Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Management practices”

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 199 records · Page 11
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2020

Delineation of vulnerable areas to water erosion in a mountain region using SDR-InVEST model: A case study of the Ourika watershed, Morocco

The Ourika watershed is characterized by higher than average flood flows, a rugged topography, a sparse vegetation cover and a friable substrate that makes it vulnerable to soil erosion. Soil is an important non-renewable asset capital, providing several ecosystem services that sustain life through physical and biological regulation processes. The loss, or otherwise, redistribution of biota by soil erosion in the Ourika watershed has received little attention and thus constitutes a key knowledge gap that needs to be addressed. This study quantifies the level of erosion and maps its spatial distribution in the watershed using the Sediment Delivery Ratio (SDR) of the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs model (InVEST3.6.0). The SDR maps the overland sediment generation and delivery to the stream at the watershed level using rainfall, soil properties, topography, cover management and cropping practices as predefined set of input variables. Recommended internal model calibration was used and results were compared to similar studies carried out in different parts of Morocco for validation. The results reveal that 93% of the watershed is subject to a strong rainfall aggressiveness greater than 50 MJ mm ha–1 h–1 yr1 under an average rainfall intensity of 541 mm/year, rainfall capacity to initiate the detachment and transport of soil particles by runoff, and only 11.5% of the watershed area is protected with vegetative cover. We find that overall, the Ourika watershed is losing its soil to erosion at an alarming average rate of 258.48 ton.ha–1.yr–1, a rate well above the tolerable threshold of 7ton.ha–1.yr–1. The spatial distribution of this loss shows areas that need to be urgently remedied. The primary factors for soil erosion in the Ourika watershed appear to be related to the aggressive nature of local rainfall and the inherent susceptibility of soils, which can be costly to this cash-crop region. Because rainfall intensity, soil properties, and topography are intrinsic characteristics of the watershed, we suggest that seasonally adapted cropping rotations that maintains conservative practices with a high cover management may reduce soil erosion in the Ourika watershed.

Erosion↗
NASA NTRS2016

The Business Change Initiative: A Novel Approach to Improved Cost and Schedule Management

Goddard Space Flight Center's Flight Projects Directorate employed a Business Change Initiative (BCI) to infuse a series of activities coordinated to drive improved cost and schedule performance across Goddard's missions. This sustaining change framework provides a platform to manage and implement cost and schedule control techniques throughout the project portfolio. The BCI concluded in December 2014, deploying over 100 cost and schedule management changes including best practices, tools, methods, training, and knowledge sharing. The new business approach has driven the portfolio to improved programmatic performance. The last eight launched GSFC missions have optimized cost, schedule, and technical performance on a sustained basis to deliver on time and within budget, returning funds in many cases. While not every future mission will boast such strong performance, improved cost and schedule tools, management practices, and ongoing comprehensive evaluations of program planning and control methods to refine and implement best practices will continue to provide a framework for sustained performance. This paper will describe the tools, techniques, and processes developed during the BCI and the utilization of collaborative content management tools to disseminate project planning and control techniques to ensure continuous collaboration and optimization of cost and schedule management in the future.

Schedule↗
NASA NTRS1992

TQM: A bibliography with abstracts

This document is designed to function as a special resource for NASA Langley scientists, engineers, and managers during the introduction and development of total quality management (TQM) practices at the Center. It lists approximately 300 bibliographic citations for articles and reports dealing with various aspects of TQM. Abstracts are also available for the majority of the citations. Citations are organized by broad subject areas, including case studies, customer service, senior management, leadership, communication tools, TQM basics, applications, and implementation. An introduction and indexes provide additional information on arrangement and availability of these materials.

Gottlich, Gretchen L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The NASA Jitter Handbook Development Activity: A Multidisciplinary Collaborative Effort

Spaceflight missions hosting high-performance vibration-sensitive optical sensor payloads with stringent pointing stability requirements are especially challenged in the areas of predicting, managing, controlling, and testing spacecraft line-of-sight (LoS) jitter. The community recognizes that this is a formidable multidisciplinary engineering task. However, while some textbooks and references in the aerospace literature may touch on the subject of jitter, important details of specific flight proven methodologies and techniques used by today’s jitter engineering practitioners are not readily accessible. There is no know engineering reference document with guidelines and best practices for managing and mitigating space-craft jitter. To fill this knowledge gap the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) has undertaken the task of developing a NASA Jitter Handbook which would include lessons learned and best practices for design, analysis, and test, along with operational guidelines to mitigate jitter. In this paper the plan for this handbook development will be described along with the envisioned handbook framework, key NASA stakeholders, and potential envisioned jitter engineering case studies. Opportunities exist technical collaboration on this handbook with NASA-external organizations.

