Project Lifecycle Reviews
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Lifecycle Project Reviews↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “Project Lifecycles”
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.
Defining and Applying Limits for Test and Flight Through the Project Lifecycle GSFC Standard
The presentation will be given at the Annual Thermal Fluids Analysis Workshop (TFAWS 2015, NCTS 21070-15) hosted by the Goddard SpaceFlight Center (GSFC) Thermal Engineering Branch (Code 545). The powerpoint presentation details the process of defining limits throughout the lifecycle of a flight project.
Thermal↗
Capturing and Modeling Radiation Hardness Assurance throughout the Project Lifecycle
This presentation describes how assurance arguments for the radiation reliability of a system can be modeled in Goal Structuring Notation over the life-cycle of a project. A practical implementation of the NASA-STD-8729.1 and Model-Based Mission Assurance.
Model-Based Mission Assurance↗
Full-Scaled Advanced Systems Testbed: Ensuring Success of Adaptive Control Research Through Project Lifecycle Risk Mitigation
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Dryden Flight Research Center completed flight testing of adaptive controls research on the Full-Scale Advance Systems Testbed (FAST) in January of 2011. The research addressed technical challenges involved with reducing risk in an increasingly complex and dynamic national airspace. Specific challenges lie with the development of validated, multidisciplinary, integrated aircraft control design tools and techniques to enable safe flight in the presence of adverse conditions such as structural damage, control surface failures, or aerodynamic upsets. The testbed is an F-18 aircraft serving as a full-scale vehicle to test and validate adaptive flight control research and lends a significant confidence to the development, maturation, and acceptance process of incorporating adaptive control laws into follow-on research and the operational environment. The experimental systems integrated into FAST were designed to allow for flexible yet safe flight test evaluation and validation of modern adaptive control technologies and revolve around two major hardware upgrades: the modification of Production Support Flight Control Computers (PSFCC) and integration of two, fourth-generation Airborne Research Test Systems (ARTS). Post-hardware integration verification and validation provided the foundation for safe flight test of Nonlinear Dynamic Inversion and Model Reference Aircraft Control adaptive control law experiments. To ensure success of flight in terms of cost, schedule, and test results, emphasis on risk management was incorporated into early stages of design and flight test planning and continued through the execution of each flight test mission. Specific consideration was made to incorporate safety features within the hardware and software to alleviate user demands as well as into test processes and training to reduce human factor impacts to safe and successful flight test. This paper describes the research configuration, experiment functionality, overall risk mitigation, flight test approach and results, and lessons learned of adaptive controls research of the Full-Scale Advanced Systems Testbed.
Pavlock, Kate M.↗
Ensuring Success of Adaptive Control Research Through Project Lifecycle Risk Mitigation
Lessons Learne: 1. Design-out unnecessary risk to prevent excessive mitigation management during flight. 2. Consider iterative checkouts to confirm or improve human factor characteristics. 3. Consider the total flight test profile to uncover unanticipated human-algorithm interactions. 4. Consider test card cadence as a metric to assess test readiness. 5. Full-scale flight test is critical to development, maturation, and acceptance of adaptive control laws for operational use.
Pavlock, Kate M.↗
Advanced Statistical Methods in Spacecraft Flight Software Cost Estimation: Bayesian Regression and Nonlinear Principal Components Analysis to Support System Engineering in the Early Project Lifecycle
This paper provides an overview of the new features and model updates in the upcoming release of the NASA Analogy Software Cost Tool (ASCoT). ASCoT, hosted within the Online NASA Space Estimation Tools (ONSET) on the One NASA Cost Engineering (ONCE) Database, is a web-based tool that provides a suite of estimation tools to support early lifecycle NASA flight software cost analysis. In addition to the traditional parametric flight software costing method COCOMO II, ASCoT contains a Bayesian linear regression to predict total flight software development cost as a function of total spacecraft cost, as well as four analogic methods: k-Nearest Neighbors (kNN) and Clustering models to predict Effort (in work-months) and total source lines of code (SLOC). These methods are designed to work primarily with system-level inputs such as mission type (orbiter, lander, etc.), mission destination (Earth, Inner Planetary, etc.), and the number of instruments and deployables. Nonlinear principal components analysis (NLPCA) is performed to find the principal features of the data composed of both categorical and numerical variables and is necessary prior to defining our analogic methods. Sensitivity analyses and in- and out-of-sample model performance results are presented for the Bayesian CER and the analogic models.
