SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Management planning”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2017

Integrated Systems Health Management for Sustainable Habitats (Using Sustainability Base as a Testbed)

Habitation systems provide a safe place for astronauts to live and work in space and on planetary surfaces. They enable crews to live and work safely in deep space, and include integrated life support systems, radiation protection, fire safety, and systems to reduce logistics and the need for resupply missions. Innovative health management technologies are needed in order to increase the safety and mission-effectiveness for future space habitats on other planets, asteroids, or lunar surfaces. For example, off-nominal or failure conditions occurring in safety-critical life support systems may need to be addressed quickly by the habitat crew without extensive technical support from Earth due to communication delays. If the crew in the habitat must manage, plan and operate much of the mission themselves, operations support must be migrated from Earth to the habitat. Enabling monitoring, tracking, and management capabilities on-board the habitat and related EVA platforms for a small crew to use will require significant automation and decision support software.Traditional caution and warning systems are typically triggered by out-of-bounds sensor values, but can be enhanced by including machine learning and data mining techniques. These methods aim to reveal latent, unknown conditions while still retaining and improving the ability to provide highly accurate alerts for known issues. A few of these techniques will briefly described, along with performance targets for known faults and failures. Specific system health management capabilities required for habitat system elements (environmental control and life support systems, etc.) may include relevant subsystems such as water recycling systems, photovoltaic systems, electrical power systems, and environmental monitoring systems. Sustainability Base, the agency's flagship LEED-platinum certified green building acts as a living laboratory for testing advanced information and sustainable technologies that provides an opportunity to test novel machine learning and controls capabilities. In this talk, key features of Sustainability Base that make it relevant to deep space habitat technology and its use of these kinds of subsystems previously listed will be presented. The fact that all such systems require less power to support human occupancy can be used as a focal point to serve as a testbed for deep space habitats that will need to operate within finite energy budgets.

Systems Health Management↗

NASA NTRS2018

Automated Contingency Management for Water Recycling System

To enable effective management, planning, and operations for future missions that involve a crewed space habitat, operational support must be migrated from Earth to the habitat. Intelligent System Health Management technologies (ISHM) promise to enable the future space habitats to increase the safety and mission success while minimizing operational risks. In this paper, Water Recycling System (WRS) deployed at NASA Ames Research Center's Sustainability Base is used for verification and validation of the proposed solution. Our work includes the development of the WRS simulation model based on its dynamic physical characteristics and the design of Automatic Contingency Management (ACM) framework that integrates fault diagnosis and optimization. In WRS modeling, a nominal model with fault injectors is developed. Fault detection and isolation techniques are then developed for isolating causes and identifying the severity of the faults. Dynamic Programming (DP) based fault mitigation strategies are designed to accommodate the faults in the system. A series of simulations are presented with different fault modes and the results indicate that the proposed ACM system can alleviate the fault in the WRS optimally regarding energy consumption and effects of the fault.

Systems Health Management↗

NASA NTRS1997

Business Plan for the Southwest Regional Spaceport: Executive Summary

A proposal for a commercial, full-service launch, tracking, and recovery complex for Reusable Launch Vehicles in New Mexico is presented. Vision, mission, business definition, competitive advantages, and business approach are formulated. Management plan and team structure are detailed, and anticipated market is described. Finance and marketing plans are presented. Financial analysis is performed.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1992

Functional requirements document for NASA/MSFC Earth Science and Applications Division: Data and information system (ESAD-DIS). Interoperability, 1992

These Earth Science and Applications Division-Data and Information System (ESAD-DIS) interoperability requirements are designed to quantify the Earth Science and Application Division's hardware and software requirements in terms of communications between personal and visualization workstation, and mainframe computers. The electronic mail requirements and local area network (LAN) requirements are addressed. These interoperability requirements are top-level requirements framed around defining the existing ESAD-DIS interoperability and projecting known near-term requirements for both operational support and for management planning. Detailed requirements will be submitted on a case-by-case basis. This document is also intended as an overview of ESAD-DIs interoperability for new-comers and management not familiar with these activities. It is intended as background documentation to support requests for resources and support requirements.

