Results for “Interoperability Maturity Model”

DOE OSTI2020

Interoperability Maturity Model

This document presents the relevant concepts for specifying criteria that support a grid modernization strategic vision for interoperability. It focuses on the ways to assess levels of interoperability. The assessment of interoperability needs to clearly show the relationship to interoperability and provide the necessary data to create a roadmap for how to improve interoperability. A key point to understand is that interoperability has several crucial elements, any of which may have areas for improvement. To measure interoperability, it is helpful to focus on specific areas based on the objectives of the stakeholders that are initiating the desired interoperability advancement. The measurement tool for interoperability allows the measurement tool and the area to which it is being applied to be segmented and applied in various ways. The measurement tool is based on, and developed from, the GridWise® Architecture Council’s (GWAC’s) Beta release of its Interoperability Maturity Model (GWAC 2011). As such, it represents an evolution of that approach, so the working name used in this document is IMM.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2023

Development of an Energy Services Interface for the EGoT

The Energy Services Interface (ESI) is a set of rules that ensure private, secure, and trustworthy information exchange between Grid Service Providers (GSPs) and utility customers. Large-scale adoption of Distributed Energy Resources (DERs) will be necessary for GSPs to dispatch effective grid services, and to stimulate technological innovations in DER and DERMS (DER Management Systems) technologies, as well as novel grid service programs. The ESI promotes these objectives by advancing a set of rules and interoperability requirements that define bi-directional, service-oriented, logical interfaces between GSPs and customers’ DERs, with expectations for privacy, security, and trust. The ESI rules and interoperability requirements establish boundaries between customers and GSPs that delineate the functions and responsibilities that must be implemented by the developers of Energy Grid of Things (EGoT) ecosystem products. These rules impose constraints on the implementation of a DERMS. The ESI interoperability requirements are based on the Interoperability Maturity Model (IMM), developed by the Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium. By emphasizing private, secure, and trustworthy information exchange, and by mandating a service-oriented and interoperable architecture, the ESI promotes the development of an EGoT ecosystem that motivates customer participation and technological innovation. Interoperability will encourage innovation by reducing barriers to entry and increasing confidence of stakeholders. Customers will be willing to participate in DER service programs that establish trust and emphasize customer choice. Large-scale customer participation ensures GSPs have ample DER resources to provide grid services that have significant impact on grid reliability and reduce electricity cost for consumers. This in turn signals economic opportunities that encourage innovation, resulting in the development of a robust EGoT ecosystem.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2022

Developing an Energy Service Interface Specification

Developing an Energy Service Interface (ESI) specification requires engaging a community of stakeholders including grid operators, Information and Communication Technology implementors, integrators, and finally standards bodies who will define an interface that respects and boundaries of ownership and roles of responsibility in order to activate millions of Distributed Energy Resource for the provision of grid services. By applying Interoperability Maturity Model Criteria and ESI principles to common grid-DER service use cases, the Grid Modernization Lab Consortium team will engage subject matter experts to develop a specification, with an eventual goal of informing development of ESI compliant profiles or standards. The ESI Specification is intended to specify the characteristics, attributes, or qualities that need to be addressed in ESI compliant standards or profiles. This includes addressing interoperability criteria and the service-performance style of the interface.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2024

PSU ESI Review

A guide to developing an Energy Service Interface (ESI) was created as part of the Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium 2.5.2 ESI project. The approach applies device-agnostic and service-oriented ESI principles and leverages documents such as the Interoperability Maturity Model and Common Grid Service Definitions to provide a methodology to review, develop, and update standards and profiles to engage distributed energy resources (DER) to provide grid services. This document evaluates the ESI developed by Portland State University’s Power Engineering Group under the Electric Grid of Things project funded by the U.S. Department of Energy. The evaluation explores the compliance of this specific implementation with the GMLC ESI principles to provide an example of an ESI profile and gap analysis.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2024

Virtual Synchronous Machine Grid-Forming Inverter Model Specification (REGFM_B1)

