Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “lifecycle analysis”

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 NTRS2007

NASA's Software Safety Standard

NASA relies more and more on software to control, monitor, and verify its safety critical systems, facilities and operations. Since the 1960's there has hardly been a spacecraft launched that does not have a computer on board that will provide command and control services. There have been recent incidents where software has played a role in high-profile mission failures and hazardous incidents. For example, the Mars Orbiter, Mars Polar Lander, the DART (Demonstration of Autonomous Rendezvous Technology), and MER (Mars Exploration Rover) Spirit anomalies were all caused or contributed to by software. The Mission Control Centers for the Shuttle, ISS, and unmanned programs are highly dependant on software for data displays, analysis, and mission planning. Despite this growing dependence on software control and monitoring, there has been little to no consistent application of software safety practices and methodology to NASA's projects with safety critical software. Meanwhile, academia and private industry have been stepping forward with procedures and standards for safety critical systems and software, for example Dr. Nancy Leveson's book Safeware: System Safety and Computers. The NASA Software Safety Standard, originally published in 1997, was widely ignored due to its complexity and poor organization. It also focused on concepts rather than definite procedural requirements organized around a software project lifecycle. Led by NASA Headquarters Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, the NASA Software Safety Standard has recently undergone a significant update. This new standard provides the procedures and guidelines for evaluating a project for safety criticality and then lays out the minimum project lifecycle requirements to assure the software is created, operated, and maintained in the safest possible manner. This update of the standard clearly delineates the minimum set of software safety requirements for a project without detailing the implementation for those requirements. This allows the projects leeway to meet these requirements in many forms that best suit a particular project's needs and safety risk. In other words, it tells the project what to do, not how to do it. This update also incorporated advances in the state of the practice of software safety from academia and private industry. It addresses some of the more common issues now facing software developers in the NASA environment such as the use of Commercial-Off-the-Shelf Software (COTS), Modified OTS (MOTS), Government OTS (GOTS), and reused software. A team from across NASA developed the update and it has had both NASA-wide internal reviews by software engineering, quality, safety, and project management. It has also had expert external review. This presentation and paper will discuss the new NASA Software Safety Standard, its organization, and key features. It will start with a brief discussion of some NASA mission failures and incidents that had software as one of their root causes. It will then give a brief overview of the NASA Software Safety Process. This will include an overview of the key personnel responsibilities and functions that must be performed for safety-critical software.

Ramsay, Christopher M.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Connecting Research and Practice: An Experience Report on Research Infusion with SAVE

NASA systems need to be highly dependable to avoid catastrophic mission failures. This calls for rigorous engineering processes including meticulous validation and verification. However, NASA systems are often highly distributed and overwhelmingly complex, making the software portion of these systems challenging to understand, maintain, change, reuse, and test. NASA's systems are long-lived and the software maintenance process typically constitutes 60-80% of the total cost of the entire lifecycle. Thus, in addition to the technical challenges of ensuring high life-time quality of NASA's systems, the post-development phase also presents a significant financial burden. Some of NASA's software-related challenges could potentially be addressed by some of the many powerful technologies that are being developed in software research laboratories. Many of these research technologies seek to facilitate maintenance and evolution by for example architecting, designing and modeling for quality, flexibility, and reuse. Other technologies attempt to detect and remove defects and other quality issues by various forms of automated defect detection, architecture analysis, and various forms of sophisticated simulation and testing. However promising, most such research technologies nevertheless do not make the transition from the research lab to the software lab. One reason the transition from research to practice seldom occurs is that research infusion and technology transfer is difficult. For example, factors related to the technology are sometimes overshadowed by other types of factors such as reluctance to change and therefore prohibits the technology from sticking. Successful infusion might also take very long time. One famous study showed that the discrepancy between the conception of the idea and its practical use was 18 years plus or minus three. Nevertheless, infusing new technology is possible. We have found that it takes special circumstances for such research infusion to succeed: 1) there must be evidence that the technology works in the practitioner's particular domain, 2) there must be a potential for great improvements and enhanced competitive edge for the practitioner, 3) the practitioner has to have strong individual curiosity and continuous interest in trying out new technologies, 4) the practitioner has to have support on multiple levels (i.e. from the researchers, from management, from sponsors etc), and 5) to remain infused, the new technology has to be integrated into the practitioner's processes so that it becomes a natural part of the daily work. NASA IV&V's Research Infusion initiative sponsored by NASA's Office of Safety & Mission Assurance (OSMA) through the Software Assurance Research Program (SARP), strives to overcome some of the problems related to research infusion.

