SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “board of directors”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1997

Institute Study Report

This report documents a study conducted by the MSFC working group on Institutes in 1995 on the structure, organization and business arrangements of Institutes at a time when the agency was considering establishing science institutes. Thirteen institutes, ten science centers associated with the state of Georgia, Stanford Research Institute (SRI), and IIT Research Institute (IITRI), and general data on failed institutes were utilized to form this report. The report covers the working group's findings on institute mission, structure, director, board of directors/advisors, the working environment, research arrangements, intellectual property rights, business management, institute funding, and metrics.

Whitaker, Ann↗

NASA NTRS1997

Business Plan: The Virginia Space Flight Center

The Virginia Commercial Space Flight Authority (VCSFA) was established on July 1, 1995 and codified at Sections 9-266.1 et seq., Code of Virginia. It is governed by an eleven person Board of Directors representing industry, state and local government and academia. VCSFA has designated the Center for Commercial Space Infrastructure as its Executive Directorate and Operating Agent. This Business Plan has been developed to provide information to prospective customers, prospective investors, state and federal government agencies, the VCSFA Board and other interested parties regarding development and operation of the Virginia Space Flight Center (VSFC) at Wallops Island. The VSFC is an initiative sponsored by VCSFA to achieve its stated objectives in the areas of economic development and education. Further, development of the VSFC is in keeping with the state's economic goals set forth in Opportunity Virginia, the strategic plan for jobs and prosperity, which are to: (1) Strengthen the rapidly growing aerospace industry in space based services including launch services, remote sensing, satellite manufacturing and telecommunications; and (2) Capitalize on intellectual and technical resources throughout the state and become a leader in the development of advanced technology businesses.

Reed, Billie M.↗

NASA NTRS1979

Orbiter data reduction complex data processing requirements for the OFT mission evaluation team (level C)

This document addresses requirements for post-test data reduction in support of the Orbital Flight Tests (OFT) mission evaluation team, specifically those which are planned to be implemented in the ODRC (Orbiter Data Reduction Complex). Only those requirements which have been previously baselined by the Data Systems and Analysis Directorate configuration control board are included. This document serves as the control document between Institutional Data Systems Division and the Integration Division for OFT mission evaluation data processing requirements, and shall be the basis for detailed design of ODRC data processing systems.

Source record↗

DOE OSTI2026

Cyber-Informed Engineering for Strategic Planning

The CIE Guide for Engaging Organizational Leadership: Board and C-Suite describes how to apply CIE at the senior-level of organizational management. This guidance integrates CIE concepts into theory and practice of guiding coalition leadership to improve permeation of CIE concepts throughout organizational culture. This guide incorporates feedback from CIE community of practice volunteers in a study of how business administrative and strategic planning and management guidance and course materials can be applied to CIE implementation throughout an organization's principles and processes. This guide defines the interests guiding senior leadership, managers and supervisors, and technicians and workers involved in creating and operating and maintaining systems, and cultural/ historical/ political assumptions or influences shaped the landscape that could facilitate or impede development of CIE. The included guidance for organizational strategic management and leadership can be imbedded into contract guidance based on the CIE implementation guide and lessons learned from industry application.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2024

Oak Ridge National Laboratory Neutron Spin Echo Beamline on NB-2

Neutron Spin Echo (NSE) spectroscopy uniquely measures the Q-dependence of slow relaxation dynamics, and having such a machine at HFIR will advance polarized neutron spectroscopy and promote the study of biophysical and energy materials using neutrons. The 2018 Instrument Advisory Board (IAB) advises Neutron Sciences Directorate, ORNL to upgrade the cold neutron delivery system at HFIR, addressing geometrical challenges in neutron transfer from the bright cold source. This is being optimized now: the entrance to the guide system is moving closer to the source, and more guides are being added. However, there are still significant challenges to making the cold flux at the sample world-class. With the proposed guide system, NB-2 can deliver more than 10 6 polarized neutrons per cm 2 /sec below 8Å, and probably 10Å with further optimization. With no potential for running user experiments with neutrons longer than 15Å, the utility of such a machine for biological studies is limited. However, there is a large demand for this class of spectrometer in materials science, chemical engineering, and nanotechnology. Workshops held over the past decade and the three-source vision have highlighted the community's need for a low-angle, high-energy resolution spectrometer at HFIR. A detailed design study of this spectrometer is needed, focusing on optimizing the neutron delivery system for SANS-type studies. This neutron spectrometer would complement studies already performed on both SNSNSE and BASIS by overlapping and extend the dynamic range accessible, while acknowledging the proposed machine, EXPANSE, at the Second Target Station. Two technologies currently exist for such a spectrometer: traditional DC solenoids like those on BL-15 at SNS and IN15 at the ILL, and RF-flipper-based machines similar to RESEDA at FRMII. Either instrument would satisfy the scientific justification. However, there are strong business and scientific cases to utilize the thermal flux, the resonant expertise developed at ORNL, and the potential to utilize an entangled beam of neutrons to probe quantum matter by adopting the neutron resonant spin-echo configuration.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