This report describes a generic virtual synchronous machine (VSM) grid-forming inverter (GFM) model - REGFM_B1. The initial model specification was proposed by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), General Electric (GE), and Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy (SGRE) also provided inputs to the specification. The model specification has been revised multiple times based on the discussions between all the contributors listed in this report. This work was funded by the Universal Interoperability for Grid-Forming Inverters (UNIFI) Consortium. This generic model is developed to help the utility industry understand the concept of VSM GFMs. The model could be used to represent equipment for long-term planning studies where vendor-specific models are not available. As equipment mature and improve, generic models will be updated to capture the new functionalities of GFMs. It is not intended that these models will always remain representative of all future GFM technologies.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Facility Cybersecurity Framework Best Practices

Federal facilities are increasingly adopting automation and connecting to the Internet creating an energy-internet-of-things environment that converges operational technology (OT) and information technology (IT). Today's buildings increasingly weave together networked sensors and cyber and physical systems that enable data to be collected, aggregated, exchanged, stored and monetized in new ways. Building technological advances have created new energy technology, services, markets and value creation opportunities (e.g. transactive energy, two-way grid communications, machine learning, and increased use of renewable and distributed energy resources). But as larger data sets are being exchanged at faster speeds between an increasing number of OT systems, it becomes more difficult to protect the security of the data lifecycle and the physical equipment it interacts with. These challenges are especially difficult to overcome because the economic and environmental gain (interoperability, big data, social networks and ubiquitous information sharing) are driving these prominent trends in the digital age. Often cybersecurity is an afterthought. The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) funded the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to develop various cybersecurity tools, trainings, and reports to aid federal facility managers – and other building owners and operators – in better applying frameworks and lessons learned from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework (CSF), risk management framework (RMF), DOE’s cybersecurity capability maturity model (C2M2), and a wide variety of industry best practices and guidance documents (i.e., NIST 800 series, Department of Defense United Facilities Criteria). This set of tools, collectively known as the FEMP Facility-Related Control System Cyber Toolkit (FRCS Cyber Toolkit)2, is focused on cybersecurity concerns from facility-related control systems and other operational technology (OT), such as industrial control systems (ICS). The FRCS Cyber Toolkit can be applied across six of the sixteen critical infrastructure sectors designated by the Department of Homeland Security, including government facilities, healthcare and public health, commercial facilities (e.g., public assembly, offices, lodging), financial services (e.g., banking and insurance), emergency services (e.g., fire and police stations), and information technology. With increasingly converged IT and OT systems, it is crucial to address OT cybersecurity considerations and assess how the seam of these two systems could impact the overall cybersecurity posture of a facility. The objective of this report is to provide an overview of the best possible method to use FRCS Cyber Toolkit (section 2.0) and distilled cybersecurity best practices for the federal facilities to address growing non-linear cyber threats (section 3.0). Recommendations in this document are aggregated from several NIST and other documents (see Appendix A for additional details).

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

NASA NTRS2010

Airspace Systems Program: Next Generation Air Transportation System, NextGen Systems Analysis, Integration and Evaluation Project: Project Plan - Version 1.0

The key objectives of the NASA ASP are to: Improve mobility, capacity efficiency and access of the airspace system. Improve collaboration, predictability, and flexibility for the airspace users. Enable accurate modeling and simulation of air transportation systems. Accommodate operations of all classes of aircraft. Maintain system safety and environmental protection. In support of these program objectives, the major goal of the NextGen-SAIE Project is to enable the transition of key capacity and efficiency improvements to the NAS. Since many aspects of the NAS are unique to specific airport or airspace environments, demand on various parts of the NAS is not expected to increase equally as system demand grows. SAIE will provide systems level analysis of the NAS characteristics, constraints, and demands such that a suite of capacity-increasing concepts and technologies for system solutions are enabled and facilitated. The technical objectives in support of this goal are the following: Integration, evaluation, and transition of more mature concepts and technologies in an environment that faithfully emulates real-world complexities. Interoperability research and analysis of ASP technologies across ATM functions is performed to facilitate integration and take ASP concepts and technologies to higher Technology Readiness Level (TRL). Analyses are conducted on the program s concepts to identify the system benefits or impacts. System level analysis is conducted to increase understanding of the characteristics and constraints of airspace system and its domains.

