Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Collaboration”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2012

Using Collaborative Engineering to Inform Collaboration Engineering

Collaboration is a critical competency for modern organizations as they struggle to compete in an increasingly complex, global environment. A large body of research on collaboration in the workplace focuses both on teams, investigating how groups use teamwork to perform their task work, and on the use of information systems to support team processes ("collaboration engineering"). This research essay presents collaboration from an engineering perspective ("collaborative engineering"). It uses examples from professional and student engineering teams to illustrate key differences in collaborative versus collaboration engineering and investigates how challenges in the former can inform opportunities for the latter.

Collaboration Engineering↗
NASA NTRS2004

A Collaboration on Collaboration

NASA's 2003-2004 Leadership Development Program class recognized that effective collaborations are often the key to achieving mission success. Personal connections and common goals were key elements of their work together and key findings of their collaboration benchmarking within the agency.

Cobleigh, Brent↗
NASA NTRS2000

Supporting Scientific Analysis within Collaborative Problem Solving Environments

Collaborative problem solving environments for scientists should contain the analysis tools the scientists require in addition to the remote collaboration tools used for general communication. Unfortunately, most scientific analysis tools have been designed for a "stand-alone mode" and cannot be easily modified to work well in a collaborative environment. This paper addresses the questions, "What features are desired in a scientific analysis tool contained within a collaborative environment?", "What are the tool design criteria needed to provide these features?", and "What support is required from the architecture to support these design criteria?." First, the features of scientific analysis tools that are important for effective analysis in collaborative environments are listed. Next, several design criteria for developing analysis tools that will provide these features are presented. Then requirements for the architecture to support these design criteria are listed. Sonic proposed architectures for collaborative problem solving environments are reviewed and their capabilities to support the specified design criteria are discussed. A deficiency in the most popular architecture for remote application sharing, the ITU T. 120 architecture, prevents it from supporting highly interactive, dynamic, high resolution graphics. To illustrate that the specified design criteria can provide a highly effective analysis tool within a collaborative problem solving environment, a scientific analysis tool that contains the specified design criteria has been integrated into a collaborative environment and tested for effectiveness. The tests were conducted in collaborations between remote sites in the US and between remote sites on different continents. The tests showed that the tool (a tool for the visual analysis of computer simulations of physics) was highly effective for both synchronous and asynchronous collaborative analyses. The important features provided by the tool (and made possible by the specified design criteria) are: 1. The tool provides highly interactive, dynamic, high resolution, 3D graphics. 2. All remote scientists can view the same dynamic, high resolution, 3D scenes of the analysis as the analysis is being conducted. 3. The responsiveness of the tool is nearly identical to the responsiveness of the tool in a stand-alone mode. 4. The scientists can transfer control of the analysis between themselves. 5. Any analysis session or segment of an analysis session, whether done individually or collaboratively, can be recorded and posted on the Web for other scientists or students to download and play in either a collaborative or individual mode. 6. The scientist or student who downloaded the session can, individually or collaboratively, modify or extend the session with his/her own "what if" analysis of the data and post his/her version of the analysis back onto the Web. 7. The peak network bandwidth used in the collaborative sessions is only 1K bit/second even though the scientists at all sites are viewing high resolution (1280 x 1024 pixels), dynamic, 3D scenes of the analysis. The links between the specified design criteria and these performance features are presented.

Watson, Velvin R.↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA as a Convener: Government, Academic and Industry Collaborations Through the NASA Human Health and Performance Center

