Engineering topics

Jaap, John

Publications and source records attributed to Jaap, John.

18 records

NASA NTRS2010

Tight Fits for Americas Next Moon Rocket, Ares V

America has begun the development of a new heavy lift rocket which will enable humans to return to the moon and reach even farther destinations. Five decades ago, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration designed a system (called Saturn/Apollo) to carry men to the moon and back; the rocket which boosted them to the moon was the Saturn V. Saturn V was huge relative to contemporary rockets and is still the largest rocket ever launched. The new moon rocket is called Ares V. It will insert 40% more payload into low earth orbit than Saturn V; and after docking with the crew spacecraft, it will insert 50% more payload onto the translunar trajectory than Saturn V. The current design of Ares V calls for two liquid-fueled stages and 2 "strap-on" solid rockets. The solid rockets are extended-length versions of the solid rockets used on the Shuttle. The diameter of the liquid stages is at least as large as the first stage of the Saturn V; the height of the lower liquid stage (called the core stage) is longer than the external tank of the Shuttle. Huge rockets require huge infrastructure and, during the Saturn/Apollo era, America invested significantly in manufacturing, assembly and launch facilities which are still in use today. Since the Saturn/Apollo era, America has invested in additional infrastructure for the Shuttle program. Ares V must utilize this existing infrastructure, with reasonable modifications. Building a rocket with 50% more capability in the same buildings, testing it in the same test stands, shipping on the same canals under the same bridges, assembling it in the same building, rolling it to the pad on the same crawler, and launching it from the same launch pad is an engineering and logistics challenge which goes hand-in-hand with designing the structure, tanks, turbines, engines, software, etc. necessary to carry such a large payload to earth orbit and to the moon. This paper quantitatively discusses the significant "tight fits" that are constraining Ares V. The engineers designing and building the infrastructure for the Saturn/Apollo program usually added margins and growth capability; sometimes the size of existing facilities (such as the width of a draw bridge) was not a constraint. Ares V may utilize the "extra" space in the existing facilities and expand other tight fits. Some of the tight fits cannot be overcome without great expense; raising the roof on the Vertical Assembly Building for example. Other tight fits are easily overcome; the transporter at the manufacturing facility for the core stage can pass under low ceilings and later over a dike (without dragging the middle) by retracting or extending the struts which support the stage. Tight fits discussed in this paper include manufacturing (jigs, widths, heights, and local transportation), testing (test stand sizes and crane capability), transportation to the test stands and the launch site (barge, waterway, and rail), assembly (VAB internal dimensions and door size), roll-out limits, and launch pad size.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2010

Contingency Operations of Americas Next Moon Rocket, Ares V

America has begun the development of a new space vehicle system which will enable humans to return to the moon and reach even farther destinations. The system is called Constellation: it has 2 earth-launch vehicles, Ares I and Ares V; a crew module, Orion; and a lander, Altair with descent and ascent stages. Ares V will launch an Earth Departure Stage (EDS) and Altair into low earth orbit. Ares I will launch the Orion crew module into low earth orbit where it will rendezvous and dock with the Altair and EDS "stack". After rendezvous, the stack will contain four complete rocket systems, each capable of independent operations. Of course this multiplicity of vehicles provides a multiplicity of opportunities for off-nominal behavior and multiple mitigation options for each. Contingency operations are complicated by the issues of crew safety and the possibility of debris from the very large components impacting the ground. This paper examines contingency operations of the EDS in low earth orbit, during the boost to translunar orbit, and after the translunar boost. Contingency operations under these conditions have not been a consideration since the Apollo era and analysis of the possible contingencies and mitigations will take some time to evolve. Since the vehicle has not been designed, much less built, it is not possible to evaluate contingencies from a root-cause basis or from a probability basis; rather they are discussed at an effects level (such as the reaction control system is consuming propellant at a high rate). Mitigations for the contingencies are based on the severity of the off-nominal condition, the time of occurrence, recovery options, options for alternate missions, crew safety, evaluation of the condition (forensics) and future prevention. Some proposed mitigations reflect innovation in thinking and make use of the multiplicity of on-orbit resources including the crew; example: Orion could do a "fly around" to allow the crew to determine the condition and cause of a partially separated payload shroud. Other mitigations are really alternate missions; example, an engine out on during ascent resulted in insufficient propellant for the lunar mission, but the on-orbit vehicle stack is otherwise perfect and can pursue an alternate mission, such as a high ballistic trajectory to test the high-speed atmospheric reentry of Orion. Evaluation and presentation of contingency operations at this early stage of the development of the Ares V rocket will improve the design of the vehicle and lay the groundwork for the exhaustive contingency planning which must be done after the vehicle is built as preparations for operations.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2007

