SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “risk management flight 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 163 records · Page 9

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2013

Modeling to Improve the Risk Reduction Process for Command File Errors

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory has learned that even innocuous errors in the spacecraft command process can have significantly detrimental effects on a space mission. Consequently, such Command File Errors (CFE), regardless of their effect on the spacecraft, are treated as significant events for which a root cause is identified and corrected. A CFE during space mission operations is often the symptom of imbalance or inadequacy within the system that encompasses the hardware and software used for command generation as well as the human experts and processes involved in this endeavor. As we move into an era of increased collaboration with other NASA centers and commercial partners, these systems become more and more complex. Consequently, the ability to thoroughly model and analyze CFEs formally in order to reduce the risk they pose is increasingly important. In this paper, we summarize the results of applying modeling techniques previously developed to the DAWN flight project. The original models were built with the input of subject matter experts from several flight projects. We have now customized these models to address specific questions for the DAWN flight project and formulating use cases to address their unique mission needs. The goal of this effort is to enhance the project's ability to meet commanding reliability requirements for operations and to assist them in managing their Command File Errors.

spacecraft↗

NASA NTRS1996

Requirement Metrics for Risk Identification

The Software Assurance Technology Center (SATC) is part of the Office of Mission Assurance of the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). The SATC's mission is to assist National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) projects to improve the quality of software which they acquire or develop. The SATC's efforts are currently focused on the development and use of metric methodologies and tools that identify and assess risks associated with software performance and scheduled delivery. This starts at the requirements phase, where the SATC, in conjunction with software projects at GSFC and other NASA centers is working to identify tools and metric methodologies to assist project managers in identifying and mitigating risks. This paper discusses requirement metrics currently being used at NASA in a collaborative effort between the SATC and the Quality Assurance Office at GSFC to utilize the information available through the application of requirements management tools.

Hammer, Theodore↗

NASA NTRS2011

NASA Tech Briefs, August 2011

Topics covered include: Miniature, Variable-Speed Control Moment Gyroscope; NBL Pistol Grip Tool for Underwater Training of Astronauts; HEXPANDO Expanding Head for Fastener-Retention Hexagonal Wrench; Diagonal-Axes Stage for Pointing an Optical Communications Transceiver; Improvements in Speed and Functionality of a 670-GHz Imaging Radar; IONAC-Lite; Large Ka-Band Slot Array for Digital Beam-Forming Applications; Development of a 150-GHz MMIC Module Prototype for Large-Scale CMB Radiation; Coupling Between Waveguide-Fed Slot Arrays; PCB-Based Break-Out Box; Multiple-Beam Detection of Fast Transient Radio Sources; Router Agent Technology for Policy-Based Network Management; Remote Asynchronous Message Service Gateway; Automatic Tie Pointer for In-Situ Pointing Correction; Jitter Correction; MSLICE Sequencing; EOS MLS Level 2 Data Processing Software Version 3; DspaceOgre 3D Graphics Visualization Tool; Metallization for Yb14MnSb11-Based Thermoelectric Materials; Solvent/Non-Solvent Sintering To Make Microsphere Scaffolds; Enhanced Fuel-Optimal Trajectory-Generation Algorithm for Planetary Pinpoint Landing; Self-Cleaning Coatings and Materials for Decontaminating Field-Deployable Land and Water-Based Optical Systems; Separation of Single-Walled Carbon Nanotubes with DEP-FFF; Li Anode Technology for Improved Performance; Post-Fragmentation Whole Genome Amplification-Based Method; Microwave Tissue Soldering for Immediate Wound Closure; Principles, Techniques, and Applications of Tissue Microfluidics; Robotic Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering and Organ Growth; Stress-Driven Selection of Novel Phenotypes; Method for Accurately Calibrating a Spectrometer Using Broadband Light; Catalytic Microtube Rocket Igniter; Stage Cylindrical Immersive Display; Vacuum Camera Cooler; Atomic Oxygen Fluence Monitor; Thermal Management Tools for Propulsion System Trade Studies and Analysis; Introduction to Physical Intelligence; Technique for Solving Electrically Small to Large Structures for Broadband Applications; Accelerated Adaptive MGS Phase Retrieval; Large Eddy Simulation Study for Fluid Disintegration and Mixing; Tropospheric Correction for InSAR Using Interpolated ECMWF Data and GPS Zenith Total Delay; Technique for Calculating Solution Derivatives With Respect to Geometry Parameters in a CFD Code; Acute Radiation Risk and BRYNTRN Organ Dose Projection Graphical User Interface; Probabilistic Path Planning of Montgolfier Balloons in Strong, Uncertain Wind Fields; Flight Simulation of ARES in the Mars Environment; Low-Outgassing Photogrammetry Targets for Use in Outer Space; Planning the FUSE Mission Using the SOVA Algorithm; Monitoring Spacecraft Telemetry Via Optical or RF Link; and Robust Thermal Control of Propulsion Lines for Space Missions.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1989

Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel

This report provides findings, conclusions and recommendations regarding the National Space Transportation System (NSTS), the Space Station Freedom Program (SSFP), aeronautical projects and other areas of NASA activities. The main focus of the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) during 1988 has been monitoring and advising NASA and its contractors on the Space Transportation System (STS) recovery program. NASA efforts have restored the flight program with a much better management organization, safety and quality assurance organizations, and management communication system. The NASA National Space Transportation System (NSTS) organization in conjunction with its prime contractors should be encouraged to continue development and incorporation of appropriate design and operational improvements which will further reduce risk. The data from each Shuttle flight should be used to determine if affordable design and/or operational improvements could further increase safety. The review of Critical Items (CILs), Failure Mode Effects and Analyses (FMEAs) and Hazard Analyses (HAs) after the Challenger accident has given the program a massive data base with which to establish a formal program with prioritized changes.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2007

2007 Lunar Regolith Simulant Workshop Overview

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) vision has as a cornerstone, the establishment of an Outpost on the Moon. This Lunar Outpost will eventually provide the necessary planning, technology development, and training for a manned mission to Mars in the future. As part of the overall activity, NASA is conducting Earth-based research and advancing technologies to a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 6 maturity under the Exploration Technology Development Program that will be incorporated into the Constellation Project as well as other projects. All aspects of the Lunar environment, including the Lunar regolith and its properties, are important in understanding the long-term impacts to hardware, scientific instruments, and humans prior to returning to the Moon and living on the Moon. With the goal of reducing risk to humans and hardware and increasing mission success on the Lunar surface, it is vital that terrestrial investigations including both development and verification testing have access to Lunar-like environments. The Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) is supporting this endeavor by developing, characterizing, and producing Lunar simulants in addition to analyzing existing simulants for appropriate applications. A Lunar Regolith Simulant Workshop was conducted by MSFC in Huntsville, Alabama, in October 2007. The purpose of the Workshop was to bring together simulant developers, simulant users, and program and project managers from ETDP and Constellation with the goals of understanding users' simulant needs and their applications. A status of current simulant developments such as the JSC-1A (Mare Type Simulant) and the NASA/U.S. Geological Survey Lunar Highlands-Type Pilot Simulant (NU-LHT-1 M) was provided. The method for evaluating simulants, performed via Figures of Merit (FoMs) algorithms, was presented and a demonstration was provided. The four FoM properties currently being assessed are: size, shape, density, and composition. Some of the Workshop findings include: simulant developers must understand simulant users' needs and applications; higher fidelity simulants are needed and needed in larger quantities now; simulants must be characterized to allow "apples-to-apples" comparison of test results; simulant users should confer with simulant experts to assist them in the selection of simulants; safety precautions should be taken in the handling and use of simulants; shipping, storing, and preparation of simulants have important implications; and most importantly, close communications among the simulant community must be maintained and will be continued via telecoms, meetings, and an annual Lunar Regolith Simulant Workshop.

