SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “requirements prioritization”

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 NTRS2015

Technology Alignment and Portfolio Prioritization (TAPP): Advanced Methods in Strategic Analysis, Technology Forecasting and Long Term Planning for Human Exploration and Operations, Advanced Exploration Systems and Advanced Concepts

The Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) at NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center is expanding its current technology assessment methodologies. ACO is developing a framework called TAPP that uses a variety of methods, such as association mining and rule learning from data mining, structure development using a Technological Innovation System (TIS), and social network modeling to measure structural relationships. The role of ACO is to 1) produce a broad spectrum of ideas and alternatives for a variety of NASA's missions, 2) determine mission architecture feasibility and appropriateness to NASA's strategic plans, and 3) define a project in enough detail to establish an initial baseline capable of meeting mission objectives ACO's role supports the decision-making process associated with the maturation of concepts for traveling through, living in, and understanding space. ACO performs concept studies and technology assessments to determine the degree of alignment between mission objectives and new technologies. The first step in technology assessment is to identify the current technology maturity in terms of a technology readiness level (TRL). The second step is to determine the difficulty associated with advancing a technology from one state to the next state. NASA has used TRLs since 1970 and ACO formalized them in 1995. The DoD, ESA, Oil & Gas, and DoE have adopted TRLs as a means to assess technology maturity. However, "with the emergence of more complex systems and system of systems, it has been increasingly recognized that TRL assessments have limitations, especially when considering [the] integration of complex systems." When performing the second step in a technology assessment, NASA requires that an Advancement Degree of Difficulty (AD2) method be utilized. NASA has used and developed or used a variety of methods to perform this step: Expert Opinion or Delphi Approach, Value Engineering or Value Stream, Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), Technique for the Order of Prioritization by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), and other multi‐criteria decision-making methods. These methods can be labor-intensive, often contain cognitive or parochial bias, and do not consider the competing prioritization between mission architectures. Strategic Decision-Making (SDM) processes cannot be properly understood unless the context of the technology is understood. This makes assessing technological change particularly challenging due to the relationships "between incumbent technology and the incumbent (innovation) system in relation to the emerging technology and the emerging innovation system." The central idea in technology dynamics is to consider all activities that contribute to the development, diffusion, and use of innovations as system functions. Bergek defines system functions within a TIS to address what is actually happening and has a direct influence on the ultimate performance of the system and technology development. ACO uses similar metrics and is expanding these metrics to account for the structure and context of the technology. At NASA technology and strategy is strongly interrelated. NASA's Strategic Space Technology Investment Plan (SSTIP) prioritizes those technologies essential to the pursuit of NASA's missions and national interests. The SSTIP is strongly coupled with NASA's Technology Roadmaps to provide investment guidance during the next four years, within a twenty-year horizon. This paper discusses the methods ACO is currently developing to better perform technology assessments while taking into consideration Strategic Alignment, Technology Forecasting, and Long Term Planning.

