Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “capabilities”

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 NTRS2005

National Research Council Dialogue to Assess Progress on NASA's Advanced Modeling, Simulation and Analysis Capability and Systems Engineering Capability Roadmap Development

Contents include the following: General Background and Introduction of Capability Roadmaps. Agency Objective. Strategic Planning Transformation. Advanced Planning Organizational Roles. Public Involvement in Strategic Planning. Strategic Roadmaps and Schedule. Capability Roadmaps and Schedule. Purpose of NRC Review. Capability Roadmap Development (Progress to Date).

Aikins, Jan↗
NASA NTRS1983

Excess science accommodation capabilities and excess performance capabilities assessment for Mars Geoscience and Climatology Orbiter: Extended study

The excess science accommodation and excess performance capabilities of a candidate spacecraft bus for the Mars Geoscience and Climatology Orbiter MGCO mission are assessed. The appendices are included to support the conclusions obtained during this contract extension. The appendices address the mission analysis, the attitude determination and control, the propulsion subsystem, and the spacecraft configuration.

Clark, K.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Evaluation of the carbon dioxide removal assembly requirements for the Space Station Freedom in the Manned Tended Capability through Permanently Manned Capability configurations

Analyses have been conducted to assess the capability of the Atmosphere Revitalization Subsystem to control ambient CO2 levels of the Space Station Freedom (SSF). The adequacy of the Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly (CDRA) performance to meet design requirements has been evaluated. Analyses considered transient effects of crew location and metabolic loading on SSF Restructure configurations. The analyses consisted of computer simulations of on-orbit conditions using both supplier-provided and adjusted CO2 removal performance approximations along with derived crew metabolic activities and locations. Results show that while the current performance of the CDRA will maintain CO2 levels within specifications for Man-Tended Operations, it cannot maintain the SSF atmosphere below specifications during Permanently Manned Operations. Potential design options are discussed and other relevant analyses are summarized.

Knox, J. C.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Human Exploration Systems and Mobility Capability Roadmap Progress Review

Contents include the following: Capability Roadmap Team. Capability Description and Capability Breakdown Structure. Benefits of the Human Systems and Mobility Capability. Roadmap Process and Approach. Drivers and Assumptions for the whole team. Current State-of-the-Art, Assumptions and Requirements will be covered in the appropriate sections. Capability Presentations by Leads under Roadmap (Repeated for each capability under roadmap). Capability Description, Benefits, Current State-of-the-Art. Capability Requirements and Assumptions. Roadmap for Capability. Capability Readiness Level. Technology Readiness Level. Figures of Merit. Summary of Top Level Capability. Significant Technical Challenges. Summary and Forward Work.

Culbert, Chris↗
NASA NTRS2005

Capability 9.4 Servicing

This paper presents viewgraphs on capability structure 9.4 servicing. The topics include: 1) Servicing Description; 2) Benefits of Servicing; 3) Drivers & Assumptions for Servicing; 4) Capability Breakdown Structure 9.4 Servicing; 5) Roadmap for Servicing; 6) 9.4 Servicing Critical Gaps; 7) Capability 9.4 Servicing; 8) Capability 9.4.1 Inspection; 9) State-of-the-Art /Maturity Level /Capabilities for 9.4.1 Inspection; 10) Capability 9.4.2 Diagnostics; 11) State-of-the-Art/Maturity Level /Capabilities for 9.4.2 Diagnostics; 12) Capability 9.4.3 Perform Planned Maintenance; 13) State-of-the-Art /Maturity Level /Capabilities for 9.4.3 Perform Planned Maintenance; 14) Capability 9.4.4 Perform Unplanned Repair; 15) State-of-the-Art /Maturity Level /Capabilities for 9.4.4 Perform Unplanned Repair; 16) Capability 9.4.5 Install Upgrade; 17) Capability 9.4.5 Install Upgrade; 18) State-of-the-Art /Maturity Level /Capabilities for 9.4.5 Install Upgrade; 19) Capability 9.4.6 Planning, Logistics, Training; and 20) State-of-the-Art /Maturity Level /Capabilities for 9.4.6 Planning, Logistics, & Training;

