Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “projections”

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 NTRS2011

How to Grow Project Scientists: A Systematic Approach to Developing Project Scientists

The Project Manager is one of the key individuals that can determine the success or failure of a project. NASA is fully committed to the training and development of Project Managers across the agency to ensure that highly capable individuals are equipped with the competencies and experience to successfully lead a project. An equally critical position is that of the Project Scientist. The Project Scientist provides the scientific leadership necessary for the scientific success of a project by insuring that the mission meets or exceeds the scientific requirements. Traditionally, NASA Goddard project scientists were appointed and approved by the Center Science Director based on their knowledge, experience, and other qualifications. However the process to obtain the necessary knowledge, skills and abilities was not documented or done in a systematic way. NASA Goddard's current Science Director, Nicholas White saw the need to create a pipeline for developing new projects scientists, and appointed a team to develop a process for training potential project scientists. The team members were Dr. Harley Thronson, Chair, Dr. Howard Kea, Mr. Mark Goldman, DACUM facilitator and the late Dr. Michael VanSteenberg. The DACUM process, an occupational analysis and evaluation system, was used to produce a picture of the project scientist's duties, tasks, knowledge, and skills. The output resulted in a 3-Day introductory course detailing all the required knowledge, skills and abilities a scientist must develop over time to be qualified for selections as a Project Scientist.

Kea, Howard↗
NASA NTRS2000

The Characteristics of Project Managers: An Exploration of Complex Projects in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Study of characteristics and relationships of project managers of complex projects in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Study is based on Research Design, Data Collection, Interviews, Case Studies, and Data Analysis across varying disciplines such as biological research, space research, advanced aeronautical test facilities, aeronautic flight demonstrations, and projects at different NASA centers to ensure that findings were not endemic to one type of project management, or to one Center's management philosophies. Each project is treated as a separate case with the primary data collected during semi-structured interviews with the project manager responsible for the overall project. Results of the various efforts show some definite similarities of characteristics and relationships among the project managers in the study. A model for how the project managers formulated and managed their projects is included.

Mulenburg, Gerald M.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Adapting Project Management Practices to Research-Based Projects

From dealing with the inherent uncertainties in outcomes of scientific research to the lack of applicability of current NASA Procedural Requirements guidance documentation, research-based projects present challenges that require unique application of classical project management techniques. If additionally challenged by the creation of a new program transitioning from basic to applied research in a technical environment often unfamiliar with the cost and schedule constraints addressed by project management practices, such projects can find themselves struggling throughout their life cycles. Finally, supplying deliverables to a prime vehicle customer, also in the formative stage, adds further complexity to the development and management of research-based projects. The Biomedical Research and Countermeasures Projects Branch at NASA Johnson Space Center encompasses several diverse applied research-based or research-enabling projects within the newly-formed Human Research Program. This presentation will provide a brief overview of the organizational structure and environment in which these projects operate and how the projects coordinate to address and manage technical requirements. We will identify several of the challenges (cost, technical, schedule, and personnel) encountered by projects across the Branch, present case reports of actions taken and techniques implemented to deal with these challenges, and then close the session with an open forum discussion of remaining challenges and potential mitigations.

Bahr, P.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Habitat Demonstration Unit Project: Leadership and Management Strategies for a Rapid Prototyping Project