Stephens, J. Briscoe↗

NASA NTRS2006

Systems Engineering and Integration for Technology Programs

The Architecture, Habitability & Integration group (AH&I) is a system engineering and integration test team within the NASA Crew and Thermal Systems Division (CTSD) at Johnson Space Center. AH&I identifies and resolves system-level integration issues within the research and technology development community. The timely resolution of these integration issues is fundamental to the development of human system requirements and exploration capability. The integration of the many individual components necessary to construct an artificial environment is difficult. The necessary interactions between individual components and systems must be approached in a piece-wise fashion to achieve repeatable results. A formal systems engineering (SE) approach to define, develop, and integrate quality systems within the life support community has been developed. This approach will allow a Research & Technology Program to systematically approach the development, management, and quality of technology deliverables to the various exploration missions. A tiered system engineering structure has been proposed to implement best systems engineering practices across all development levels from basic research to working assemblies. These practices will be implemented through a management plan across all applicable programs, projects, elements and teams. While many of the engineering practices are common to other industries, the implementation is specific to technology development. An accounting of the systems engineering management philosophy will be discussed and the associated programmatic processes will be presented.

Kennedy, Kruss J.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Systems Engineering and Management Applications of ISO 9001:2015 for Government

The manufacturing segment of the business world is busy assessing the impact of ISO 9001:2015, and updating their management systems to meet the required compliance date. What does the new revision mean for government agencies that deliver large engineering projects rather than mass production? In fact, the standard, especially the new revision, can be used quite readily for government agencies, or applied to specific projects, once it is understood in terms of the similarities with systems engineering and project management. From there it can be extrapolated to "mission realization" systems, and a Quality Management System (QMS) is a logical result that can bring order to processes and systems that likely already exist in some fashion. ISO 9001:2015 is less product-oriented than previous versions. It can be more broadly applied to public organizations as well as private; and to services (missions) as well as products. The emphasis on risk management in the revised standard provides the needed balance for weighing decisions with respect to cost, schedule, technical, safety, and regulatory compliance; so if this is not part of agency governance already, this is a good place to start, especially for large engineering projects. The Systems Engineering standard used for this analysis is from NASA's NPR 7123.1 NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements; however, those who are more familiar with ISO/IEC 26702 Systems Engineering-application and management of the systems engineering process, or SAE/EIA 632 Processes for Engineering a System will also recognize the similarities. In reality, the QMS outlined by ISO 9001 reinforces the systems engineering processes, and serves to ensure that they are adequately implemented, although most of the ISO 9001 literature emphasizes the production and process aspects of the standard. Rather than beginning with ISO 9001and getting lost in the vocabulary, it is useful to begin with the systems engineering lifecycle. Identification of stakeholder expectations, identifying solutions, creating specific product or service designs, production of the product or service, delivery to the public, and the associated management, planning, and control processes, are a familiar place to begin thinking of the overall system of identifying, designing, and competing a project or mission. Lining up this lifecycle with the ISO requirements (see Figure 1) illustrates how a quality management system is concerned with the same processes, and provides a governance and assurance function. If implemented properly, there are cost savings resulting from less rework, repair, reprocessing, failures, misplaced documents, and similar types of deficiencies1. Starting with an organization's systems engineering processes allows the organization to use their own terminology for a QMS plan, and tailor the plan to their own project or organization, so that it is more easily developed, understood, and implemented.