Moe, Rud↗
NASA NTRS2006

Integrated System Health Management (ISHM): Systematic Capability Implementation

This paper provides a credible approach for implementation of ISHM capability in any system. The requirements and processes to implement ISHM capability are unique in that a credible capability is initially implemented at a low level, and it evolves to achieve higher levels by incremental augmentation. In contrast, typical capabilities, such as thrust of an engine, are implemented once at full Functional Capability Level (FCL), which is not designed to change during the life of the product. The approach will describe core ingredients (e.g. technologies, architectures, etc.) and when and how ISHM capabilities may be implemented. A specific architecture/taxonomy/ontology will be described, as well as a prototype software environment that supports development of ISHM capability. This paper will address implementation of system-wide ISHM as a core capability, and ISHM for specific subsystems as expansions and evolution, but always focusing on achieving an integrated capability.

Figueroa, Fernando↗
DOE OSTI2025

New developments and verification of fusion blanket simulation capabilities in the MOOSE framework

Multiphysics modeling capabilities have a crucial role to play in the accelerated deployment of fusion energy. To that end, we developed new multiphysics fusion blanket simulation capabilities in the Multiphysics Object-Oriented Simulation Environment (MOOSE). Firstly, we expanded on the existing capabilities of the previously published work, by coupling 3D tritium transport modeling capabilities using the Tritium Migration Analysis Program, version 8 (TMAP8) to an existing tool including thermal hydraulics, fully three-dimensional (3D) heat transfer, and loosely coupled neutronics analysis. Secondly, we performed a thorough verification of the new capabilities and increased testing code coverage to meet MOOSE’s software quality standards. The MOOSE framework follows a strict software quality assurance plan to be Nuclear Quality Assurance, Level 1 compliant. The new multiphysics fusion blanket simulation capabilities are now held to the same standard. Thirdly, to demonstrate MOOSE’s new fusion blanket modeling capabilities, we performed a fully integrated, multiphysics simulation of a 3D solid ceramic breeder blanket design. This proof-of-concept simulation provides the temperature and tritium distribution across the blanket. In conclusion, the combined efforts towards software quality and the development of multiphysics coupling capabilities provide an effective and reliable framework for modeling solid ceramic fusion blankets using MOOSE.

modeling and simulation↗
NASA NTRS2002

Onboard Determination of Vehicle Glide Capability for Shuttle Abort Flight Managment (SAFM)

When one or more main engines fail during ascent, the flight crew of the Space Shuttle must make several critical decisions and accurately perform a series of abort procedures. One of the most important decisions for many aborts is the selection ofa landing site. Several factors influence the ability to reach a landing site, including the spacecraft point of atmospheric entry, the energy state at atmospheric entry, the vehicle glide capability from that energy state, and whether one or more suitable landing sites are within the glide capability. Energy assessment is further complicated by the fact that phugoid oscillations in total energy influence glide capability. Once the glide capability is known, the crew must select the "best" site option based upon glide capability and landing site conditions and facilities. Since most of these factors cannot currently be assessed by the crew in flight, extensive planning is required prior to each mission to script a variety of procedures based upon spacecraft velocity at the point of engine failure (or failures). The results of this preflight planning are expressed in tables and diagrams on mission-specific cockpit checklists. Crew checklist procedures involve leafing through several pages of instructions and navigating a decision tree for site selection and flight procedures - all during a time critical abort situation. With the advent of the Cockpit Avionics Upgrade (CAU), the Shuttle will have increased on-board computational power to help alleviate crew workload during aborts and provide valuable situational awareness during nominal operations. One application baselined for the CAU computers is Shuttle Abort Flight Management (SAFM), whose requirements have been designed and prototyped. The SAFM application includes powered and glided flight algorithms. This paper describes the glided flight algorithm which is dispatched by SAFM to determine the vehicle glide capability and make recommendations to the crew for site selection as well as to monitor glide capability while in route to the selected site. Background is provided on Shuttle entry guidance as well as the various types of Shuttle aborts. SAFM entry requirements and cockpit disp lays are discussed briefly to provide background for Glided Flight algorithm design considerations. The central principal of the Glided Flight algorithm is the use of energy-over-weight (EOW) curves to determine range and crossrange boundaries. The major challenges of this technique are exo-atmospheric flight, and phugoid oscillations in energy. During exo-atmospheric flight, energy is constant, so vehicle EOW is not sufficient to determine glide capability. The paper describes how the exo-atmospheric problem is solved by propagating the vehicle state to an "atmospheric pullout" state defined by Shuttle guidance parameters.