This paper gives an overview of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) led multi-center Habitat Demonstration Unit (HDU) project leadership and management strategies being used by the NASA HDU team for a rapid prototyping project. The HDU project team constructed and tested an analog prototype lunar surface habitat/laboratory called the Pressurized Excursion Module (PEM) during 2010. The prototype unit subsystems were integrated in a short amount of time, utilizing a tiger team rapid prototyping approach that brought together over 20 habitation-related technologies and innovations from a variety of NASA centers. This paper describes the leadership and management strategies as well as lessons learned pertaining to leading and managing a multi-center diverse team in a rapid prototype environment. The PEM configuration went from a paper design to an operational surface habitat demonstration unit in less than 12 months. The HDU project is part of the strategic plan from the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) Directorate Integration Office (DIO) and the Exploration Mission Systems Office (EMSO) to test destination elements in analog environments. The 2011 HDU-Deep Space Habitat (DSH) configuration will build upon the PEM work, and emphasize validity of crew operations (remote working and living), EVA operations, mission operations, logistics operations, and science operations that might be required in a deep space context for Near Earth Object (NEO) exploration mission architectures. The 2011 HDU-DSH will be field-tested during the 2011 Desert Research and Technologies Studies (DRaTS) field tests. The HDU project is a "technology-pull" project that integrates technologies and innovations from multiple NASA centers. This project will repurpose the HDU 2010 demo unit that was field tested in the 2010 DRaTS, adding habitation functionality to the prototype unit. This paper will describe the strategy of establishing a multi-center project management team that put in place the key multi-center leadership skills and disciplines to enable a successful tiger team approach. Advocacy was established with key stakeholders and NASA Headquarters (HQ) by defining a strategic vision, mission, goals and objectives for the project and team. As a technology-pull testbed capability the HDU project was able to collaborate and leverage the Exploration Technology Development Program (ETDP) and individual NASA center investments which capitalized on their respective center core competencies and skills. This approach enable the leveraging of over $7.5m of value to create an operational habitat demonstration unit 2010 PEM configuration.

Kennedy, Kriss J.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Space Projects: Improvements Needed in Selecting Future Projects for Private Financing

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and NASA jointly selected seven projects for commercialization to reduce NASA's fiscal year 1990 budget request and to help achieve the goal of increasing private sector involvement in space. However, the efforts to privately finance these seven projects did not increase the commercial sector's involvement in space to the extent desired. The General Accounting Office (GAO) determined that the projects selected were not a fair test of the potential of increasing commercial investment in space at an acceptable cost to the government, primarily because the projects were not properly screened. That is, neither their suitability for commercialization nor the economic consequences of seeking private financing for them were adequately evaluated before selection. Evaluations and market tests done after selection showed that most of the projects were not viable candidates for private financing. GAO concluded that projects should not be removed from NASA's budget for commercial development until after careful screening has been done to determine whether adequate commercial demand exists, development risks are commercially acceptable and private financing is found or judged to be highly likely, and the cost effectiveness of such a decision is acceptable. Premature removal of projects from NASA's budget ultimately can cause project delays and increased costs when unsuccessful commercialization candidates must be returned to the budget. NASA also needs to ensure appropriate comparisons of government and private financing options for future commercialization projects.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2000

How Project Managers Really Manage: An Indepth Look at Some Managers of Large, Complex NASA Projects

This paper reports on a research study by the author that examined ten contemporary National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) complex projects. In-depth interviews with the project managers of these projects provided qualitative data about the inner workings of the project and the methodologies used in establishing and managing the projects. The inclusion of a variety of space, aeronautics, and ground based projects from several different NASA research centers helped to reduce potential bias in the findings toward any one type of project, or technical discipline. The findings address the participants and their individual approaches. The discussion includes possible implications for project managers of other large, complex, projects.

Mulenburg, Gerald M.↗
NASA NTRS2018

An “EPIIC” Vision to Evolve Project Integration, Innovation, and Collaboration with Broad Impact for How NASA Executes Complex Projects