In-Space Crew-Collaborative Task Scheduling

For all past and current human space missions, the final scheduling of tasks to be done in space has been devoid of crew control, flexibility, and insight. Ground controllers, with minimal input from the crew, schedule the tasks and uplink the timeline to the crew or uplink the command sequences to the hardware. Prior to the International Space Station (ISS), the crew could make requests about tomorrow s timeline, they could omit a task, or they could request that something in the timeline be delayed. This lack of control over one's own schedule has had negative consequences. There is anecdotal consensus among astronauts that control over their own schedules will mitigate the stresses of long duration missions. On ISS, a modicum of crew control is provided by the job jar. Ground controllers prepare a task list (a.k.a. "job jar") of non-conflicting tasks from which jobs can be chosen by the in space crew. Because there is little free time and few interesting non-conflicting activities, the task-list approach provides little relief from the tedium of being micro-managed by the timeline. Scheduling for space missions is a complex and laborious undertaking which usually requires a large cadre of trained specialists and suites of complex software tools. It is a giant leap from today s ground prepared timeline (with a job jar) to full crew control of the timeline. However, technological advances, currently in-work or proposed, make it reasonable to consider scheduling a collaborative effort by the ground-based teams and the in-space crew. Collaboration would allow the crew to make minor adjustments, add tasks according to their preferences, understand the reasons for the placement of tasks on the timeline, and provide them a sense of control. In foreseeable but extraordinary situations, such as a quick response to anomalies and extended or unexpected loss of signal, the crew should have the autonomous ability to make appropriate modifications to the timeline, extend the timeline, or even start over with a new timeline. The Vision for Space Exploration (VSE), currently being pursued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), will send humans to Mars in a few decades. Stresses on the human mind will be exacerbated by the longer durations and greater distances, and it will be imperative to implement stress-reducing innovations such as giving the crew control of their daily activities.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2006

Remote Collaboration on Task Scheduling for Humans at Mars

As humans venture farther from Earth for longer durations, it will become essential for those on the journey to have significant control over the scheduling of their own activities as well as the activities of their companion systems and robots. However, the crew will not do all the scheduling; timelines will be the result of collaboration with ground personnel. Emerging technologies such as in-space message buses, delay-tolerant networks, and in-space internet will be the carriers on which the collaboration rides. Advances in scheduling technology, in the areas of task modeling, scheduling engines, and user interfaces will allow the crew to become virtual scheduling experts. New concepts of operations for producing the timeline will allow the crew and the ground support to collaborate while providing safeguards to ensure that the mission will be effectively accomplished without endangering the systems or personnel.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2006

In-Space Crew-Collaborative Task Scheduling

As humans venture farther from earth for longer durations, it will become essential for those on the journey to have significant control over the scheduling of their own activities as well as the activities of their companion systems and robots. However, there are many reasons why the crew will not do all the scheduling; timelines will be the result of collaboration with ground personnel. Emerging technologies such as in-space message buses, delay-tolerant networks, and in-space internet will be the carriers on which the collaboration rides. Advances in scheduling technology, in the areas of task modeling, scheduling engines, and user interfaces will allow the crew to become virtual scheduling experts. New concepts of operations for producing the timeline will allow the crew and the ground support to collaborate while providing safeguards to ensure that the mission will be effectively accomplished without endangering the systems or personnel.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2006

