Standard for Models and Simulations

Steele, Martin J.

Home/Archive/NASA NTRS

NASA NTRS · 20160011121

Standard for Models and Simulations

Steele, Martin J.

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This NASA Technical Standard establishes uniform practices in modeling and simulation to ensure essential requirements are applied to the design, development, and use of models and simulations (MS), while ensuring acceptance criteria are defined by the program project and approved by the responsible Technical Authority. It also provides an approved set of requirements, recommendations, and criteria with which MS may be developed, accepted, and used in support of NASA activities. As the MS disciplines employed and application areas involved are broad, the common aspects of MS across all NASA activities are addressed. The discipline-specific details of a given MS should be obtained from relevant recommended practices. The primary purpose is to reduce the risks associated with MS-influenced decisions by ensuring the complete communication of the credibility of MS results.

Explore related subjects

verification simulation model credibility validation uncertainty

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Steele, Martin J.. 2016-09-01. Standard for Models and Simulations. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20160011121

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

NASA NTRS2013

Distilling the Verification Process for Prognostics Algorithms

The goal of prognostics and health management (PHM) systems is to ensure system safety, and reduce downtime and maintenance costs. It is important that a PHM system is verified and validated before it can be successfully deployed. Prognostics algorithms are integral parts of PHM systems. This paper investigates a systematic process of verification of such prognostics algorithms. To this end, first, this paper distinguishes between technology maturation and product development. Then, the paper describes the verification process for a prognostics algorithm as it moves up to higher maturity levels. This process is shown to be an iterative process where verification activities are interleaved with validation activities at each maturation level. In this work, we adopt the concept of technology readiness levels (TRLs) to represent the different maturity levels of a prognostics algorithm. It is shown that at each TRL, the verification of a prognostics algorithm depends on verifying the different components of the algorithm according to the requirements laid out by the PHM system that adopts this prognostics algorithm. Finally, using simplified examples, the systematic process for verifying a prognostics algorithm is demonstrated as the prognostics algorithm moves up TRLs.

verification↗

NASA NTRS2008

NASA Standard for Models and Simulations: Credibility Assessment Scale

As one of its many responses to the 2003 Space Shuttle Columbia accident, NASA decided to develop a formal standard for models and simulations (M and S)ii. Work commenced in May 2005. An interim version was issued in late 2006. This interim version underwent considerable revision following an extensive Agency-wide review in 2007 along with some additional revisions as a result of the review by the NASA Engineering Management Board (EMB) in the first half of 2008. Issuance of the revised, permanent version,hereafter referred to as the M and S Standard or just the Standard, occurred in July 2008.

verification↗

NASA NTRS2006

Validation (not just verification) of Deep Space Missions

ion & Validation (V&V) is a widely recognized and critical systems engineering function. However, the often used definition 'Verification proves the design is right; validation proves it is the right design' is rather vague. And while Verification is a reasonably well standardized systems engineering process, Validation is a far more abstract concept and the rigor and scope applied to it varies widely between organizations and individuals. This is reflected in the findings in recent Mishap Reports for several NASA missions, in which shortfalls in Validation (not just Verification) were cited as root- or contributing-factors in catastrophic mission loss. Furthermore, although there is strong agreement in the community that Test is the preferred method for V&V, many people equate 'V&V' with 'Test', such that Analysis and Modeling aren't given comparable attention. Another strong motivator is a realization that the rapid growth in complexity of deep-space missions (particularly Planetary Landers and Space Observatories given their inherent unknowns) is placing greater demands on systems engineers to 'get it right' with Validation.

verification↗