Shepherd, Christena C.↗

NASA NTRS1991

NASA software documentation standard software engineering program

The NASA Software Documentation Standard (hereinafter referred to as Standard) can be applied to the documentation of all NASA software. This Standard is limited to documentation format and content requirements. It does not mandate specific management, engineering, or assurance standards or techniques. This Standard defines the format and content of documentation for software acquisition, development, and sustaining engineering. Format requirements address where information shall be recorded and content requirements address what information shall be recorded. This Standard provides a framework to allow consistency of documentation across NASA and visibility into the completeness of project documentation. This basic framework consists of four major sections (or volumes). The Management Plan contains all planning and business aspects of a software project, including engineering and assurance planning. The Product Specification contains all technical engineering information, including software requirements and design. The Assurance and Test Procedures contains all technical assurance information, including Test, Quality Assurance (QA), and Verification and Validation (V&V). The Management, Engineering, and Assurance Reports is the library and/or listing of all project reports.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1991

NASA Software Documentation Standard

The NASA Software Documentation Standard (hereinafter referred to as "Standard") is designed to support the documentation of all software developed for NASA; its goal is to provide a framework and model for recording the essential information needed throughout the development life cycle and maintenance of a software system. The NASA Software Documentation Standard can be applied to the documentation of all NASA software. The Standard is limited to documentation format and content requirements. It does not mandate specific management, engineering, or assurance standards or techniques. This Standard defines the format and content of documentation for software acquisition, development, and sustaining engineering. Format requirements address where information shall be recorded and content requirements address what information shall be recorded. This Standard provides a framework to allow consistency of documentation across NASA and visibility into the completeness of project documentation. The basic framework consists of four major sections (or volumes). The Management Plan contains all planning and business aspects of a software project, including engineering and assurance planning. The Product Specification contains all technical engineering information, including software requirements and design. The Assurance and Test Procedures contains all technical assurance information, including Test, Quality Assurance (QA), and Verification and Validation (V&V). The Management, Engineering, and Assurance Reports is the library and/or listing of all project reports.

Source record↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Crew Autonomy through Self-Scheduling: Scheduling Performance Pilot Study

Within the domain of human spaceflight, crew scheduling for International Space Station (ISS) remains a human-driven planning task. Large teams of flight controllers (called Ops Planners) spend weeks creating violation-free schedules for all crewmembers. As NASA considers long-duration exploration missions, the necessary shift of scheduling and planning management from Ops Planners to crew members requires significant research and investigation of crew performance to complete these scheduling tasks. This pilot study was conducted to evaluate non-expert human performance for the task of planning and scheduling, focusing on scheduling problems that increased in complexity based on the number of activities to be scheduled and the number of planning constraints. Nine non-expert planners were recruited to complete scheduling tasks using Playbook, a scheduling software. The results of this pilot study show that scheduling performance decreased as scheduling workload (i.e. number of activities and percent of activities with planning constraints) increased. This paper provides evidence towards developing a model for scheduling task difficulty and identifies potential implications for future automated aids for flight crew scheduling.

planning↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Crew Autonomy Through Self-Scheduling: Scheduling Performance Pilot Study

planning↗

NASA NTRS1979

Photovoltaic system criteria documents. Volume 1: Guidelines for evaluating the management and operations planning of photovoltaic applications

Guidelines are provided to the Field Centers for organization, scheduling, project and cost control, and performance in the areas of project management and operations planning for Photovoltaics Test and Applications. These guidelines may be used in organizing a T and A Project Team for system design/test, site construction and operation, and as the basis for evaluating T and A proposals. The attributes are described for project management and operations planning to be used by the Field Centers. Specifically, all project management and operational issues affecting costs, schedules and performance of photovoltaic systems are addressed. Photovoltaic tests and applications include residential, intermediate load center, central station, and stand-alone systems. The sub-categories of system maturity considered are: Initial System Evaluation Experiments (ISEE); System Readiness Experiments (SRE); and Commercial Readiness Demonstration Projects (CRDP).

Koenig, John C.↗

NASA NTRS1977

Status of Goldstone solar energy system study of the first Goldstone energy project

The results reached by the DSN engineering section and private consultants in the review of the initial plan of the Golstone Energy Project are summarized. The main objectives were in the areas of energy conservation and the application of solar-driven systems for power and hydrogen generation. This summary will provide background data for management planning decisions both to the DSN engineering section and other organizations planning a similar program. The review showed that an add-on solar driven absorption refrigeration unit with its associated changes to the existing system was not cost-effective, having a payback period of 29 years. Similar economically unattractive results were found for both a solar-hydrogen and a wind-hydrogen generation plant. However, cutting the hydrogen generation linkage from this plant improved its economic feasibility.