Funaro, Gregory V.↗

NASA NTRS2018

A Prognostics Framework Development for Swarm Satellite Formations

Prognostics is the science of predicting the failure(s) of a component or a system and understanding how the performance will change in the event of a failure or degradation mechanism. With accurate predictions of possible failures, autonomous mitigative actions can be taken to correct/repair any issues or alert human operators of a failure threshold exceedance requiring condition-based maintenance. Although there is extensive research on failure predictions for a component or a system, there are significantly more opportunities to foray into failure predictions and prognostics for a system of systems such as an airspace consisting of multiple aircraft, a fleet of unmanned aerial vehicles, and a swarm of intelligent satellite systems. Failure prediction and mitigation are particularly important in autonomous systems such as satellite swarm systems that need effective resource management and minimal human interactions. Based on NASA's decadal survey, there is a clear need to prioritize the development of satellite swarm technology for studies of space physics and Earth science. The science community will propose future missions that return in-situ measurements from a 3-D (three-dimensional) volume of space, with relative spacecraft motion and inter-satellite baselines controlled according to the mission objectives. For such multi-spacecraft missions, it is required that ground operations resources do not scale with the number of satellites, thus compromising the swarm or leading to inefficiencies in resource allocation. Swarms of tens or hundreds of small satellites will require autonomy in attitude control, navigation and failure. Although significant research has been conducted in the areas of autonomous formation flying algorithms, less attention has been given to the development of resilient systems robust to failures.The focus of this research paper is the integration of model-based prognostics into the swarm dynamics control and decision-making algorithms. We simulate swarm management strategies for a subsystem failure to demonstrate the importance of failure predictions by comparing two cases: (i) no health information is provided to the system and utilized in the decision-making process and (2) system health information is obtained using prognostics and employed by the control system. One example scenario presented is for the GPS (Global Positioning System) system of an individual satellite to perform off-nominally due to increasing estimated error. In this scenario, the keep-out zone for that satellite would become more conservative, thereby decreasing the risk of collision. This is achieved via tuning the individual artificial repulsive functions assigned to each satellite.This paper is structured as follows. First we provide an overview of current swarm technology development, where we specifically use the term swarm to define multiple satellites flying in formation in similar orbits, with cross-link communication and station-keeping capabilities. Second, we give an introduction to the Swarm Orbital Dynamics Advisor (SODA), a tool that accepts high-level configuration commands and provides the orbital maneuvers required to achieve the prescribed formation configuration. Third, we provide the details of the model-based prognostics algorithm implementation in SODA. Finally, we present different case studies for potential component/subsystem failures and the swarm responses based with and without failure prediction information.

prognostics↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of NASA's Break the Ice Lunar Challenge

This paper provides the background, status and ongoing plans by NASA’s CentennialChallenges Program (CCP) in developing “Break the Ice Lunar Challenge”. This challenge will enable the development of excavation technologies that can operate in the extreme conditions on the Moon. As a direct result of NASA’s Space Policy Directive 1 (To the Moon, then Mars”), CCP organized a kickoff meeting in October 2019 where Subject Matter Experts (SME) from various NASA centers got together and identified the technology gaps in the areas of Lunar Excavation, Manufacturing, and Construction. Following the kickoff meeting, CCP in partnership with external challenge consultants conducted in-depth interviews with experts from academia, industry, and NASA over a period of two months to further identify any technology gaps and the status of the current state of the art technologies in these areas. Through these activities, we determined that there is sufficient need and opportunity to move forward and develop this into a robust challenge. As a nextstep, CCP organized a workshop in February 2020 where experts from academia, industry, NASA, and other government agencies met to validate the specific technology need and prioritize those needs in such a way that the potential challenge can address the high priority needs. Since the completion of this workshop, a core challenge development team has been working on the challenge scenarios, rules, and requirements with the goal to open the challenge in Nov 2020.

Centennnial Challenges↗

NASA NTRS1997

A Cognitive System Model for Human/Automation Dynamics in Airspace Management

NASA has initiated a significant thrust of research and development focused on providing the flight crew and air traffic managers automation aids to increase capacity in en route and terminal area operations through the use of flexible, more fuel-efficient routing, while improving the level of safety in commercial carrier operations. In that system development, definition of cognitive requirements for integrated multi-operator dynamic aiding systems is fundamental. In order to support that cognitive function definition, we have extended the Man Machine Integrated Design and Analysis System (MIDAS) to include representation of multiple cognitive agents (both human operators and intelligent aiding systems) operating aircraft, airline operations centers and air traffic control centers in the evolving airspace. The demands of this application require representation of many intelligent agents sharing world-models, and coordinating action/intention with cooperative scheduling of goals and actions in a potentially unpredictable world of operations. The MIDAS operator models have undergone significant development in order to understand the requirements for operator aiding and the impact of that aiding in the complex nondeterminate system of national airspace operations. The operator model's structure has been modified to include attention functions, action priority, and situation assessment. The cognitive function model has been expanded to include working memory operations including retrieval from long-term store, interference, visual-motor and verbal articulatory loop functions, and time-based losses. The operator's activity structures have been developed to include prioritization and interruption of multiple parallel activities among multiple operators, to provide for anticipation (knowledge of the intention and action of remote operators), and to respond to failures of the system and other operators in the system in situation-specific paradigms. The model's internal representation has been be modified so that multiple, autonomous sets of equipment will function in a scenario as the single equipment sets do now. In order to support the analysis requirements with multiple items of equipment, it is necessary for equipment to access the state of other equipment objects at initialization time (a radar object may need to access the position and speed of aircraft in its area, for example), and as a function of perception and sensor system interaction. The model has been improved to include multiple world-states as a function of equipment am operator interaction. The model has been used -1o predict the impact of warning and alert zones in aircraft operation, and, more critic-ally, the interaction of flight-deck based warning mechanisms and air traffic controller action in response to ground-based conflict prediction and alerting systems. In this operation, two operating systems provide alerting to two autonomous, but linked sets of operators, whose view of the system and whose dynamics in response are radically different. System stability and operator action was predicted using the MIDAS model.

