SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
Nondestructive screening tests for identifying electronic and electromechanical parts susceptible to failure, reviewing techniques of Apollo spacecraft program
James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is the space-based observatory that will extend the knowledge gained by the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). Hubble focuses on optical and ultraviolet wavelengths while JWST focuses on the infrared portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, to see the earliest stars and galaxies that formed in the Universe and to look deep into nearby dust clouds to study the formation of stars and planets. JWST, which commenced creation in 1996, is scheduled to launch in 2018. It includes a suite of four instruments, the spacecraft bus, optical telescope element, Integrated Science Instrument Module (ISIM, the platform to hold the instruments), and a sunshield. The mass of JWST is approximately 6200 kg, including observatory, on-orbit consumables and launch vehicle adaptor. Many challenges were overcome while providing the electrical and electronic components for the Goddard Space Flight Center hardware builds. Other difficulties encountered included developing components to work at cryogenic temperatures, failures of electronic components during development and flight builds, Integration and Test electronic parts problems, and managing technical issues with international partners. This paper will present the context of JWST from a EEE (electrical, electronic, and electromechanical) perspective with examples of challenges and lessons learned throughout the design, development, and fabrication of JWST in cooperation with our associated partners including the Canadian Space Agency (CSA), the European Space Agency (ESA), Lockheed Martin and their respective associated partners. Technical challenges and lessons learned will be discussed.
This presentation will cover NASA Electrical, Electronic and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts Assurance Structure, NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program, NASA Electronic Parts Assurance Group (NEPAG), examples of assurance challenges, and future challenges.
Describes development and content of a new NASA Standard for Electrical Electronic and Electromechanical (EEE) parts. This Standard reflects current practices, instead of changing them. Most NASA Centers utilize local documents, but there is minimal consistency across the Agency. A gap analysis clearly shows the differences that exist among the different centers and with respect to the NASA Parts Policy. Once approved, the new standard can be referenced in contracts and agreements with organizations outside of NASA.
This document establishes electrical, electronic, and electromechanical (EEE) parts management and control requirements for contractors providing and maintaining space flight and mission-essential or critical ground support equipment for NASA space flight programs. Although the text is worded 'the contractor shall,' the requirements are also to be used by NASA Headquarters and field installations for developing program/project parts management and control requirements for in-house and contracted efforts. This document places increased emphasis on parts programs to ensure that reliability and quality are considered through adequate consideration of the selection, control, and application of parts. It is the intent of this document to identify disciplines that can be implemented to obtain reliable parts which meet mission needs. The parts management and control requirements described in this document are to be selectively applied, based on equipment class and mission needs. Individual equipment needs should be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement should be implemented on a procurement. Utilization of this document does not preclude the usage of other documents. The entire process of developing and implementing requirements is referred to as 'tailoring' the program for a specific project. Some factors that should be considered in this tailoring process include program phase, equipment category and criticality, equipment complexity, and mission requirements. Parts management and control requirements advocated by this document directly support the concept of 'reliability by design' and are an integral part of system reliability and maintainability. Achieving the required availability and mission success objectives during operation depends on the attention given reliability and maintainability in the design phase. Consequently, it is intended that the requirements described in this document are consistent with those of NASA publications, 'Reliability Program Requirements for Aeronautical and Space System Contractors,' NHB 5300.4(1A-l); 'Maintainability Program Requirements for Space Systems,' NHB 5300.4(1E); and 'Quality Program Provisions for Aeronautical and Space System Contractors,' NHB 5300.4(1B).