Lindvall, Mikael↗
NASA NTRS2015

The OSIRIS-REx Asteroid Sample Return Mission Operations Design

OSIRIS-REx is an acronym that captures the scientific objectives: Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, and Security-Regolith Explorer. OSIRIS-REx will thoroughly characterize near-Earth asteroid Bennu (Previously known as 1019551999 RQ36). The OSIRIS-REx Asteroid Sample Return Mission delivers its science using five instruments and radio science along with the Touch-And-Go Sample Acquisition Mechanism (TAGSAM). All of the instruments and data analysis techniques have direct heritage from flown planetary missions. The OSIRIS-REx mission employs a methodical, phased approach to ensure success in meeting the mission's science requirements. OSIRIS-REx launches in September 2016, with a backup launch period occurring one year later. Sampling occurs in 2019. The departure burn from Bennu occurs in March 2021. On September 24, 2023, the Sample Return Capsule (SRC) lands at the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR). Stardust heritage procedures are followed to transport the SRC to Johnson Space Center, where the samples are removed and delivered to the OSIRIS-REx curation facility. After a six-month preliminary examination period the mission will produce a catalog of the returned sample, allowing the worldwide community to request samples for detailed analysis. Traveling and returning a sample from an Asteroid that has not been explored before requires unique operations consideration. The Design Reference Mission (DRM) ties together spacecraft, instrument and operations scenarios. Asteroid Touch and Go (TAG) has various options varying from ground only to fully automated (natural feature tracking). Spacecraft constraints such as thermo and high gain antenna pointing impact the timeline. The mission is sensitive to navigation errors, so a late command update has been implemented. The project implemented lessons learned from other "small body" missions. The key lesson learned was 'expect the unexpected' and implement planning tools early in the lifecycle. This paper summarizes the ground and spacecraft design as presented at OSIRIS-REx Critical Design Review(CDR) held April 2014.

mission operations↗
NASA NTRS2016

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

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

Shepherd, Christena C.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Practical Application of PRA as an Integrated Design Tool for Space Systems

This paper presents the application of the first comprehensive Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) during the design phase of a joint NASA/NOAA weather satellite program, Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite Series R (GOES-R). GOES-R is the next generation weather satellite primarily to help understand the weather and help save human lives. PRA has been used at NASA for Human Space Flight for many years. PRA was initially adopted and implemented in the operational phase of manned space flight programs and more recently for the next generation human space systems. Since its first use at NASA, PRA has become recognized throughout the Agency as a method of assessing complex mission risks as part of an overall approach to assuring safety and mission success throughout project lifecycles. PRA is now included as a requirement during the design phase of both NASA next generation manned space vehicles as well as for high priority robotic missions. The influence of PRA on GOES-R design and operation concepts are discussed in detail. The GOES-R PRA is unique at NASA for its early implementation. It also represents a pioneering effort to integrate risks from both Spacecraft (SC) and Ground Segment (GS) to fully assess the probability of achieving mission objectives. PRA analysts were actively involved in system engineering and design engineering to ensure that a comprehensive set of technical risks were correctly identified and properly understood from a design and operations perspective. The analysis included an assessment of SC hardware and software, SC fault management system, GS hardware and software, common cause failures, human error, natural hazards, solar weather and infrastructure (such as network and telecommunications failures, fire). PRA findings directly resulted in design changes to reduce SC risk from micro-meteoroids. PRA results also led to design changes in several SC subsystems, e.g. propulsion, guidance, navigation and control (GNC), communications, mechanisms, and command and data handling (C&DH). The fault tree approach assisted in the development of the fault management system design. Human error analysis, which examined human response to failure, indicated areas where automation could reduce the overall probability of gaps in operation by half. In addition, the PRA brought to light many potential root causes of system disruptions, including earthquakes, inclement weather, solar storms, blackouts and other extreme conditions not considered in the typical reliability and availability analyses. Ultimately the PRA served to identify potential failures that, when mitigated, resulted in a more robust design, as well as to influence the program's concept of operations. The early and active integration of PRA with system and design engineering provided a well-managed approach for risk assessment that increased reliability and availability, optimized lifecyc1e costs, and unified the SC and GS developments.

