SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mission Assurance”

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 217 records · Page 12

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2007

The NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program: Results and Direction

The NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program's mission is to provide guidance to NASA for the selection and application of microelectronic technologies, to improve understanding of the risks related to the use of these technologies in the space environment and to ensure that appropriate research is performed to meet NASA mission assurance needs. This viewgraph presentation reviews the NEPP program's goals and objectives, and reviews many of the missions that the NEPP program has impacted, both in and out of NASA. Also included are examples of the evaluation that the program performed.

LaBel, Kenneth A.↗

NASA NTRS2024

Workshop on the Role of Design Assurance in System-Wide Safety’s Safety Demonstrator Series

This report summarizes a three-hour hybrid in-person/online workshop on June 7, 2024 on the topic of design assurance and the Safety Demonstrator Series (SDS), which was held at NASA Ames Research Center. The SDS provides an operational demonstration of, and recommendations for, requirements and standards necessary to monitor, assess, and mitigate risks to assure safety in disaster-oriented operations. Over sixty NASA personnel participated in the workshop. Four main topics were discussed: (1) assurance needs for the Safety Demonstrator Series, (2) assurance and the In-Time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS), (3) in-time assurance: existing efforts and future opportunities, and (4) demonstrating assurance tools in the Safety Demonstrators. Key takeaways are as follows: 1. Design assurance tools can be used to assure an In-Time Aviation Safety Management System, the systems that comprise it, and other systems or missions. Assurance must consider both systems and components and include the interactions between elements in both a systems/aircraft context and a systems-of-systems/airspace context. 2. Design-time assurance activities can support the identification of monitors needed for operational assurance activities (i.e., the “monitor” function in the monitor-assess-mitigate paradigm at the heart of the IASMS concept). 3. A major opportunity for design-time assurance tools to contribute to the IASMS concept is to support rapid re-validation of systems. This will be particularly important for (1) supporting novel operations in the IASMS, where operational data may disprove design-time assumptions (motivating re-analysis of system safety) and (2) adapting technologies (e.g., AI/ML for autonomous operations) to new operational domains, where there may be new or different safety considerations not included in the initial scope of operations. 4. There are several design assurance tools under development in the System-Wide Safety project that can support assurance of Services, Functions, and Capabilities (SFCs) in the Safety Demonstrators. Transitioning these tools from one-off research projects into a functioning part of IASMS assurance will require closer integration between these tools. 5. It is not clear whether the role of design assurance tools is primarily as a part of IASMS architecture or as an external check on IASMS. The workshop consisted of four discussion topics initiated via four lightning talks by System-Wide Safety researchers. Discussions utilized Mural to engage both in-person and online participants in the hybrid format. Polls and surveys were also utilized to gather participant input. The workshop closed with a reflection activity for participants, as well as new ideas for collaboration and coordination of ongoing System-Wide Safety research.

design assurance↗

NASA NTRS2013

Motor Qualification for Long-Duration Mars Missions

Qualification of motors for deep space under extreme thermal environments to be encountered during the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) mission is required to verify the reliability and validate mission assurance requirements. The motor assembly must survive all ground operations, plus the nominal 670 Martian-day (or sol) mission that includes summer and winter seasons of the Mars environment. The motor assembly was tested and characterized under extreme temperature conditions with reference to hardware requirements. The motor assembly has been proved to be remarkably robust and displayed no sign of degradation due to the 3 X (three times per JPL design principles) thermal environmental exposure to the punishing Mars surface operations cycles. The motor characteristics obtained before, during, and post-test comparisons for the surface operations cycles are within measurement error of one another. The motors withstood/survived 2,010 extreme temperature cycles with a Delta T of 190 C deep temperature cycles, representing three times the expected thermal cycling exposure during the MSL surface operations. The qualification test hardware elements (A200 motor assembly, encoders, and resolver) have not shown any signs of degradation due to the PQV (Package Qualification and Verification) testing. The test hardware has demonstrated sufficient life to survive the deep thermal cycles associated with MSL mission surface operations for three lives.

Ramesham, Rajeshuni↗

NASA NTRS2016

Risk-based SMA for Cubesats

This presentation conveys an approach for risk-based safety and mission assurance applied to cubesats. This presentation accompanies a NASA Goddard standard in development that provides guidance for building a mission success plan for cubesats based on the risk tolerance and resources available.