Quon, Leighton↗

NASA NTRS2006

Mission Control Technologies: A New Way of Designing and Evolving Mission Systems

Current mission operations systems are built as a collection of monolithic software applications. Each application serves the needs of a specific user base associated with a discipline or functional role. Built to accomplish specific tasks, each application embodies specialized functional knowledge and has its own data storage, data models, programmatic interfaces, user interfaces, and customized business logic. In effect, each application creates its own walled-off environment. While individual applications are sometimes reused across multiple missions, it is expensive and time consuming to maintain these systems, and both costly and risky to upgrade them in the light of new requirements or modify them for new purposes. It is even more expensive to achieve new integrated activities across a set of monolithic applications. These problems impact the lifecycle cost (especially design, development, testing, training, maintenance, and integration) of each new mission operations system. They also inhibit system innovation and evolution. This in turn hinders NASA's ability to adopt new operations paradigms, including increasingly automated space systems, such as autonomous rovers, autonomous onboard crew systems, and integrated control of human and robotic missions. Hence, in order to achieve NASA's vision affordably and reliably, we need to consider and mature new ways to build mission control systems that overcome the problems inherent in systems of monolithic applications. The keys to the solution are modularity and interoperability. Modularity will increase extensibility (evolution), reusability, and maintainability. Interoperability will enable composition of larger systems out of smaller parts, and enable the construction of new integrated activities that tie together, at a deep level, the capabilities of many of the components. Modularity and interoperability together contribute to flexibility. The Mission Control Technologies (MCT) Project, a collaboration of multiple NASA Centers, led by NASA Ames Research Center, is building a framework to enable software to be assembled from flexible collections of components and services.

Trimble, Jay↗

DOE OSTI2026

Enabling the Broader Use of MOOSE for Nuclear Energy and Other Simulation

This Final Scientific and Technical Report summarizes work performed under the Phase IIA SBIR project “Enabling the Broader Use of MOOSE for Nuclear Energy and Other Simulation” (DE-SC0020906) from August 2023 through August 2025. The objective of the Phase IIA effort was to mature and harden capabilities developed during Phase II, with the goal of enabling practical interoperability between Coreform’s isogeometric analysis (IGA) technologies and the Multiphysics Object-Oriented Simulation Environment (MOOSE), while improving robustness, performance, and scalability for complex, nuclear-relevant geometries. Over the course of Phase IIA, the project established and validated an extraction-based interoperability pathway between Coreform tools and MOOSE. A combined mesh and matrix format was defined collaboratively with MOOSE developers and integrated into the solver, enabling standard MOOSE workflows to operate on data exported from Coreform’s IGA and Flex Representation Method (FRM) pipelines. Early demonstrations validated architectural compatibility using linear solid mechanics problems, while later efforts focused on benchmark testing and external use. By the end of the project period, engineers at BWXT were able to independently set up and execute a simulation using the Coreform–MOOSE workflow and provide direct feedback that informed further refinement. In parallel, substantial effort was devoted to improving the robustness of trimmed U-spline construction for complex CAD geometries. A growing test suite of nuclear-relevant models was compiled through collaboration with multiple stakeholders and used to drive extensive bug fixing and reliability improvements. These efforts resulted in improved robustness and performance, including the addition of fallback capabilities that enhance reliability when the underlying commercial CAD kernel fails. Performance-oriented work progressed later in the project, with the development and demonstration of methods to decompose complex geometries into structured subregions and updated data representations to support more efficient solver processing. Additionally, extensive enhancements to threadsafe parallel data structures and trimming operations established a foundation for scalable processing of large assemblies. Collaboration with Sandia National Laboratories on the SGM geometric modeling kernel advanced to a functioning interface test case, positioning the workflow for future kernel integration. Overall, the Phase IIA effort successfully transitioned the project from architectural proof-of-concept to externally exercised, solver-integrated capability, while clarifying remaining technical challenges related to standardization, performance optimization, and kernel integration.

