SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
Support was provided for the maintenance and modifications of software for the production and detailed analysis of data from the DE-A spacecraft and new software developed for this end. Software for the analysis of the data from the Spacelab Experimental Particle Accelerator (SEPAC) was also developed.
Various software testing techniques are described. The techniques are classified as dynamic or static, structural or functional, and manual or automated. The objects tested include the elements designed during the development of the software, such as codes, data structures, and requirements. Testing techniques and procedures applicable to each phase of software development are examined; the development phases are: software requirements analysis, preliminary design, detailed design, coding, testing, and operation and maintenance. The characteristics of a future software engineering environment for software testing and validation are discussed.
MAX is a fault-tolerant multicomputer hardware and software architecture designed to meet the needs of NASA spacecraft systems. It consists of conventional computing modules (computers) connected via a dual network topology. One network is used to transfer data among the computers and between computers and I/O devices. This network's topology is arbitrary. The second network operates as a broadcast medium for operating system synchronization messages and supports the operating system's Byzantine resilience. A fully distributed operating system supports multitasking in an asynchronous event and data driven environment. A large grain dataflow paradigm is used to coordinate the multitasking and provide easy control of concurrency. It is the basis of the system's fault tolerance and allows both static and dynamical location of tasks. Redundant execution of tasks with software voting of results may be specified for critical tasks. The dataflow paradigm also supports simplified software design, test and maintenance. A unique feature is a method for reliably patching code in an executing dataflow application.
The NASA SLR Operational Center is responsible for: 1) NASA SLR network control, sustaining engineering, and logistics; 2) ILRS mission operations; and 3) ILRS and NASA SLR data operations. NASA SLR network control and sustaining engineering tasks include technical support, daily system performance monitoring, system scheduling, operator training, station status reporting, system relocation, logistics and support of the ILRS Networks and Engineering Working Group. These activities ensure the NASA SLR systems are meeting ILRS and NASA mission support requirements. ILRS mission operations tasks include mission planning, mission analysis, mission coordination, development of mission support plans, and support of the ILRS Missions Working Group. These activities ensure than new mission and campaign requirements are coordinated with the ILRS. Global Normal Points (NP) data, NASA SLR FullRate (FR) data, and satellite predictions are managed as part of data operations. Part of this operation includes supporting the ILRS Data Formats and Procedures Working Group. Global NP data operations consist of receipt, format and data integrity verification, archiving and merging. This activity culminates in the daily electronic transmission of NP files to the CDDIS. Currently of all these functions are automated. However, to ensure the timely and accurate flow of data, regular monitoring and maintenance of the operational software systems, computer systems and computer networking are performed. Tracking statistics between the stations and the data centers are compared periodically to eliminate lost data. Future activities in this area include sub-daily (i.e., hourly) NP data management, more stringent data integrity tests, and automatic station notification of format and data integrity issues.
Over the past several years, techniques for estimating software fault content based on measurements of a system's structural evolution during its implementation have been developed.
With respect to the long-life missions associated with NASA's X2000 Advanced Deep-Space System Development Program, reliability implies a system's continuous operation for many years in an unsurveyed radiation-intense environment.
Until recently, NASA did not consider allowing computers total control of flight systems. Human operators, via hardware, have constituted the ultimate safety control. In an attempt to reduce costs, NASA has come to rely more and more heavily on computers and software to control space missions. (For example. software is now planned to control most of the operational functions of the International Space Station.) Thus the need for systematic software safety programs has become crucial for mission success. Concurrent engineering principles dictate that safety should be designed into software up front, not tested into the software after the fact. 'Cost of Quality' studies have statistics and metrics to prove the value of building quality and safety into the development cycle. Unfortunately, most software engineers are not familiar with designing for safety, and most safety engineers are not software experts. Software written to specifications which have not been safety analyzed is a major source of computer related accidents. Safer software is achieved step by step throughout the system and software life cycle. It is a process that includes requirements definition, hazard analyses, formal software inspections, safety analyses, testing, and maintenance. The greatest emphasis is placed on clearly and completely defining system and software requirements, including safety and reliability requirements. Unfortunately, development and review of requirements are the weakest link in the process. While some of the more academic methods, e.g. mathematical models, may help bring about safer software, this paper proposes the use of currently approved software methodologies, and sound software and assurance practices to show how, to a large degree, safety can be designed into software from the start. NASA's approach today is to first conduct a preliminary system hazard analysis (PHA) during the concept and planning phase of a project. This determines the overall hazard potential of the system to be built. Shortly thereafter, as the system requirements are being defined, the second iteration of hazard analyses takes place, the systems hazard analysis (SHA). During the systems requirements phase, decisions are made as to what functions of the system will be the responsibility of software. This is the most critical time to affect the safety of the software. From this point, software safety analyses as well as software engineering practices are the main focus for assuring safe software. While many of the steps proposed in this paper seem like just sound engineering practices, they are the best technical and most cost effective means to assure safe software within a safe system.