Johnson, James K.↗
Solar Bankability Data to Advance Transactions and Access (SB-DATA) Final Technical Report
The DOE project “Solar Bankability Data to Advance Transactions and Access”, known in the solar industry and referred to in this report as “Orange Button”, had project objectives of convening key stakeholder participants in the solar project lifecycle to develop a data taxonomy that meets to the solar industry’s needs for standardized data types for use in solar projects. Additional Orange Button deliverables included the development of an online data exchange to act as a clearinghouse of data that conformed to the data standard and additional solar industry data, and a Solar Data Translation Platform that could transform legacy solar project data to conform to the Orange Button data standard. All of these objectives were achieved. The Smart Electric Power Alliance (SEPA) provided program management, industry participant recruiting and convening, worked with the solar industry to define the scope of the Orange Button data taxonomy, and documented and delivered the taxonomy data requirements to funded project partners to develop both the taxonomy and the data conversion tools. Further efforts included performing extensive industry outreach and awareness to encourage adoption of the Orange Button taxonomy by the solar industry by enumerating the cost saving benefits of using the taxonomy and the public benefit of the increased use of solar energy due to increased bankability and viability of solar development projects. Solar PV panel and component prices have fallen in the last decade, while soft costs have remained stubbornly high and can account for as much as 64% of the total cost of a new solar system. Part of the U.S. Department of Energy SunShot Initiative, Orange Button enabled the creation and adoption of industry-led open data standards for rapid and seamless information exchange across the solar value chain, from origination to decommissioning. Standardizing data will reduce soft costs by making it easier to share solar data and speeding up processes. The taxonomy is a product of solar industry participants convening to identify the pain points caused by incompatible data, and to agree on and standardize data types to be used by the actors in the solar project lifecycle. This report focuses on the SEPA led first phase of Orange Button project that included industry outreach and recruiting participants for five industry working groups, widespread industry outreach to increase awareness and encourage eventual adoption of the taxonomy, and the definition of the scope, use cases, and supporting data types of the Orange Button taxonomy. The solar industry has been receptive of the completed Orange Button taxonomy. In SEPA’s work, 401 solar industry participants facilitated by SEPA defined the scope, use cases, and requirements for the taxonomy leading to over 150 taxonomy early adopters incorporating the taxonomy into their software products serving the solar industry, and several large investors and banks have started projects to enable them to utilize the taxonomy to gain back-office efficiencies. Moving forward, as the solar industry more widely embraces the Orange Button taxonomy and begins realizing the tangible benefits of adoption at scale, we expect further pressure on solar soft costs and increases in the bankability of solar projects.