NASA NTRS2005

Vehicle Assembly Building Fire Mishap Investigation Report. Volume I of V

On January 13, 2005, at approximately 1355, smoke was noticed on the 4th floor of D Tower in the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB). Subsequently, a 911 call was made, a fire alarm pull station was activated, and the VAB was evacuated. The source of the smoke was determined to be a fire on the Low Bay M/N section roof near the Launch Control Center (LCC) Crossover. Due to the high visibility of the mishap, the KSC Center Director appointed a Mishap Investigation Board. Damage to government property was limited to the roof and a small number of ceiling tiles that were damaged by the fire fighters during the response. At the time of the mishap, there were hazardous commodities in the VAB including Solid Rocket Motors (SRMs) with open grain due to Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) igniter inspections. The Board agrees with the SGS Fire Services' theory that large amounts of smoke concentrated in the VAB D Tower and moved downward into the cable tunnel. The Board determined the proximate cause of this incident to be torching. HRI was installing a torch applied roof membrane which resulted in the ignition of combustible materials under the membrane near a wooden roof expansion joint. The torch applied roofing method is a universally accepted safe industry practice when applied to non-combustible surfaces. The combination of an open flame torch and combustible materiaLs presents an increased level of risk even with skilled applicators. The addition of high winds to this combination results in a risk the Board thinks can not be adequately mitigated. An appropriate risk assessment and analysis must be performed on the proposed roofing method to be used on high visibility facilities which represent unique national assets even when using common industry practices for repair and modification. The Board identified three root causes which contributed to or created the proximate cause and, if eliminated or modified, would have prevented the mishap: 1. Combustible materials in existing roof system 2. Wind speed and direction 3. Inadequate fire watch technique. Two contributing factors were identified which may have contributed to the occurrence but, if eliminated or modified, would not have prevented the occurrence: 1. HRI rushed to dry in and seal the roof on January 13 because heavy rain was predicted for the next day 2. No guidance on torching in windy conditions A total of 17 significant observations were noted during this investigation, which could lead to another mishap, or increase the severity of a mishap, but were not contributing factors in this mishap.

Kight, Ira↗

NASA NTRS1986

INTERMARS: User-controlled international management system

Existing international space law as well as the best interest of all nations are consistent with the establishment of a user-based international organization, herein called INTERMARS. INTERMARS would provide access to facilities and services at a Martian base which would be of high functional potential, quality, safety, and reliability. These opportunities would be available on an open and nondiscriminatory basis to all peaceful users and investors. INTERMARS is a model organization concept tailored to provide cooperative international management of a Martian base for the benefit of its members, users, and investors. Most importantly, INTERMARS would provide such management through a sharing of both sovereignty and opportunity rather then unilateral control by any one nation or set of competing nations. Through an Assembly of Parties, a Board of Governors, a Board of Users and Investors, and a Director General, INTERMARS would meet its primary goal as it would be in the self-interest of all members, users, and investors to do so. The internal structure and philosophy of INTERMARS would provide not only for all participants to have representation in decisions affecting its activities, but also would insure effective and responsive management. Surely this is the precedent wished for, to establish for mankind at the now not-so-distant shores of the new ocean of space.

Schmitt, Harrison H.↗

NASA NTRS2004

ASK Talks with Al Diaz

Following the release of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) Report, Alphonso (Al) Diaz, Goddard Center director, was asked by NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe to head up the Agency's response. The Diaz team, as it came to be known, was changed with making sure the CAIB Report did not become another dusty volume on a shelf of old Agency reviews.