On October 18, 2010, the NASA Human Health and Performance center (NHHPC) was opened to enable collaboration among government, academic and industry members. Membership rapidly grew to 60 members (http://nhhpc.nasa.gov ) and members began identifying collaborative projects as detailed below. In addition, a first workshop in open collaboration and innovation was conducted on January 19, 2011 by the NHHPC resulting in additional challenges and projects for further development. This first workshop was a result of the SLSD successes in running open innovation challenges over the past two years. In 2008, the NASA Johnson Space Center, Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD) began pilot projects in open innovation (crowd sourcing) to determine if these new internet-based platforms could indeed find solutions to difficult technical problems. From 2008 to 2010, the SLSD issued 34 challenges, 14 externally and 20 internally. The 14 external challenges were conducted through three different vendors: InnoCentive, Yet2.com and TopCoder. The 20 internal challenges were conducted using the InnoCentive platform, customized to NASA use, and promoted as NASA@Work. The results from the 34 challenges involved not only technical solutions that were reported previously at the 61st IAC, but also the formation of new collaborative relationships. For example, the TopCoder pilot was expanded by the NASA Space Operations Mission Directorate to the NASA Tournament Lab in collaboration with Harvard Business School and TopCoder. Building on these initial successes, the NHHPC workshop in January of 2011, and ongoing NHHPC member discussions, several important collaborations are in development: Space Act Agreement between NASA and GE for collaborative projects, NASA and academia for a Visual Impairment / Intracranial Hypertension summit (February 2011), NASA and the DoD through the Defense Venture Catalyst Initiative (DeVenCI) for a technical needs workshop (June 2011), NASA and the San Diego Zoo in Biomimicry, NASA and the FAA Center of Excellence for Commercial Space Flight for collaborative projects, NASA and the FDA concerning automatic external defibrillators, and NASA and Tufts University for an education pilot. These and other collaborations will be detailed in the paper demonstrating that a government-sponsored convening entity (the NHHPC) can facilitate industry, academic, and non-profit collaborations for products of mutual benefit.

Davis, Jeffrey R.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Advancing Innovation Through Collaboration: Implementation of the NASA Space Life Sciences Strategy

On October 18, 2010, the NASA Human Health and Performance center (NHHPC) was opened to enable collaboration among government, academic and industry members. Membership rapidly grew to 90 members (http://nhhpc.nasa.gov ) and members began identifying collaborative projects as detailed in this article. In addition, a first workshop in open collaboration and innovation was conducted on January 19, 2011 by the NHHPC resulting in additional challenges and projects for further development. This first workshop was a result of the SLSD successes in running open innovation challenges over the past two years. In 2008, the NASA Johnson Space Center, Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD) began pilot projects in open innovation (crowd sourcing) to determine if these new internet-based platforms could indeed find solutions to difficult technical problems. From 2008 to 2010, the SLSD issued 34 challenges, 14 externally and 20 internally. The 14 external challenges were conducted through three different vendors: InnoCentive, Yet2.com and TopCoder. The 20 internal challenges were conducted using the InnoCentive platform, customized to NASA use, and promoted as NASA@Work. The results from the 34 challenges involved not only technical solutions that were reported previously at the 61st IAC, but also the formation of new collaborative relationships. For example, the TopCoder pilot was expanded by the NASA Space Operations Mission Directorate to the NASA Tournament Lab in collaboration with Harvard Business School and TopCoder. Building on these initial successes, the NHHPC workshop in January of 2011, and ongoing NHHPC member discussions, several important collaborations have been developed: (1) Space Act Agreement between NASA and GE for collaborative projects (2) NASA and academia for a Visual Impairment / Intracranial Hypertension summit (February 2011) (3) NASA and the DoD through the Defense Venture Catalyst Initiative (DeVenCI) for a technical needs workshop (June 2011) (4) NASA and the San Diego Zoo for a joint challenge in biomimicry (5) NASA and the FAA Center of Excellence for Commercial Space Flight for five collaborative projects (6) NASA and ESA for a Space Medicine Workshop (July 2011) (7) NASA and Tufts University for an education pilot (8) Establishment of long-term contracts (August 2011) to enable future challenges (9) Establishment of a new Center of Excellence for Collaborative Innovation (July 2011) for all federal agencies in the US

Davis, Jeffrey R.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Collaborative WorkBench for Researchers - Work Smarter, Not Harder