This assessment had two Phases. Phase I captured NASA Centers’ current practices for commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts 1 used in spaceflight systems and ground support equipment (available at https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205011579) [ref. 1]. The Phase II report provides guidance for selecting and using COTS parts in NASA missions. The approaches proposed in this report differ from current agency practices. This top-level executive summary touches on these new approaches for using COTS parts but does not provide the detailed information that is critical in understanding the rationale behind these new approaches. Readers will need to read the entire report to gain full understanding and effectively use the recommendations herein. NASA’s historical approach to selecting and applying parts has been to define certain parts, primarily specific classes of military specification (MIL-SPEC) parts, as “standard”, leaving all others, including COTS parts, as nonstandard. Standard parts typically are used without further testing (“use-as-is”). Nonstandard parts are subjected to initial screening and subsequent lot acceptance testing of representative samples from each procured lot per MIL-SPEC or similar requirements. Decades later, top-tier commercial part manufacturers have evolved significant manufacturing, statistical control, and technological improvements that can now provide parts as reliable or more reliable than MIL-SPEC parts, when used within their datasheet limits. Concurrently, the space science and exploration community’s needs demand technological advances unavailable with MIL-SPEC parts. This ongoing change necessitates using COTS parts for space missions. Properly selected COTS parts in appropriate applications can offer performance and supply availability advantages compared to MIL-SPEC parts. Their utility and demonstrated reliability result from large volumes and automated production and testing processes. However, careful review and a thorough understanding of their specifications (i.e., datasheet limitations) is needed, and verifying that manufacturer specifications and reliability meet space hardware application needs are necessary. This report recommends MIL-SPEC screening and non-radiation-related lot acceptance testing be reduced or eliminated in cases where evidence of sufficient quality and reliability exists for COTS parts. The extent of NASA's insight into COTS manufacturers and the amount and nature of the needed evidence will differ by mission and will likely be driven by a mission's resources and associated risk posture. To facilitate this goal, two new terminologies have been defined and described: “Industry Leading Parts Manufacturer (ILPM)” and “Established COTS parts.” An ILPM is a COTS manufacturer that produces high quality and reliable parts. Some parts produced by ILPMs, defined as Established COTS parts, do not need any additional MIL-SPEC or NASA screening and lot acceptance testing to be used in space applications. This report provides guidance for selecting, procuring, and applying COTS parts and for performing part-, board-, and system-level COTS parts verification. The recommendation to select Established COTS parts from ILPMs will assure those COTS parts will have comparable quality to corresponding MIL-SPEC parts. Selecting, applying, and verifying Established COTS parts from ILPMs requires a holistic team approach, engaging parts engineers, circuit designers, quality, reliability, and systems engineers, procurement specialists, radiation specialists, avionics leads, and program/project managers. A mission-specific approach tailored to a project’s Mission, Environment, Applications and Lifetime (MEAL) [ref. 2] requirements should be developed and approved by program/project managers. Any associated risks should be clearly identified, quantified, mitigated, and/or accepted. Different approaches are recommended according to program/project Risk Classes A, B, C, and D [ref. 3] and human-rated missions [ref. 4]: 1. Recommend Classes A and B and human-rated missions consider a “MIL-SPEC parts- based design” approach. ”MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach is one in which most parts are MIL-SPEC parts and Established COTS parts from ILPMs are used only when an equivalent MIL-SPEC part does not meet functional or size, weight, and power (SWaP) or performance requirements, or is not available. 2. Recommend Classes D and Sub-D missions consider a “System of COTS” approach. “System of COTS” approach is one which most parts are Established COTS parts from ILPMs. 3. Recommend Class C missions determine which approach is the best for their projects; that is, use either a “MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach, “System of COTS” approach, or a combined approach utilizing elements of both. This report intends to provide guidance in using COTS parts for NASA missions with risk classifications of A through D and human-rated missions; but it does not address the costs of using COTS parts. Costs of using COTS parts in different NASA mission classes can vary significantly even if the same parts are used in different risk postures, due to differing verification levels needed. The guidance does not distinguish between critical or non-critical systems, and a given project will need to apply the appropriate guidance based on their risk posture. The intended audience of this report are NASA personnel and commercial practitioners who support NASA’s spaceflight missions, including spaceflight program or project managers, parts engineers, parts manufacturers, radiation engineers, avionics engineers, system engineers, circuit design engineers, reliability engineers, safety and mission assurance (SMA) personnel, and parts procurement specialists. The NEPP Program will perform a pathfinder study to explore implementing the guidance in this NESC report. An ILPM verification process is not the same as conventional vendor qualification processes performed according to military standards and specifications. This NESC report intends to provide guidance in utilizing available parts data from ILPM manufacturers for parts assurance assessments needed for NASA missions. The report also captured the current practices from DoD and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in Section 10. Note each DoD and FAA report was provided by the corresponding agencies regarding their practices, which are independent from the NESC recommendations in the report.
NASA's Commercial Crew and Cargo Program (CCP) is stimulating efforts within the private sector to develop and demonstrate safe, reliable, and cost-effective space transportation capabilities. One initiative involves investigating the use of commercial electronic parts. NASA's CCP asked the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) to collect data to help frame the technical, cost, and schedule risk trades associated with electrical, electronic and electromechanical (EEE) parts selection and specifically expressed desire of some of the CCP partners to employ EEE parts of a lower grade than traditionally used in most NASA safety-critical applications. This document contains the outcome from the NESC's review and analyses.
More effective electronic communication processes are needed to transfer contractor and international partner data into NASA and prime contractor baseline database systems. It is estimated that the International Space Station Alpha (ISSA) parts database will contain up to one million parts each of which may require database capabilities for approximately one thousand bytes of data for each part. The resulting gigabyte database must provide easy access to users who will be preparing multiple analyses and reports in order to verify as-designed, as-built, launch, on-orbit, and return configurations for up to 45 missions associated with the construction of the ISSA. Additionally, Internet access to this data base is strongly indicated to allow multiple user access from clients located in many foreign countries. This summer's project involved familiarization and evaluation of the ISSA Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts data and the process of electronically managing these data. Particular attention was devoted to improving the interfaces among the many elements of the ISSA information system and its global customers and suppliers. Additionally, prototype queries were developed to facilitate the identification of data changes in the data base, verifications that the designs used only approved parts, and certifications that the flight hardware containing EEE parts was ready for flight. This project also resulted in specific recommendations to NASA for further development in the area of EEE parts database development and usage.