Christopher D'Souza↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modern Scientific Data Governance Framework

Science has entered the era of Big Data with new challenges related to data governance, stewardship, and management. The existing data governance practices must catch up to ensure proper data management. Existing data governance policies and stewardship best practices tend to be disconnected from operational data management practices and enforcement and mainly exist in well-meaning documents or reports. These governance policies are, at best, partially implemented and rarely monitored or audited. In addition, existing governance policies keep adding additional data management steps that require a human, ‘a data steward’, in the loop, and the cost of data management can no longer scale proportionately with the current and future increased data volume and complexity. The goal for developing an updated data governance framework is to modernize scientific data governance to the reality of Big data and align it with the current technology trends such as cloud computing and AI. The goals of this framework are two folds. One is to ensure thoroughness that the governance adequately covers the entire data life cycle. Two, provide a practical approach that offers a consistent and repeatable process for different projects. Three core principles ground this framework. First, focus on just enough governance and prevent data governance from becoming a roadblock toward the scientific process. Remove any unnecessary processes and steps. Second, automate data management steps where possible. Actively remove steps that require ‘human in the loop’ within the management process to be efficient and scale with increasing data. Third, all the processes should continually be optimized using quantified metrics to streamline the monitoring and auditing workflows.

Rahul Ramachandran↗
NASA NTRS1971

NASA's quality program - Achievements and forecast.

The NASA quality assurance program during the preceding decade is reviewed, with emphasis on those events and accomplishments which bear on the improvement of quality assurance technology, practice, and management. The nature of the space program is discussed to help understand the significance of past quality assurance events and to anticipate future trends. Potential benefits are revealed which are not necessarily limited to the aerospace field.

Weiss, H. M.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Spatial variability of surface temperature as related to cropping practice with implications for irrigation management

Crop stress measured using thermal infrared emission is evaluated with the stress-degree-day (SDD) concept. Throughout the season, the accumulation of SDD during the reproductive stage of growth is inversely related to yield. This relationship is shown for durum wheat, hard red winter wheat, barley, grain sorghum and soybeans. It is noted that SDD can be used to schedule irrigations for maximizing yields and for applying remotely sensed data to management of water resources. An airborne flight with a thermal-IR scanner was used to examine the variability in temperature that may exist from one field to another and to determine realistic within-field temperature variations. It was found that the airborne and the ground-based data agreed very well and that there was less variability in the fields that were completely covered with crops than those of bare soil.

Hatfield, J. L.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Fire behavior and risk analysis in spacecraft

Practical risk management for present and future spacecraft, including space stations, involves the optimization of residual risks balanced by the spacecraft operational, technological, and economic limitations. Spacecraft fire safety is approached through three strategies, in order of risk: (1) control of fire-causing elements, through exclusion of flammable materials for example; (2) response to incipient fires through detection and alarm; and (3) recovery of normal conditions through extinguishment and cleanup. Present understanding of combustion in low gravity is that, compared to normal gravity behavior, fire hazards may be reduced by the absence of buoyant gas flows yet at the same time increased by ventilation flows and hot particle expulsion. This paper discusses the application of low-gravity combustion knowledge and appropriate aircraft analogies to fire detection, fire fighting, and fire-safety decisions for eventual fire-risk management and optimization in spacecraft.