Diaz, Alphonso↗

NASA NTRS2008

Managing Space Radiation Risk in the New Era of Space Exploration

Space exploration is a risky enterprise. Rockets launch astronauts at enormous speeds into a harsh, unforgiving environment. Spacecraft must withstand the bitter cold of space and the blistering heat of reentry. Their skin must be strong enough to keep the inside comfortably pressurized and tough enough to resist damage from micrometeoroids. Spacecraft meant for lunar or planetary landings must survive the jar of landing, tolerate dust, and be able to take off again. For astronauts, however, there is one danger in space that does not end when they step out of their spacecraft. The radiation that permeates space -- unattenuated by Earth s atmosphere and magnetosphere -- may damage or kill cells within astronauts bodies, resulting in cancer or other health consequences years after a mission ends. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has recently embarked on Project Constellation to implement the Vision for Space Exploration -- a program announced by President George W. Bush in 2004 with the goal of returning humans to the Moon and eventually transporting them to Mars. To adequately prepare for the safety of these future space explorers, NASA s Exploration Systems Mission Directorate requested that the Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board of the National Research Council establish a committee to evaluate the radiation shielding requirements for lunar missions and to recommend a strategic plan for developing the radiation mitigation capabilities needed to enable the planned lunar mission architecture

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2013

Center Planning and Development Student Engineer

This fall I was the Student Trainee (Engineering) Pathways Intern (co-op) at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in the Center Planning Development (CPD) Directorate. CPD works with commercial companies who are interested using KSCs unique capabilities in spaceflight, spacecraft processing, ground systems and Research Development (RD) projects that fall in line with NASAs mission and goals. CPD is divided into four (4) groups: (1) AD-A, which works on the Master Planning for center, (2) AD-B (where I am), which works on project management and integration, (3) AD-C, which works on partnership development, and (4) AD-T, which works on the RD aspects of partnerships. CPDs main goal is to one day make KSC the worlds largest spaceport and maintain the center as a leader in space exploration. CPD is a very diverse group with employees having a wide knowledge of not only the Space Shuttle, but also that of the Apollo era. Our director of CPD, Scott Colloredo, is on the advisory board for Commercial Space Operations (CSO) and has a degree at ERAU. I worked on a number of different tasks for AD-B, as well as CPD, that includes, but not limited to: reviewing and reissuing engineering drawings from the Apollo and Shuttle eras, to supporting NASA rocket launches (MAVEN), and working on actual agreementsproposals that will be used in the partnership process with multiple partners. Most of the work I have done is sensitive information and cannot be disclosed.

engineering↗

NASA NTRS2015

Center Planning and Development Student Engineer at KSC

This summer I was the Student Trainee (Engineering) Pathways Intern (co-op) at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in the Center Planning & Development (CPD) Directorate. CPD works with commercial companies who are interested in using KSC's unique capabilities for spaceflight, spacecraft processing, ground systems and Research & Development (R&D) projects that fall in line with NASA's Mission and Vision. CPD is divided into three (3) groups: (1) AD-A, which works on the Master Planning for the center, (2) AD-B (where I am), which works on project control, management and integration, and (3) AD-C, which works on partnership development. CPD's main goal is to make KSC the world's preeminent multi-user spaceport and maintain the center as a leader in space exploration. CPD is a very diverse group of employees having a wide knowledge of not only the Space Shuttle, but also Expendable Launch Vehicles (ELV). The director of CPD, Scott Colloredo, is on the advisory board for Commercial Space Operations (CSO) and has a degree from ERAU. I worked on a number of different tasks for AD-B, as well as CPD, that includes, but not limited to: reviewing and reissuing engineering documents, weekly notes for CPD and senior management, engineering familiarizations with facilities at KSC, leading a tour for the Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Career Services office, and working on actual agreements/proposals that will be used in the partnership process with multiple partners, along with other projects. Most of the work I have done is sensitive information and cannot be disclosed.

