerate current development, but also build longevity for a more cohesive international space community.

Ingalls, John↗
NASA NTRS2004

Grounding Headphones for Protection Against ESD

A simple alternative technique has been devised protecting delicate equipment against electrostatic discharge (ESD) in settings in which workers wear communication headsets. In the original setting in which the technique was devised, the workers who wear the headsets also wear anti-ESD grounding straps on their wrists. The alternative technique eliminates the need for the wrist grounding straps by providing for grounding through the headsets. In place of the electrically insulating foam pads on the headsets, one installs pads made of electrically conductive foam like that commonly used to protect electronic components. Grounding wires are attached to the conductive foam pads, then possibly to the shielding cable which may be grounded to the backshell on the connector. The efficacy of this technique in protecting against ESD has been verified in experiments. The electrical resistance of the pads is a few megohms - about the same as that of a human body between the fingers of opposite hands and, hence, low enough for grounding. The only drawback of the technique is that care must be taken to place the foam pads in contact with the user s skin: any hair that comes between the foam pads and the skin must be pushed aside because hair is electrically insulating and thus prevents adequate grounding.

Peters, John↗
NASA NTRS2007

Safety Considerations in the Ground Environment

In the history of humankind, every great space adventure has begun on the ground. While this seems to be stating the obvious, mission and spacecraft designers who have overlooked this fact have paid a high price, either in loss or damage to the spacecraft pre-launch, or in mission failure or reduction. Spacecraft personnel may risk not only their flight hardware, but they may also risk their lives, their co-workers lives and even the general public by not heeding safety on the ground. Their eyes may be on the stars but their feet are on the ground! One additional comment: Although the design requirements are very different for human rated and nonhuman rated flight hardware, while on the ground that flight hardware (and its ground support equipment) doesn't care about what it is flying on. On the ground, additional requirements are often levied to protect the work force and general public. (Authors' Note: The source material for this chapter is primarily taken from the Kennedy Space Center Handbook (KHB) 1700.7/45 SW Handbook S-100 Space Shuttle Payload Ground Safety Handbook and the authors' personal experiences.

Kirkpatrick, Paul D.↗
NASA NTRS2013

The Architecture of the Laser Communications Relay Demonstration Ground Stations: An Overview

NASA's Laser Communication Relay Demonstration (LCRD) will be NASA's first long-duration demonstration of laser communications (lasercom) in space, providing geosynchronous-satellite-hosted bidirectional relay services between two Earth ground stations. LCRD will leverage and enhance existing ground stations. Ground Station 1 (GS-1) will leverage the Optical Communications Telescope Laboratory (OCTL) built by JPL, while Ground Station 2 (GS-2) will leverage the Lunar Laser Communications Demonstration (LLCD) Ground Terminal (LLGT) built by MIT Lincoln Laboratory. While each ground system has unique telescopes and integrated optics, many of the backend subsystems (e.g., communications, environmental monitoring, control, user simulators) will be common to both terminals. Here we provide an overview of the architecture of the LCRD ground stations, and the planned enhancements to the existing facilities.

deformable mirror↗
NASA NTRS2015

Preparing for Mars: The Evolvable Mars Campaign 'Proving Ground' Approach

As the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) prepares to extend human presence beyond Low Earth Orbit, we are in the early stages of planning missions within the framework of an Evolvable Mars Campaign. Initial missions would be conducted in near-Earth cis-lunar space and would eventually culminate in extended duration crewed missions on the surface of Mars. To enable such exploration missions, critical technologies and capabilities must be identified, developed, and tested. NASA has followed a principled approach to identify critical capabilities and a "Proving Ground" approach is emerging to address testing needs. The Proving Ground is a period subsequent to current International Space Station activities wherein exploration-enabling capabilities and technologies are developed and the foundation is laid for sustained human presence in space. The Proving Ground domain essentially includes missions beyond Low Earth Orbit that will provide increasing mission capability while reducing technical risks. Proving Ground missions also provide valuable experience with deep space operations and support the transition from "Earth-dependence" to "Earth-independence" required for sustainable space exploration. A Technology Development Assessment Team identified a suite of critical technologies needed to support the cadence of exploration missions. Discussions among mission planners, vehicle developers, subject-matter-experts, and technologists were used to identify a minimum but sufficient set of required technologies and capabilities. Within System Maturation Teams, known challenges were identified and expressed as specific performance gaps in critical capabilities, which were then refined and activities required to close these critical gaps were identified. Analysis was performed to identify test and demonstration opportunities for critical technical capabilities across the Proving Ground spectrum of missions. This suite of critical capabilities is expected to provide the foundation required to enable a variety of possible destinations and missions consistent with the Evolvable Mars Campaign.. The International Space Station will be used to the greatest extent possible for exploration capability and technology development. Beyond this, NASA is evaluating a number of options for Proving Ground missions. An "Asteroid Redirect Mission" will demonstrate needed capabilities (e.g., Solar Electric Propulsion) and transportation systems for the crew (i.e., Space Launch System and Orion) and for cargo (i.e., Asteroid Redirect Vehicle). The Mars 2020 mission and follow-on robotic precursor missions will gather Mars surface environment information and will mature technologies. NASA is considering emplacing a small pressurized module in cis-lunar space to support crewed operations of increasing duration and to serve as a platform for critical exploration capabilities testing (e.g., radiation mitigation; extended duration deep space habitation). In addition, "opportunistic mission operations" could demonstrate capabilities not on the Mars critical path that may, nonetheless, enhance exploration operations (e.g., teleoperations, crew assisted Mars sample return). The Proving Ground may also include "pathfinder" missions to test and demonstrate specific capabilities at Mars (e.g., entry, descent, and landing). This paper describes the (1) process used to conduct an architecture-driven technology development assessment, (2) exploration mission critical and supporting capabilities, and (3) approach for addressing test and demonstration opportunities encompassing the spectrum of flight elements and destinations consistent with the Evolvable Mars Campaign.