Straube, Timothy↗
NASA NTRS1989

Space Logistics: Launch Capabilities

The current maximum launch capability for the United States are shown. The predicted Earth-to-orbit requirements for the United States are presented. Contrasting the two indicates the strong National need for a major increase in Earth-to-orbit lift capability. Approximate weights for planned payloads are shown. NASA is studying the following options to meet the need for a new heavy-lift capability by mid to late 1990's: (1) Shuttle-C for near term (include growth versions); and (2) the Advanced Lauching System (ALS) for the long term. The current baseline two-engine Shuttle-C has a 15 x 82 ft payload bay and an expected lift capability of 82,000 lb to Low Earth Orbit. Several options are being considered which have expanded diameter payload bays. A three-engine Shuttle-C with an expected lift of 145,000 lb to LEO is being evaluated as well. The Advanced Launch System (ALS) is a potential joint development between the Air Force and NASA. This program is focused toward long-term launch requirements, specifically beyond the year 2000. The basic approach is to develop a family of vehicles with the same high reliability as the Shuttle system, yet offering a much greater lift capability at a greatly reduced cost (per pound of payload). The ALS unmanned family of vehicles will provide a low end lift capability equivalent to Titan IV, and a high end lift capability greater than the Soviet Energia if requirements for such a high-end vehicle are defined.In conclusion, the planning of the next generation space telescope should not be constrained to the current launch vehicles. New vehicle designs will be driven by the needs of anticipated heavy users.

Furnas, Randall B.↗
NASA NTRS1996

Using Design Capability Indices to Satisfy Ranged Sets of Design Requirements

For robust design it is desirable to allow the design requirements to vary within a certain range rather than setting point targets. This is particularly important during the early stages of design when little is known about the system and its requirements. Toward this end, design capability indices are developed in this paper to assess the capability of a family of designs, represented by a range of top-level design specifications, to satisfy a ranged set of design requirements. Design capability indices are based on process capability indices from statistical process control and provide a single objective, alternate approach to the use of Taguchi's signal-to- noise ratio which is often used for robust design. Successful implementation of design capability indices ensures that a family of designs conforms to a given ranged set of design requirements. To demonstrate an application and the usefulness of design capability indices, the design of a solar powered irrigation system is presented. Our focus in this paper is on the development and implementation of design capability indices as an alternate approach to the use of the signal-to-noise ratio and not on the results of the example problem, per se.

Chen, Wei↗
NASA NTRS2005

An Overview of Power Capability Requirements for Exploration Missions

Advanced power is one of the key capabilities that will be needed to achieve NASA's missions of exploration and scientific advancement. Significant gaps exist in advanced power capabilities that are on the critical path to enabling human exploration beyond Earth orbit and advanced robotic exploration of the solar system. Focused studies and investment are needed to answer key development issues for all candidate technologies before down-selection. The viability of candidate power technology alternatives will be a major factor in determining what exploration mission architectures are possible. Achieving the capabilities needed to enable the CEV, Moon, and Mars missions is dependent on adequate funding. Focused investment in advanced power technologies for human and robotic exploration missions is imperative now to reduce risk and to make informed decisions on potential exploration mission decisions beginning in 2008. This investment would begin the long lead-time needed to develop capabilities for human exploration missions in the 2015 to 2030 timeframe. This paper identifies some of the key technologies that will be needed to fill these power capability gaps. Recommendations are offered to address capability gaps in advanced power for Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) power, surface nuclear power systems, surface mobile power systems, high efficiency power systems, and space transportation power systems. These capabilities fill gaps that are on the critical path to enabling robotic and human exploration missions. The recommendations address the following critical technology areas: Energy Conversion, Energy Storage, and Power Management and Distribution.