Lansing, F. L.↗

NASA NTRS2011

SOFIA Program SE and I Lessons Learned

Once a "Troubled Project" threatened with cancellation, the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA) Program has overcome many difficult challenges and recently achieved its first light images. To achieve success, SOFIA had to overcome significant deficiencies in fundamental Systems Engineering identified during a major Program restructuring. This presentation will summarize the lessons learn in Systems Engineering on the SOFIA Program. After the Program was reformulated, an initial assessment of Systems Engineering established the scope of the problem and helped to set a list of priorities that needed to be work. A revised Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) was written to address the new Program structure and requirements established in the approved NPR7123.1A. An important result of the "Technical Planning" effort was the decision by the Program and Technical Leadership team to re-phasing the lifecycle into increments. The reformed SOFIA Program Office had to quickly develop and establish several new System Engineering core processes including; Requirements Management, Risk Management, Configuration Management and Data Management. Implementing these processes had to consider the physical and cultural diversity of the SOFIA Program team which includes two Projects spanning two NASA Centers, a major German partnership, and sub-contractors located across the United States and Europe. The SOFIA Program experience represents a creative approach to doing "System Engineering in the middle" while a Program is well established. Many challenges were identified and overcome. The SOFIA example demonstrates it is never too late to benefit from fixing deficiencies in the System Engineering processes.

Ray, Ronald J.↗

NASA NTRS2014

NASA's Space Launch System: Momentum Builds Towards First Launch

NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) is gaining momentum programmatically and technically toward the first launch of a new exploration-class heavy lift launch vehicle for international exploration and science initiatives. The SLS comprises an architecture that begins with a vehicle capable of launching 70 metric tons (t) into low Earth orbit. Its first mission will be the launch of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) on its first autonomous flight beyond the Moon and back. SLS will also launch the first Orion crewed flight in 2021. SLS can evolve to a 130-t lift capability and serve as a baseline for numerous robotic and human missions ranging from a Mars sample return to delivering the first astronauts to explore another planet. Managed by NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, the SLS Program formally transitioned from the formulation phase to implementation with the successful completion of the rigorous Key Decision Point C review in 2014. At KDP-C, the Agency Planning Management Council determines the readiness of a program to go to the next life-cycle phase and makes technical, cost, and schedule commitments to its external stakeholders. As a result, the Agency authorized the Program to move forward to Critical Design Review, scheduled for 2015, and a launch readiness date of November 2018. Every SLS element is currently in testing or test preparations. The Program shipped its first flight hardware in 2014 in preparation for Orion's Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1) launch on a Delta IV Heavy rocket in December, a significant first step toward human journeys into deep space. Accomplishments during 2014 included manufacture of Core Stage test articles and preparations for qualification testing the Solid Rocket Boosters and the RS-25 Core Stage engines. SLS was conceived with the goals of safety, affordability, and sustainability, while also providing unprecedented capability for human exploration and scientific discovery beyond Earth orbit. In an environment of economic challenges, the nationwide SLS team continues to meet ambitious budget and schedule targets through the studied use of hardware, infrastructure, and workforce investments the United States has already made in the last half century, while selectively using new technologies for design, manufacturing, and testing, as well as streamlined management approaches that have increased decision velocity and reduced associated costs. This paper will summarize recent SLS Program technical accomplishments, as well as the challenges and opportunities ahead for the most powerful and capable launch vehicle in history.