Kalia, Prince↗
NASA NTRS1986

Choosing a software design method for real-time Ada applications: JSD process inversion as a means to tailor a design specification to the performance requirements and target machine

The validity of real-time software is determined by its ability to execute on a computer within the time constraints of the physical system it is modeling. In many applications the time constraints are so critical that the details of process scheduling are elevated to the requirements analysis phase of the software development cycle. It is not uncommon to find specifications for a real-time cyclic executive program included to assumed in such requirements. It was found that prelininary designs structured around this implementation abscure the data flow of the real world system that is modeled and that it is consequently difficult and costly to maintain, update and reuse the resulting software. A cyclic executive is a software component that schedules and implicitly synchronizes the real-time software through periodic and repetitive subroutine calls. Therefore a design method is sought that allows the deferral of process scheduling to the later stages of design. The appropriate scheduling paradigm must be chosen given the performance constraints, the largest environment and the software's lifecycle. The concept of process inversion is explored with respect to the cyclic executive.

Withey, James V.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Event Report for The Ethical Artificial Intelligence Quantification Workshop

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a powerful emerging technology area which requires special attention to using it ethically. AI ethics is still an emerging field, and the partners for this workshop and report seek to move AI ethics discussion ahead by experimenting with ways to measure AI ethics criteria. The following document describes the outcomes and learnings from The Ethical Artificial Intelligence Quantification Workshop held at the National Institute for Aerospace (NIA), Hampton, Virginia on May 12th, 2022. The purpose of the workshop was for participants to evaluate and experiment-with the methodology and process presented by AIEthics.World in cooperation with Intel Corporation. The meeting participants learned about the Ethical AI Certification and Maturity Model™ and applied the methodology to selected notional AI systems. The workshop facilitated the evaluation of the maturity of the AI system according to ethical considerations relevant to NASA, NIA and other participants. The workshop consisted of three main phases. The first phase focused on understanding and summarizing NASA’s ethical approaches, mission and values based on published documentation, discussions and individual insights & opinions of participants. This information was prioritized, weighted, ordered, and quantified in phase two, to formulate an alignment between human values (ethics) and their applicability to AI systems during all lifecycle phases. The first two phases were summarized as a form of ethical genealogy for artificial intelligence, specific to NASA’s ethical approaches. In the third and last phase of the workshop the participants evaluated notional examples of artificial intelligence to qualify and quantify its ability to adhere to the organizational ethics approaches, using the Ethical AI Certification and Maturity Model™. The workshop uses the concept of genealogy, in the traditional sense: the study and traceability of lines of ancestors in the process of evolutionary development from earlier forms. However, as it is applied to an Ethical AI definition, it is providing the insights to the necessary and mandatory traceability of content, data, metrics, telemetry, elements, and structures which are used in the AI’s lifecycle to foster and measure AI ethics in all steps of its lifecycle. The Ethical Artificial Intelligence Quantification Workshop provided NASA with the opportunity to apply the Ethical AI Certification and Maturity Model™, in combination with existing and well-known decision-making and quality control methods to identify the metrics and measurements for an Ethical AI and assess its ethical condition and quality aligned with NASA ethics approaches. The result of the workshop is the capacity for NASA to apply the maturity model assessment to its AI Systems as desired and if necessary, publish the ability of these AI Systems to adhere to the organizational ethical goals. AI ethics frameworks need to be customized for each application domain, for example, individual NASA Mission Directorates. General principles that work in one area such as AI/Machine Learning-based text analysis (the ethics of information-extraction) may need to be adapted for another such as sense-and-avoid decision-making in a flight environment. The workshop was conducted among approximately twenty NASA subject matter experts, so the elements noted above should be considered examples, not definitive NASA ethical AI principles, genealogy, etc. Generating a definitive AI ethics framework for an organization as diverse as NASA would require far more discussion, debate, review, etc. However, the workshop provided valuable insight into mechanisms and processes for quantifying AI ethical qualities.