Bobskill, Marianne R.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Tailoring NIST Security Controls for the Ground System: Selection and Implementation -- Recommendations for Information System Owners

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) invests millions of dollars in spacecraft and ground system development, and in mission operations in the pursuit of scientific knowledge of the universe. In recent years, NASA sent a probe to Mars to study the Red Planet's upper atmosphere, obtained high resolution images of Pluto, and it is currently preparing to find new exoplanets, rendezvous with an asteroid, and bring a sample of the asteroid back to Earth for analysis. The success of these missions is enabled by mission assurance. In turn, mission assurance is backed by information assurance. The information systems supporting NASA missions must be reliable as well as secure. NASA - like every other U.S. Federal Government agency - is required to manage the security of its information systems according to federal mandates, the most prominent being the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) of 2002 and the legislative updates that followed it. Like the management of enterprise information technology (IT), federal information security management takes a "one-size fits all" approach for protecting IT systems. While this approach works for most organizations, it does not effectively translate into security of highly specialized systems such as those supporting NASA missions. These systems include command and control (C&C) systems, spacecraft and instrument simulators, and other elements comprising the ground segment. They must be carefully configured, monitored and maintained, sometimes for several years past the missions' initially planned life expectancy, to ensure the ground system is protected and remains operational without any compromise of its confidentiality, integrity and availability. Enterprise policies, processes, procedures and products, if not effectively tailored to meet mission requirements, may not offer the needed security for protecting the information system, and they may even become disruptive to mission operations. Certain protective measures for the general enterprise may not be as efficient within the ground segment. This is what the authors have concluded through observations and analysis of patterns identified from the various security assessments performed on NASA missions such as MAVEN, OSIRIS-REx, New Horizons and TESS, to name a few. The security audits confirmed that the framework for managing information system security developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for the federal government, and adopted by NASA, is indeed effective. However, the selection of the technical, operational and management security controls offered by the NIST model - and how they are implemented - does not always fit the nature and the environment where the ground system operates in even though there is no apparent impact on mission success. The authors observed that unfit controls, that is, controls that are not necessarily applicable or sufficiently effective in protecting the mission systems, are often selected to facilitate compliance with security requirements and organizational expectations even if the selected controls offer minimum or non-existent protection. This paper identifies some of the standard security controls that can in fact protect the ground system, and which of them offer little or no benefit at all. It offers multiple scenarios from real security audits in which the controls are not effective without, of course, disclosing any sensitive information about the missions assessed. In addition to selection and implementation of controls, the paper also discusses potential impact of recent legislation such as the Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) of 2014 - aimed at the enterprise - on the ground system, and offers other recommendations to Information System Owners (ISOs).

GOVERNANCE↗
NASA NTRS2019

NASA GeneLab Platform Utilized for Space Radiation Dosimetry Biological Response Compared to Radiation Ground Studies

Ionizing radiation from Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCR) is one of the major risk factors factor that will impact health of astronauts on extended missions outside the protective effects of the Earth's magnetic field. Currently there are gaps in our knowledge of the health risks associated with chronic low dose, low dose rate ionizing radiation, specifically ions associated with high (H) atomic number (Z) and energy (E). The NASA GeneLab project (genelab.nasa.gov) aims to provide a detailed library of Omics datasets associated with biological samples exposed to HZE. The GeneLab Data System (GLDS) includes datasets from both spaceflight and ground-based studies, a majority of which involved exposure to ionizing radiation. Recently GeneLab has also assessed radiation dosimetry data with omics datasets associated with samples flown to the International Space Station (ISS). The combination of the detailed information on radiation exposure for ground-based studies and curated dosimetry information for spaceflight experiments allows GeneLab to be the first comprehensive Omics database for space related research from which an investigator can generate hypotheses to direct future experiments utilizing both ground and space biological radiation data. We demonstrate the usefulness of these datasets by analyzing multiple GeneLab datasets associated with both radiation ground-based studies and spaceflight studies. The radiation ground based studies we analyzed includes both in vivo and in vitro work with a range ions from protons to iron particles with doses from 0.1Gy to 2Gy. These datasets were compared to both in vivo and in vitro datasets from samples flown to the ISS and on shorter shuttle missions with total doses of 0.1 mGy to 30 mGys. From this analysis we were able to associate distinct biological signatures associating specific ions to specific biological response to radiation exposure in space. For example, we discovered radiation biological response related to cardiovascular effects from proton ground studies are the dominating response for samples related to cardiovascular effects on the ISS. With this work we will provide a summary of how different ions will impact different biological response in space and how this can be used in future studies to assess optimal ground experiments to simulate space radiation.