In-Space Crew-Collaborative Task Scheduling

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2005

Enabling New Operations Concepts for Lunar and Mars Exploration

The planning and scheduling of human space activities is an expensive and time-consuming task that seldom provides the crew with the control, flexibility, or insight that they need. During the past thirty years, scheduling software has seen only incremental improvements; however, software limitations continue to prevent even evolutionary improvements in the operations concept that is used for human space missions. Space missions are planned on the ground long before they are executed in space, and the crew has little input or influence on the schedule. In recent years the crew has been presented with a job jar of activities that they can do whenever they have time, but the contents of the jar is limited to tasks that do not use scarce shared resources and do not have external timing constraints. Consequently, the crew has no control over the schedule of the majority of their own tasks. As humans venture farther from earth for longer durations, it will become imperative that they have the ability to plan and schedule not only their own activities, but also the unattended activities of the systems, equipment, and robots on the journey with them. Significant software breakthroughs are required to enable the change in the operations concept. The crew does not have the time to build or modify the schedule by hand. They only need to issue a request to schedule a task and the system should automatically do the rest. Of course, the crew should not be required to build the complete schedule. Controllers on the ground should contribute the models and schedules where they have the better knowledge. The system must allow multiple simultaneous users, some on earth and some in space. The Mission Operations Laboratory at NASA's Marshall Space flight Center has been researching and prototyping a modeling schema, scheduling engine, and system architecture that can enable the needed paradigm shift - it can make the crew autonomous. This schema and engine can be the core of a planning and scheduling system that would enable multiple planners, some on the earth and some in space, to build one integrated timeline. Its modeling schema can capture all the task requirements; its scheduling engine can build the schedule automatically, and its architecture can allow those (on earth and in space) with the best knowledge of the tasks to schedule them. This paper describes the enabling technology and proposes an operations concept for astronauts autonomously scheduling their activities and the activities around them.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2005

Considerations for Using an Incremental Scheduler for Human Exploration Task Scheduling

As humankind embarks on longer space missions farther from home, the requirements and environments for scheduling the activities performed on these missions are changing. As we begin to prepare for these missions it is appropriate to evaluate the merits and applicability of the different types of scheduling engines. Scheduling engines temporally arrange tasks onto a timeline so that all constraints and objectives are met and resources are not overbooked. Scheduling engines used to schedule space missions fall into three general categories: batch, mixed-initiative, and incremental. This paper presents an assessment of the engine types, a discussion of the impact of human exploration of the moon and Mars on planning and scheduling, and the applicability of the different types of scheduling engines. This paper will pursue the hypothesis that incremental scheduling engines may have a place in the new environment; they have the potential to reduce cost, to improve the satisfaction of those who execute or benefit from a particular timeline (the customers), and to allow astronauts to plan their own tasks.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2005

Incremental Scheduling Engines: Cost Savings through Automation

As humankind embarks on longer space missions farther from home, the requirements and environments for scheduling the activities performed on these missions are changing. As we begin to prepare for these missions it is appropriate to evaluate the merits and applicability of the different types of scheduling engines. Scheduling engines temporally arrange tasks onto a timeline so that all constraints and ob.jectives are met and resources are not over-booked. Scheduling engines used to schedule space missions fall into three general categories: batch, mixed-initiative, and incremental. This paper, presents an assessment of the engine types, a discussion of the impact of human exploration of the moon and Mars on planning and scheduling, and the applicability of the different types of scheduling engines. This paper will pursue the hypothesis that incremental scheduling engines may have a place in the new environment; they have the potential to reduce cost, to improve the satisfaction of those who execute or benefit from a particular timeline (the customers), and to allow astronauts to plan their own tasks and those of their companion robots.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2005

Nexus: Planning Tomorrow, Today

To prepare for future human space flight programs, the Mission Operations Laboratory (MOL) at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) has been investigating new planning and scheduling paradigms. To support and prove this investigation, MOL technologists have developed a working prototype of a scheduling system to support the new paradigms. The new planning and scheduling system is called Nexus and has a web site at http://nexus.nasa.gov/. Nexus is based on a comprehensive modeling schema to capture all scheduling requirements typical to human space missions, an incremental scheduling engine tailored to the modeling schema, and remote access (including Personal Data Assistant (PDA) access) to the scheduling system. This paper describes the proposed paradigm shift and the enabling software. It also describes a typical Nexus demonstration which emphasizes how it works, how it enables the paradigm shift, and possible applications. Demonstrations include access to the full functionally of Nexus from a personal computer and access to limited functionally via a PDA. An appendix includes a description and screen shots of the demonstrations.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2005