McLemore, Carole A.↗

NASA NTRS2007

2007 Lunar Regolith Simulant Workshop Overview

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) vision has as a cornerstone, the establishment of an Outpost on the Moon. This Lunar Outpost will eventually provide the necessary planning, technology development, and training for a manned mission to Mars in the future. As part of the overall activity, NASA is conducting Earth-based research and advancing technologies to a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 6 maturity under the Exploration Technology Development Program that will be incorporated into the Constellation Project as well as other projects. All aspects of the Lunar environment, including the Lunar regolith and its properties, are important in understanding the long-term impacts to hardware, scientific instruments, and humans prior to returning to the Moon and living on the Moon. With the goal of reducing risk to humans and hardware and increasing mission success on the Lunar surface, it is vital that terrestrial investigations including both development and verification testing have access to Lunar-like environments. The Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) is supporting this endeavor by developing, characterizing, and producing Lunar simulants in addition to analyzing existing simulants for appropriate applications. A Lunar Regolith Simulant Workshop was conducted by MSFC in Huntsville, Alabama, in October 2007. The purpose of the Workshop was to bring together simulant developers, simulant users, and program and project managers from ETDP and Constellation with the goals of understanding users' simulant needs and their applications. A status of current simulant developments such as the JSC-1A (Mare Type Simulant) and the NASA/U.S. Geological Survey Lunar Highlands-Type Pilot Simulant (NU-LHT-1M) was provided. The method for evaluating simulants, performed via Figures of Merit (FoMs) algorithms, was presented and a demonstration was provided. The four FoM properties currently being assessed are: size, shape, density, and composition. Some of the Workshop findings include: simulant developers must understand simulant users' needs and applications; higher fidelity simulants are needed and needed in larger quantities now; simulants must be characterized to allow "apples-to-apples" comparison of test results; simulant users should confer with simulant experts to assist them in the selection of simulants; safety precautions should be taken in the handling and use of simulants; shipping, storing, and preparation of simulants have important implications; and most importantly, close communications among the simulant community must be maintained and will be continued via telecoms, meetings, and an annual Lunar Regolith Simulant Workshop.

McLemore, Carole A.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Design and Requirements Creep In A Build-To-Print Mission

Build-to-Print designs, or rebuilds of flight proven designs, are attractive to mission stakeholders, as they give the appearance of minimal engineering development cost, risk, and schedule. The reality is that seldom is a project an exact duplicate of a predecessor. Mission reclassification, improvements in hardware, and science objective changes can all serve as a source of requirements and design creep and have ramifications often not fully anticipated during initial proposals. The Thermal Infrared Sensor Instrument (TIRS) was a late addition to the LandSat-8 program to provide infrared imaging to measure evapotranspiration for water cycle management. To meet the launch requirements for LandSat-8, instrument design life requirements were relaxed, the sensor development expedited, and technology development was minimized. Consequently, TIRS was designed as a higher risk instrument, with less redundancy than an instrument critical to mission success. After the successful LandSat-8 launch in 2013 and instrument performance, a rebuild of the instrument for the next LandSat spacecraft was included in the baseline mission success criteria. This paper discusses the technical challenges encountered during the rebuild of the TIRS-2 (Thermal Infrared Sensor 2) instrument and the resultant impacts on the thermal system design.

TIRS-2 Thermal Design↗

NASA NTRS2017

Radiation Hardness Assurance (RHA): Challenges and New Considerations

Radiation Hardness Assurance (RHA) challenges associated with the use of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components and emerging technologies are cause for risk acceptance in space flight missions. The RHA flow includes environment definition, hazard evaluation, requirements definition, evaluation of design, and design trades to accommodate the risk a project or program takes. The varied missions profiles and environments don't necessarily benefit from the same risk reduction efforts or cost reduction attempts. The level of effort within the RHA flow can be tailored to minimize risk based on the environment or design criticality.