Beheshti, Afshin↗
NASA NTRS2020

The Influence of Frequency and Duration Of Seismic Ground Motion On The Size Of Triggered Landslides—A Regional View

Observation, theory, and intuition all suggest that larger earthquakes should trigger larger landslides. Many factors could contribute to this, including depth-dependent shear strength or non-linearity of ground motion in soils and rock, but we hypothesize that the key characteristics of large earthquakes causing this phenomenon are (in addition to magnitude) the frequency and duration of the strong ground motion. Because of the paucity of site-specific data for detailed analysis, we take a regional approach to this question by analyzing strong-motion records and earthquake-induced landslide (EQIL) inventories from six well-documented earthquakes. Ground motion is characterized using earthquake magnitude and the median durations and frequencies (mean periods) of subsets of strong-motion records relevant to landslide triggering. EQIL inventories are characterized using the median landslide area of the entire inventory as well as the median areas of the largest 1% of the landslides and the largest 10 landslides. We then compare ground-motion characteristics with landslide size statistics to determine possible correlations. Comparisons of all earthquake- and landslide-size statistics show strong positive correlations between landslide size and (1) magnitude, (2) ground-motion duration, and (3) mean period. Although all the ground-motion measures yield highly correlated regressions, mean period appears to be the best overall predictor of landslide size. Landslide modeling using Newmark's sliding-block method also shows that longer mean periods and durations and larger magnitudes correlate strongly with increases in modeled displacements. These results support our hypothesis that increasing period and duration of seismic ground motion are the physical factors driving increased landslide sizes for larger earthquakes. Additional studies including data from a much larger set of earthquakes is needed to confirm the results of this initial study.

Hakan Tanyas↗
NASA NTRS2019

Surface erythemal UV irradiance in the continental United States derived from ground-based and OMI observations: quality assessment, trend analysis and sampling issues

Surface full-sky erythemal dose rate (EDR) from the Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) at both satellite overpass time and local noon time is evaluated against ground measurements at 31 sites from the US Department of Agriculture's (USDA) UV-B Monitoring and Research Program (UVMRP) over the period of 2005–2017. We find that both OMI overpass and solar noon time EDR are highly correlated with the measured counterparts (with a linear correlation coefficient of 0.90 and 0.88, respectively). Although the comparison statistics are improved with a longer time window (0.5–1.0 h) for pairing surface and OMI measurements, both OMI overpass and local noon time EDRs have 7 % overestimation that is larger than 6 % uncertainty in the ground measurements and show different levels of dependence on solar zenith angle (SZA) and to lesser extent on cloud optical depth. The ratio of EDR between local noon and OMI overpass time is often (95 % in frequency) larger than 1 with a mean of 1.18 in the OMI product; in contrast, the same ratio from surface observation is normally distributed with 22 % of the times less than 1 and a mean of 1.38. This contrast in part reflects the deficiency in the OMI surface UV algorithm that assumes constant atmospheric conditions between overpass and noon time. The probability density functions (PDFs) for both OMI and ground measurements of noontime EDR are in statistically significant agreement, showing dual peaks at ∼20 and ∼200 mW/sq. m, respectively; the latter is lower than 220 mW/ sq. m, the value at which the PDF of daily EDR from ground measurements peaks, and this difference indicates that the largest EDR value for a given day may not often occur at local noon. Lastly, statistically significant positive trends of EDR are found in the northeastern US in OMI data, but opposite trends are found within ground-based data (regardless of sampling for either noontime or daily averages). While positive trends are consistently found between OMI and surface data for EDR over the southern Great Plains (Texas and Oklahoma), their values are within the uncertainty of ground measurements. Overall, no scientifically sound trends can be found among OMI data for aerosol total and absorbing optical depth, cloud optical depth and total ozone to explain coherently the surface UV trends revealed either by OMI or ground-based estimates; these data also cannot reconcile trend differences between the two estimates (of EDR from OMI and surface observations). Future geostationary satellites with better spatiotemporal resolution data should help overcome spatiotemporal sampling issues inherent in OMI data products and therefore improve the estimates of surface UV flux and EDR from space.

Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI)↗