A computer program that belongs to the class known among software experts as output truth-maintenance-systems (output TMSs) has been devised as one of a number of software tools for reducing the size of the knowledge base that must be searched during execution of artificial- intelligence software of the rule-based inference-engine type in a case in which data are missing. This program determines whether the consequences of activation of two or more rules can be combined without causing a logical inconsistency. For example, in a case involving hypothetical scenarios that could lead to turning a given device on or off, the program determines whether a scenario involving a given combination of rules could lead to turning the device both on and off at the same time, in which case that combination of rules would not be included in the scenario.
This paper's main purpose is to detail issues and lessons learned regarding designing, integrating, and implementing Fault Detection Isolation and Recovery (FDIR) for Constellation Exploration Program (CxP) Ground Operations at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Part of the0 overall implementation of National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) CxP, FDIR is being implemented in three main components of the program (Ares, Orion, and Ground Operations/Processing). While not initially part of the design baseline for the CxP Ground Operations, NASA felt that FDIR is important enough to develop, that NASA's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate's (ESMD's) Exploration Technology Development Program (ETDP) initiated a task for it under their Integrated System Health Management (ISHM) research area. This task, referred to as the FDIIR project, is a multi-year multi-center effort. The primary purpose of the FDIR project is to develop a prototype and pathway upon which Fault Detection and Isolation (FDI) may be transitioned into the Ground Operations baseline. Currently, Qualtech Systems Inc (QSI) Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) software products Testability Engineering and Maintenance System (TEAMS) Designer and TEAMS RDS/RT are being utilized in the implementation of FDI within the FDIR project. The TEAMS Designer COTS software product is being utilized to model the system with Functional Fault Models (FFMs). A limited set of systems in Ground Operations are being modeled by the FDIR project, and the entire Ares Launch Vehicle is being modeled under the Functional Fault Analysis (FFA) project at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). Integration of the Ares FFMs and the Ground Processing FFMs is being done under the FDIR project also utilizing the TEAMS Designer COTS software product. One of the most significant challenges related to integration is to ensure that FFMs developed by different organizations can be integrated easily and without errors. Software Interface Control Documents (ICDs) for the FFMs and their usage will be addressed as the solution to this issue. In particular, the advantages and disadvantages of these ICDs across physically separate development groups will be delineated.
Ada Programming Support Environments (APSE) include many powerful tools that address the implementation of Ada code. These tools do not address the entire software development process. Structured analysis is a methodology that addresses the creation of complete and accurate system specifications. Structured design takes a specification and derives a plan to decompose the system subcomponents, and provides heuristics to optimize the software design to minimize errors and maintenance. It can also produce the creation of useable modules. Studies have shown that most software errors result from poor system specifications, and that these errors also become more expensive to fix as the development process continues. Structured analysis and design help to uncover error in the early stages of development. The APSE tools help to insure that the code produced is correct, and aid in finding obscure coding errors. However, they do not have the capability to detect errors in specifications or to detect poor designs. An automated system for structured analysis and design TEAMWORK, which can be integrated with an APSE to support software systems development from specification through implementation is described. These tools completement each other to help developers improve quality and productivity, as well as to reduce development and maintenance costs. Complete system documentation and reusable code also resultss from the use of these tools. Integrating an APSE with automated tools for structured analysis and design provide capabilities and advantages beyond those realized with any of these systems used by themselves.