Evolving Project Integration, Innovation, and Collaboration (EPIIC) is a vision defined to transform the way projects manage information to support real-time decisions, capture best practices and lessons learned, perform assessments, and manage risk across a portfolio of projects. The foundational project management needs for data and information will be revolutionized through innovations on how we manage and access that data, implement configuration control, and certify compliance. The embedded intelligence of new interactive data interfaces integrate technical and programmatic data such that near real time analytics can be accomplished to more efficiently and accurately complete systems engineering and project management tasks. The system-wide data analytics that are integrated into customized data interfaces allows the growing team of engineers and managers required to develop and implement major NASA missions the ability to access authoritative source(s) of system information while greatly reducing the labor required to complete system assessments. This would allow, for example, much of what is accomplished in a scheduled design review to take place as needed, between any team members, at any time. An intelligent data interface that rigorously integrates systems engineering and project management information in near real time can provide substantially greater insight for systems engineers, project managers, and the large diverse teams required to complete a complex project. System engineers, programmatic personnel (those who focus on cost, schedule, and risk), the technical engineering disciplines, and project management can realize immediate benefit from the shared vision described herein. Implementation of the vision also enables significant improvements in the performance of the engineered system being developed.

Moreland, Robert J.↗
NASA NTRS1976

The project scientist's role in scientific spacecraft project management

The project scientists is in a position which rates very high in terms of behavioral study recommendations. His influence over objectives is generally considered to be important. He is highly autonomous in a moderately coordinated environment. He has diverse managerial and technical functions and the performance of these functions require him to grow beyond his role as an experimenter. However, the position within the line organization for those interviewed is also very stimulating, rating almost as high by the same criteria. The role of project scientist may not be the dominant means of professional growth for the experienced scientific investigators. The influence which the project scientist exerts on the project and the stimulation of that position for him are determined largely by his position outside the defined project scientist role. The role of the project scientist is changing because the environment of those who become project scientists is changing.

Eller, E. L.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Flat-plate solar array project. Volume 8: Project analysis and integration

Project Analysis and Integration (PA&I) performed planning and integration activities to support management of the various Flat-Plate Solar Array (FSA) Project R&D activities. Technical and economic goals were established by PA&I for each R&D task within the project to coordinate the thrust toward the National Photovoltaic Program goals. A sophisticated computer modeling capability was developed to assess technical progress toward meeting the economic goals. These models included a manufacturing facility simulation, a photovoltaic power station simulation and a decision aid model incorporating uncertainty. This family of analysis tools was used to track the progress of the technology and to explore the effects of alternative technical paths. Numerous studies conducted by PA&I signaled the achievement of milestones or were the foundation of major FSA project and national program decisions. The most important PA&I activities during the project history are summarized. The PA&I planning function is discussed and how it relates to project direction and important analytical models developed by PA&I for its analytical and assessment activities are reviewed.

Mcguire, P.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Project Assessment Framework through Design (PAFTD) - A Project Assessment Framework in Support of Strategic Decision Making

Research and development organizations that push the innovation edge of technology frequently encounter challenges when attempting to identify an investment strategy and to accurately forecast the cost and schedule performance of selected projects. Fast moving and complex environments require managers to quickly analyze and diagnose the value of returns on investment versus allocated resources. Our Project Assessment Framework through Design (PAFTD) tool facilitates decision making for NASA senior leadership to enable more strategic and consistent technology development investment analysis, beginning at implementation and continuing through the project life cycle. The framework takes an integrated approach by leveraging design principles of useability, feasibility, and viability and aligns them with methods employed by NASA's Independent Program Assessment Office for project performance assessment. The need exists to periodically revisit the justification and prioritization of technology development investments as changes occur over project life cycles. The framework informs management rapidly and comprehensively about diagnosed internal and external root causes of project performance.

Depenbrock, Brett T.↗
NASA NTRS2021

Reduced Complexity Model Intercomparison Project Phase 2: Synthesizing Earth System Knowledge for Probabilistic Climate Projections