Corker, Kevin M.↗

NASA NTRS2012

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) Capability Roadmap Development for Exploration

NASA is considering a number of future human space exploration mission concepts. Although detailed requirements and vehicle architectures remain mostly undefined, near-term technology investment decisions need to be guided by the anticipated capabilities needed to enable or enhance the mission concepts. This paper describes a roadmap that NASA has formulated to guide the development of Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS) capabilities required to enhance the long-term operation of the International Space Station (ISS) and enable beyond-Low Earth Orbit (LEO) human exploration missions. Three generic mission types were defined to serve as a basis for developing a prioritized list of needed capabilities and technologies. Those are 1) a short duration micro gravity mission; 2) a long duration transit microgravity mission; and 3) a long duration surface exploration mission. To organize the effort, ECLSS was categorized into three major functional groups (atmosphere, water, and solid waste management) with each broken down into sub-functions. The ability of existing, flight-proven state-of-the-art (SOA) technologies to meet the functional needs of each of the three mission types was then assessed. When SOA capabilities fell short of meeting the needs, those "gaps" were prioritized in terms of whether or not the corresponding capabilities enable or enhance each of the mission types. The resulting list of enabling and enhancing capability gaps can be used to guide future ECLSS development. A strategy to fulfill those needs over time was then developed in the form of a roadmap. Through execution of this roadmap, the hardware and technologies needed to enable and enhance exploration may be developed in a manner that synergistically benefits the ISS operational capability, supports Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) development, and sustains long-term technology investments for longer duration missions. This paper summarizes NASA s ECLSS capability roadmap development process, findings, and recommendation

Bagdigian, Robert M.↗

NASA NTRS1984

Dynamic Conversion Working Group Summary

The potential of dynamic conversion devices for use in solar and nuclear dynamic space power systems was addressed. Conversion systems considered were based on the use of Brayton, Stirling and Rankine cycles. Both organic and liquid metal Rankine cycles were included. The basic system considerations were: mission requirements, system attributes, system options, technology issues and constraints, and priorities of needed technology development. Mission requirements, where dynamic conversion was considered enabling technology, were identified along with the associated power levels and potential energy sources. When considering the system options special attention was given to recommend operating temperatures and other significant discriminators. A list of prioritized tasks considered important for the successful development of dynamic conversion systems for 1995 and beyond was compiled.

Chaffee, N.↗

NASA NTRS1985

Mission-oriented requirements for updating MIL-H-8501: Calspan proposed structure and rationale

This report documents the effort by Arvin/Calspan Corporation to formulate a revision of MIL-H-8501A in terms of Mission-Oriented Flying Qualities Requirements for Military Rotorcraft. Emphasis is placed on development of a specification structure which will permit addressing Operational Missions and Flight Phases, Flight Regions, Classification of Required Operational Capability, Categorization of Flight Phases, and Levels of Flying Qualities. A number of definitions is established to permit addressing the rotorcraft state, flight envelopes, environments, and the conditions under which degraded flying qualities are permitted. Tentative requirements are drafted for Required Operational Capability Class 1. Also included is a Background Information and Users Guide for the draft specification structure proposed for the MIL-H-8501A revision. The report also contains a discussion of critical data gaps and attempts to prioritize these data gaps and to suggest experiments that should be performed to generate data needed to support formulation of quantitative design criteria for the additional Operational Capability Classes 2, 3, and 4.