Small Satellites↗

NASA NTRS2018

Mission Configuration Tree for the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST)

The GSFC Mission Configuration web-based application is a means of documenting the structure of the many elements used in building each mission that NASA launches, as well as archiving the documents associated with each of these elements and keeping track of suppliers. This includes all available drawings, engineering orders, parts lists, block diagrams, and photos of each system, subsystem, and component. While the information for several of NASA's missions is being input into Mission Configuration, the ten weeks of this project focused on collecting information for the instrument systems of the James Webb Space Telescope. Documents were collected from a database called the Next Generation Integrated Network (NGIN) so that they can eventually be uploaded into the application. From these documents, including drawings and parts lists, a configuration tree was created in Microsoft Visio which showed the relationships between each system, subsystem, and component. When both these documents and the configuration tree are input into Mission Configuration, they will be place into a drill down tree structure, from which drawings and documents can be accessed directly. Mission Configuration also includes search functions that make all parts searchable by keywords such as vendor, part number, taxonomy, and alternate nomenclature. This application is an important resource for providing access to documents related to the components used on each mission. It has created a central repository for information which can be used to benefit Safety & Mission Assurance, but may also be useful across codes. The process of collecting the information and documents to put into Mission Configuration is also allowing for a concise breakdown of information from diverse formats, creating standardization which makes information more readily accessible, while retaining project-specific information that makes it more easily searchable.

Cain, Mary C.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Revised Planetary Protection Policy and Implementation

NASA has updated its planetary protection policy and implementation approach in response to advances in scientific understanding of solar system targets, upcoming mission opportunities for exploration and sample return, and the private sector’s emerging capability to plan missions to Earth’s Moon and Mars. In September 2021, the NASA Procedural Requirements NPR 8715.24, entitled “Planetary Protection Provisions for Robotic Extraterrestrial Missions” was released which repositions planetary protection in existing NASA mission and program management structures, introduces risk-informed decision making, expands on key roles and responsibilities for both programmatic and the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, updates the categorization process and streamlines the planetary protection documentation approval and schedule. NASA is working on a more detailed technical standard to accompany NPR 8715.24 which will include the detailed technical requirements to address organic contamination, inadvertent impact avoidance, biological control and management, end of mission disposal and restricted Earth-Return sample safety and assurance. This report to the COSPAR community will describe the current NASA planetary protection policy and its alignment with the revised COSPAR planetary protection policy. NASA’s plans for updating the supporting “Handbook for Implementing Planetary Protection Technical Requirements” and future policies for addressing planetary protection of crewed missions will also be presented.

Planetary Protection↗

NASA NTRS2022

NASA’s Revised Planetary Protection Policy and Implementation

Elaine Seasly↗

NASA NTRS2022

Adaptive IV&V for Increasingly Complex Software Systems

As NASA software systems continue to innovate, becoming more complex and nondeterministic, the need for the NASA IV&V Program to become systemically adaptive to ensure mission success is paramount. To ensure adaptability within resource constraints, IV&V has developed an agile, risk-based approach to identify, characterize, scope, focus, and prioritize mission assurance activities. This risk based adaptive framework has been applied to trends such as increased reliance on data driven algorithms for safety and mission critical software behavior, use of MBSE in system design, and application of agile principles to embedded software development. The framework is enabled by continuous innovation of new approaches such as software only test beds, assurance design tools, and initiatives that augment IV&V assurance methods with artificial intelligence and machine learning techniques. This presentation will highlight the trends the NASA IV&V Program is seeing, the innovative steps it is taking to address those challenges, and how it is postured to address evolving risk and constantly changing and new technologies.

Wesley W Deadrick↗

NASA NTRS2022

NASA’s Revised Planetary Protection Policy and Implementation

NASA has updated its planetary protection policy and implementation approach in response to advances in scientific understanding of solar system targets, upcoming mission opportuni-ties for exploration and sample return, and the private sector’s emerging capability to plan missions to Earth’s Moon and Mars. In September 2021, the NASA Procedural Requirements NPR 8715.24, entitled “Planetary Protection Provisions for Robotic Extraterrestrial Missions” was released which repositions planetary protection in existing NASA mission and program management structures, introduces risk-informed decision making, expands on key roles and responsibilities for both programmatic and the Oÿce of Safety and Mission Assurance, updates the categorization process and streamlines the planetary protection documentation approval and schedule. NASA is working on a more detailed technical standard to accompany NPR 8715.24 which will include the detailed technical requirements to address organic contamina-tion, inadvertent impact avoidance, biological control and management, end of mission disposal and restricted Earth-Return sample safety and assurance. This report to the COSPAR com-munity will describe the current NASA planetary protection policy and its alignment with the revised COSPAR planetary protection policy. NASA’s plans for updating the supporting “Handbook for Implementing Planetary Protection Technical Requirements” and future policies for addressing planetary protection of crewed missions will also be presented.