Over the last decades, climate science has evolved rapidly across multiple expert domains. Our best tools to capture state-of-the-art knowledge in an internally self-consistent modelling framework are the increasingly complex fully coupled Earth System Models (ESMs). However, computational limitations and the structural rigidity of ESMs mean that the full range of uncertainties across multiple domains are difficult to capture with ESMs alone. The tools of choice are instead more computationally efficient reduced complexity models (RCMs), which are structurally flexible and can span the response dynamics across a range of domain-specific models and ESM experiments. Here we present Phase 2 of the Reduced Complexity Model Intercomparison Project (RCMIP Phase 2), the first comprehensive intercomparison of RCMs that are probabilistically calibrated with key benchmark ranges from specialized research communities. Unsurprisingly, but crucially, we find that models which have been constrained to reflect the key benchmarks better reflect the key benchmarks. Under the low-emissions SSP1-1.9 scenario, across the RCMs, median peak warming projections range from 1.3 to 1.7°C (relative to 1850-1900, using an observationally-based historical warming estimate of 0.8°C between 1850-1900 and 1995-2014). Further developing methodologies to constrain these projection uncertainties seems paramount given the international community's goal to contain warming to below 1.5°C above pre-industrial in the long-term. Our findings suggest that users of RCMs should carefully evaluate their RCM, specifically its skill against key benchmarks and consider the need to include projections benchmarks either from ESM results or other assessments to reduce divergence in future projections.

Climate↗
NASA NTRS2021

Climate model projections from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) of CMIP6

The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) defines and coordinates the main set of future climate projections, based on concentration-driven simulations, within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6). This paper presents a range of its outcomes by synthesizing results from the participating global coupled Earth system models. We limit our scope to the analysis of strictly geophysical outcomes: mainly global averages and spatial patterns of change for surface air temperature and precipitation. We also compare CMIP6 projections to CMIP5 results, especially for those scenarios that were designed to provide continuity across the CMIP phases, at the same time highlighting important differences in forcing composition, as well as in results. The range of future temperature and precipitation changes by the end of the century (2081–2100) encompassing the Tier 1 experiments based on the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) scenarios (SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0 and SSP5-8.5) and SSP1-1.9 spans a larger range of outcomes compared to CMIP5, due to higher warming (by close to 1.5 °C) reached at the upper end of the 5 %–95 % envelope of the highest scenario (SSP5-8.5). This is due to both the wider range of radiative forcing that the new scenarios cover and the higher climate sensitivities in some of the new models compared to their CMIP5 predecessors. Spatial patterns of change for temperature and precipitation averaged over models and scenarios have familiar features, and an analysis of their variations confirms model structural differences to be the dominant source of uncertainty. Models also differ with respect to the size and evolution of internal variability as measured by individual models' initial condition ensemble spreads, according to a set of initial condition ensemble simulations available under SSP3-7.0. These experiments suggest a tendency for internal variability to decrease along the course of the century in this scenario, a result that will benefit from further analysis over a larger set of models. Benefits of mitigation, all else being equal in terms of societal drivers, appear clearly when comparing scenarios developed under the same SSP but to which different degrees of mitigation have been applied. It is also found that a mild overshoot in temperature of a few decades around mid-century, as represented in SSP5-3.4OS, does not affect the end outcome of temperature and precipitation changes by 2100, which return to the same levels as those reached by the gradually increasing SSP4-3.4 (not erasing the possibility, however, that other aspects of the system may not be as easily reversible). Central estimates of the time at which the ensemble means of the different scenarios reach a given warming level might be biased by the inclusion of models that have shown faster warming in the historical period than the observed. Those estimates show all scenarios reaching 1.5 °C of warming compared to the 1850–1900 baseline in the second half of the current decade, with the time span between slow and fast warming covering between 20 and 27 years from present. The warming level of 2 °C of warming is reached as early as 2039 by the ensemble mean under SSP5-8.5 but as late as the mid-2060s under SSP1-2.6. The highest warming level considered (5 °C) is reached by the ensemble mean only under SSP5-8.5 and not until the mid-2090s.d-2090s.

Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMI↗
NASA NTRS2003

Managing a project's legacy: implications for organizations and project management

Organizations that rely on projects to implement their products must find effective mechanisms for propagating lessons learned on one project throughout the organization. A broad view of what constitutes a project's 'legacy' is presented that includes not just the design products and leftover parts, but new processes, relationships, technology, skills, planning data, and performance metrics. Based on research evaluating knowledge reuse in innovative contexts, this paper presents an approach to project legacy management that focuses on collecting and using legacy knowledge to promote organizational learning and effective reuse, while addressing factors of post-project responsibility, information obsolescence, and the importance of ancillary contextual information. .

risk management↗
NASA NTRS2021

Large-scale features of Last Interglacial climate: results from evaluating the lig127k simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6)–Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP4)

The modeling of paleoclimate, using physically based tools, is increasingly seen as a strong out-of-sample test of the models that are used for the projection of future climate changes. New to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) is the Tier 1 Last Interglacial experiment for 127 000 years ago (lig127k), designed to address the climate responses to stronger orbital forcing than the midHolocene experiment, using the same state-of-the-art models as for the future and following a common experimental protocol. Here we present a first analysis of a multi-model ensemble of 17 climate models, all of which have completed the CMIP6 DECK (Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima) experiments. The equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) of these models varies from 1.8 to 5.6°C. The seasonal character of the insolation anomalies results in strong summer warming over the Northern Hemisphere continents in the lig127k ensemble as compared to the CMIP6 piControl and much-reduced minimum sea ice in the Arctic. The multi-model results indicate enhanced summer monsoonal precipitation in the Northern Hemisphere and reductions in the Southern Hemisphere. These responses are greater in the lig127k than the CMIP6 midHolocene simulations as expected from the larger insolation anomalies at 127 than 6 ka. New synthesis for surface temperature and precipitation, targeted for 127 ka, have been developed for comparison to the multi-model ensemble. The lig127k model ensemble and data reconstructions are in good agreement for summer temperature anomalies over Canada, Scandinavia, and the North Atlantic and for precipitation over the Northern Hemisphere continents. The model–data comparisons and mismatches point to further study of the sensitivity of the simulations to uncertainties in the boundary conditions and of the uncertainties and sparse coverage in current proxy reconstructions. The CMIP6–Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP4) lig127k simulations, in combination with the proxy record, improve our confidence in future projections of monsoons, surface temperature, and Arctic sea ice, thus providing a key target for model evaluation and optimization.

Last Interglacial climate↗
NASA NTRS2007

A Project Management Approach to Using Simulation for Cost Estimation on Large, Complex Software Development Projects

It is very difficult for project managers to develop accurate cost and schedule estimates for large, complex software development projects. None of the approaches or tools available today can estimate the true cost of software with any high degree of accuracy early in a project. This paper provides an approach that utilizes a software development process simulation model that considers and conveys the level of uncertainty that exists when developing an initial estimate. A NASA project will be analyzed using simulation and data from the Software Engineering Laboratory to show the benefits of such an approach.

Mizell, Carolyn↗
NASA NTRS1974

AAFE man-made noise experiment project. Volume 2: Project and experiment discussions

An experiment for the acquisition and processing of man-made noise interference data on earth orbital altitudes is discussed. The objectives of the project are to confirm the results of analytical studies concerning radio frequency man-made noise in space. It is stated that the measurements of the amounts and types of noise in frequency bands of interest could allow the allocation and utilization of frequencies to be optimized and would also contribute to the engineering objective of optimizing flight receiving systems. A second objective of the project was to design and fabricate a noise measuring receiver which would demonstrate the feasibility of the experiment design under the project. The procedures for acquiring and processing the electromagnetic radiation data are discussed.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1976

Tracking and data systems support for the Helios project. Volume 1: Project development through end of mission, phase 2

The overall evolution of the Helios Project is summarized from its conception through to the completion of the Helios-1 mission phase 2. Beginning with the project objectives and concluding with the Helios-1 spacecraft entering its first superior conjunction (end of mission phase 2), descriptions of the project, the mission and its phases, international management and interfaces, and Deep Space Network-spacecraft engineering development in telemetry, tracking, and command systems to ensure compatibility between the U.S. Deep Space Network and the German-built spacecraft are included.

Goodwin, P. S.↗