It is important to define some commonly used terminology related to collaboration to facilitate clarity in later discussions. We define provisioning as infrastructure capabilities such as computation, storage, data, and tools provided by some agency or similarly trusted institution. Sharing is defined as the process of exchanging data, programs, and knowledge among individuals (often strangers) and groups. Collaboration is a specialized case of sharing. In collaboration, sharing with others (usually known colleagues) is done in pursuit of a common scientific goal or objective. Collaboration entails more dynamic and frequent interactions and can occur at different speeds. Synchronous collaboration occurs in real time such as editing a shared document on the fly, chatting, video conference, etc., and typically requires a peer-to-peer connection. Asynchronous collaboration is episodic in nature based on a push-pull model. Examples of asynchronous collaboration include email exchanges, blogging, repositories, etc. The purpose of a workbench is to provide a customizable framework for different applications. Since the workbench will be common to all the customized tools, it promotes building modular functionality that can be used and reused by multiple tools. The objective of our Collaborative Workbench (CWB) is thus to create such an open and extensible framework for the Earth Science community via a set of plug-ins. Our CWB is based on the Eclipse [2] Integrated Development Environment (IDE), which is designed as a small kernel containing a plug-in loader for hundreds of plug-ins. The kernel itself is an implementation of a known specification to provide an environment for the plug-ins to execute. This design enables modularity, where discrete chunks of functionality can be reused to build new applications. The minimal set of plug-ins necessary to create a client application is called the Eclipse Rich Client Platform (RCP) [3]; The Eclipse RCP also supports thousands of community-contributed plug-ins, making it a popular development platform for many diverse applications including the Science Activity Planner developed at JPL for the Mars rovers [4] and the scientific experiment tool Gumtree [5]. By leveraging the Eclipse RCP to provide an open, extensible framework, a CWB supports customizations via plug-ins to build rich user applications specific for Earth Science. More importantly, CWB plug-ins can be used by existing science tools built off Eclipse such as IDL or PyDev to provide seamless collaboration functionalities.

Ramachandran, Rahul↗
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 NTRS2014

Public-Private Collaborations with Earth-Space Benefits

The NASA Human Health and Performance Center (NHHPC) was established in October 2010 to promote collaborative problem solving and project development to advance human health and performance innovations benefiting life in space and on Earth. The NHHPC, which now boasts over 135 corporate, government, academic and non-profit members, has convened four successful workshops and engaged in multiple collaborative projects. The center is currently developing a streamlined partner engagement process to capture technical needs and opportunities of NHHPC members, facilitate partnership development, and establish and manage collaborative projects for NASA. The virtual center facilitates member engagement through a variety of vehicles, including annual inperson workshops, webcasts, quarterly electronic newsletters, web postings, and the new system for partner engagement. The most recent NHHPC workshop was conducted in November 2013 on the topic of "Accelerating Innovation: New Organizational Business Models," and focused on various collaborative approaches successfully used by organizations to achieve their goals. The powerful notion of collaboration across sectors to solve intractable problems was recently highlighted in Williams Eggers' book "The Solution Revolution,"i which provides numerous examples of how business, government and social enterprises partner to solve tough problems. Mr. Eggers was a keynote speaker at the workshop, along with Harvard Business School, Jump Associates, and the Conrad Foundation. The robust program also included an expert panel addressing collaboration across sectors, four interactive breakout sessions, and a concluding keynote on innovative ways to increase science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) education by NASA Associate Administrator for Education, Leland Melvin. The NHHPC forum also provides a platform for international partners to interact on many topics. Members from around the world include ISS International Partner JAXA; the World Biomimetic Foundation in Spain who is interested in advancing the use of biomimicry to provide technical solutions in many industries; Satellite Application Catapult in London, England who interested in pursuing U.S. collaborations with the Space and Life Sciences Innovation Centre under development in Scotland; and DLR in Cologne, Germany who developed :envihab, a collaborative facility for partners to pursue research and technology projects of mutual interest. The NHHPC has sponsored two global networking forums on innovation by partners Wyle, NASA, and DLR, was featured in the 2013 Humans in Space Symposium Panel on "NHHPC and :envihab - reach out to Future Markets," and is working on an international meeting for Spring 2014 in Cologne with :envihab.