Chalk, C. R.↗

NASA NTRS2011

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) Integrated Roadmap Development

At present, NASA has considered a number of future human space exploration mission concepts . Yet, detailed mission requirements and vehicle architectures remain mostly undefined, making technology investment strategies difficult to develop and sustain without a top-level roadmap to serve as a guide. This paper documents a roadmap for development of Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS) capabilities required to enhance the long-term operation of the International Space Station (ISS) as well as enable beyond-Low Earth Orbit (LEO) human exploration missions. Three generic mission types were defined to serve as a basis for developing a prioritized list of needed capabilities and technologies. Those are 1) a short duration micro gravity mission; 2) a long duration transit microgravity mission; and 3) a long duration surface exploration mission. To organize the effort, ECLSS was categorized into three major functional groups (atmosphere, water, and solid waste management) with each broken down into sub-functions. The ability of existing state-of-the-art (SOA) technologies to meet the functional needs of each of the three mission types was then assessed by NASA subject matter experts. When SOA capabilities were deemed to fall short of meeting the needs of one or more mission types, those gaps were prioritized in terms of whether or not the corresponding capabilities enable or enhance each of the mission types. The result was a list of enabling and enhancing capabilities needs that can be used to guide future ECLSS development, as well as a list of existing hardware that is ready to go for exploration-class missions. A strategy to fulfill those needs over time was then developed in the form of a roadmap. Through execution of this roadmap, the hardware and technologies intended to meet exploration needs will, in many cases, directly benefit the ISS operational capability, benefit the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), and guide long-term technology investments for longer duration missions The final product of this paper is an agreed-to ECLSS roadmap detailing ground and flight testing to support the three mission scenarios previously mentioned. This information will also be used to develop the integrated NASA budget submit in January 2012.

Metcalf, Jordan↗

NASA NTRS2012

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) Integrated Roadmap Development

Although NASA is currently considering a number of future human space exploration mission concepts, detailed mission requirements and vehicle architectures remain mostly undefined, making technology investment strategies difficult to develop and sustain without a top-level roadmap to serve as a guide. This paper documents the process and results of an effort to define a roadmap for Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS) capabilities required to enhance the long-term operation of the International Space Station (ISS) as well as enable beyond-Low Earth Orbit (LEO) human exploration missions. Three generic mission types were defined to serve as a basis for developing a prioritized list of needed capabilities and technologies. Those are 1) a short duration micro-gravity mission; 2) a long duration microgravity mission; and 3) a long duration partial gravity (surface) exploration mission. To organize the effort, a functional decomposition of ECLSS was completed starting with the three primary functions: atmosphere, water, and solid waste management. Each was further decomposed into sub-functions to the point that current state-of-the-art (SOA) technologies could be tied to the sub-function. Each technology was then assessed by NASA subject matter experts as to its ability to meet the functional needs of each of the three mission types. When SOA capabilities were deemed to fall short of meeting the needs of one or more mission types, those gaps were prioritized in terms of whether or not the corresponding capabilities enable or enhance each of the mission types. The result was a list of enabling and enhancing capability needs that can be used to guide future ECLSS development, as well as a list of existing hardware that is ready to go for exploration-class missions. A strategy to fulfill those needs over time was then developed in the form of a roadmap. Through execution of this roadmap, the hardware and technologies intended to meet exploration needs will, in many cases, directly benefit the ISS operational capability, benefit the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), and guide long-term technology investments for longer duration missions.

Metcalf, Jordan↗

NASA NTRS1988

Introduction to the report of the Asilomar 3 LDR workshop

The Large Deployable Reflector (LDR) is a system concept for a dedicated, orbiting, submillimeter, far infrared, astronomical observatory. The purpose of the 3rd conference was to review the latest system concepts for LDR, update the science requirements, and assess the status of the technology development that was recommended at Asilomar 2. The technology development assessment included ongoing work within NASA, the DOD, and various universities. Problem areas and technologies not being adequately addressed were to be identified and prioritized. In particular, the CSTI program in Sensors and Precision Segmented Reflectors was reviewed for appropriateness and progress relative to LDR technology needs.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2010

Flight Rules Critical Readiness Review

The increment 23/24 Critical Readiness Review (CRR) flight rules are presented. The topics include: 1) B13-152 Acoustic Constraints; 2) B13-113 IFM/Corrective Action Prioritization Due to Loss of Exercise Capability; 3) B13-116 Constraints on Treadmill VIS Failure; 4) B13-201 Medical Management of ISS Fire/Smoke Response; 5) ARED and T2 Exercise constraints Flight rules (flight and stage specific); 6) FYI: B14 FR to be updated with requirement to sample crew sleep locations prior to receiving a "recommendation" from SRAG on where to sleep.