Engineer↗

NASA NTRS2004

Genesis failure investigation report : JPL Failure Review Board, Avionics Sub-Team

On January 7, 2001, the Genesis spacecraft lifted off from Cape Canaveral. Its mission was to collect solar wind samples and return those samples to Earth for detailed analysis by scientists. The mission proceeded successfully for three-and-a-half years. On September 8, 2004, the spacecraft approached Earth, pointed the Sample Return Capsule (SRC) at its entry target, and then fired pyros that jettisoned the SRC. The SRC carried the valuable samples collected over the prior 29 months. The SRC also contained the requisite hardware (mechanisms, parachutes, and electronics) to manage the process of entry, descent, and landing (EDL). After entering Earthas atmosphere, the SRC was expected to open a drogue parachute. This should have been followed by a pyro event to release the drogue chute, and then by a pyro event to deploy the main parachute at an approximate elevation of 6.7 kilometers. As the SRC descended to the Utah landing site, helicopters were in position to capture the SRC before the capsule touched down. On September 8, 2004, observers of the SRCas triumphant return became concerned as the NASA announcer fell silent, and then became even more alarmed as they watched the spacecraft tumble as it streaked across the sky. Long-distance cameras clearly showed that the drogue parachute had not deployed properly. On September 9, 2004, General Eugene Tattini, Deputy Director of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory formed a Failure Review Board (FRB). This board was charged with investigating the cause of the Genesis mishap in close concert with the NASA Mishap Investigation Board (MIB). The JPL-FRB was populated with experts from within and external to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The JPL-FRB participated with the NASA-MIB through all phases of the investigation, working jointly and concurrently as one team to discover the facts of the mishap.

solar wind↗

NASA NTRS2013

Review of the Draft 2014 Science Mission Directorate Science Plan

At the request of NASA's Science Mission Directorate (SMD), the National Research Council's (NRC's) Space Studies Board (SSB) initiated a study to review a draft of the SMD's 2014 Science Plan. The request for this review was made at a time when NASA is engaged in the final stages of a comprehensive, agency-wide effort to develop a new strategic plan and at a time when NASA's budget is under considerable stress. SMD's Science Plan serves to provide more detail on its four traditional science disciplines-astronomy and astrophysics, solar and space physics (also called heliophysics), planetary science, and Earth remote sensing and related activities-than is possible in the agency-wide Strategic Plan. In conducting its review of the draft Science Plan, the Committee on the Assessment of the NASA Science Mission Directorate 2014 Science Plan was charged to comment on the following specific areas: (1) Responsiveness to the NRC's guidance on key science issues and opportunities in recent NRC reports; (2) Attention to interdisciplinary aspects and overall scientific balance; (3) Identification and exposition of important opportunities for partnerships as well as education and public outreach; (4) Integration of technology development with the science program; (5) Clarity on how the plan aligns with SMD's strategic planning process; (6) General readability and clarity of presentation; and (7) Other relevant issues as determined by the committee. The main body of the report provides detailed findings and recommendations relating to the draft Science Plan. The highest-level, crosscutting issues are summarized here, and more detail is available in the main body of the report.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2017

Cross-Cutting Risk Framework: Mining Data for Common Risks Across the Portfolio

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) defines risk management as an integrated framework, combining risk-informed decision making and continuous risk management to foster forward-thinking and decision making from an integrated risk perspective. Therefore, decision makers must have access to risks outside of their own project to gain the knowledge that provides the integrated risk perspective. Through the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Flight Projects Directorate (FPD) Business Change Initiative (BCI), risks were integrated into one repository to facilitate access to risk data between projects. With the centralized repository, communications between the FPD, project managers, and risk managers improved and GSFC created the cross-cutting risk framework (CCRF) team. The creation of the consolidated risk repository, in parallel with the initiation of monthly FPD risk managers and risk governance board meetings, are now providing a complete risk management picture spanning the entire directorate. This paper will describe the challenges, methodologies, tools, and techniques used to develop the CCRF, and the lessons learned as the team collectively worked to identify risks that FPD programs projects had in common, both past and present.

risk-informed decision making↗

NASA NTRS2006

Space Studies Board Annual Report, 2006

The 2006 Annual Report of the Space Studies Board provides an opportunity to comment not only on the SSB's activities for the past year but also on the environment that has shaped those activities. As has been true for the past several years, and may well be for years to come, we live in an environment that is continually changing. NASA has continued to pursue the Vision for Space Exploration laid down by President George W. Bush in 2004, but it has obtained only limited resources to do so, requiring continuing adjustments in other NASA programs and reconsideration of our plans for the future. In this environment, the activities of the Space Studies Board are of particular importance. We can, through the National Research Council reports that we charter, provide advice on the issues most important to the execution and planning of the space program. Through our Congressional testimony and public statements, we call attention to the concerns and dilemmas that confront NASA and the science community that it supports. The Space Studies Board itself is also in transition. The year 2006 marked the arrival of a new Director, Marcia Smith, who is the permanent replacement for the long-serving and much admired Joe Alexander. As is evident in this Annual Report, Marcia has had to experience a year that has been among the busiest for the Space Studies Board. And that level of activity appears only to be increasing, as we attempt to help navigate the space program through the technical challenges and political turbulence that are expected in the years ahead.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration(NASA↗