Friedman, Robert↗
NASA NTRS2005

Design Methods and Practices for Fault Prevention and Management in Spacecraft

Integrated Systems Health Management (ISHM) is intended to become a critical capability for all space, lunar and planetary exploration vehicles and systems at NASA. Monitoring and managing the health state of diverse components, subsystems, and systems is a difficult task that will become more challenging when implemented for long-term, evolving deployments. A key technical challenge will be to ensure that the ISHM technologies are reliable, effective, and low cost, resulting in turn in safe, reliable, and affordable missions. To ensure safety and reliability, ISHM functionality, decisions and knowledge have to be incorporated into the product lifecycle as early as possible, and ISHM must be considered as an essential element of models developed and used in various stages during system design. During early stage design, many decisions and tasks are still open, including sensor and measurement point selection, modeling and model-checking, diagnosis, signature and data fusion schemes, presenting the best opportunity to catch and prevent potential failures and anomalies in a cost-effective way. Using appropriate formal methods during early design, the design teams can systematically explore risks without committing to design decisions too early. However, the nature of ISHM knowledge and data is detailed, relying on high-fidelity, detailed models, whereas the earlier stages of the product lifecycle utilize low-fidelity, high-level models of systems and their functionality. We currently lack the tools and processes necessary for integrating ISHM into the vehicle system/subsystem design. As a result, most existing ISHM-like technologies are retrofits that were done after the system design was completed. It is very expensive, and sometimes futile, to retrofit a system health management capability into existing systems. Last-minute retrofits result in unreliable systems, ineffective solutions, and excessive costs (e.g., Space Shuttle TPS monitoring which was considered only after 110 flights and the Columbia disaster). High false alarm or false negative rates due to substandard implementations hurt the credibility of the ISHM discipline. This paper presents an overview of the current state of ISHM design,and a review of formal design methods to make recommendations about possible approaches to enable the ISHM capabilities to be designed-in at the system-level, from the very beginning of the vehicle design process.

Tumer, Irem Y.↗
NASA NTRS2008

An Uncertainty Structure Matrix for Models and Simulations

Software that is used for aerospace flight control and to display information to pilots and crew is expected to be correct and credible at all times. This type of software is typically developed under strict management processes, which are intended to reduce defects in the software product. However, modeling and simulation (M&S) software may exhibit varying degrees of correctness and credibility, depending on a large and complex set of factors. These factors include its intended use, the known physics and numerical approximations within the M&S, and the referent data set against which the M&S correctness is compared. The correctness and credibility of an M&S effort is closely correlated to the uncertainty management (UM) practices that are applied to the M&S effort. This paper describes an uncertainty structure matrix for M&S, which provides a set of objective descriptions for the possible states of UM practices within a given M&S effort. The columns in the uncertainty structure matrix contain UM elements or practices that are common across most M&S efforts, and the rows describe the potential levels of achievement in each of the elements. A practitioner can quickly look at the matrix to determine where an M&S effort falls based on a common set of UM practices that are described in absolute terms that can be applied to virtually any M&S effort. The matrix can also be used to plan those steps and resources that would be needed to improve the UM practices for a given M&S effort.

Green, Lawrence L.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Space Life Sciences at NASA: Spaceflight Health Policy and Standards

In January 2005, the President proposed a new initiative, the Vision for Space Exploration. To accomplish the goals within the vision for space exploration, physicians and researchers at Johnson Space Center are establishing spaceflight health standards. These standards include fitness for duty criteria (FFD), permissible exposure limits (PELs), and permissible outcome limits (POLs). POLs delineate an acceptable maximum decrement or change in a physiological or behavioral parameter, as the result of exposure to the space environment. For example cardiovascular fitness for duty standards might be a measurable clinical parameter minimum that allows successful performance of all required duties. An example of a permissible exposure limit for radiation might be the quantifiable limit of exposure over a given length of time (e.g. life time radiation exposure). An example of a permissible outcome limit might be the length of microgravity exposure that would minimize bone loss. The purpose of spaceflight health standards is to promote operational and vehicle design requirements, aid in medical decision making during space missions, and guide the development of countermeasures. Standards will be based on scientific and clinical evidence including research findings, lessons learned from previous space missions, studies conducted in space analog environments, current standards of medical practices, risk management data, and expert recommendations. To focus the research community on the needs for exploration missions, NASA has developed the Bioastronautics Roadmap. The Bioastronautics Roadmap, NASA's approach to identification of risks to human space flight, revised baseline was released in February 2005. This document was reviewed by the Institute of Medicine in November 2004 and the final report was received in October 2005. The roadmap defines the most important research and operational needs that will be used to set policy, standards (define acceptable risk), and implement an overall Risk Management and Analysis process. Currently NASA is drafting spaceflight health standards for neurosensory alterations, space radiation exposure, behavioral health, muscle atrophy, cardiovascular fitness, immunological compromise, bone demineralization, and nutrition.