Kim, E.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Meal Replacement Mass Reduction and Integration Acceptability Study

NASA, in planning for long duration missions, has an imperative to provide a food system with the necessary nutrition, acceptability, and safety to ensure sustainment of crew health and performance. The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) and future exploration missions are mass constrained; therefore we are challenged to reduce the mass of the food system by 10% while maintaining safety, nutrition, and acceptability for exploration missions. Food bars have previously been used to supplement meals in the Skylab food system, indicating that regular consumption of bars will be acceptable. However, commercially available products do not meet the requirements for a full meal replacement in the spaceflight food system. The purpose of this task is to develop a variety of nutritionally balanced breakfast replacement bars, which meet spaceflight nutritional, microbiological, sensorial, and shelf-life requirements, while enabling a 10% food mass savings. To date, six nutrient-dense meal replacement bars have been developed, using both traditional methods of compression as well as novel ultrasonic compression technologies developed by Creative Resonance Inc. (Phoenix, AZ). All bars will be prioritized based on acceptability and the four top candidates will be evaluated in the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) to assess the frequency with which actual meal replacement options may be implemented. Specifically, overall impact to mood, satiety, dietary discomfort, and satisfaction with food will be analyzed to inform successful implementation strategies. In addition, these bars will be evaluated based on final product sensory acceptability, nutritional stability, qualitative stability of analytical measurements (i.e. water activity and texture), and microbiological compliance over two years of storage at room temperature and potential temperature abuse conditions to predict long-term acceptability. It is expected that this work will enable a successful meal replacement strategy to be implemented that maintains crew food consumption and health, while informing exploration missions with appropriate mass savings expectations.

Sirmons, T.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Recent Advances in the U.S. in Ablative TPS for In-situ Exploration of Giant Planets

The Decadal Survey report released [1] prioritizes Uranus as the highest priority Flagship class mission to be explored with an orbiter and a probe and it also recommended Saturn Probe under New Frontiers mission class. Thermal protection system (TPS) is essential for Uranus and Saturn probe missions. The two cardinal requirements are that it must be fail-safe and yet be mass efficient. The Decadal Survey report also pointed out the readiness of heatshield for extreme entry environment technology (HEEET) at TRL 6 for probe missions at Gas Giants. HEEET relies on 3-D weaving and is shown to be a robust and mass efficient TPS through ground testing and analysis. HEEET was matured to TRL 6 in 2019. HEEET was reported at the Ice Giant Workshop in 2019 at Marseille. Since 2019, significant advances have been made primarily because of Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission. MSR baselined 3-D Woven TPS as its heatshield for the earth entry system. MSR earth entry system (EES) requirements and the resulting heatshield/TPS requirements are most stringent of all entry missions. This is a result of backward contamination protection which classifies MSR as a “restricted class 5” mission to safeguard the accidental release of potentially hazardous Mars Sample into Earth’s atmosphere. Complex requirements for the heatshield start with micro-meteor impact tolerance followed by the requirement for steep entry to minimize the size of the impact footprint which results in extreme heating. The heatshield is part of the impact attenuation system. The EES architecture does not use a parachute and is designed to tolerate impact loads. Hence heatshield TPS selection and design becomes one of the key challenges. After completion of the HEEET technology maturation in 2019, IRAD efforts focused on assessing the 3-D Woven family of TPS to MSR EES. After nearly two years of evaluation of alternate TPS such as carbon phenolic, C-C hot structure, PICA, and 3-D woven family of TPS, a single layer 3-D woven TPS derived from the dual-layer HEEET was down selected and is currently the baseline. A new loom capable of weaving the single-layer 3-D woven preform at 80” wide has been designed, assembled and is currently on the verge of weaving the MSR EES TPS. During the HEEET maturation and the follow-on development, the single-layer TPS has been tested at extreme heating conditions. As a result, single layer TPS was recommended and evaluated during the Planetary Mission Concept Studies funded by NASA in preparation for the Decadal committee. In addition, in anticipation of Saturn mission proposals, single layer was evaluated as well. Aerocapture can reduce the trip time, also allow bigger payload fraction and in addition, it allows for the possibility of probe delivery once the spacecraft is in orbit. This can lead to obtaining both in-situ data as well as data from orbit simultaneously. Since Aerocapture depletes energy/velocity, probe delivery from orbit reduces the demand on TPS. Aerocapture was mentioned in the Decadal Study report as ready for implementation, but due to perceived risk it is not adopted by the mission designers. Establishing TPS readiness for aerocapture missions will be addressed. Going one step beyond aerocapture is aerogravity assist if fast return is the goal. Recent studies [4] looked at aerogravity assist and the TPS readiness. This talk will highlight both aerocapture and aerogravity assist from a TPS perspective. The main objective of this proposed talk is to present a comprehensive picture of the SOA TPS technology including recent developments. The talk will highlight advances in manufacturing, results from the Decadal White Papers, PMCS and other studies, and aerocapture and aerogravity assist that could play a role in the near or far term in-situ exploration.