NASA NTRS1993

Human computer interface guide, revision A

The Human Computer Interface Guide, SSP 30540, is a reference document for the information systems within the Space Station Freedom Program (SSFP). The Human Computer Interface Guide (HCIG) provides guidelines for the design of computer software that affects human performance, specifically, the human-computer interface. This document contains an introduction and subparagraphs on SSFP computer systems, users, and tasks; guidelines for interactions between users and the SSFP computer systems; human factors evaluation and testing of the user interface system; and example specifications. The contents of this document are intended to be consistent with the tasks and products to be prepared by NASA Work Package Centers and SSFP participants as defined in SSP 30000, Space Station Program Definition and Requirements Document. The Human Computer Interface Guide shall be implemented on all new SSFP contractual and internal activities and shall be included in any existing contracts through contract changes. This document is under the control of the Space Station Control Board, and any changes or revisions will be approved by the deputy director.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2009

An Effective Health and Medical Technical Authority

The NASA Governance model directed the formation of three Technical Authorities, Engineering; Safety and Mission Assurance; and Health and Medical, to ensure that risks are identified and adjudicated efficiently and transparently in concert with the spaceflight programs and projects. The Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) has been implemented at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) and consists of the Chief Medical Office (CMO), the Deputy CMO, and HMTA Delegates. The JSC HMTA achieves the goals of risk identification and adjudication through the discharge of the appropriate technical expertise to human space flight programs and projects and the escalation of issues within program and technical authority boards. The JSC HMTA relies on subject matter experts (SMEs) in the Space Life Sciences Directorate at JSC as well as experts from other Centers to work crew health and performance issues at the technical level, develop requirements, oversee implementation and validation of requirements, and identify risks and non-compliances. Once a risk or potential noncompliance has been identified and reported to the programs or projects, the JSC HMTA begins to track it and closely monitor the program's or project's response. As a risk is developed or a non-compliance negotiated, positions from various levels of decision makers are sought at the program and project control boards. The HMTA may support a program or project position if it is satisfied with the decision making and vetting processes (ex. the subject matter expert voiced his/her concerns and all dissenting opinions were documented) and finds that the position both acknowledges the risk and cost of the mitigation and resolves the issue without changing NASA risk posture. The HMTA may disagree with a program or project position if the NASA risk posture has been elevated or obfuscated. If the HMTA does disagree with the program or project position, it will appeal to successively higher levels of authority so that risk acceptance and risk trades will be acknowledged and sanctioned at the highest appropriate level; this includes Program Managers, Mission Directorate Associate Administrators and the Agency Administrator.

Fogarty, Jennifer A.↗

NASA NTRS2004

Multi-level Simulation of a Real Time Vibration Monitoring System Component

This paper describes the development of a custom built Digital Signal Processing (DSP) printed circuit board designed to implement the Advanced Real Time Vibration Monitoring Subsystem proposed by MSFC Transportation Directorate in 2000 for the Space Shuttle Main Engine Advanced Health Management System (AHMS). This Real Time Vibration Monitoring System (RTVMS) is being developed for ground use as part of the AHMS Health Management Computer-Integrated Rack Assembly (HMC-IRA). The HMC-IRA RTVMS design contains five DSPs which are highly interconnected through individual communication ports, shared memory, and a unique communication router that allows all the DSPs to receive digitized data from two multi-channel analog boards simultaneously. This paper will briefly cover the overall board design but will focus primarily on the state-of-the-art simulation environment within which this board was developed. This 16-layer board with over 1800 components and an additional mezzanine card has been an extremely challenging design. Utilization of a Mentor Graphics simulation environment provided the unique board and system level simulation capability to ascertain any timing or functional concerns before production. By combining VHDL, Synopsys Software and Hardware Models, and the Mentor Design Capture Environment, multiple simulations were developed to verify the RTVMS design. This multi-level simulation allowed the designers to achieve complete operability without error the first time the RTVMS printed circuit board was powered. The HMCIRA design has completed all engineering unit testing and the deliverable unit is currently under development.

Roberston, Bryan↗