Incremental Scheduling Engines for Human Exploration of the Cosmos

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2004

An Enabling Technology for New Planning and Scheduling Paradigms

The Night Projects Directorate at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center is developing a new planning and scheduling environment and a new scheduling algorithm to enable a paradigm shift in planning and scheduling concepts. Over the past 33 years Marshall has developed and evolved a paradigm for generating payload timelines for Skylab, Spacelab, various other Shuttle payloads, and the International Space Station. The current paradigm starts by collecting the requirements, called ?ask models," from the scientists and technologists for the tasks that are to be scheduled. Because of shortcomings in the current modeling schema, some requirements are entered as notes. Next, a cadre with knowledge of vehicle and hardware modifies these models to encompass and be compatible with the hardware model; again, notes are added when the modeling schema does not provide a better way to represent the requirements. Finally, the models are modified to be compatible with the scheduling engine. Then the models are submitted to the scheduling engine for automatic scheduling or, when requirements are expressed in notes, the timeline is built manually. A future paradigm would provide a scheduling engine that accepts separate science models and hardware models. The modeling schema would have the capability to represent all the requirements without resorting to notes. Furthermore, the scheduling engine would not require that the models be modified to account for the capabilities (limitations) of the scheduling engine. The enabling technology under development at Marshall has three major components: (1) A new modeling schema allows expressing all the requirements of the tasks without resorting to notes or awkward contrivances. The chosen modeling schema is both maximally expressive and easy to use. It utilizes graphical methods to show hierarchies of task constraints and networks of temporal relationships. (2) A new scheduling algorithm automatically schedules the models without the intervention of a scheduling expert. The algorithm is tuned for the constraint hierarchies and the complex temporal relationships provided by the modeling schema. It has an extensive search algorithm that can exploit timing flexibilities and constraint and relationship options. (3) An innovative architecture allows multiple remote users to simultaneously model science and technology requirements and other users to model vehicle and hardware characteristics. The architecture allows the remote users to submit scheduling requests directly to the scheduling engine and immediately see the results. These three components are integrated so that science and technology experts with no knowledge of the vehicle or hardware subsystems and no knowledge of the internal workings of the scheduling engine have the ability to build and submit scheduling requests and see the results. The immediate feedback will hone the users' modeling skills and ultimately enable them to produce the desired timeline. This paper summarizes the three components of the enabling technology and describes how this technology would make a new paradigm possible.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2004

Enabling a New Planning and Scheduling Paradigm

The Flight Projects Directorate at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center is developing a new planning and scheduling environment and a new scheduling algorithm to enable a paradigm shift in planning and scheduling concepts. Over the past 33 years Marshall has developed and evolved a paradigm for generating payload timelines for Skylab, Spacelab, various other Shuttle payloads, and the International Space Station. The current paradigm starts by collecting the requirements, called "tasks models," from the scientists and technologists for the tasks that they want to be done. Because of shortcomings in the current modeling schema, some requirements are entered as notes. Next a cadre with knowledge of vehicle and hardware modifies these models to encompass and be compatible with the hardware model; again, notes are added when the modeling schema does not provide a better way to represent the requirements. Finally, another cadre further modifies the models to be compatible with the scheduling engine. This last cadre also submits the models to the scheduling engine or builds the timeline manually to accommodate requirements that are expressed in notes. A future paradigm would provide a scheduling engine that accepts separate science models and hardware models. The modeling schema would have the capability to represent all the requirements without resorting to notes. Furthermore, the scheduling engine would not require that the models be modified to account for the capabilities (limitations) of the scheduling engine. The enabling technology under development at Marshall has three major components. (1) A new modeling schema allows expressing all the requirements of the tasks without resorting to notes or awkward contrivances. The chosen modeling schema is both maximally expressive and easy to use. It utilizes graphics methods to show hierarchies of task constraints and networks of temporal relationships. (2) A new scheduling algorithm automatically schedules the models without the intervention of a scheduling expert. The algorithm is tuned for the constraint hierarchies and the complex temporal relationships provided by the modeling schema. It has an extensive search algorithm which can exploit timing flexibilities and constraint and relationship options. (3) A web-based architecture allows multiple remote users to simultaneously model science and technology requirements and other users to model vehicle and hardware characteristics. The architecture allows the users to submit scheduling requests directly to the scheduling engine and immediately see the results. These three components are integrated so that science and technology experts with no knowledge of the vehicle or hardware subsystems and no knowledge of the internal workings of the scheduling engine have the ability to build and submit scheduling requests and see the results. The immediate feedback will hone the users' modeling skills and ultimately enable them to produce the desired timeline. This paper summarizes the three components of the enabling technology and describes how this technology would make a new paradigm possible.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2004

Maximally Expressive Modeling

Planning and scheduling systems organize tasks into a timeline or schedule. Tasks are logically grouped into containers called models. Models are a collection of related tasks, along with their dependencies and requirements, that when met will produce the desired result. One challenging domain for a planning and scheduling system is the operation of on-board experiments for the International Space Station. In these experiments, the equipment used is among the most complex hardware ever developed; the information sought is at the cutting edge of scientific endeavor; and the procedures are intricate and exacting. Scheduling is made more difficult by a scarcity of station resources. The models to be fed into the scheduler must describe both the complexity of the experiments and procedures (to ensure a valid schedule) and the flexibilities of the procedures and the equipment (to effectively utilize available resources). Clearly, scheduling International Space Station experiment operations calls for a maximally expressive modeling schema.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2002