Elaine Seasly↗

NASA NTRS2023

Full Lunar Surface Visualization and Simulation Platform

This project created a visualization and simulation software platform for the entire lunar surface. Given the polar Artemis landing targets, the challenging terrain, lighting, and associated integrated crew / vehicle risk assessment, a more integrated approach to mission safety certification, potentially impacting equipment design and crew activity is required. This integrated capability will enable Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA), Flight Operations (FOD), and EVA to effectively collaborate to reduce human lunar exploration operational risk utilizing the identical tools to perform mission planning, rehearsal simulations, and providing the Safety Review Panel with integrated risk analysis capability.

information fusion↗

NASA NTRS2002

Managing Risk for Cassini During Mission Operations and Data Analysis (MOandDA)

A Risk Management Process has been tailored for Cassini that not only satisfies the requirements of NASA and JPL, but also allows the Program to proactively identify and assess risks that threaten mission objectives. Cassini Risk Management is a team effort that involves both management and engineering staff. The process is managed and facilitated by the Mission Assurance Manager (MAM), but requires regular interactions with Program Staff and team members to instill the risk management philosophy into the day to day mission operations. While Risk Management is well defined for projects in the development phase, it is a relatively new concept for Mission Operations. The Cassini team has embraced this process and has begun using it in an effective, proactive manner, to ensure mission success. It is hoped that the Cassini Risk Management Process will form the basis by which risk management is conducted during MO&DA on future projects. proactive in identifying, assessing and mitigating risks before they become problems. Cost ehtiveness is achieved by: Comprehensively identifying risks Rapidly assessing which risks require the expenditure of pruject cewums Taking early actions to mitigate these risks Iterating the process frequently, to be responsive to the dynamic internal and external environments The Cassini Program has successfully implemented a Risk Management Process for mission operations, The initial SRL has been developed and input into he online tool. The Risk Management webbased system has been rolled out for use by the flight team and risk owners we working proactive in identifying, assessing and mitigating risks before they become problems. Cost ehtiveness is achieved by: Comprehensively identifying risks Rapidly assessing which risks require the expenditure of pruject cewums Taking early actions to mitigate these risks Iterating the process frequently, to be responsive to the dynamic internal and external environments The Cassini Program has successfully implemented a Risk Management Process for mission operations, The initial SRL has been developed and input into he online tool. The Risk Management webbased system has been rolled out for use by the flight team and risk owners we working put into place will become visible and will be illusmted in future papers.

risk management↗

NASA NTRS2016

Technical Reference Suite Addressing Challenges of Providing Assurance for Fault Management Architectural Design

Research into complexities of software systems Fault Management (FM) and how architectural design decisions affect safety, preservation of assets, and maintenance of desired system functionality has coalesced into a technical reference (TR) suite that advances the provision of safety and mission assurance. The NASA Independent Verification and Validation (IVV) Program, with Software Assurance Research Program support, extracted FM architectures across the IVV portfolio to evaluate robustness, assess visibility for validation and test, and define software assurance methods applied to the architectures and designs. This investigation spanned IVV projects with seven different primary developers, a wide range of sizes and complexities, and encompassed Deep Space Robotic, Human Spaceflight, and Earth Orbiter mission FM architectures. The initiative continues with an expansion of the TR suite to include Launch Vehicles, adding the benefit of investigating differences intrinsic to model-based FM architectures and insight into complexities of FM within an Agile software development environment, in order to improve awareness of how nontraditional processes affect FM architectural design and system health management.

Fitz, Rhonda↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

EXCAP-LR: Exploration Capabilities Logistics Reduction

All human space missions require substantial logistical mass and volume. As our exploration missions increase in distance and duration, reduction of these logistics requirements becomes more important. The movement and tracking of logistics between vehicle elements are increasingly recognized as critical to crew efficiency and on-orbit mission assurance. This project targets the best opportunities to demonstrate logistics reduction, repurposing, and efficient tracking and management of logistics. These technologies and innovations will make future exploration missions more affordable. - REALM-3 (RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) Enabled Autonomous Logistics Management) – Hydra (HYper-Distributed RFID Antenna) Smart Stow: receives RFID signal from readers, use very small % of signal to self-power on-board microcontroller and RF switch, multiplex RFID signal to other nodes in a chain or to a multitude of antennas. ISS HYDRA Smart Stow is over-instrumented to allow evaluation of a branched network HYDRA chain. - UWMS (Universal Waste Management System) – provides a compact, lower mass/volume toilet for exploration missions - ACS (Advanced Clothing Systems) – investigates ways to reduce clothing mass and volume directly or through efficiently cleaning them for reuse.

Patrick Fink↗

NASA NTRS2009

The Application of a Residual Risk Evaluation Technique Used for Expendable Launch Vehicles

This presentation provides a Residual Risk Evaluation Technique (RRET) developed by Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) Launch Services Division. This technique is one of many procedures used by S&MA at KSC to evaluate residual risks for each Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV) mission. RRET is a straight forward technique that incorporates the proven methodology of risk management, fault tree analysis, and reliability prediction. RRET derives a system reliability impact indicator from the system baseline reliability and the system residual risk reliability values. The system reliability impact indicator provides a quantitative measure of the reduction in the system baseline reliability due to the identified residual risks associated with the designated ELV mission. An example is discussed to provide insight into the application of RRET.