14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
The Continuously Evolving Land Use Control Climate in FUSRAP - 12285
In recent years the topic of Land Use Controls (LUCs) has become much more prevalent in the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) for a number of reasons. Some regulatory agencies have been placing much more emphasis on this topic than they historically did. Also as the FUSRAP has matured, more sites are approaching a point in the project lifecycle that LUCs are needed to be implemented. There are many issues, some site specific, some agency specific, and some programmatic, that may arise when addressing LUCs on a FUSRAP site. These issues can span the life of a project from planning to implementation. As the emphasis on LUCs increases at a fast pace, USACE is faced with the task of developing consistency in how we respond, and at the same time leaving enough latitude for projects to accomplish their individual missions while taking into consideration the site specific concerns. The Land Use Controls arena encompasses a large number of tools to address the matter at hand. There are numerous mechanisms that can accomplish Land Use Control goals, some of which include administrative controls and engineering controls. This paper will discuss some of the mechanisms being utilized by USACE at our FUSRAP projects. Having a better understanding of how LUCs are currently being handled in the FUSRAP will be beneficial to project delivery teams in order to make the best decisions moving through the project lifecycle. Being aware of LUC requirements and options at an early stage in a project will help a team effectively plan for and execute the chosen alternative for remedial action. There are a number of guidance tools from various other agencies that exist for consideration during Land Use Control planning and implementation. The USACE is currently evaluating these guidance tools to determine applicability and impact to FUSRAP projects. Some of these tools are under review at Army and the Department of Defense. Critical to this evaluation is internal team coordination as well as coordination and input from stakeholders. With guidance on LUCs available from a number of entities, the USACE now has the opportunity to develop consistency in determining how LUCs are handled on FUSRAP projects. The FUSRAP ER, ER 200-1-4, is currently being revised and will broadly touch on LUCs. This broad approach was a result of recognizing the magnitude of variances and site specific components that come into play when applying LUCs to our FUSRAP sites. As land use controls scenarios continue to arise on our FUSRAP sites, the methods for how our project teams address those will continue to evolve. The Program is continuing to develop guidance on how to address LUCs. In the interim, our FUSRAP projects can share lessons learned on the LUCs they are implementing. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA's Software Safety Standard
NASA relies more and more on software to control, monitor, and verify its safety critical systems, facilities and operations. Since the 1960's there has hardly been a spacecraft launched that does not have a computer on board that will provide command and control services. There have been recent incidents where software has played a role in high-profile mission failures and hazardous incidents. For example, the Mars Orbiter, Mars Polar Lander, the DART (Demonstration of Autonomous Rendezvous Technology), and MER (Mars Exploration Rover) Spirit anomalies were all caused or contributed to by software. The Mission Control Centers for the Shuttle, ISS, and unmanned programs are highly dependant on software for data displays, analysis, and mission planning. Despite this growing dependence on software control and monitoring, there has been little to no consistent application of software safety practices and methodology to NASA's projects with safety critical software. Meanwhile, academia and private industry have been stepping forward with procedures and standards for safety critical systems and software, for example Dr. Nancy Leveson's book Safeware: System Safety and Computers. The NASA Software Safety Standard, originally published in 1997, was widely ignored due to its complexity and poor organization. It also focused on concepts rather than definite procedural requirements organized around a software project lifecycle. Led by NASA Headquarters Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, the NASA Software Safety Standard has recently undergone a significant update. This new standard provides the procedures and guidelines for evaluating a project for safety criticality and then lays out the minimum project lifecycle requirements to assure the software is created, operated, and maintained in the safest possible manner. This update of the standard clearly delineates the minimum set of software safety requirements for a project without detailing the implementation for those requirements. This allows the projects leeway to meet these requirements in many forms that best suit a particular project's needs and safety risk. In other words, it tells the project what to do, not how to do it. This update also incorporated advances in the state of the practice of software safety from academia and private industry. It addresses some of the more common issues now facing software developers in the NASA environment such as the use of Commercial-Off-the-Shelf Software (COTS), Modified OTS (MOTS), Government OTS (GOTS), and reused software. A team from across NASA developed the update and it has had both NASA-wide internal reviews by software engineering, quality, safety, and project management. It has also had expert external review. This presentation and paper will discuss the new NASA Software Safety Standard, its organization, and key features. It will start with a brief discussion of some NASA mission failures and incidents that had software as one of their root causes. It will then give a brief overview of the NASA Software Safety Process. This will include an overview of the key personnel responsibilities and functions that must be performed for safety-critical software.