42 ENGINEERING↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lunar Search & Rescue Applications of Lunar GNSS

Accurate lunar navigation and timing knowledge provides for the development of safety-critical services in the cislunar and lunar surface domain. Currently under development, the Goddard Space Flight Center’s (GSFC) Search and Rescue Mission Office is investigating and integrating search and rescue (SAR) capability into planned and future lunar communication and navigation interfaces. Lunar Search and Rescue (LunaSAR) development has a stated end-goal for assured, reliable, and timely indication of distress events for a wide variety of lunar surface users, including government-sponsored, commercial, and international users. LunaSAR performance requirements are modelled after the current terrestrial Cospas-Sarsat distress notification system, leveraging an internationally robust global navigation satellite system (GNSS) ecosystem as a core element of survivor locating capability. This presentation will discuss NASA’s work to develop user-focused distress messaging capabilities including infusion of example sensor data for triggering of automated distress alerts coupled with location-tagging. Additionally, the presentation will examine overall message structures, rotating fields for use in bi-directional distress messaging, and specific use cases based on NASA’s lunar exploration and lunar communication relay architectures. Modelling and simulation of LunaSAR use by individual lunar explorers will be discussed, based on notional industry and government design reference missions and mission considerations. Results from GSFC-funded Internal Research and Development (IRAD) efforts will be detailed, including successful distress message formulation simulating the ingestion of example legacy space suit telemetry fields. Hardware-in-the-loop testing using high-reliability software defined radio (SDR) modules serve as an example of IRAD successes and the framework for technical requirements. Architectural development and technical evolution from 2020 to 2021 included alignment of LunaSAR distress waveforms with ongoing NASA LunaNet interoperability development, as well as engagement with NASA Lunar Spectrum authorities for allocation of UHF-band distress frequencies on the lunar surface. S-Band and UHF-band transmission characteristics will be detailed, along with band-specific applications of each emission type. Additionally, examples of ingestion and formatting of GNSS signals (using historical terrestrial National Marine Electronics Association-formatted GNSS data) will be detailed, underscoring lunar user needs for a common lunar GNSS receiver output message framework. Maturity and ability to support evolving lunar exploration goals has been demonstrated and will be detailed, with maturity gaps such as position, navigation, and timing (PNT) and lunar reference frames identified within the context of distress message generation. Provision of LunaSAR services for lunar surface users represents a new era of ensured safety for lunar explorers and builds off of forty years of the Cospas-Sarsat program, underscoring the importance of lunar GNSS for safety-critical applications and growing interest in safe, reliable lunar surface operations. Enabled by new GNSS systems being developed by government and industry partners, NASA will continue to evolve and integrate lunar GNSS types into distress message generation, with a focus on compact and efficient message transmission over various lunar communication links. When fielded, LunaSAR will be the first dedicated search and rescue notification system employed on another celestial body. Robust lunar navigation and timing services form the core of LunaSAR capabilities, allowing for system syncing with time-dominant sensors, and high-accuracy location of those in distress while engaged in lunar surface activities.

Search and Rescue↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NextSTEP Appendix A Modular ECLSS Effort Lessons Learned

NASA’s Artemis program provides the first steps for earth-independent exploration starting with crewed habitats in cislunar space and progressing toward crewed landings on the lunar surface that will prepare systems and crews for the exploration of Mars. The Next Space Technology for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) is a public-private partnership model that facilitates commercial development of deep space exploration capabilities in support of more extensive human spaceflight missions in and beyond cislunar space. NASA issued the original NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) to U.S. industry in late 2014 and issued the second BAA (NextSTEP-2) in April 2016. The first appendix under NextSTEP-2, Appendix A, focused on developing deep space habitation concepts, engineering design and development, and risk reduction efforts leading to a habitation capability in cislunar space. NASA solicited concepts to develop and refine the evolvable, modular architecture, functional allocation options, standards, and common interfaces required to enable interoperability of the aggregate system to provide long duration deep space transit habitation, specifically enhancements and testing of deep space Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS). Collins Aerospace, formerly UTC Aerospace Systems (UTAS), was awarded a Phase 1 and subsequent Phase 2 contract to “develop concepts that group ECLS systems into logical modules maximizing the use of common components and the development of unique methods and design concepts that support in-flight maintenance and repair for future exploration systems.” This paper summarizes the work accomplished under this effort, the lessons that can be applied to development of forthcoming habitation elements, and the gaps remaining to achieve a more resilient, maintainable, repairable and adaptable system capable of installation on a wide variety of habitat platforms. A primary accomplishment of this effort is the development and maturation of a modular palletization concept to enable standard rack interfaces, post-launch outfitting, and decoupling of structural supports that withstand launch environments from those needed for lower on-orbit loads in order to reduce installed mass and repurposing of panels within the habitat. In the course of the effort, Collins assessed numerous architecture trades, including the use of condensing and noncondensing heat exchangers, the ability of modular units to accommodate various habitat volumes and thermal loading, and the most appropriate order of and timing of delivery of regenerative ECLSS hardware to orbital habitats. In addition to the modularity of hardware elements, Collins developed software approaches for distributed/modular command, control, and communication systems and innovative Bayesian fault detection and isolation techniques. Finally, the effort explored advanced maintainability and supportability concepts including the definition of maintenance units (MUs) in place of the traditional Orbital Replacement Units (ORUs), increasing parts commonality to reduce the number and type of spare parts, the use of augmented reality to guide crews during maintenance and repair procedures, and how crews would prepare for and recover from long durations of habitat dormancy. Now that the NextSTEP Modular ECLSS effort has come to a close, it’s important to identify the lessons learned and where they can be leveraged to improve NASA’s broader program of ECLSS technology development and demonstration and ultimately how they can increase the performance of future surface and orbital habitats.