E. Venkatapathy↗

NASA NTRS2021

Exploration Medical Capability Medical Scenarios

Medical systems supporting exploration class missions to cislunar space, the lunar surface, and the vicinity of Mars require an evolution in medical capability beyond that available for today’s low Earth orbit centric paradigm. Progress in developing more capable medical systems will be driven by the requirements of prolonged mission duration, increasing distance from Earth, and the realities of orbital mechanics, all necessitating a concomitant need for progressively Earth independent medical decision-making capabilities. These medical systems (which include the crewmembers) are expected to be capable of evaluating, diagnosing, treating and managing a defined list of medical conditions as well as addressing unanticipated medical conditions that may arise. The prioritized medical capabilities and associated resources needed to treat these medical conditions and support anticipated inflight medical events provide robust content that informs system designers and allows for a more complete evaluation of both medical and overall mission risk. Communication of these medical capabilities to system, vehicle, and mission designers can be enhanced using scenarios that characterize the system’s operations. Carefully considered scenarios provide the context needed to explore expected human and system interfaces, roles of ground and inflight crew (including periods of interrupted or delayed communications), identify training needs, assess data needs, etc. Mission-based scenario content varies dependent upon the needs, medical capabilities, conditions and context they are intended to illustrate. This document explicitly seeks to capture and codify those scenarios that have been useful to the Exploration Medical Capability Element of the Human Research Program in defining the enhanced medical systems required for future space exploration. It is expected that this document will continue to evolve through the refinement and characterization of current and future scenarios, respectively, as our knowledge grows, and requirements increasingly focus on Earth independent spaceflight operations.

Derek M Nusbaum↗

NASA NTRS2010

Integration of Advanced Concepts and Vehicles Into the Next Generation Air Transportation System: Introduction, Key Messages, and Vehicle Attributes - Volume 1

Raytheon, in partnership with NASA, is leading the way in ensuring that the future air transportation continues to be a key driver of economic growth and stability and that this system provides an environmentally friendly, safe, and effective means of moving people and goods. A Raytheon-led team of industry and academic experts, under NASA contract NNA08BA47C, looked at the potential issues and impact of introducing four new classes of advanced aircraft into the next generation air transportation system -- known as NextGen. The study will help determine where NASA should further invest in research to support the safe introduction of these new air vehicles. Small uncrewed or unmanned aerial systems (SUAS), super heavy transports (SHT) including hybrid wing body versions (HWB), very light jets (VLJ), and supersonic business jets (SSBJ) are the four classes of aircraft that we studied. Understanding each vehicle's business purpose and strategy is critical to assessing the feasibility of new aircraft operations and their impact on NextGen's architecture. The Raytheon team used scenarios created by aviation experts that depict vehicles in year 2025 operations along with scripts or use cases to understand the issues presented by these new types of vehicles. The information was then mapped into the Joint Planning and Development Office's (JPDO s) Enterprise Architecture to show how the vehicles will fit into NextGen's Concept of Operations. The team also identified significant changes to the JPDO's Integrated Work Plan (IWP) to optimize the NextGen vision for these vehicles. Using a proven enterprise architecture approach and the JPDO s Joint Planning Environment (JPE) web site helped make the leap from architecture to planning efficient, manageable and achievable. Very Light Jets flying into busy hub airports -- Supersonic Business Jets needing to climb and descend rapidly to achieve the necessary altitude Super-heavy cargo planes requiring the shortest common flight path -- are just a few of the potential new operations in the future National Airspace System. To assess the impact of these new scenarios on overall national airspace operations, the Raytheon team used the capabilities of a suite of tools such as NASA's Airspace Concepts Evaluation System (ACES), the Flight Optimization System (FLOPS), FAA's Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT), Intelligent Automations Kinematic Trajectory Generator (KTG) and the Aviation Safety Risk Model (ASRM). Detailed metroplex modeling, surface delay models for super heavy transports, prioritized routing and corridors for supersonics business jets, and VLJ demand models are some of the models developed by the Raytheon team to study the effect of operating these new vehicles in the future NAS. Using this suite of models, several trade studies were conducted to evaluate these effects in terms of delays, equity in access, safety, and the environment. Looking at the impact of each vehicle, a number of critical issues were identified. The Raytheon team concluded that strict compliance to NextGen's 4-dimensional trajectory (4DT) management will be required to accommodate these vehicles unique operations and increased number of flights in the future air space system. The next section provides a discussion of this and the other key findings from our study.