May, Todd↗

NASA NTRS2023

Drought and Deluge: the Recurrence of Hydroclimate Extremes During the Past 600 Years in Eastern Australia’s Natural Resource Management (NRM) Clusters

Recent extremes of flood and drought across Australia have raised questions about the recurrence of such rare events and highlighted the importance of understanding multi-decadal climate variability. However, instrumental records over the past century are too short to adequately characterise climate variability on multi-decadal and longer timescales or robustly determine extreme event frequencies and their duration. Palaeoclimate reconstructions can provide much-needed information to help address this problem. Here, we use the 600-year hydroclimate record captured in the eastern Australian and New Zealand Drought Atlas (ANZDA) to analyse drought and pluvial frequency trends for East Australian Natural Resource Management (NRM) clusters. This partitioning of the drought atlas grid points into recognised biophysical areas (i.e. NRM clusters) revealed their differences and similarities in drought intensity and pluvial events over time. We find sustained multi-decadal periods of a wet–dry geographic 'seesaw' between eastern to central and southern NRMs (e.g. 1550–1600 CE and 1700–1750 CE). In contrast, other periods reveal spatially consistent wetting (e.g. 1500–1550 CE) or drying (e.g. 1750–1800 CE). Emerging hot spot analysis further shows that some areas that appear naturally buffered from severe drought during the instrumental period have a greater exposure risk when the longer 600-year record is considered. These findings are particularly relevant to management plans when dealing with the impacts of climate extremes developed at regional scales. Our results demonstrate that integrating and extending instrumental records with palaeoclimate datasets will become increasingly important for developing robust and locally specific extreme event frequency information for managing water resources.

Australian hydroclimate↗

NASA NTRS1984

NASA RECON: Course development, administration, and evaluation. A research and development proposal

This proposal addresses the development, administration, and evaluation of a set of transportable, college-level courses to educate science and engineering students in the effective use of automated scientific and technical information storage and retrieval systems, and, in particular, in the use of the NASA RECON system. Chapter 1 presents a brief introduction. Chapter 2 identifies general and specific objectives, i.e., needs analysis, course development, course administration, and course evaluation. Chapter 3 proposes the methodology to be used in successfully accomplishing these objectives. Chapter 4 highlights expected results and product deliverables, and Chapter 5 presents the project evaluation plan to be followed. Chapter 6 is a brief overview of the institutional resources available at the proposing institutions, i.e., at the University of Southwestern Louisiana and at Southern University to support the project. Chapter 7 proposes a budget, time schedule, and management plan. Chapter 8 is a summary of the foregoing.

Dominick, Wayne D.↗

NASA NTRS1991

Space Station Freedom - Design review process

The Space Station Freedom (SSF) design review process is described. The SSF program background is summarized, and the program review management plan and organization are described. The technical approach of the Integrated System Preliminary Design Review (ISPDR) is examined along with the Review Item Discrepancy Tracking System. ISPDR results are summarized and compared with its objectives. Lessons learned for the future support of the management life cycle are addressed.

Koontz, Robert↗

NASA NTRS2021

COVID-19 Lockdowns Drive Decline in Active Fires in Southeastern United States

Fire is a common ecosystem process in forests and grasslands worldwide. Increasingly, ignitions are controlled by human activities either through suppression of wildfires or intentional ignition of prescribed fires. The Southeastern United States leads the nation in prescribed fire, burning ca. 80% of the countries extent annually. The COVID-19 pandemic radically changed human behavior as workplaces implemented social-distancing guidelines and provided an opportunity to evaluate relationships between humans and fire as fire management plans were postponed or cancelled. Using active fire data from satellite-based observations, we found that in the Southeastern United States, COVID-19 led to a 21% reduction in fire activity compared to the 2003-2019 average. The reduction was more pronounced for federally managed lands, up to 41% below average compared to the past 20-years (38% below average compared to the past decade). Declines in fire activity were partly affected by an unusually wet February before the COVID-19 shutdown began in mid-March 2020. Despite the wet spring, the predicted number of active fire detections was still lower than expected, confirming a COVID-19 signal on ignitions. In addition, prescribed fire management statistics, reported by US federal agencies, confirmed the satellite observations, and showed that following the wet February and before the mid-March COVID-19 shutdown, cumulative burned area was approaching record highs across the region. With fire return intervals in the Southeastern United States as frequent as 1-2 years, COVID-19 fire impacts will contribute to an increasing backlog in necessary fire management activities, affecting biodiversity and future fire danger.

Biological Sciences↗