Latimer, John A.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Mass and Reliability System (MaRS)

The Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) Directorate is responsible for mitigating risk, providing system safety, and lowering risk for space programs from ground to space. The S&MA is divided into 4 divisions: The Space Exploration Division (NC), the International Space Station Division (NE), the Safety & Test Operations Division (NS), and the Quality and Flight Equipment Division (NT). The interns, myself and Arun Aruljothi, will be working with the Risk & Reliability Analysis Branch under the NC Division's. The mission of this division is to identify, characterize, diminish, and communicate risk by implementing an efficient and effective assurance model. The team utilizes Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) and Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) to ensure decisions concerning risks are informed, vehicles are safe and reliable, and program/project requirements are realistic and realized. This project pertains to the Orion mission, so it is geared toward a long duration Human Space Flight Program(s). For space missions, payload is a critical concept; balancing what hardware can be replaced by components verse by Orbital Replacement Units (ORU) or subassemblies is key. For this effort a database was created that combines mass and reliability data, called Mass and Reliability System or MaRS. The U.S. International Space Station (ISS) components are used as reference parts in the MaRS database. Using ISS components as a platform is beneficial because of the historical context and the environment similarities to a space flight mission. MaRS uses a combination of systems: International Space Station PART for failure data, Vehicle Master Database (VMDB) for ORU & components, Maintenance & Analysis Data Set (MADS) for operation hours and other pertinent data, & Hardware History Retrieval System (HHRS) for unit weights. MaRS is populated using a Visual Basic Application. Once populated, the excel spreadsheet is comprised of information on ISS components including: operation hours, random/nonrandom failures, software/hardware failures, quantity, orbital replaceable units (ORU), date of placement, unit weight, frequency of part, etc. The motivation for creating such a database will be the development of a mass/reliability parametric model to estimate mass required for replacement parts. Once complete, engineers working on future space flight missions will have access a mean time to failures and on parts along with their mass, this will be used to make proper decisions for long duration space flight missions

Barnes, Sarah↗

NASA NTRS2010

Verification and Implementation of Operations Safety Controls for Flight Missions

Approximately eleven years ago, the International Space Station launched the first module from Russia, the Functional Cargo Block (FGB). Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) Operations (Ops) Engineers played an integral part in that endeavor by executing strict flight product verification as well as continued staffing of S&MA's console in the Mission Evaluation Room (MER) for that flight mission. How were these engineers able to conduct such a complicated task? They conducted it based on product verification that consisted of ensuring that safety requirements were adequately contained in all flight products that affected crew safety. S&MA Ops engineers apply both systems engineering and project management principles in order to gain a appropriate level of technical knowledge necessary to perform thorough reviews which cover the subsystem(s) affected. They also ensured that mission priorities were carried out with a great detail and success.

Jones, Cheryl L.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Enabling Assurance in the MBSE Environment

Evans, John W.↗

NASA NTRS2020

Enabling Assurance in the MBSE Environment

A number of specific benefits that fit within the hallmarks of effective development are realized with implementation of model-based approaches to systems and assurance. Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) enabled by standardized modeling languages (e.g., SysML®) is at the core. These benefits in the context of spaceflight system challenges can include [1]: • Improved management of complex development • Reduced risk in the development process • Improved cost management • Improved design decisions With appropriate modeling techniques the assurance community also can improve early oversight and insight into project development. NASA has shown the basic constructs of SysML in an MBSE environment offer several key advantages, within a Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA) initiative [2, 3]. These include the following: • Model viewpoints that promote rapid and systematic assessment of requirements coverage, hazard tagging and risk management • Embedded safety assessments for launch vehicles • Deployment of model assisted development of reliability products - Failure Modes and Effects Analyses (FMEAs) and Fault Trees • Test Planning • Validation and Verification of complex functions • Support of Assurance Case development for complex systems In addition, while there are benefits to be harvested, there is a realization that these do not come without effort and cost. Enabling model-based approaches requires structure, not only in an organizational context, but in a modeling context as well. There can be a steep learning curve and costs associated to train skilled modelers. But, on the other hand, not all of the assurance community need to be modelers. Models themselves must conform to ontologies that enable assurance. This places constraints upon the models and modelers. Optimums have yet to be developed where resources and constraints on modeling must be traded off in the organization and modeling efforts for projects. A number of barriers need to be overcome, as well, which pose challenges to the developers of the software that supports MBSE/MBMA. Information and data must be made to flow seamlessly through the life cycle. Because there is a wide variety of tools used in the community, to avoid the problems of the past of silos, delays, and diverging interests, information should flow among these tools to support the “single source of truth” paradigm of MBSE. This will greatly facilitate MBMA and advancement of assurance functions.

Evans, John W.↗