Qualtech Systems, Inc. developed a complete software system with capabilities of multisignal modeling, diagnostic analysis, run-time diagnostic operations, and intelligent interactive reasoners. Commercially available as the TEAMS (Testability Engineering and Maintenance System) tool set, the software can be used to reveal unanticipated system failures. The TEAMS software package is broken down into four companion tools: TEAMS-RT, TEAMATE, TEAMS-KB, and TEAMS-RDS. TEAMS-RT identifies good, bad, and suspect components in the system in real-time. It reports system health results from onboard tests, and detects and isolates failures within the system, allowing for rapid fault isolation. TEAMATE takes over from where TEAMS-RT left off by intelligently guiding the maintenance technician through the troubleshooting procedure, repair actions, and operational checkout. TEAMS-KB serves as a model management and collection tool. TEAMS-RDS (TEAMS-Remote Diagnostic Server) has the ability to continuously assess a system and isolate any failure in that system or its components, in real time. RDS incorporates TEAMS-RT, TEAMATE, and TEAMS-KB in a large-scale server architecture capable of providing advanced diagnostic and maintenance functions over a network, such as the Internet, with a web browser user interface.
A summary of Quality Improvement techniques, implementation, and results in the maintenance, management, and modification of large software systems for the Space Shuttle Program's ground-based systems is provided.
The Space Station Information System (SSIS) provides the data processing capability for the Space Station Program (SSP). The Software Support Environment (SSE) System for the SSP is the collection of software, procedures, standards, hardware specification, documentation, policy, and training materials. The Ada programming language was baselined by the Space Station Program Office as the language for development and maintenance of all space station software including the software of the SSE itself. The Test And Validation Environment for Remote Networked Systems (TAVERNS) is a distributed philosophy for development and validation of Ada applications software for the space station and as such is closely related to the SSE. An overview of the system is provided.
Organization-wide measurement of software products and processes is needed to establish full life cycle control over software products. The Software Engineering Laboratory (SEL)--a joint venture between NASA GSFC, the University of Maryland, and Computer Sciences Corporation--started measurement of software development more than 15 years ago. Recently, the measurement of maintenance was added to the scope of the SEL. In this article, the maintenance measurement program is presented as an addition to the already existing and well-established SEL development measurement program and evaluated in terms of its immediate benefits and long-term improvement potential. Immediate benefits of this program for the SEL include an increased understanding of the maintenance domain, the differences and commonalities between development and maintenance, and the cause-effect relationships between development and maintenance. Initial results from a sample maintenance study are presented to substantiate these benefits. The long-term potential of this program includes the use of maintenance baselines to better plan and manage future projects and to improve development and maintenance practices for future projects wherever warranted.
The completion of, and improvements made to, the software developed during 1990 for program maintenance on the PC and HEURIKON and transfer to the CYRO, and integration of the Rocketdyne vision software with the CYRO is documented. The new programs were used successfully by NASA, Rocketdyne, and UAH technicians and engineers to create, modify, upload, download, and control CYRO NC programs.
Use of computer program STRCMACS has enabled Illinois Bell Telephone, a subsidiary of American Telephone and Telegraph to cut software development costs about 10 percent by reducing program maintenance and by allowing the department to bring other software into operation more quickly. It has also been useful in company training of programming staff.
The Simplified NEPP Automated Preprocessor (SNAP), which is written to aid in the preparation of input data files for the NASA Engine Performance Program (NEPP), is described. Specifically, SNAP is a software package on the Virtual Machine operating system that prompts the NEPP user for input information via a series of menus. The data collected from these menus are assimilated into an input file suitable for the running of NEPP. SNAP acts as a user-friendly preprocessing interface for NEPP. This serves as an introduction to the SNAP software, a user's manual, a description of the program logic, and a maintenance manual for future modifications to the software.
This data- and event-driven persistent storage system leverages the use of commercial software provided by Oracle for portability, ease of maintenance, scalability, and ease of integration with embedded, client-server, and multi-tiered applications. In this role, the Service Management Database (SMDB) is a key component of the overall end-to-end process involved in the scheduling, preparation, and configuration of the Deep Space Network (DSN) equipment needed to perform the various telecommunication services the DSN provides to its customers worldwide. SMDB makes efficient use of triggers, stored procedures, queuing functions, e-mail capabilities, data management, and Java integration features provided by the Oracle relational database management system. SMDB uses a third normal form schema design that allows for simple data maintenance procedures and thin layers of integration with client applications. The software provides an integrated event logging system with ability to publish events to a JMS messaging system for synchronous and asynchronous delivery to subscribed applications. It provides a structured classification of events and application-level messages stored in database tables that are accessible by monitoring applications for real-time monitoring or for troubleshooting and analysis over historical archives.