Artificial Intelligence↗
NASA NTRS2002

A Virtual Mission Operations Center: Collaborative Environment

The Virtual Mission Operations Center - Collaborative Environment (VMOC-CE) intent is to have a central access point for all the resources used in a collaborative mission operations environment to assist mission operators in communicating on-site and off-site in the investigation and resolution of anomalies. It is a framework that as a minimum incorporates online chat, realtime file sharing and remote application sharing components in one central location. The use of a collaborative environment in mission operations opens up the possibilities for a central framework for other project members to access and interact with mission operations staff remotely. The goal of the Virtual Mission Operations Center (VMOC) Project is to identify, develop, and infuse technology to enable mission control by on-call personnel in geographically dispersed locations. In order to achieve this goal, the following capabilities are needed: Autonomous mission control systems Automated systems to contact on-call personnel Synthesis and presentation of mission control status and history information Desktop tools for data and situation analysis Secure mechanism for remote collaboration commanding Collaborative environment for remote cooperative work The VMOC-CE is a collaborative environment that facilitates remote cooperative work. It is an application instance of the Virtual System Design Environment (VSDE), developed by NASA Goddard Space Flight Center's (GSFC) Systems Engineering Services & Advanced Concepts (SESAC) Branch. The VSDE is a web-based portal that includes a knowledge repository and collaborative environment to serve science and engineering teams in product development. It is a "one stop shop" for product design, providing users real-time access to product development data, engineering and management tools, and relevant design specifications and resources through the Internet. The initial focus of the VSDE has been to serve teams working in the early portion of the system/product lifecycle - concept development, proposal preparation, and formulation. The VMOC-CE expands the application of the VSDE into the operations portion of the system lifecycle. It will enable meaningful and real-time collaboration regardless of the geographical distribution of project team members. Team members will be able to interact in satellite operations, specifically for resolving anomalies, through access to a desktop computer and the Internet. Mission Operations Management will be able to participate and monitor up to the minute status of anomalies or other mission operations issues. In this paper we present the VMOC-CE project, system capabilities, and technologies.

Medina, Barbara↗
NASA NTRS2006

Mission Scenario Development Workbench

The Mission Scenario Development Workbench (MSDW) is a multidisciplinary performance analysis software tool for planning and optimizing space missions. It provides a number of new capabilities that are particularly useful for planning the surface activities on other planets. MSDW enables rapid planning of a space mission and supports flight system and scientific-instrumentation trades. It also provides an estimate of the ability of flight, ground, and science systems to meet high-level mission goals and provides means of evaluating expected mission performance at an early stage of planning in the project life cycle. In MSDW, activity plans and equipment-list spreadsheets are integrated with validated parameterized simulation models of spacecraft systems. In contrast to traditional approaches involving worst-case estimates with large margins, the approach embodied in MSDW affords more flexibility and more credible results early in the lifecycle through the use of validated, variable- fidelity models of spacecraft systems. MSDW is expected to help maximize the scientific return on investment for space missions by understanding early the performance required to have a successful mission while reducing the risk of costly design changes made at late stages in the project life cycle.