Space Technology↗

NASA NTRS2019

Airborne Radar for sUAS Sense and Avoid

A primary challenge for the safe integration of small UAS operations into the National Airspace System (NAS) is traffic deconfliction, both from manned and unmanned aircraft. The UAS Traffic Management (UTM) project being conducted at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) considers a layered approach to separation provision, ranging from segregation of operations through airspace volumes (geofences) to autonomous sense and avoid (SAA) technologies for higher risk, densely occupied airspace. Cooperative SAA systems, such as Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) and/or vehicle-to-vehicle communication systems provide significant additional risk mitigation but they fail to adequately mitigate collision risks for non-cooperative (non-transponder equipped) airborne aircraft. The RAAVIN (Radar on Autonomous Aircraft to Verify ICAROUS Navigation) flight test being conducted by NASA and the Mid-Atlantic Aviation Partnership (MAAP) was designed to investigate the applicability and performance of a prototype, commercially available sUAS radar to detect and track non-cooperative airborne traffic, both manned and unmanned. The radar selected for this research was a Frequency Modulated Continuous Wave (FMCW) radar with 120 degree azimuth and 80 degree elevation field of view operating at 24.55GHz center frequency with a 200 MHz bandwidth. The radar transmits 2 watts of power thru a Metamaterial Electronically Scanning Array antenna in horizontal polarization. When the radar is transmitting, personnel must be at least 1 meter away from the active array to limit nonionizing radiation exposure. The radar physical dimensions are 18.7cm by 12.1cm by 4.1cm and it weighs less than 820 grams making it well suited for installation on small UASs. The onboard, SAA capability, known as ICAROUS, (Independent Configurable Architecture for Reliable Operations of Unmanned Systems), developed by NASA to support sUAS operations, will provide autonomous guidance using the traffic radar tracks from the onboard radar. The RAAVIN set of studies will be conducted in three phases. The first phase included outdoor, ground-based radar evaluations performed at the Virginia Tech’s Kentland Farm testing range in Blacksburg, VA. The test was designed to measure how well the radar could detect and track a small UAS flying in the radar’s field of view. The radar was used to monitor 5 test flights consisting of outbound, inbound and crossing routes at different ranges and altitudes. The UAS flown during the ground test was the Inspire 2, a quad copter weighing less than 4250 grams (10 pounds) at maximum payload. The radar was set up to scan and track targets over its full azimuthal field of view from 0 to 40 degrees in elevation. The radar was configured to eliminate tracks generated from any targets located beyond 2000 meters from the radar and moving at velocities under 1.45 meters per second. For subsequent phases of the study the radar will be integrated with a sUAS platform to evaluate its performance in flight for SAA applications ranging from sUAS to manned GA aircraft detections and tracking. Preliminary data analysis from the first outdoor ground tests showed the radar performed well at tracking the vehicle as it flew outbound and repeatedly maintained a track out to 1000 meters (maximum 1387 meters) until the vehicle slowed to a stop to reverse direction to fly inbound. As the Inspire flew inbound tracks from beyond 800 meters, a reacquisition time delay was consistently observed between when the Inspire exceeds a speed of 1.45 meters per second and when the radar indicated an inbound target was present and maintained its track. The time delay varied between 6 seconds to over 37 seconds for the inbound flights examined, and typically resulted in about a 200 meter closure distance before the Inspire track was maintained. The radar performed well at both acquiring and tracking the vehicle as it flew crossing routes out past 400 meters across the azimuthal field of view. The radar and ICAROUS software will be integrated and flown on a BFD-1400-SE8-E UAS during the next phase of the RAAVIN project. The main goal at the conclusion of this effort is to determine if this radar technology can reliably support minimum requirements for SAA applications of sUAS. In particular, the study will measure the range of vehicle detections, lateral and vertical angular errors, false and missed/late detections, and estimated distance at closest point of approach after an avoidance maneuver is executed. This last metric is directly impacted by sensor performance and indicates its suitability for the task.

Szatkowski, George N.↗

NASA NTRS2010

NEXT Single String Integration Test Results

As a critical part of NASA's Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) test validation process, a single string integration test was performed on the NEXT ion propulsion system. The objectives of this test were to verify that an integrated system of major NEXT ion propulsion system elements meets project requirements, to demonstrate that the integrated system is functional across the entire power processor and xenon propellant management system input ranges, and to demonstrate to potential users that the NEXT propulsion system is ready for transition to flight. Propulsion system elements included in this system integration test were an engineering model ion thruster, an engineering model propellant management system, an engineering model power processor unit, and a digital control interface unit simulator that acted as a test console. Project requirements that were verified during this system integration test included individual element requirements ; integrated system requirements, and fault handling. This paper will present the results of these tests, which include: integrated ion propulsion system demonstrations of performance, functionality and fault handling; a thruster re-performance acceptance test to establish baseline performance: a risk-reduction PMS-thruster integration test: and propellant management system calibration checks.

