Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “contractors”

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

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

At least 1,711 records · Page 95
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

Solar Array Structures for 300 kW-Class Spacecraft

State-of-the-art solar arrays for spacecraft provide on the order of 20 kW of electrical power, and they usually consist of 3J solar cells bonded to hinged rigid panels about 1 inch in thickness. This structural construction allows specific mass and packaging volumes of up to approximately 70 W/kg and 15 kW/m3 to be achieved. Significant advances in solar array structures are required for future very-high-power spacecraft (300+ kW), such as those proposed for pre-positioning heavy cargo on or near the Moon, Mars, or asteroids using solar electric propulsion. These applications will require considerable increases in both W/kg and kW/m3, and will undoubtedly require the use of flexible-substrate designs. This presentation summarizes work sponsored by NASA's Game Changing Development Program since Oct. 2011 to address the challenge of developing 300+ kW solar arrays. The work is primarily being done at NASA Langley, NASA Glenn, and two contractor teams (ATK and DSS), with technical collaboration from AFRL/Kirtland. The near-tem objective of the project is design, analysis, and testing of 30-50 kW solar array designs that are extensible to the far-term objective of 300+ kW. The work is currently focused on three designs: the MegaFlex concept by ATK, the Mega-ROSA concept by DSS, and an in-house 300-kW Government Reference Array concept. Each of these designs will be described in the presentation. Results obtained to date by the team, as well as future work plans, for the design, analysis, and testing of these large solar array structures will be summarized.

Pappa, Richard↗
NASA NTRS2013

Configuration Management at NASA

NASA programs are characterized by complexity, harsh environments and the fact that we usually have one chance to get it right. Programs last decades and need to accept new hardware and technology as it is developed. We have multiple suppliers and international partners Our challenges are many, our costs are high and our failures are highly visible. CM systems need to be scalable, adaptable to new technology and span the life cycle of the program (30+ years). Multiple Systems, Contractors and Countries added major levels of complexity to the ISS program and CM/DM and Requirements management systems center dot CM Systems need to be designed for long design life center dot Space Station Design started in 1984 center dot Assembly Complete in 2012 center dot Systems were developed on a task basis without an overall system perspective center dot Technology moves faster than a large project office, try to make sure you have a system that can adapt

Doreswamy, Rajiv↗
NASA NTRS2013

Tuning and Robustness Analysis for the Orion Absolute Navigation System

The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) is currently under development as NASA's next-generation spacecraft for exploration missions beyond Low Earth Orbit. The MPCV is set to perform an orbital test ight, termed Exploration Flight Test 1 (EFT-1), some time in late 2014. The navigation system for the Orion spacecraft is being designed in a Multi-Organizational Design Environment (MODE) team including contractor and NASA personnel. The system uses an Extended Kalman Filter to process measurements and determine the state. The design of the navigation system has undergone several iterations and modi cations since its inception, and continues as a work-in-progress. This paper seeks to show the e orts made to-date in tuning the lter for the EFT-1 mission and instilling appropriate robustness into the system to meet the requirements of manned space ight. The results generally show Monte Carlo error performance bounded by the lter uncertainty for all phases of ight. Some future items of investigation are presented related to suspected anomalies in the trajectory truth reference le.

Holt, Greg N.↗
NASA NTRS2013

KSC Tech Transfer News, Volume 5, No. 2

Kennedy Tech Transfer News is the semiannual magazine of the Innovative Partnerships Program Office at NASA Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida. This magazine seeks to inform and educate cMI servant and Contractor personnel at Kennedy about actively participating in achieving NASA's technology transfer goals

Nichols, James D.↗
NASA NTRS2013

JCL Implementation On A Human Spaceflight Program

Joint Confidence Level (JCL) analysis focuses on the integration of traditionally stove-piped programmatic components (schedule, cost and risk) to establish projected resource and schedule requirements at various confidence levels and to identify programmatic cost and schedule risk drivers. SLS Program consists of multiple Prime Contractors managed by independent SLS Elements which are integrated using SE&I and Program Management. SLS further integrates with GSDO and MPCV through ESD integrated working groups.