The NEPP Program focuses on the reliability aspects of electronic devices (integrated circuits such as a processor in a computer). There are three principal aspects of this reliability: 1) Lifetime, inherent failure and design issues related to the EEE parts technology and packaging; 2) Effects of space radiation and the space environment on these technologies, and; 3) Creation and maintenance of the assurance support infrastructure required for mission success. The NEPP mission is to provide guidance to NASA for the selection and application of microelectronics technologies, to improve understanding of the risks related to the use of these technologies in the space environment, and to ensure that appropriate EEE parts research is performed to meet NASA mission assurance needs. NEPPs FY15 goals are to represent the NASA voice to the greater aerospace EEE parts community including supporting anti-counterfeit and trust, provide relevant guidance to cost-effective missions, aid insertion of advanced (and commercial) technologies, resolve unexpected parts issues, ensure access to appropriate radiation test facilities, and collaborate as widely as possible with external entities. In accordance with the changing mission profiles throughout NASA, the NEPP Program has developed a balanced portfolio of efforts to provide agency-wide assurance for not only traditional spacecraft developments, but also those in-line with the new philosophies emerging worldwide. In this presentation, we shall present an overview of this program and considerations for EEE parts assurance as applied to cost conscious missions.
This presentation provides a brief NASA-perspective of the major historical milestones in the development of space quality electrical, electronic, and electromechanical (EEE) components in the USA from the dawn of the space age through present.
As the space business rapidly evolves to accommodate a lower cost model of development and operation via concepts such as commercial space and small spacecraft (aka, CubeSats), traditional EEE parts screening and qualification methods are being scrutinized under a risk-reward trade space. In this presentation, two basic concepts will be the overarching theme: 1) The movement from complete risk aversion EEE parts methods to managing andor accepting risk via alternate approaches; and, 2) A discussion of over-design focusing on both electrical design performance and bounding margins.
As the space business rapidly evolves to accommodate a lower cost model of development and operation via concepts such as commercial space and small spacecraft (aka, CubeSats), traditional EEE parts screening and qualification methods are being scrutinized under a risk-reward trade space. In this presentation, two basic concepts will be the overarching theme: 1) The movement from complete risk aversion EEE parts methods to managing and or accepting risk via alternate approaches; and, 2) A discussion of over-design focusing on both electrical design performance and bounding margins.
The NASA Electronic Parts & Packaging Program Manager, requested a NASA Engineering and Safety Center independent assessment to summarize Commercial Crew Program and NASA Centers’ current and best practices, and lessons learned, on use of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) for all mission risk classifications, and provide recommendations that could lead to future NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging Program and/or Agency guidance on COTS parts. This document contains the outcome of the assessment.
The NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging Program co-manager, requested the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) to compile a body of publicly available knowledge on copper (Cu) wire bonds and perform reliability testing and analysis on these bonds, including environment tests, sample destructive physical analysis, and bond pull/shear tests during environment test intervals. The goal was to understand the risks of using Cu wire bonds for space applications and develop guidelines on Cu bond pull/shear limits for NASA applications. This document contains the results of the NESC assessment.
As the space business rapidly evolves to accommodate a lower cost model of development and operation via concepts such as commercial space and small spacecraft (aka, CubeSats), traditional EEE parts screening and qualification methods are being scrutinized under a risk-reward trade space. In this presentation, two basic concepts will be the overarching theme: 1) The movement from complete risk aversion EEE parts methods to managing and/or accepting risk via alternate approaches; and, 2) A discussion of over-design focusing on both electrical design performance and bounding margins.
As the space business rapidly evolves to accommodate a lower cost model of development and operation via concepts such as commercial space and small spacecraft (aka, CubeSats and swarms), traditional EEE parts screening and qualification methods are being scrutinized under a risk-reward trade space. In this presentation, two basic concepts will be discussed: (1) The movement from complete risk aversion EEE parts methods to managing and/or accepting risk via alternate approaches; and, (2) A discussion of emerging assurance methods to reduce overdesign as well emerging model based mission assurance (MBMA) concepts. center dot Example scenarios will be described as well as consideration for trading traditional versus alternate methods.
These charts provide an overview of the NASA electronic parts management implementation and execution process as well as the agency-wide radiation test facility block buy. Near-term challenges and future management team efforts are also described.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.