NextSTEP↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NextSTEP Appendix A Modular ECLSS Effort Lessons Learned

NASA’s Artemis program provides the first steps for earth-independent exploration starting with crewed habitats in cislunar space and progressing toward crewed landings on the lunar surface that will prepare systems and crews for the exploration of Mars. The Next Space Technology for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) is a public-private partnership model that facilitates commercial development of deep space exploration capabilities in support of more extensive human spaceflight missions in and beyond cislunar space. NASA issued the original NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) to U.S. industry in late 2014 and issued the second BAA (NextSTEP-2) in April 2016. The first appendix under NextSTEP-2, Appendix A, focused on developing deep space habitation concepts, engineering design and development, and risk reduction efforts leading to a habitation capability in cislunar space. NASA solicited concepts to develop and refine the evolvable, modular architecture, functional allocation options, standards, and common interfaces required to enable interoperability of the aggregate system to provide long duration deep space transit habitation, specifically enhancements and testing of deep space Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS). Collins Aerospace, formerly UTC Aerospace Systems (UTAS), was awarded a Phase 1 and subsequent Phase 2 contract to “develop concepts that group ECLS systems into logical modules maximizing the use of common components and the development of unique methods and design concepts that support in-flight maintenance and repair for future exploration systems.” This paper summarizes the work accomplished under this effort, the lessons that can be applied to development of forthcoming habitation elements, and the gaps remaining to achieve a more resilient, maintainable, repairable and adaptable system capable of installation on a wide variety of habitat platforms. A primary accomplishment of this effort is the development and maturation of a modular palletization concept to enable standard rack interfaces, post-launch outfitting, and decoupling of structural supports that withstand launch environments from those needed for lower on-orbit loads in order to reduce installed mass and repurposing of panels within the habitat. In the course of the effort, Collins assessed numerous architecture trades, including the use of condensing and noncondensing heat exchangers, the ability of modular units to accommodate various habitat volumes and thermal loading, and the most appropriate order of and timing of delivery of regenerative ECLSS hardware to orbital habitats. In addition to the modularity of hardware elements, Collins developed software approaches for distributed/modular command, control, and communication systems and innovative Bayesian fault detection and isolation techniques. Finally, the effort explored advanced maintainability and supportability concepts including the definition of maintenance units (MUs) in place of the traditional Orbital Replacement Units (ORUs), increasing parts commonality to reduce the number and type of spare parts, the use of augmented reality to guide crews during maintenance and repair procedures, and how crews would prepare for and recover from long durations of habitat dormancy. Now that the NextSTEP Modular ECLSS effort has come to a close, it’s important to identify the lessons learned and where they can be leveraged to improve NASA’s broader program of ECLSS technology development and demonstration and ultimately how they can increase the performance of future surface and orbital habitats.