Kulpa, Vyga↗
NASA NTRS2014

Design, Integration, Certification and Testing of the Orion Crew Module Propulsion System

The Orion Multipurpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) is NASA's next generation spacecraft for human exploration of deep space. Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor for the design, development, qualification and integration of the vehicle. A key component of the Orion Crew Module (CM) is the Propulsion Reaction Control System, a high‐flow hydrazine system used during re‐entry to orient the vehicle for landing. The system consists of a completely redundant helium (GHe) pressurization system and hydrazine fuel system with monopropellant thrusters. The propulsion system has been designed, integrated, and qualification tested in support of the Orion program's first orbital flight test, Exploration Flight Test One (EFT‐1), scheduled for 2014. A subset of the development challenges and lessons learned from this first flight test campaign will be discussed in this paper for consideration when designing future spacecraft propulsion systems. The CONOPS and human rating requirements of the CM propulsion system are unique when compared with a typical satellite propulsion reaction control system. The system requires a high maximum fuel flow rate. It must operate at both vacuum and sea level atmospheric pressure conditions. In order to meet Orion's human rating requirements, multiple parts of the system must be redundant, and capable of functioning after spacecraft system fault events.

McKay, Heather↗
NASA NTRS2014

Configuration Management Process Assessment Strategy

Purpose: To propose a strategy for assessing the development and effectiveness of configuration management systems within Programs, Projects, and Design Activities performed by technical organizations and their supporting development contractors. Scope: Various entities CM Systems will be assessed dependent on Project Scope (DDT&E), Support Services and Acquisition Agreements. Approach: Model based structured against assessing organizations CM requirements including best practices maturity criteria. The model is tailored to the entity being assessed dependent on their CM system. The assessment approach provides objective feedback to Engineering and Project Management of the observed CM system maturity state versus the ideal state of the configuration management processes and outcomes(system). center dot Identifies strengths and risks versus audit gotcha's (findings/observations). center dot Used "recursively and iteratively" throughout program lifecycle at select points of need. (Typical assessments timing is Post PDR/Post CDR) center dot Ideal state criteria and maturity targets are reviewed with the assessed entity prior to an assessment (Tailoring) and is dependent on the assessed phase of the CM system. center dot Supports exit success criteria for Preliminary and Critical Design Reviews. center dot Gives a comprehensive CM system assessment which ultimately supports configuration verification activities.*

Henry, Thad↗
NASA NTRS2014

A Flight Research Overview of WSPR, a Pilot Project for Sonic Boom Community Response

In support of NASAs ongoing effort to bring supersonic commercial travel to the public, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center and NASA Langley Research Center, in cooperation with other industry organizations, conducted a flight research experiment to identify the methods, tools, and best practices for a large-scale quiet (or low) sonic boom community human response test. The name of the effort was Waveforms and Sonic boom Perception and Response. Such tests will go towards building a dataset that governing agencies like the Federal Aviation Administration and International Civil Aviation Organization will use to establish regulations for acceptable sound levels of overland sonic booms. Until WSPR, there had never been an effort that studied the response of people in their own homes and performing daily activities to non-traditional, low sonic booms.WSPR was a NASA collaborative effort with several industry partners, in response to a NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate Research Opportunities in Aeronautics. The primary contractor was Wyle. Other partners included Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, Pennsylvania State University, Tetra Tech, and Fidell Associates, Inc.A major objective of the effort included exposing a community with the sonic boom magnitudes and occurrences expected in high-air traffic regions with a network of supersonic commercial aircraft in place. Low-level sonic booms designed to simulate those produced by the next generation of commercial supersonic aircraft were generated over a small residential community. The sonic boom footprint was recorded with an autonomous wireless microphone array that spanned the entire community. Human response data was collected using multiple survey methods. The research focused on essential elements of community response testing including subject recruitment, survey methods, instrumentation systems, flight planning and operations, and data analysis methods.This paper focuses on NASAs role in the efforts logistics and operations including human response subject recruitment, the operational processes involved in implementing the surveys throughout the community, instrumentation systems, logistics, flight planning, and flight operations. Findings discussed in this paper include critical lessons learned in all of those areas. The paper also discusses flight operations results. Analysis of the accuracy and repeatability of planning and executing the unique aircraft maneuver used to generate low sonic booms concluded that the sonic booms had overpressures within 0.15 pounds-per-square-feet of the planned values for 76 of t he attempts. Similarly, 90 of the attempts to generate low sonic booms within the community were successful.

sonic booms↗
NASA NTRS2014

A Flight Research Overview of WSPR, a Pilot Project for Sonic Boom Community Response