Davis, Jeffrey R.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Collaborative Arrival Planning: Data Sharing and User Preference Tools

Air traffic growth and air carrier economic pressures have motivated efforts to increase the flexibility of the air traffic management process and change the relationship between the air traffic control service provider and the system user. One of the most visible of these efforts is the U.S. government/industry "free flight" initiative, in which the service provider concentrates on safety and cross-airline fairness, and the user on their business objectives and operating preferences, including selecting their own path and speed in real-time. In the terminal arrival phase of flight, severe restrictions and rigid control are currently placed on system users, typically without regard for individual user operational preferences. Airborne delays applied to arriving aircraft into capacity constrained airports are imposed on a first-come, first-serve basis, and thus do not allow the system user to plan for or prioritize late arrivals, or to economically optimize their arrival sequence. A central tenant of the free-flight operating paradigm is collaboration between service providers and users in reaching air traffic management decisions. Such collaboration would be particularly beneficial to an airline's "hub" operation, where off-schedule arrival aircraft are a consistent problem, as they cause serious air-port ramp difficulties, rippling airline scheduling effects, and result in large economic inefficiencies. Greater collaboration can also lead to increased airport capacity and decrease the severity of over-capacity rush periods. In the NASA Collaborative Arrival Planning (CAP) project, both independent exchange of real-time data between the service provider and system user and collaborative decision support tools are addressed. Data exchange of real-time arrival scheduling, airspace management, and air carrier fleet data between the FAA service provider and an air carrier is being conducted and evaluated. Collaborative arrival decision support tools to allow intra-airline arrival preferences are being developed and simulated. The CAP project is part of and leveraged from the NASA/FAA Center TRACON Automation System (CTAS), a fielded set of decision support tools that provide computer generated advisories for both enroute and terminal area controllers to manage and control arrival traffic more efficiently. In this paper, the NASA Collaborative Arrival Planning project is outlined and recent results detailed, including the real-time use of CTAS arrival scheduling data by a major air carrier and simulations of tactical and strategic user preference decision support tools.

Zelenka, Richard E.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Expanding NASA and Roscosmos Scientific Collaboration on the International Space Station

The International Space Station (ISS) is a world-class laboratory orbiting in space. NASA and Roscosmos have developed a strong relationship through the ISS Program Partnership, working together and with the other ISS Partners for more than twenty years. Since 2013, based on a framework agreement between the Program Managers, NASA and Roscosmos are building a joint program of collaborative research on ISS. This international collaboration is developed and implemented in phases. Initially, members of the ISS Program Science Forum from NASA and TsNIIMash (representing Roscosmos) identified the first set of NASA experiments that could be implemented in the "near term". The experiments represented the research categories of Technology Demonstration, Microbiology, and Education. Through these experiments, the teams from the "program" and "operations" communities learned to work together to identify collaboration opportunities, establish agreements, and jointly plan and execute the experiments. The first joint scientific activity on ISS occurred in January 2014, and implementation of these joint experiments continues through present ISS operations. NASA and TsNIIMash have proceeded to develop "medium term" collaborations, where scientists join together to improve already-proposed experiments. A major success is the joint One-Year Mission on ISS, with astronaut Scott Kelly and cosmonaut Mikhail Kornienko, who returned from ISS in March, 2016. The teams from the NASA Human Research Program and the RAS Institute for Biomedical Problems built on their considerable experience to design joint experiments, learn to work with each other's protocols and processes, and share medical and research data. New collaborations are being developed between American and Russian scientists in complex fluids, robotics, rodent research and space biology, and additional human research. Collaborations are also being developed in Earth Remote Sensing, where scientists will share data from imaging systems mounted on ISS as well as other orbiting spacecraft to improve our understanding of the Earth and its climate. NASA and Roscosmos continue to encourage international scientific cooperation and expanded use of the ISS Laboratory. "Long-term", larger collaborations will achieve scientific objectives that no single national science team or agency can achieve on its own. The joint accomplishments achieved so far have paved the way for a stronger international scientific community and improved results and benefits from ISS.