Davis, Jose M.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Human Planetary Landing System (HPLS) Capability Roadmap NRC Progress Review

Capability Roadmap Team. Capability Description, Scope and Capability Breakdown Structure. Benefits of the HPLS. Roadmap Process and Approach. Current State-of-the-Art, Assumptions and Key Requirements. Top Level HPLS Roadmap. Capability Presentations by Leads. Mission Drivers Requirements. "AEDL" System Engineering. Communication & Navigation Systems. Hypersonic Systems. Super to Subsonic Decelerator Systems. Terminal Descent and Landing Systems. A Priori In-Situ Mars Observations. AEDL Analysis, Test and Validation Infrastructure. Capability Technical Challenges. Capability Connection Points to other Roadmaps/Crosswalks. Summary of Top Level Capability. Forward Work.

Manning, Rob↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA Stennis Space Center Integrated System Health Management Test Bed and Development Capabilities

Integrated System Health Management (ISHM) is a capability that focuses on determining the condition (health) of every element in a complex System (detect anomalies, diagnose causes, prognosis of future anomalies), and provide data, information, and knowledge (DIaK)-not just data-to control systems for safe and effective operation. This capability is currently done by large teams of people, primarily from ground, but needs to be embedded on-board systems to a higher degree to enable NASA's new Exploration Mission (long term travel and stay in space), while increasing safety and decreasing life cycle costs of spacecraft (vehicles; platforms; bases or outposts; and ground test, launch, and processing operations). The topics related to this capability include: 1) ISHM Related News Articles; 2) ISHM Vision For Exploration; 3) Layers Representing How ISHM is Currently Performed; 4) ISHM Testbeds & Prototypes at NASA SSC; 5) ISHM Functional Capability Level (FCL); 6) ISHM Functional Capability Level (FCL) and Technology Readiness Level (TRL); 7) Core Elements: Capabilities Needed; 8) Core Elements; 9) Open Systems Architecture for Condition-Based Maintenance (OSA-CBM); 10) Core Elements: Architecture, taxonomy, and ontology (ATO) for DIaK management; 11) Core Elements: ATO for DIaK Management; 12) ISHM Architecture Physical Implementation; 13) Core Elements: Standards; 14) Systematic Implementation; 15) Sketch of Work Phasing; 16) Interrelationship Between Traditional Avionics Systems, Time Critical ISHM and Advanced ISHM; 17) Testbeds and On-Board ISHM; 18) Testbed Requirements: RETS AND ISS; 19) Sustainable Development and Validation Process; 20) Development of on-board ISHM; 21) Taxonomy/Ontology of Object Oriented Implementation; 22) ISHM Capability on the E1 Test Stand Hydraulic System; 23) Define Relationships to Embed Intelligence; 24) Intelligent Elements Physical and Virtual; 25) ISHM Testbeds and Prototypes at SSC Current Implementations; 26) Trailer-Mounted RETS; 27) Modeling and Simulation; 28) Summary ISHM Testbed Environments; 29) Data Mining - ARC; 30) Transitioning ISHM to Support NASA Missions; 31) Feature Detection Routines; 32) Sample Features Detected in SSC Test Stand Data; and 33) Health Assessment Database (DIaK Repository).

Figueroa, Fernando↗
NASA NTRS2005

Results from the NASA Capability Roadmap Team for In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU)

On January 14, 2004, the President of the United States unveiled a new vision for robotic and human exploration of space entitled, "A Renewed Spirit of Discovery". As stated by the President in the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE), NASA must "... implement a sustained and affordable human and robotic program to explore the solar system and beyond " and ".. .develop new technologies and harness the moon's abundant resources to allow manned exploration of more challenging environments." A key to fulfilling the goal of sustained and affordable human and robotic exploration will be the ability to use resources that are available at the site of exploration to "live off the land" instead of bringing everything from Earth, known as In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU). ISRU can significantly reduce the mass, cost, and risk of exploration through capabilities such as: mission consumable production (propellants, fuel cell reagents, life support consumables, and feedstock for manufacturing & construction); surface construction (radiation shields, landing pads, walls, habitats, etc.); manufacturing and repair with in-situ resources (spare parts, wires, trusses, integrated systems etc.); and space utilities and power from space resources. On January 27th, 2004 the President's Commission on Implementation of U.S. Space Exploration Policy (Aldridge Committee) was created and its final report was released in June 2004. One of the report's recommendations was to establish special project teams to evaluate enabling technologies, of which "Planetary in situ resource utilization" was one of them. Based on the VSE and the commission's final report, NASA established fifteen Capability Roadmap teams, of which ISRU was one of the teams established. From Oct. 2004 to May 2005 the ISRU Capability Roadmap team examined the capabilities, benefits, architecture and mission implementation strategy, critical decisions, current state-of-the-art (SOA), challenges, technology gaps, and risks of ISRU for future human Moon and Mars exploration. This presentation will provide an overview of the ISRU capability, architecture, and implementation strategy examined by the ISRU Capability Roadmap team, along with a top-level review of ISRU benefits, resources and products of interest, and the current SOA in ISRU processes and systems. The presentation will also highlight the challenges of incorporating ISRU into future missions and the gaps in technologies and capabilities that need to be filled to enable ISRU.