NextSTEP↗

NASA NTRS2009

Evolution of Web Services in EOSDIS: Search and Order Metadata Registry (ECHO)

During 2005 through 2008, NASA defined and implemented a major evolutionary change in it Earth Observing system Data and Information System (EOSDIS) to modernize its capabilities. This implementation was based on a vision for 2015 developed during 2005. The EOSDIS 2015 Vision emphasizes increased end-to-end data system efficiency and operability; increased data usability; improved support for end users; and decreased operations costs. One key feature of the Evolution plan was achieving higher operational maturity (ingest, reconciliation, search and order, performance, error handling) for the NASA s Earth Observing System Clearinghouse (ECHO). The ECHO system is an operational metadata registry through which the scientific community can easily discover and exchange NASA's Earth science data and services. ECHO contains metadata for 2,726 data collections comprising over 87 million individual data granules and 34 million browse images, consisting of NASA s EOSDIS Data Centers and the United States Geological Survey's Landsat Project holdings. ECHO is a middleware component based on a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). The system is comprised of a set of infrastructure services that enable the fundamental SOA functions: publish, discover, and access Earth science resources. It also provides additional services such as user management, data access control, and order management. The ECHO system has a data registry and a services registry. The data registry enables organizations to publish EOS and other Earth-science related data holdings to a common metadata model. These holdings are described through metadata in terms of datasets (types of data) and granules (specific data items of those types). ECHO also supports browse images, which provide a visual representation of the data. The published metadata can be mapped to and from existing standards (e.g., FGDC, ISO 19115). With ECHO, users can find the metadata stored in the data registry and then access the data either directly online or through a brokered order to the data archive organization. ECHO stores metadata from a variety of science disciplines and domains, including Climate Variability and Change, Carbon Cycle and Ecosystems, Earth Surface and Interior, Atmospheric Composition, Weather, and Water and Energy Cycle. ECHO also has a services registry for community-developed search services and data services. ECHO provides a platform for the publication, discovery, understanding and access to NASA s Earth Observation resources (data, service and clients). In their native state, these data, service and client resources are not necessarily targeted for use beyond their original mission. However, with the proper interoperability mechanisms, users of these resources can expand their value, by accessing, combining and applying them in unforeseen ways.

Mitchell, Andrew↗

NASA NTRS2020

SISO Space Reference FOM - Tools and Testing

The Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization (SISO) Space Reference Federation Object Model (SpaceFOM) version 1.0 is nearing completion. Earlier papers have described the use of the High Level Architecture (HLA) in Space simulation as well as technical aspects of the SpaceFOM. This paper takes a look at different SpaceFOM tools and how they were used during the development and testing of the standard.The first organizations to develop SpaceFOM-compliant federates for SpaceFOM development and testing were NASA's Johnson Space Center (JSC), the University of Calabria (UNICAL), and Pitch Technologies.JSC is one of NASA's lead centers for human space flight. Much of the core distributed simulation technology development, specifically associated with the SpaceFOM, is done by the NASA Exploration Systems Simulations (NExSyS) team. One of NASA's principal simulation development tools is the Trick Simulation Environment. NASA's NExSyS team has been modifying and using Trick and TrickHLA to help develop and test the SpaceFOM.The System Modeling And Simulation Hub Laboratory (SMASH-Lab) at UNICAL has developed the Simulation Exploration Experience (SEE) HLA Starter kit, that has been used by most SEE teams involved in the distributed simulation of a Moon base. It is particularly useful for the development of federates that are compatible with the SpaceFOM. The HLA Starter Kit is a Java based tool that provides a well-structured framework to simplify the formulation, generation, and execution of SpaceFOM-compliant federates.Pitch Technologies, a company specializing in distributed simulation, is utilizing a number of their existing HLA tools to support development and testing of the SpaceFOM. In addition to the existing tools, Pitch has developed a few SpaceFOM specific federates: Space Master for managing the initialization, execution and pacing of any SpaceFOM federation; EarthEnvironment, a simple Root Reference Publisher; and Space Monitor, a graphical tool for monitoring reference frames and physical entities.Early testing of the SpaceFOM was carried out in the SEE university outreach program, initiated in SISO. Students were given a subset of the FOM, that was later extended. Sample federates were developed and frameworks were developed or adapted to the early FOM versions.As drafts of the standard matured, testing was performed using federates from government, industry, and academia. By mixing federates developed by different teams the standard could be tested with respect to functional correctness, robustness and clarity.These frameworks and federates have been useful when testing and verifying the design of the standard. In addition to this, they have since formed a starting point for developing SpaceFOM-compliant federations in several projects, for example for NASA, ESA as well as SEE.

Möller, Björn↗