Zellweger, Andres↗

NASA NTRS2022

Embedding Climate Change in Urban Planning and Urban Design in New York City

Confronting the challenges of a rapidly urbanizing world threatened by climate change requires expanding the traditional influence and capabilities of urban planning and urban design, integrating climate science, natural systems and compact urban form to configure dynamic, desirable and healthy communities. Cost-effective planning and design measures that help mitigate emissions while bringing adaptive benefits should be prioritized. The chapter draws from the publication Climate Change and Cities (Cambridge University Press 2018) by the Urban Climate Change Research Network (UCCRN). The two-phase New York City case study by the Urban Design Climate Lab at the New York Institute of Technology and a team of international urban design climate experts illustrates how this emerging expertise can be replicated and implemented worldwide. Its focus on configuring people-centered public spaces that enhance energy efficiency and improve public health draws from four urban climate factors: improving efficiency of urban systems, both in energy and transportation; optimizing the form and layout of urban districts to enhance ventilation; promoting appropriate building materials with high reflectivity; and increasing green and blue urban infrastructure. The chapter highlights a set of tools and methods to measure success.

Resiliency↗

NASA NTRS2011

Summary of the NASA Science Instrument, Observatory and Sensor System (SIOSS) Technology Assessment

Technology advancement is required to enable NASA's high priority missions of the future. To prepare for those missions requires a roadmap of how to get from the current state of the art to where technology needs to be in 5, 10, 15 and 20 years. SIOSS identifies where substantial enhancements in mission capabilities are needed and provides strategic guidance for the agency's budget formulation and prioritization process.

Stahl, H. Philip↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Recommended Crew Systems Capabilities for a 30 to 90 Day Four-Crew Lunar Surface Mission

For any given surface mission duration, there exists a set of surface capabilities necessary to sustain a four-person crew for the length of time the crew is on the surface. Identifying these capabilities is important to mission planners and spacecraft design engineers responsible for lunar surface habitation elements, who need to know which systems and capabilities must be prioritized for the vehicles they are designing. However, simply identifying the surface capabilities does not necessarily equal a viable surface configuration. These capabilities may or may not satisfy stakeholder expectations or even permit completion of mission objectives. Lunar lander cargo mass constraints are a powerful forcing function that requires significant efforts to reduce the mass of all surface elements, including those supporting crew habitation. The required capabilities do increase as a function of mission duration, but it is a nonlinear growth. There are key points in mission duration, beyond which certain additional capabilities are needed. This forms bands of capability between each point. Within a given band, the same functional capabilities are needed, and the only scaling is that associated with daily consumables. The next higher band requires additional capabilities. This paper will focus on those capabilities needed for missions of 30-90 days. It should be noted that there are some uncertainties interpreting NASA requirements that require capabilities after a certain number of days, as typically this refers to number of days in space, not number of days on the lunar surface. Depending on transportation architecture, the number of days between Earth launch and lunar surface landing may vary, therefore impacting when certain required capabilities are implemented. However, activities to prepare humans for missions to Mars and commercial interest in lunar development may drive progressive increases in surface duration. Missions up to 30 days are expected to follow the initial 6.5-day surface missions and there may be commercial interest in extending to even greater durations. This paper will examine the potential case of a 30-90-day surface mission duration with respect to the systems necessary to support crew living and working on the lunar surface.

Habitat↗