Hasbrook, Pete↗
NASA NTRS2016

Collaborations and Partnerships in NASA’s Earth Science Data Systems

NASA has been collecting Earth observation data from spaceborne instruments since 1960. Today, there are tens of satellites orbiting the Earth and collecting frequent global observations for the benefit of mankind. Collaboration between NASA and organizations in the US and other countries has been extremely important in maintaining the Earth observation capabilities as well as collecting, organizing and managing the data. These collaborations have occurred in the form of: 1. NASA’s developing and launching spacecraft and instruments for operation by other agencies; 2. Instruments from collaborating organizations being flown on NASA satellites; and 3. Instruments from NASA being flown on satellites from collaborating organizations. In addition, there are collaborations such as joint science teams, data exchanges, and participation in international organizations to promote interoperability of various data systems. The purpose of this paper is to describe some of the Earth science data-related collaborative efforts in which NASA participates, and highlight a few results relevant to Earth system science research obtained through such collaborations.

Ramapriyan, Hampapuram K.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Aerospace Systems Design in NASA's Collaborative Engineering Environment

Past designs of complex aerospace systems involved an environment consisting of collocated design teams with project managers, technical discipline experts, and other experts (e.g., manufacturing and systems operation). These experts were generally qualified only on the basis of past design experience and typically had access to a limited set of integrated analysis tools. These environments provided less than desirable design fidelity, often lead to the inability of assessing critical programmatic and technical issues (e.g., cost, risk, technical impacts), and generally derived a design that was not necessarily optimized across the entire system. The continually changing, modern aerospace industry demands systems design processes that involve the best talent available (no matter where it resides) and access to the the best design and analysis tools. A solution to these demands involves a design environment referred to as collaborative engineering. The collaborative engineering environment evolving within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a capability that enables the Agency's engineering infrastructure to interact and use the best state-of-the-art tools and data across organizational boundaries. Using collaborative engineering, the collocated team is replaced with an interactive team structure where the team members are geographical distributed and the best engineering talent can be applied to the design effort regardless of physical location. In addition, a more efficient, higher quality design product is delivered by bringing together the best engineering talent with more up-to-date design and analysis tools. These tools are focused on interactive, multidisciplinary design and analysis with emphasis on the complete life cycle of the system, and they include nontraditional, integrated tools for life cycle cost estimation and risk assessment. NASA has made substantial progress during the last two years in developing a collaborative engineering environment. NASA is planning to use this collaborative engineering engineering infrastructure to provide better aerospace systems life cycle design and analysis, which includes analytical assessment of the technical and programmatic aspects of a system from "cradle to grave." This paper describes the recent NASA developments in the area of collaborative engineering, the benefits (realized and anticipated) of using the developed capability, and the long-term plans for implementing this capability across Agency.

Monell, Donald W.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Aerospace Systems Design in NASA's Collaborative Engineering Environment

Past designs of complex aerospace systems involved an environment consisting of collocated design teams with project managers, technical discipline experts, and other experts (e.g. manufacturing and systems operations). These experts were generally qualified only on the basis of past design experience and typically had access to a limited set of integrated analysis tools. These environments provided less than desirable design fidelity, often lead to the inability of assessing critical programmatic and technical issues (e.g., cost risk, technical impacts), and generally derived a design that was not necessarily optimized across the entire system. The continually changing, modern aerospace industry demands systems design processes that involve the best talent available (no matter where it resides) and access to the best design and analysis tools. A solution to these demands involves a design environment referred to as collaborative engineering. The collaborative engineering environment evolving within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a capability that enables the Agency's engineering infrastructure to interact and use the best state-of-the-art tools and data across organizational boundaries. Using collaborative engineering, the collocated team is replaced with an interactive team structure where the team members are geographically distributed and the best engineering talent can be applied to the design effort regardless of physical location. In addition, a more efficient, higher quality design product is delivered by bringing together the best engineering talent with more up-to-date design and analysis tools. These tools are focused on interactive, multidisciplinary design and analysis with emphasis on the complete life cycle of the system, and they include nontraditional, integrated tools for life cycle cost estimation and risk assessment. NASA has made substantial progress during the last two years in developing a collaborative engineering environment. NASA is planning to use this collaborative engineering infrastructure to provide better aerospace systems life cycle design and analysis, which includes analytical assessment of the technical and programmatic aspects of a system from "cradle to grave." This paper describes the recent NASA developments in the area of collaborative engineering, the benefits (realized and anticipated) of using the developed capability, and the long-term plans for implementing this capability across the Agency.