Kordon, Mark↗
NASA NTRS2023

Information Systems Technology for NASA Earth Systems Digital Twins (ESDT)

The term “Digital Twin” was first used in 2002 for product lifecycle management. Since then, Digital Twin concepts have been proposed in various domains until very recently for Earth Science. For NASA’s Advanced Information Systems Technology (AIST) Program, an Earth System Digital Twin (ESDT) is defined as composed of three components: 1. A Digital Replica, i.e., an integrated picture of the past and current states of Earth systems 2. Forecasting capabilities, providing an integrated picture of how Earth systems will evolve in the future from the current state 3. Impact Assessment capabilities, providing an integrated picture of how Earth systems could evolve under different hypothetical what-if scenarios. Developing such a vision will require technologies related to: integrating continuous observations from various disparate sources; developing frameworks that builds on inter-connected models; improving the speed and accuracy of integrated prediction, analysis and visualization capabilities (e.g., by using machine learning); and utilizing causality and uncertainty quantification to improve our understanding of the evolution of Earth Science systems as a function of their interactions with other Earth and human systems. In addition, AIST is also investigating interoperability standards to federate multiple Digital Twins, as well as computational resources required by those systems.

Earth Science Remote Sensing; Information Systems↗
NASA NTRS2026

Improvement in the Thermal-to-Structural Model Mapping Process for Integrated Modeling for the Roman Space Telescope

Integrated Modeling has been a key component of verifying optical requirements for the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope (RST) that are either impossible or impractical to verify exclusively through ground testing. Two major areas for integrated Modeling are Jitter and Thermal Distortion that require the exchanges of model performance predictions across disciplines. In both cases, distortions are impressed on optical models to evaluate the impact on boresight alignment and wave front error. In the case of Jitter, the disturbances are driven by reactions to motions most often from actuators; however, in the case of thermal distortion, the motions are driven by thermal expansion or contraction as a result of changing temperatures. This then requires a link further upstream to the thermal model, which is used to predict the thermal performance and temperature gradients and stability. The process for mapping temperatures from a thermal model to a corresponding structural model has been performed numerous times through the RST project lifecycle, with improvements in the accuracy, verification, and effort sought throughout. This paper describes some of the recent improvements to the process, including: capture of the visualization parameters, automatic generation of the mapped images for both the thermal and structural model groupings, and reduction in the effort to assemble the full set of mapped temperatures. These upgrades have greatly reduced the manual effort associated with thermal mapping and allowed for faster turn-around of Integrated Modeling predictions.

Thermal Mapping↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA Space Launch System Operations Outlook

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Space Launch System (SLS) Program, managed at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), is working with the Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) Program, based at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), to deliver a new safe, affordable, and sustainable capability for human and scientific exploration beyond Earth's orbit (BEO). Larger than the Saturn V Moon rocket, SLS will provide 10 percent more thrust at liftoff in its initial 70 metric ton (t) configuration and 20 percent more in its evolved 130-t configuration. The primary mission of the SLS rocket will be to launch astronauts to deep space destinations in the Orion Multi- Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), also in development and managed by the Johnson Space Center. Several high-priority science missions also may benefit from the increased payload volume and reduced trip times offered by this powerful, versatile rocket. Reducing the lifecycle costs for NASA's space transportation flagship will maximize the exploration and scientific discovery returned from the taxpayer's investment. To that end, decisions made during development of SLS and associated systems will impact the nation's space exploration capabilities for decades. This paper will provide an update to the operations strategy presented at SpaceOps 2012. It will focus on: 1) Preparations to streamline the processing flow and infrastructure needed to produce and launch the world's largest rocket (i.e., through incorporation and modification of proven, heritage systems into the vehicle and ground systems); 2) Implementation of a lean approach to reach-back support of hardware manufacturing, green-run testing, and launch site processing and activities; and 3) Partnering between the vehicle design and operations communities on state-of-the-art predictive operations analysis techniques. An example of innovation is testing the integrated vehicle at the processing facility in parallel, rather than sequentially, saving both time and money. These themes are accomplished under the context of a new cross-program integration model that emphasizes peer-to-peer accountability and collaboration towards a common, shared goal. Utilizing the lessons learned through 50 years of human space flight experience, SLS is assigning the right number of people from appropriate backgrounds, providing them the right tools, and exercising the right processes for the job. The result will be a powerful, versatile, and capable heavy-lift, human-rated asset for the future human and scientific exploration of space.