Ramsay, Christopher M.↗
Future Projections of Lifecycle Cost and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Light-Duty Vehicles
Vehicles with electrified powertrains carry the promise of significant reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from a lifecycle analysis (LCA) standpoint compared to conventional internal combustion engine (CICE) vehicles. However, trade-offs exist between different types of electrified powertrains in terms of cost, consumer acceptance, and GHG reduction efficacy for different operating conditions. The open-source tool CarGHG was developed with an aim to enable the exploration of a plethora of parametric study scenarios, including the cost of electrification technologies, different driving patterns and charging habits, and the cost and carbon intensity of electricity and fuel blends. This paper introduces the framework of CarGHG, then showcases total cost of ownership (TCO) and LCA GHG results for select models of light-duty vehicles. Another capability of CarGHG, which is the ability to estimate the performance of “virtual” vehicle models (perceived vehicle design specifications not yet on the market), is utilized to explore future scenarios of electrification and low-carbon fuel blends for Small Sports Utility Vehicles (SUVs), a popular light-duty vehicle segment in North America. With opportunities, but also uncertainties, in future scenarios, it is likely wise to continue pursuing multiple ways towards the reduction of LCA GHG.
Hamza, Karim↗
Waste Disposition Methodology at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant - 16469
Cost-effective and sustainable remedial design is a prudent and required approach for dealing with legacy wastes at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) sites. The concept of using contaminated soils as engineered fill for waste disposal facilities is a sustainable remediation process that warrants investigation. Options for cost-effective site-wide remediation were evaluated by DOE and its site contractor, including completion of evaluations for excavation of certain closed landfills and the excavation of contaminated soil in areas of known groundwater plumes to be used as engineered fill for the operation of an On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF) at Portsmouth. The evaluations concluded that excavating select landfills and significant volumes of soil associated with the groundwater plumes considering Portsmouth site specific geology would mitigate the project lifecycle risk. As a result of this evaluation, the excavation of the landfills and soils associated with the groundwater plumes is being incorporated into the project's lifecycle baseline. On-site independent Headquarters review of this sustainable design approach and evaluation was performed in 2013 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Extensive presentations, background information, and data were provided to the independent review team along with tours of the affected areas. The review team agreed with the approach, and the Final Waste Disposition Record of Decision (ROD) for the OSWDF at the Portsmouth Site issued in June 2015, provides for the use of contaminated fill as an option provided that additional regulatory authorization/approval is obtained to use contaminated fill. Stakeholder and regulatory support is evidenced by the issuance of resolutions advocating this sustainable approach. The Commissioners of each of the four surrounding counties and the Portsmouth Site Specific Advisory Board have issued resolutions advocating this approach. They, along with other local leaders and Ohio's congressional delegation, are continuing to pursue implementation of this approach that they believe will enhance the attractiveness of the site for future re-industrialization. This approach at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PORTS) in Piketon, Ohio, is estimated to save more than $200 million over the lifecycle of the decontamination and decommissioning (D and D) project. This strategy has merit not only at Portsmouth, but perhaps other sites within the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Environmental (EM) Management - and beyond. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Assuring NASA's Safety and Mission Critical Software
What is IV&V? Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) is an objective examination of safety and mission critical software processes and products. Independence: 3 Key parameters: Technical Independence; Managerial Independence; Financial Independence. NASA IV&V perspectives: Will the system's software: Do what it is supposed to do?; Not do what it is not supposed to do?; Respond as expected under adverse conditions?. Systems Engineering: Determines if the right system has been built and that it has been built correctly. IV&V Technical Approaches: Aligned with IEEE 1012; Captured in a Catalog of Methods; Spans the full project lifecycle. IV&V Assurance Strategy: The IV&V Project's strategy for providing mission assurance; Assurance Strategy is driven by the specific needs of an individual project; Implemented via an Assurance Design; Communicated via Assurance Statements.