In support of the ongoing effort by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to bring supersonic commercial travel to the public, the NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center and the NASA Langley Research Center, in cooperation with other industry organizations, conducted a flight research experiment to identify the methods, tools, and best practices for a large-scale quiet (or low) sonic boom community human response test. The name of the effort was Waveforms and Sonic boom Perception and Response (WSPR). Such tests will be applied to building a dataset that governing agencies such as the Federal Aviation Administration and the International Civil Aviation Organization will use to establish regulations for acceptable sound levels of overland sonic booms. The WSPR test was the first such effort that studied responses to non-traditional low sonic booms while the subject persons were in their own homes and performing daily activities.The WSPR test was a NASA collaborative effort with several industry partners, in response to a NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate Research Opportunities in Aeronautics. The primary contractor was Wyle (El Segundo, California). Other partners included Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation (Savannah, Georgia); Pennsylvania State University (University Park, Pennsylvania); Tetra Tech, Inc. (Pasadena, California); and Fidell Associates, Inc. (Woodland Hills, California).A major objective of the effort included exposing a community to the sonic boom magnitudes and occurrences that would be expected to occur in high-air traffic regions having a network of supersonic commercial aircraft in place. Low-level sonic booms designed to simulate those produced by the next generation of commercial supersonic aircraft were generated over a small residential community. The sonic boom footprint was recorded with an autonomous wireless microphone array that spanned the entire community. Human response data were collected using multiple survey methods. The research focused on essential elements of community response testing including subject recruitment, survey methods, instrumentation systems, flight planning and operations, and data analysis methods.This paper focuses on the NASA role in the logistics and operations of the effort, including human response subject recruitment, the operational processes involved in implementing the surveys throughout the community, instrumentation systems, logistics, flight planning, and flight operations. Findings discussed in this paper include critical lessons learned in all of the above-mentioned areas, as well as flight operations results. Analysis of the accuracy and repeatability of planning and executing the unique aircraft maneuver used to generate low sonic booms concluded that the sonic booms had overpressures within 0.15 lbft2 of the planned values for 76 percent of the attempts. Similarly, 90 percent of the attempts to generate low sonic booms within the community were successful.

community response↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA Space Rocket Logistics Challenges

The Space Launch System (SLS) is the new NASA heavy lift launch vehicle and is scheduled for its first mission in 2017. The goal of the first mission, which will be uncrewed, is to demonstrate the integrated system performance of the SLS rocket and spacecraft before a crewed flight in 2021. SLS has many of the same logistics challenges as any other large scale program. Common logistics concerns for SLS include integration of discreet programs geographically separated, multiple prime contractors with distinct and different goals, schedule pressures and funding constraints. However, SLS also faces unique challenges. The new program is a confluence of new hardware and heritage, with heritage hardware constituting seventy-five percent of the program. This unique approach to design makes logistics concerns such as commonality especially problematic. Additionally, a very low manifest rate of one flight every four years makes logistics comparatively expensive. That, along with the SLS architecture being developed using a block upgrade evolutionary approach, exacerbates long-range planning for supportability considerations. These common and unique logistics challenges must be clearly identified and tackled to allow SLS to have a successful program. This paper will address the common and unique challenges facing the SLS programs, along with the analysis and decisions the NASA Logistics engineers are making to mitigate the threats posed by each.

Neeley, James R.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Software Engineering for Human Spaceflight

The Spacecraft Software Engineering Branch of NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) provides world‐class products, leadership, and technical expertise in software engineering, processes, technology, and systems management for human spaceflight. The branch contributes to major NASA programs (e.g. ISS, MPCV/Orion) with in‐house software development and prime contractor oversight, and maintains the JSC Engineering Directorate CMMI rating for flight software development. Software engineering teams work with hardware developers, mission planners, and system operators to integrate flight vehicles, habitats, robotics, and other spacecraft elements. They seek to infuse automation and autonomy into missions, and apply new technologies to flight processor and computational architectures. This presentation will provide an overview of key software‐related projects, software methodologies and tools, and technology pursuits of interest to the JSC Spacecraft Software Engineering Branch.

Fredrickson, Steven E.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Space Architecture: The Role, Work and Aptitude

Space architecture has been an emerging discipline for at least 40 years. Has it arrived? Is space architecture a legitimate vocation or an avocation? If it leads to a job, what do employers want? In 2002, NASA Headquarters created a management position for a space architect whose job was to "lead the development of strategic architectures and identify high level requirements for systems that will accomplish the Nation's space exploration vision." This is a good job description with responsibility at the right level in NASA, but unfortunately, the office was discontinued two years later. Even though there is no accredited academic program or professional licensing for space architecture, there is a community of practitioners. They are civil servants, contractors and academicians supporting International Space Station and space exploration programs. In various ways, space architects currently contribute to human spaceflight, but there is a way for the discipline to be more effective in developing solutions to large scale complex problems. This paper organizes contributions from engineers, architects and psychologists into recommendations on the role of space architects in the organization, the process of creating and selecting options, and intrinsic personality traits including why they must have a high tolerance for ambiguity.