Hefner, William Keith↗
NASA NTRS2018

Collaborative Systems Engineering in the Ascent Abort-2 Crew Module/Separation Ring Project

Generally speaking, systems engineering (SE) tool-sets face a dilemma balancing power and accessibility. High-powered SE tools (MagicDraw, Cradle, Core, etc.) tend to be specialized and are available only to highly trained Systems Engineers, and/or through the use of a 'back room' developer team making the output products available to the broader team. On the other hand, highly accessible tools (MS Word, Excel, etc.) do not have the power to implement SE in a rigorous manner. NASA has to test all aspects of the new human-rated Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle spacecraft prior to its first crewed mission. The test program includes uncrewed launch abort flight tests to demonstrate the capability to save the crew in the event that a launch failure occurs. Orion's second abort flight test will be a low-altitude flight test known as "Ascent Abort 2 (AA-2)." This test is currently scheduled to be carried out at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station's Space Launch Complex 46 (SLC-46) in Florida in 2019. NASA's in-house AA-2 Crew Module and Separation Ring (CSR) Team is producing the crew module and separation ring. Operating jointly as both an Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Project and an Orion Project, the CSR project charter includes development of innovative, streamlined and generally more efficient practices for creation of flight hardware and software. One result of this tasking has been development of a collaborative and data-centric systems engineering environment within the team's shared web environment (Microsoft SharePoint). Through the use of built-in, 'out of the box capabilities' present in MS SharePoint, the CSR Systems Engineering team has created (with some limited developer support) a data-centric architecture for the project's SE implementation, including functional and interface analysis, requirements development and management, risk management, verification planning and management, test results, and end item management. Data elements are linked between data structures so as to define and control relationships between item types, link requirements to parents and children, and link tests to the requirements that they verify. The overall project team integration is increased by also linking SE content to project management content over the project life cycle, including team communication, action items, configuration management, decisional and meeting materials, and life cycle reviews. This presentation will provide an overview of the collaborative SE environment, showing how it provides the power for a number of SE tasks while still providing the accessibility and transparency to allow the full project team to collaborate and succeed. Given the project phase, we'll be able to present a nearly full lifecycle discussion, from concept through verification and approaching delivery.

Systems Engineering environments↗
NASA NTRS2011

Software Development Standard Processes (SDSP)

A JPL-created set of standard processes is to be used throughout the lifecycle of software development. These SDSPs cover a range of activities, from management and engineering activities, to assurance and support activities. These processes must be applied to software tasks per a prescribed set of procedures. JPL s Software Quality Improvement Project is currently working at the behest of the JPL Software Process Owner to ensure that all applicable software tasks follow these procedures. The SDSPs are captured as a set of 22 standards in JPL s software process domain. They were developed in-house at JPL by a number of Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) residing primarily within the Engineering and Science Directorate, but also from the Business Operations Directorate and Safety and Mission Success Directorate. These practices include not only currently performed best practices, but also JPL-desired future practices in key thrust areas like software architecting and software reuse analysis. Additionally, these SDSPs conform to many standards and requirements to which JPL projects are beholden.

Lavin, Milton L.↗
NASA NTRS2007

MODIS Aerosol Observations used to Constrain Dust Distributions and Lifecycle in the NASA GEOS-5 Model

Approximately 240 Tg of mineral dust aerosol are transported annually from Saharan Africa to the Atlantic Ocean. Dust affects the Earth radiation budget, and plays direct (through scattering and absorption of radiation) and indirect (through modification of cloud properties and environment) roles in climate. Deposition of dust to the surface provides an important nutrient source to terrestrial and oceanic ecosystems. Dust is additionally a contributor to adverse air quality. Among the tools toward understanding the lifecycle and impacts of mineral dust aerosols are numerical models. Important constraints on these models come from quantitative satellite observations, like those from the space-based Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS). In particular, Kauhan et al. [2005] used MODIS aerosol observations to infer transport and deposition fluxes of Saharan dust over the Atlantic, Caribbean, and Amazonian basins. Those observations are used here to constrain the transport of dust and its interannual variability simulated in the NASA GEOS-5 general circulation model and data assimilation system. Significant uncertainty exists in the MODIS-derived fluxes, however, due to uncertainty in the wind fields provided by meteorological analyses in this region. That same uncertainty in the wind fields is manifest in our GEOS-5 simulations of dust distributions. Here we use MODIS observations to investigate the seasonality and location of the Saharan dust plume and explore through sensitivity analysis of our model the meteorological controls on the dust distribution, including dust direct radiative effects and sub-gridscale source and sink processes.