Monell, Donald W.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Collaborative PLM - The Next Generation AKA Cars on Mars

In this slide presentation the importance of collaboration in developing the next systems for space exploration is stressed. The mechanism of this collaboration are reviewed, and particular emphasis is given to our planned exploration of Mars and how this will require a great deal of collaboration. A system architecture for this collaboration is shown and the diagram for the collaborative environment is conceptualized.

collaboration↗
NASA NTRS1999

A Collaborative Analysis Tool for Thermal Protection Systems for Single Stage to Orbit Launch Vehicles

Presented is a design tool and process that connects several disciplines which are needed in the complex and integrated design of high performance reusable single stage to orbit (SSTO) vehicles. Every system is linked to every other system and in the case of SSTO vehicles with air breathing propulsion, which is currently being studied by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA); the thermal protection system (TPS) is linked directly to almost every major system. The propulsion system pushes the vehicle to velocities on the order of 15 times the speed of sound in the atmosphere before pulling up to go to orbit which results high temperatures on the external surfaces of the vehicle. Thermal protection systems to maintain the structural integrity of the vehicle must be able to mitigate the heat transfer to the structure and be lightweight. Herein lies the interdependency, in that as the vehicle's speed increases, the TPS requirements are increased. And as TPS masses increase the effect on the propulsion system and all other systems is compounded. To adequately determine insulation masses for a vehicle such as the one described above, the aeroheating loads must be calculated and the TPS thicknesses must be calculated for the entire vehicle. To accomplish this an ascent or reentry trajectory is obtained using the computer code Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories (POST). The trajectory is then used to calculate the convective heat rates on several locations on the vehicles using the Miniature Version of the JA70 Aerodynamic Heating Computer Program (MINIVER). Once the heat rates are defined for each body point on the vehicle, then insulation thicknesses that are required to maintain the vehicle within structural limits are calculated using Systems Improved Numerical Differencing Analyzer (SINDA) models. If the TPS masses are too heavy for the performance of the vehicle the process may be repeated altering the trajectory or some other input to reduce the TPS mass. The problem described is an example of the need for collaborative design and analysis. Analysis tools are being developed to facilitate these collaborative efforts. RECIPE is a cross-platform application capable of hosting a number of engineers and designers across the Internet for distributed and collaborative engineering environments. Such integrated system design environments allow for collaborative team design analysis for performing individual or reduced team studies. The analysis tools mentioned earlier are commonly run on different platforms and are usually run by different people. To facilitate the larger number of potential runs that may need to be made, RECIPE connects the computer codes that calculate the trajectory data, heat rate data, and TPS masses so that the output from each tool is easily transferred to the model input files that need it. This methodology is being applied to solve launch vehicle thermal design problems to shorten the design cycle, and enable the project team to evaluate design options. Results will be presented indicating the effectiveness of this as a collaborative design tool.