Griffin, Brand↗
NASA NTRS2014

The History of Orbiter Corrosion Control (1981 - 2011)

After 135 missions and 30 years the Orbiter fleet was retired in 2011. Working with Orbiter project management and a world class engineering team the CCRB was successful in providing successful sustaining engineering support for approximately 20 years. Lessons learned from the Orbiter program have aided NASA and contractor engineers in the design and manufacture of new spacecraft so that exploration of space can continue. The Orbiters are proudly being displayed for all the public to see in New York City, Washington D.C., Los Angeles, and at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

Corrosion↗
NASA NTRS2014

A Historical Analysis of Crane Mishaps at Kennedy Space Center

Cranes and hoists are widely used in many areas. Crane accidents and handling mishaps are responsible for injuries, costly equipment damage, and program delays. Most crane accidents are caused by preventable factors. Understanding these factors is critical when designing cranes and preparing lift plans. Analysis of previous accidents provides insight into current recommendations for crane safety. Cranes and hoists are used throughout Kennedy Space Center to lift everything from machine components to critical flight hardware. Unless they are trained crane operators, most NASA employees and contractors do not need to undergo specialized crane training and may not understand the safety issues surrounding the use of cranes and hoists. A single accident with a crane or hoist can injure or kill people, cause severe equipment damage, and delay or terminate a program. Handling mishaps can also have a significant impact on the program. Simple mistakes like bouncing or jarring a load, or moving the crane down when it should go up, can damage fragile flight hardware and cause major delays in processing. Hazardous commodities (high pressure gas, hypergolic propellants, and solid rocket motors) can cause life safety concerns for the workers performing the lifting operations. Most crane accidents are preventable with the correct training and understanding of potential hazards. Designing the crane with human factors taken into account can prevent many accidents. Engineers are also responsible for preparing lift plans where understanding the safety issues can prevent or mitigate potential accidents. Cranes are widely used across many areas of KSC. Failure of these cranes often leads to injury, high damage costs, and significant delays in program objectives. Following a basic set of principles and procedures during design, fabrication, testing, regular use, and maintenance can significantly minimize many of these failures. As the accident analysis shows, load drops are often caused or influenced by human factors. Therefore, proper training and understanding of crane safety throughout the workforce is critical. It is important that the engineers designing the cranes, lift planners preparing the lift plans, operators performing the lifts, and training officers conducting the operator training all understand the problems that can happen with cranes and how to ensure the safety of the workforce and equipment being lifted.

Materials Handling↗
NASA NTRS2014

DUKSUP: A Computer Program for High Thrust Launch Vehicle Trajectory Design and Optimization

From the late 1960's through 1997, the leadership of NASA's Intermediate and Large class unmanned expendable launch vehicle projects resided at the NASA Lewis (now Glenn) Research Center (LeRC). One of LeRC's primary responsibilities --- trajectory design and performance analysis --- was accomplished by an internally-developed analytic three dimensional computer program called DUKSUP. Because of its Calculus of Variations-based optimization routine, this code was generally more capable of finding optimal solutions than its contemporaries. A derivation of optimal control using the Calculus of Variations is summarized including transversality, intermediate, and final conditions. The two point boundary value problem is explained. A brief summary of the code's operation is provided, including iteration via the Newton-Raphson scheme and integration of variational and motion equations via a 4th order Runge-Kutta scheme. Main subroutines are discussed. The history of the LeRC trajectory design efforts in the early 1960's is explained within the context of supporting the Centaur upper stage program. How the code was constructed based on the operation of the Atlas/Centaur launch vehicle, the limits of the computers of that era, the limits of the computer programming languages, and the missions it supported are discussed. The vehicles DUKSUP supported (Atlas/Centaur, Titan/Centaur, and Shuttle/Centaur) are briefly described. The types of missions, including Earth orbital and interplanetary, are described. The roles of flight constraints and their impact on launch operations are detailed (such as jettisoning hardware on heating, Range Safety, ground station tracking, and elliptical parking orbits). The computer main frames on which the code was hosted are described. The applications of the code are detailed, including independent check of contractor analysis, benchmarking, leading edge analysis, and vehicle performance improvement assessments. Several of DUKSUP's many major impacts on launches are discussed including Intelsat, Voyager, Pioneer Venus, HEAO, Galileo, and Cassini.