Validation↗
EVs@Scale High-Power Charging (HPC) Pillar Deep-Dive Technical Meeting
EVs@Scale Lab Consortium is addressing challenges, developing solutions, and enabling technologies for transportation electrification ecosystem. The consortium has five research pillars one of which focuses on high power charging (HPC). HPC pillar brings together hardware and software expertise, capabilities, and facilities related to high power EV charging, charge management, and grid integration. Deep-dive technical meetings are organized twice a year and provides an opportunity for more industry engagement and technical feedback for the national labs throughout the project lifecycle. High-Power Charging pillar has two active projects: (i) Next-Gen Profiles (NGP) and (ii) High-Power Electric Vehicle Charging Hub Integration Platform (eCHIP). This presentation summarizes the progress made in both projects during the past six months focusing on specific topics. There will be two deep-dive technical meetings twice a year. Every deep-dive meeting will focus on different aspects of the project progress.
ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
Nov. 2024 EVs@Scale High-Power Charging Deep Dive Technical Meeting
EVs@Scale Lab Consortium is addressing challenges, developing solutions, and enabling technologies for transportation electrification ecosystem. The consortium has five research pillars one of which focuses on high power charging (HPC). HPC pillar brings together hardware and software expertise, capabilities, and facilities related to high power EV charging, charge management, and grid integration. Deep-dive technical meetings are organized twice a year and provides an opportunity for more industry engagement and technical feedback for the national labs throughout the project lifecycle. High-Power Charging pillar has two active projects: (i) Next-Gen Profiles (NGP) and (ii) High-Power Electric Vehicle Charging Hub Integration Platform (eCHIP). This presentation summarizes the progress made in both projects during the past six months focusing on specific topics. There will be two deep-dive technical meetings twice a year. Every deep-dive meeting will focus on different aspects of the project progress.
ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS,DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSI↗
LAMP Project Facility and Space Requirements
The project will require significant space over the lifetime of the project to successfully execute design, technology maturation, component testing and verification, and final removal and installation. The types of space required falls into three general categories: office, storage, and laboratory. Figure 1 below summarizes the project space requirements by project lifecycle. The specific color coding indicates the availability (and potential risk to the project) of the particular type of space: green indicates space that is already allocated and in use by the LAMP project; yellow indicates space that is expected to be easily transitioned from its current use to the project; red indicates a space that is use by multiple users or other projects, and will most likely require high-level negotiations and planning to become available to the project. Figure 2 summarizes the LAMP Space Requirements by calendar year and type throughout the duration of the project. As can be seen in Fig. 2, the maximum space needed by the project exceeds 40,000 square feet, with an average space requirement over the lifetime of the project equal to approximately 25,000 square feet.
43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
Integrated Concurrent Engineering Teams for Increased Efficiency in Flight Projects
A highly integrated Concurrent Engineering Team (CET) within a flight project evolves in its function and has the potential to provide many benefits through the project lifecycle. The benefits include superior systems-oriented design products, as well as overall improved project efficiency and higher-performing interpersonal relationships within the project. If physically integrated, this can manifest as a Concurrent Engineering Center (CEC) centrally located within a project’s physical office space. Here we discuss the process to establish and maintain a tightly integrated engineering and design team for providing highly streamlined service to the project, including a cost/benefits analysis discussion.
Flight Project↗
Integrated Concurrent Engineering Teams for Increased Efficiency in Flight Projects
A highly integrated Concurrent Engineering Team (CET) within a flight project evolves in its function and has the potential to provide many benefits through the project lifecycle. The benefits include superior systems-oriented design products, as well as overall improved project efficiency and higher-performing interpersonal relationships within the project. If physically integrated, this can manifest as a Concurrent Engineering Center (CEC) centrally located within a project’s physical office space. Here we discuss the process to establish and maintain a tightly integrated engineering and design team for providing highly streamlined service to the project, including a cost/benefits analysis discussion.
Flight Project↗