Sanders, Gerald B.↗
DOE OSTI2026

Investigating the Determinants of Household Capabilities Burden During Power Outages: The Case of Winter Storm Uri

Existing research primarily uses census data to identify the vulnerability of communities to hazards. These vulnerability indices provide aggregated data and are not hazard-specific nor well-validated with post-event data. In contrast, our study uses household survey data (n=1065) to understand which Texan households suffered the greatest loss of their capabilities due to power outages and other utility service disruptions during Winter Storm Uri. Inspired by the Capabilities Approach, our measures of burden include the number of household capability types disrupted during the outages (e.g., cooking, heating, refrigeration), the severity of impact for each disrupted capability, and the additional time and financial costs of coping with these disruptions. We perform a clustering analysis, and find two distinct groups in our data, consisting of ‘lesser burden' and ‘heavier burden' households. Results indicate that the households experiencing the heaviest capabilities burden were most likely to experience longer power outages and the loss of water services. They were also more likely to have a Hispanic-Latino household member, lack access to a generator, live in a rented home, have larger households with more young children, fewer adults over 65, lower household incomes, been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, and more family characteristics that made life harder. We also fit a logistic regression model to assess the role of outage, household, and community characteristics in predicting differences in capabilities burden. Our results offer insights into enumerating the consequences of utility service disruptions on households, which can inform more targeted and equitable resilience strategies.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Kinetic Plasma Simulation in the MOOSE Framework: Verification of Electrostatic Particle In Cell Capabilities

In magnetic confinement nuclear fusion reactors, the interaction between the plasma edge and plasma facing components is extremely important. At the plasma edge, a kinetic representation such as particle-in-cell (rather than a fluid representation) is required to accurately capture the plasma behavior. General purpose particle-in-cell plasma simulation capabilities have been developed in the Multiphysics Object-Oriented Simulation Environment (MOOSE) framework. This new capability is a part of the development of a new MOOSE-based framework for modeling plasma facing components, the Fusion ENergy Integrated multiphys-X (FENIX) framework. In this work, the verification of foundational particle-in-cell capabilities in FENIX is presented. This new plasma simulation capability has three main components: moving particles in discrete steps on the finite element mesh, mapping charge density from the particle's location to the finite element mesh, and solving for the electrostatic potential based on the charge density mapped from particles to the mesh. In this paper, simple verification problems demonstrating each of these new capabilities are presented, and future work includes electromagnetic capabilities and Monte Carlo collisions with neutral gas particles.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
NASA NTRS1992

Space Station Freedom research capabilities

NASA's plan for enhancing space-based research capabilities begins with extended-duration Space Shuttle missions that will double the research capability currently provided by Spacelab and culminate in Space Station Freedom. The 14-day USML 1 mission flown on the Space Shuttle in June 1992 was a space station precursor mission, dedicated to microgravity and life science research. Freedom will be a permanent space-based research facility, providing a working environment nearly free of buoyancy-driven convection, sedimentation, and hydrostatic pressure and featuring access to the ultra-high vacuum of space (for external payloads). In its crew-tended phase, Space Station Freedom will provide 40 times Spacelab's capability, and in its permanently occupied phase, Freedom will provide 110 times Spacelab's capability. (The Russian space station, Mir, offers 26 times Spacelab's capabilities.) According to NASA's current schedule, the first launch of a space station element will take place in November 1995, with permanently occupied capability planned for September 1999. This year, NASA will conduct space station critical design reviews (CDR's). Work package design reviews will take place from February to April 1993, followed by a systems CDR.

Moorehead, Robert↗