Maximally Expressive Modeling of Operations Tasks

Planning and scheduling systems organize "tasks" into a timeline or schedule. The tasks are defined within the scheduling system in logical containers called models. The dictionary might define a model of this type as "a system of things and relations satisfying a set of rules that, when applied to the things and relations, produce certainty about the tasks that are being modeled." One challenging domain for a planning and scheduling system is the operation of on-board experiments for the International Space Station. In these experiments, the equipment used is among the most complex hardware ever developed, the information sought is at the cutting edge of scientific endeavor, and the procedures are intricate and exacting. Scheduling is made more difficult by a scarcity of station resources. The models to be fed into the scheduler must describe both the complexity of the experiments and procedures (to ensure a valid schedule) and the flexibilities of the procedures and the equipment (to effectively utilize available resources). Clearly, scheduling International Space Station experiment operations calls for a "maximally expressive" modeling schema.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS2000

Putting ROSE to Work: A Proposed Application of a Request-Oriented Scheduling Engine for Space Station Operations

Scheduling engines are found at the core of software systems that plan and schedule activities and resources. A Request-Oriented Scheduling Engine (ROSE) is one that processes a single request (adding a task to a timeline) and then waits for another request. For the International Space Station, a robust ROSE-based system would support multiple, simultaneous users, each formulating requests (defining scheduling requirements), submitting these requests via the internet to a single scheduling engine operating on a single timeline, and immediately viewing the resulting timeline. ROSE is significantly different from the engine currently used to schedule Space Station operations. The current engine supports essentially one person at a time, with a pre-defined set of requirements from many payloads, working in either a "batch" scheduling mode or an interactive/manual scheduling mode. A planning and scheduling process that takes advantage of the features of ROSE could produce greater customer satisfaction at reduced cost and reduced flow time. This paper describes a possible ROSE-based scheduling process and identifies the additional software component required to support it. Resulting changes to the management and control of the process are also discussed.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS1997

Using Common Graphics Paradigms Implemented in a Java Applet to Represent Complex Scheduling Requirements

The experiments planned for the International Space Station promise to be complex, lengthy and diverse. The scarcity of the space station resources will cause significant competition for resources between experiments. The scheduling job facing the Space Station mission planning software requires a concise and comprehensive description of the experiments' requirements (to ensure a valid schedule) and a good description of the experiments' flexibility (to effectively utilize available resources). In addition, the continuous operation of the station, the wide geographic dispersion of station users, and the budgetary pressure to reduce operations manpower make a low-cost solution mandatory. A graphical representation of the scheduling requirements for station payloads implemented via an Internet-based application promises to be an elegant solution that addresses all of these issues. The graphical representation of experiment requirements permits a station user to describe his experiment by defining "activities" and "sequences of activities". Activities define the resource requirements (with alternatives) and other quantitative constraints of tasks to be performed. Activities definitions use an "outline" graphics paradigm. Sequences define the time relationships between activities. Sequences may also define time relationships with activities of other payloads or space station systems. Sequences of activities are described by a "network" graphics paradigm. The bulk of this paper will describe the graphical approach to representing requirements and provide examples that show the ease and clarity with which complex requirements can be represented. A Java applet, to run in a web browser, is being developed to support the graphical representation of payload scheduling requirements. Implementing the entry and editing of requirements via the web solves the problems introduced by the geographic dispersion of users. Reducing manpower is accomplished by developing a concise representation which eliminates the misunderstanding possible with verbose representations and which captures the complete requirements and flexibility of the experiments.

Jaap, John↗

NASA NTRS1988

Experiment scheduling for Spacelab missions

The Experiment Scheduling Program (ESP) is the heart of a group of programs developed at NASA-Marshall to schedule the experiment activities of Spacelab and other Shuttle missions. Other programs in the group either prepare input data for ESP or produce derivative information based on the schedule produced by ESP. The task of experiment scheduling can be simply stated as positioning the experiment activities in a mission to that they collect their desired data without interfering with other activities. The program's capabilities as seen by the user are described along with mission constraints the program handles, and how the expert system in the program handles these constraints.

Jaap, John↗