Alexander, Reginald A.↗
NASA NTRS1996

Use of the Collaborative Optimization Architecture for Launch Vehicle Design

Collaborative optimization is a new design architecture specifically created for large-scale distributed-analysis applications. In this approach, problem is decomposed into a user-defined number of subspace optimization problems that are driven towards interdisciplinary compatibility and the appropriate solution by a system-level coordination process. This decentralized design strategy allows domain-specific issues to be accommodated by disciplinary analysts, while requiring interdisciplinary decisions to be reached by consensus. The present investigation focuses on application of the collaborative optimization architecture to the multidisciplinary design of a single-stage-to-orbit launch vehicle. Vehicle design, trajectory, and cost issues are directly modeled. Posed to suit the collaborative architecture, the design problem is characterized by 5 design variables and 16 constraints. Numerous collaborative solutions are obtained. Comparison of these solutions demonstrates the influence which an priori ascent-abort criterion has on development cost. Similarly, objective-function selection is discussed, demonstrating the difference between minimum weight and minimum cost concepts. The operational advantages of the collaborative optimization

Braun, R. D.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Collaborative Supervised Learning for Sensor Networks

Collaboration methods for distributed machine-learning algorithms involve the specification of communication protocols for the learners, which can query other learners and/or broadcast their findings preemptively. Each learner incorporates information from its neighbors into its own training set, and they are thereby able to bootstrap each other to higher performance. Each learner resides at a different node in the sensor network and makes observations (collects data) independently of the other learners. After being seeded with an initial labeled training set, each learner proceeds to learn in an iterative fashion. New data is collected and classified. The learner can then either broadcast its most confident classifications for use by other learners, or can query neighbors for their classifications of its least confident items. As such, collaborative learning combines elements of both passive (broadcast) and active (query) learning. It also uses ideas from ensemble learning to combine the multiple responses to a given query into a single useful label. This approach has been evaluated against current non-collaborative alternatives, including training a single classifier and deploying it at all nodes with no further learning possible, and permitting learners to learn from their own most confident judgments, absent interaction with their neighbors. On several data sets, it has been consistently found that active collaboration is the best strategy for a distributed learner network. The main advantages include the ability for learning to take place autonomously by collaboration rather than by requiring intervention from an oracle (usually human), and also the ability to learn in a distributed environment, permitting decisions to be made in situ and to yield faster response time.

Wagstaff, Kiri L.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Designing Facilities for Collaborative Operations

A methodology for designing operational facilities for collaboration by multiple experts has begun to take shape as an outgrowth of a project to design such facilities for scientific operations of the planned 2003 Mars Exploration Rover (MER) mission. The methodology could also be applicable to the design of military "situation rooms" and other facilities for terrestrial missions. It was recognized in this project that modern mission operations depend heavily upon the collaborative use of computers. It was further recognized that tests have shown that layout of a facility exerts a dramatic effect on the efficiency and endurance of the operations staff. The facility designs (for example, see figure) and the methodology developed during the project reflect this recognition. One element of the methodology is a metric, called effective capacity, that was created for use in evaluating proposed MER operational facilities and may also be useful for evaluating other collaboration spaces, including meeting rooms and military situation rooms. The effective capacity of a facility is defined as the number of people in the facility who can be meaningfully engaged in its operations. A person is considered to be meaningfully engaged if the person can (1) see, hear, and communicate with everyone else present; (2) see the material under discussion (typically data on a piece of paper, computer monitor, or projection screen); and (3) provide input to the product under development by the group. The effective capacity of a facility is less than the number of people that can physically fit in the facility. For example, a typical office that contains a desktop computer has an effective capacity of .4, while a small conference room that contains a projection screen has an effective capacity of around 10. Little or no benefit would be derived from allowing the number of persons in an operational facility to exceed its effective capacity: At best, the operations staff would be underutilized; at worst, operational performance would deteriorate. Elements of this methodology were applied to the design of three operations facilities for a series of rover field tests. These tests were observed by human-factors researchers and their conclusions are being used to refine and extend the methodology to be used in the final design of the MER operations facility. Further work is underway to evaluate the use of personal digital assistant (PDA) units as portable input interfaces and communication devices in future mission operations facilities. A PDA equipped for wireless communication and Ethernet, Bluetooth, or another networking technology would cost less than a complete computer system, and would enable a collaborator to communicate electronically with computers and with other collaborators while moving freely within the virtual environment created by a shared immersive graphical display.

Norris, Jeffrey↗