Davis, Jeffrey R.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Managing Risk on the Final Frontier

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) has combined the Continuous Risk Management (CRM) discipline with innovative knowledge management (KM) practices to more effectively enable the accomplishment of work. CRM enables proactive problem identification and problem solving in the complex world of rocket science. while KM is used to improve this process.

Lengyel, David M.↗
NASA NTRS2024

NASA Risk Management Handbook: Version 2.0, Part 1

The purpose of this handbook is to provide an in-depth reference for the practice of risk management in NASA, updating the guidance offered in its original version, NASA/SP-2011-3422 (November 2011), and closely aligning the updated guidance with the current NASA Procedural Requirements for Agency Risk Management, NPR 8000.4, and the parent NASA Policy Directive for NASA Governance and Strategic Management, NPD 1000.0. NPD 1000.0 introduces with emphasis the concept of “Risk Leadership,” making it a fundamental tenet and pillar of the risk management culture that it advocates for the Agency. NPR 8000.4 applies this concept and establishes Risk Management (RM) requirements for the Agency as an integrated enterprise, as well as the RM requirements for portfolio elements within the enterprise. Such elements include the various programs and projects that contribute to the Agency’s objectives and the various institutional activities carried out by entities that contribute to mission support. The present version of the handbook also emphasizes the integration of risk management processes across activity and project life cycles and their coordination and interaction with day-to-day programmatic and organizational functions. Areas of application of risk assessment and management that were not covered with specific guidance in the preceding version are addressed in this version with in-depth examples. The handbook is structured into two parts, whose chapters are in turn organized in a sequential order intended to facilitate a gradual and progressive introduction of the reader to risk management principles and practices. Part 1 of the handbook is dedicated to the introduction of the basic foundations of the NASA integrated risk management framework, the related fundamental risk concepts, the description of the risk management and decision processes that are to be implemented within the framework, the discussion of the risk assessment techniques that should be utilized in support of such processes, and the management and organizational interactions and interfaces that should be enabled to implement an effective integration of risk management activities within the Agency. Part 2 provides self-contained, end-to-end examples of application of the processes and techniques introduced in Part 1, in the context of both programmatic (i.e., project and/or mission related) and institutional activities.

Uncertainty↗
NASA NTRS2024

NASA Risk Management Handbook: Version 2.0, Part 2

The purpose of this handbook is to provide an in-depth reference for the practice of risk management in NASA, updating the guidance offered in its original version, NASA/SP-2011-3422 (November 2011), and closely aligning the updated guidance with the current NASA Procedural Requirements for Agency Risk Management, NPR 8000.4, and the parent NASA Policy Directive for NASA Governance and Strategic Management, NPD 1000.0 (January 2020). NPD 1000.0 introduces with emphasis the concept of “Risk Leadership,” making it a fundamental tenet and pillar of the risk management culture that it advocates for the Agency. NPR 8000.4 applies this concept and establishes Risk Management (RM) requirements for the Agency as an integrated enterprise, as well as the RM requirements for portfolio elements within the enterprise. Such elements include the various programs and projects that contribute to the Agency’s objectives and the various institutional activities carried out by entities that contribute to mission support. The present version of the handbook also emphasizes the integration of risk management processes across activity and project life cycles and their coordination and interaction with day-to-day programmatic and organizational functions. Areas of application of risk assessment and management that were not covered with specific guidance in the preceding version are addressed in this version with in-depth examples. The handbook is structured into two parts, whose chapters are in turn organized in a sequential order intended to facilitate a gradual and progressive introduction of the reader to risk management principles and practices. Part 1 of the handbook is dedicated to the introduction of the basic foundations of the NASA integrated risk management framework, the related fundamental risk concepts, the description of the risk management and decision processes that are to be implemented within the framework, the discussion of the risk assessment techniques that should be utilized in support of such processes, and the management and organizational interactions and interfaces that should be enabled to implement an effective integration of risk management activities within the Agency. Part 2 provides self-contained, end-to-end examples of application of the processes and techniques introduced in Part 1, in the context of both programmatic (i.e., project and/or mission related) and institutional activities.