high thrust trajectory design↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA Glenn Research Center Support of the ASRG Project

A high efficiency radioisotope power system is being developed for long-duration NASA space science missions. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) managed a flight contract with Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company (LMSSC) to build Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generators (ASRGs), with support from NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC). Sunpower Inc. held two parallel contracts to produce Advanced Stirling Convertors (ASCs), one with DOELockheed Martin to produce ASC-F flight units, and one with GRC for the production of ASC-E3 engineering unit pathfinders that are built to the flight design. In support of those contracts, GRC provided testing, materials expertise, government furnished equipment, inspections, and related data products to DOELockheed Martin and Sunpower. The technical support includes material evaluations, component tests, convertor characterization, and technology transfer. Material evaluations and component tests have been performed on various ASC components in order to assess potential life-limiting mechanisms and provide data for reliability models. Convertor level tests have been used to characterize performance under operating conditions that are representative of various mission conditions. Technology transfers enhanced contractor capabilities for specialized production processes and tests. Despite termination of flight ASRG contract, NASA continues to develop the high efficiency ASC conversion technology under the ASC-E3 contract. This paper describes key government furnished services performed for ASRG and future tests used to provide data for ongoing reliability assessments.

Technology Transfer↗
NASA NTRS2014

Design Visualization Internship Overview

This is a report documenting the details of my work as a NASA KSC intern for the Summer Session from June 2nd to August 8th, 2014. This work was conducted within the Design Visualization Group, a Contractor staffed organization within the C1 division of the IT Directorate. The principle responsibilities of the KSC Design Visualization Group are the production of 3D simulations of NASA equipment and facilities for the purpose of planning complex operations such as hardware transportation and vehicle assembly. My role as an intern focused on aiding engineers in using 3D scanning equipment to obtain as-built measurements of NASA facilities, as well as using CATIA and DELMIA to process this data. My primary goals for this internship focused on expanding my CAD knowledge and capabilities, while also learning more about technologies I was previously unfamiliar with, such as 3D scanning. An additional goal of mine was to learn more about how NASA operates, and how the U.S. Space Program operates on a day-to-day basis. This opportunity provided me with a front-row seat to the daily maneuvers and operations of KSC and NASA as a whole. Each work day, I was able to witness, and even take part of, a small building block of the future systems that will take astronauts to other worlds. After my experiences this summer, not only can I say that my goals have been met, but also that this experience has been the highlight of my experience in higher education.

Telescience↗
NASA NTRS2014

Supporting Multiple Programs and Projects at NASA's Kennedy Space Center

With the conclusion of the shuttle program in 2011, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) had found itself at a crossroads for finding transportation of United States astronauts and experiments to space. The agency would eventually hand off the taxiing of American astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) that orbits in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) about 210 miles above the earth under the requirements of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP). By privatizing the round trip journey from Earth to the ISS, the space agency has been given the additional time to focus funding and resources to projects that operate beyond LEO; however, adding even more stress to the agency, the premature cancellation of the program that would succeed the Shuttle Program - The Constellation Program (CxP) -it would inevitably delay the goal to travel beyond LEO for a number of years. Enter the Space Launch System (SLS) and the Orion Multipurpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). Currently, the SLS is under development at NASA's Marshall Spaceflight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, while the Orion Capsule, built by government contractor Lockheed Martin Corporation, has been assembled and is currently under testing at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida. In its current vision, SLS will take Orion and its crew to an asteroid that had been captured in an earlier mission in lunar orbit. Additionally, this vehicle and its configuration is NASA's transportation to Mars. Engineers at the Kennedy Space Center are currently working to test the ground systems that will facilitate the launch of Orion and the SLS within its Ground Services Development and Operations (GSDO) Program. Firing Room 1 in the Launch Control Center (LCC) has been refurbished and outfitted to support the SLS Program. In addition, the Spaceport Command and Control System (SCCS) is the underlying control system for monitoring and launching manned launch vehicles. As NASA finds itself at a junction, so does all of its associated centers across the US. KSC has found itself at the blunt end of change as the entire center has transitioned from an operations mindset to a development mentality. The author of this paper has had the fortunate privilege and opportunity to be part of a transforming NASA during the fall months of 2014. The following is a high level account of projects that he had the chance to work on including the Spaceport Command and Control System, the Advanced Ground System and Maintenance Program Project, Customer Avionics Development & Analysis (CAIDA) Lab and Swamp Works.

Advanced Ground System Maintenance↗