Colarco, P.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Failure Assessment

Three questions to which software developers want accurate, precise answers are "How can the software system fail?", "mat bad things will happen if the software fails?t', and "How many failures will the software experience?". Numerous techniques have been devised to answer these questions; three of the best known are: 1) Software Fault Tree Analysis (SFTA) 2) Software Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (SFMECA 3) Software Fault/Failure Modeling. SFTA and SFMECA have been successfully used to analyze the flight software for a number of robotic planetary exploration missions, including Galileo, Cassini, and Deep Space 1. Given the increasing interest in reusing software components from mission to mission, one of us has developed techniques for reusing the corresponding portions of the SFTA and SFMECA, reducing the effort required to conduct these analyses. SFTA has also been shown to be effective in analyzing the security aspects of software systems; intrusion mechanisms and effects can easily be modeled using these techniques. The Bi- Directional Safety Analysis (BDSA) method combines a forward search (similar to SFMECA) from potential failure modes to their effects, with a backward search (similar to SFTA) from feasible hazards to the contributing causes of each hazard. BDSA offers an efficient way to identify latent failures. Recent work has extended BDSA to product-line applications such as flight-instrumentation displays and developed tool support for the reuse of the failure-analysis artifacts within a product line. BDSA has also been streamlined to support those projects having tight cost and/or schedule constraints for their failure analysis efforts. We discuss lessons learned from practice, describe available tools, and identi@ some future directions for the topic. A substantial amount of research has been devoted to estimating the number of failures that a software system will experience during test and operations, as well as the number of faults that have been inserted into that system during its development. One of us has found that the amount of structural change to a system during its development is strongly related to the number of faults inserted into it. Using techniques requiring no additional effort on the part of the development organization, the required measurements of structural evolution can be easily obtained from a development effort's configuration management system and readily transformed into an estimate of fault content. So far, structure-fault relationships have been identified for source code; current work seeks to examine artifacts available earlier in the lifecycle to determine if similar relationships between structure and fault content can be found. In particular, relationships between requirements change requests and the number of faults inserted into the implemented system would provide a significant improvement in our ability to control software quality during the early development phases.

fault tree↗
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 NTRSDate not supplied

Machine Learning for NASA Advanced Information Systems

NASA's Advanced Information Systems Technology (AIST) Program is one of several Technology programs managed by the Earth Science Technology Office (ESTO) in the Earth Science Division (ESD). The AIST Program focuses on advanced information systems and novel computer science technologies that will be needed by NASA Earth Science in the next 5 to 10 years. The three main thrusts of the AIST Program deal with Novel Observing Strategies (NOS), Analytic Collaborative Frameworks (ACF) and Earth System Digital Twins (ESDT). For all these thrusts, Machine Learning (ML) is increasingly being used in multiple aspects of Earth science systems, e.g., for onboard autonomy and decision making, for the analysis of massive and diverse datasets as well as more recently for developing surrogate models that will represent one of the main components of future Digital Twins of the Earth. Particularly, ESDT technologies developed by the AIST Program will allow to develop integrated Earth Science frameworks that will mirror the Earth with state-of-the-art models (Earth system models and others), timely and relevant observations, and analytic tools. These information systems will be used for supporting near- and long-term science and policy decisions. ESDT frameworks will build on previously developed AIST capabilities and technologies to integrate interconnected models with continuous streams of observations, data analytics, data assimilation, simulations, advanced visualizations and the ability to conduct "what-if" scenarios. This talk will describe the three thrusts of the AIST Program with a special focus on Machine Learning and how it is being used at all steps of the Earth Science data lifecycle.

Mathematical and Computer Sciences (General)↗