Soulas, George C.↗

NASA NTRS1999

The Faster, Better, Cheaper Approach to Space Missions: An Engineering Management Assessment

NASA was chartered as an independent civilian space agency in 1958 following the Soviet Union's dramatic launch of the Sputnik 1 (1957). In his state of the union address in May of 1961, President Kennedy issued to the fledging organization his famous challenge for a manned lunar mission by the end of the decade. The Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programs that followed put the utmost value on high quality, low risk (as low as possible within the context of space flight), quick results, all with little regard for cost. These circumstances essentially melded NASAs culture as an organization capable of great technological achievement but at extremely high cost. The Space Shuttle project, the next major agency endeavor, was put under severe annual budget constraints in the 1970's. NASAs response was to hold to the high quality standards, low risk and annual cost and let schedule suffer. The result was a significant delay in the introduction of the Shuttle as well as overall total cost growth. By the early 1990's, because NASA's budget was declining, the number of projects was also declining. Holding the same cost and schedule productivity levels as before was essentially causing NASA to price itself out of business. In 1992, the helm of NASA was turned over to a new Administrator. Dan Goldin's mantra was "faster, better, cheaper" and his enthusiasm and determination to change the NASA culture was not to be ignored. This research paper documents the various implementations of "faster, better, cheaper" that have been attempted, analyzes their impact and compares the cost performance of these new projects to previous NASA benchmarks. Fundamentally, many elements of "faster, better, cheaper" are found to be working well, especially on smaller projects. Some of the initiatives are found to apply only to smaller or experimental projects however, so that extrapolation to "flagship" projects may be problematic.

Hamaker, Joseph W.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Best Practices for Researching and Documenting Lessons Learned

Identification, resolution, and avoidance of technical and programmatic issues are important for ensuring safe and successful space missions. Although the importance of applying lessons learned to reduce risk is frequently stressed, there is little material available to help technical and management personnel research and document lessons learned. Collecting, researching, identifying, and documenting lessons learned that will be useful to current and future management and engineering personnel is not always a straightforward task. This white paper presents lessons learned and best practices concerning the research and documentation of technical and organizational lessons learned. It is intended to enable organizations to initiate or improve lessons learned research and documentation efforts. The content of this white paper is based on four technical lessons learned projects conducted by the United Space Alliance (USA) Flight Design and Dynamics Department, in support of the NASA/Johnson Space Center (JSC) Flight Design and Dynamics Division. Each project published a report, titled as follows: (1) GPS Lessons Learned From the ISS, Space Shuttle and X-38; (2) Lessons Learned From Seven Space Shuttle Missions; (3) Space Shuttle Rendezvous and Proximity Operations Experience Report; and (4) Navigation Technical History with Lessons Learned. The four projects were different in availability of subject matter experts and primary source material, subject scope, and the level of effort required to produce the final report. However, generic lessons can be drawn from all of them. The best practices will be discussed by the phases of report research and development: (1) Defining Report Requirements, Project Organization, and Schedule; (2) Collection and Analysis of Source Material; (3) Writing and Integrating the Report; and (4) Review and Revision of the Report.

Goodman, John L.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Risk Balance: A Key Tool for Mission Operations Assurance

The Mission Operations Assurance (MOA) discipline actively participates as a project member to achieve their common objective of full mission success while also providing an independent risk assessment to the Project Manager and Office of Safety and Mission Success staff. The cornerstone element of MOA is the independent assessment of the risks the project faces in executing its mission. Especially as the project approaches critical mission events, it becomes imperative to clearly identify and assess the risks the project faces. Quite often there are competing options for the project to select from in deciding how to execute the event. An example includes choices between proven but aging hardware components and unused but unproven components. Timing of the event with respect to visual or telecommunications visibility can be a consideration in the case of Earth reentry or hazardous maneuver events. It is in such situations that MOA is called upon for a risk balance assessment or risk trade study to support their recommendation to the Project Manager for a specific option to select. In the following paragraphs we consider two such assessments, one for the Stardust capsule Earth return and the other for the choice of telecommunications system configuration for the EPOXI flyby of the comet Hartley 2. We discuss the development of the trade space for each project's scenario and characterize the risks of each possible option. The risk characterization we consider includes a determination of the severity or consequence of each risk if realized and the likelihood of its occurrence. We then examine the assessment process to arrive at a MOA recommendation. Finally we review each flight project's decision process and the outcome of their decisions.