Risk Leadership↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA Schedule Management Handbook

The purpose of schedule management is to provide the framework for time-phasing, resource planning, coordination, and communicating the necessary tasks within a work effort. The intent is to improve schedule management by providing recommended concepts, processes, and techniques used within the Agency and private industry. The intended function of this handbook is two-fold: first, to provide guidance for meeting the scheduling requirements contained in NPR 7120.5, NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements, NPR 7120.7, NASA Information Technology and Institutional Infrastructure Program and Project Requirements, NPR 7120.8, NASA Research and Technology Program and Project Management Requirements, and NPD 1000.5, Policy for NASA Acquisition. The second function is to describe the schedule management approach and the recommended best practices for carrying out this project control function. With regards to the above project management requirements documents, it should be noted that those space flight projects previously established and approved under the guidance of prior versions of NPR 7120.5 will continue to comply with those requirements until project completion has been achieved. This handbook will be updated as needed, to enhance efficient and effective schedule management across the Agency. It is acknowledged that most, if not all, external organizations participating in NASA programs/projects will have their own internal schedule management documents. Issues that arise from conflicting schedule guidance will be resolved on a case by case basis as contracts and partnering relationships are established. It is also acknowledged and understood that all projects are not the same and may require different levels of schedule visibility, scrutiny and control. Project type, value, and complexity are factors that typically dictate which schedule management practices should be employed.

Source record↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Systemic Risk From the Perspective of Climate, Environmental and Disaster Risk Science and Practice

Understanding and managing systemic risk is more important than ever due to our immense global connectivity (e.g., between sectors, such as food-health-water-energy, countries and continents, down to individuals). Despite the fact that the notion of systemic risk is several decades old, the term is used in diverse ways across different disciplines (e.g., financial systems, medicine, earth system sciences, disaster risk research and climate science). Triggered by the repercussions of the global financial crisis of the late 2000s, and more recently the COVID-19 pandemic, which are clear realization of systemic risk, the perception of systemic risk has often been focused on global and catastrophic or even existential risks. Systemic risk, however, can be seen as a feature of systems at all possible scales (e.g., global, national, regional, local) with system boundaries varying depending on the context. Addressing current societal challenges, such as climate change, in terms of systemic risk requires integrating different systems perspectives and fostering system thinking, while implementing key intergovernmental agendas, such as the Paris Agreement, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Sustainable Development Goals. Based on insights gained and knowledge collected from an expert workshop, literature review and expert elicitation, we give an integrated perspective of climate, environmental and disaster risk science and practice on systemic risk as summarized in a Briefing Note to the International Science Council. We provide an overview of concepts of systemic risk that have evolved over time and identify commonalities across terminologies and perspectives associated with systemic risk used in different contexts. Key attributes of systemic risk are outlined without prescribing a single definition, and information and data requirements are discussed that are essential for a better and more actionable understanding of the systemic nature of risk. Finally, the opportunities to connect research and policy for addressing systemic risk are highlighted.

systemic risk↗
NASA NTRS2006

The Future of Asset Management for Human Space Exploration: Supply Classification and an Integrated Database

One of the major logistical challenges in human space exploration is asset management. This paper presents observations on the practice of asset management in support of human space flight to date and discusses a functional-based supply classification and a framework for an integrated database that could be used to improve asset management and logistics for human missions to the Moon, Mars and beyond.

interplanetary supply chain management↗
NASA NTRS2009

Applying Formal Methods to NASA Projects: Transition from Research to Practice

NASA project managers attempt to manage risk by relying on mature, well-understood process and technology when designing spacecraft. In the case of crewed systems, the margin for error is even tighter and leads to risk aversion. But as we look to future missions to the Moon and Mars, the complexity of the systems will increase as the spacecraft and crew work together with less reliance on Earth-based support. NASA will be forced to look for new ways to do business. Formal methods technologies can help NASA develop complex but cost effective spacecraft in many domains, including requirements and design, software development and inspection, and verification and validation of vehicle subsystems. To realize these gains, the technologies must be matured and field-tested so that they are proven when needed. During this discussion, current activities used to evaluate FM technologies for Orion spacecraft design will be reviewed. Also, suggestions will be made to demonstrate value to current designers, and mature the technology for eventual use in safety-critical NASA missions.

Othon, Bill↗