operations↗

NASA NTRS2002

Advanced Range Safety System for High Energy Vehicles

The advanced range safety system project is a collaboration between the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the United States Air Force to develop systems that would reduce costs and schedule for safety approval for new classes of unmanned high-energy vehicles. The mission-planning feature for this system would yield flight profiles that satisfy the mission requirements for the user while providing an increased quality of risk assessment, enhancing public safety. By improving the speed and accuracy of predicting risks to the public, mission planners would be able to expand flight envelopes significantly. Once in place, this system is expected to offer the flexibility of handling real-time risk management for the high-energy capabilities of hypersonic vehicles including autonomous return-from-orbit vehicles and extended flight profiles over land. Users of this system would include mission planners of Space Launch Initiative vehicles, space planes, and other high-energy vehicles. The real-time features of the system could make extended flight of a malfunctioning vehicle possible, in lieu of an immediate terminate decision. With this improved capability, the user would have more time for anomaly resolution and potential recovery of a malfunctioning vehicle.

Claxton, Jeffrey S.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Human Systems Integration in Practice: Constellation Lessons Learned

NASA's Constellation program provided a unique testbed for Human Systems Integration (HSI) as a fundamental element of the Systems Engineering process. Constellation was the first major program to have HSI mandated by NASA's Human Rating document. Proper HSI is critical to the success of any project that relies on humans to function as operators, maintainers, or controllers of a system. HSI improves mission, system and human performance, significantly reduces lifecycle costs, lowers risk and minimizes re-design. Successful HSI begins with sufficient project schedule dedicated to the generation of human systems requirements, but is by no means solely a requirements management process. A top-down systems engineering process that recognizes throughout the organization, human factors as a technical discipline equal to traditional engineering disciplines with authority for the overall system. This partners with a bottoms-up mechanism for human-centered design and technical issue resolution. The Constellation Human Systems Integration Group (HSIG) was a part of the Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I) organization within the program office, and existed alongside similar groups such as Flight Performance, Environments & Constraints, and Integrated Loads, Structures and Mechanisms. While the HSIG successfully managed, via influence leadership, a down-and-in Community of Practice to facilitate technical integration and issue resolution, it lacked parallel top-down authority to drive integrated design. This presentation will discuss how HSI was applied to Constellation, the lessons learned and best practices it revealed, and recommendations to future NASA program and project managers. This presentation will discuss how Human Systems Integration (HSI) was applied to NASA's Constellation program, the lessons learned and best practices it revealed, and recommendations to future NASA program and project managers on how to accomplish this critical function.

Zumbado, Jennifer Rochlis↗

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 NTRS2006

Systems Integration Processes for NASA's Crew Launch Vehicle

NASA's Exploration Initiative will require development of many new elements to constitute a robust system of systems. New launch vehicles are needed to place cargo and crew in stable low earth orbit. This paper examines the systems integration processes NASA is utilizing to ensure integration and control of propulsion and non-propulsion elements within NASA's Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV). The objective of the CLV is to provide the transportation capabilities to meet the Constellation Program requirements for delivering a Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) or other payload to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) in support of the lunar and Mars missions. The CLV must successfully provide the capability within cost and schedule with an acceptable risk approach. This paper will describe in detail the systems engineering management processes that will be applied to assure CLV Project success through complete and efficient technical integration. Discussion of specific processes for requirements development and verification, integrated design and analysis, integrated simulation and testing and the integration of reliability, maintainability and supportability (RMS) into the design will also be included. The CLV Project is broken logically into elements by the major hardware groupings, and associated management, system engineering, and integration functions. The processes to be described herein are designed to integrate within these CLV elements and among the other Constellation projects. Launch vehicle stack integration (CLV to CEV, and Ground and Flight Operations integration) throughout the life cycle, including integrated vehicle performance through orbital insertion, recovery of the first stage, and reentry of the upper stage will also be discussed. The processes for decomposing requirements to the Elements and ensuring that requirements have been correctly validated, decomposed, allocated, and that the verification requirements are properly defined to ensure that the system design meets requirements will be discussed.

Reuter, James L.↗

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↗