Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “missions 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.

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

At least 217 records · Page 12
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2012

Space Shuttle Program Legacy Report

Share lessons learned on Space Shuttle Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) culture, processes, and products that can guide future enterprises to improve mission success and minimize the risk of catastrophic failures. Present the chronology of the Johnson Space Center (JSC) S&MA organization over the 40-year history of the Space Shuttle Program (SSP) and identify key factors and environments which contributed to positive and negative performance.

Johnson, Scott↗
NASA NTRS1996

Risk/Requirements Trade-Off Guidelines for Faster, Better, Cheaper Missions

From Preface: This document is a compendium of Risk/Requirements Tradeoff Guidelines for Faster, Better, Cheaper missions. It summarizes the reduced-cost approach for the design, verification, and validation of flight equipment for assuring mission success of microspacecraft.

risk risk management faster better cheaper product↗
NASA NTRS1992

A six-degree-of-freedom guidance and control analysis of Mars aerocapture

A six-degree-of-freedom (6DOF) simulation is developed to investigate the control and guidance issues of a Mars aerobraking vehicle. The guidance algorithm used is a predictor-corrector guidance formulation designed to control the exit orbital apoapsis and wedge angle using bank-angle modulation. Major features of this predictor-corrector guidance algorithm include: (1) integration of the 3DOF equations of motion within an inner-loop simulation; (2) load-relief logic; (3) finite roll rates; and (4) an aerodynamic feedback multiplier. The algorithm is capable of successfully guiding the vehicle through combinations of atmospheric density dispersions, aerodynamic mispredictions, and off-nominal atmospheric interface conditions. This study demonstrated that the addition of vehicle dynamics to the Mars aerobraking simulation does not significantly impact mission feasibility. That is, a robust control system design coupled with an adaptive guidance algorithm can assure mission success in the presence of numerous off-nominal conditions.

Powell, Richard W.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Responsible Exploration Preserving the Cosmos for Tomorrow

This submittal encompasses NASA presentations to be shared at the forthcoming Trilateral S&MA Summit at ESRIN in Frascati, Italy. This event is an annual meeting comprised of SMA leadership and supporting staff from NASA, ESA, and JAXA. The Trilateral Parties discuss current and future areas of cooperation in areas of Safety & Mission Assurance.

trilateral↗
NASA NTRS1996

Aeronautics and Space Report of the President: Fiscal Year 1996 Activities

Topics considered include: (1) Space launch activities: space shuttle missions; expendable launch vehicles. (2) Space science: astronomy and space physics; solar system exploration. (3) Space flight and technology: life and microgravity sciences; space shuttle technology; reuseable launch vehicles; international space station; energy; safety and mission assurance; commercial development and regulation of space; surveillance. (4) Space communications: communications satellites; space network; ground networks; mission control and data systems. (5) Aeronautical activities: technology developments; air traffic control and navigation; weather-related aeronautical activities; flight safety and security; aviation medicine and human factors. (6) Studies of the planet earth: terrestrial studies and applications: atmospheric studies: oceanographic studies; international aeronautical and space activities; and appendices.

Source record↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Robust and Mass Efficient Thermal Protection Systems for Future Venus Missions

Several international Venus missions, both orbiter, and in-situ probe are in the works after a prolonged absence. Future missions are expected to be long-duration lander missions and balloon missions to investigate the cloud layer. The entry mass for these in-situ missions will be significantly higher, and the aeroshell will be larger, than previous missions. Two cardinal requirements govern the selection and use of thermal protection systems (TPS), namely, robustness to assure mission safety during entry and mass efficiency so that the useful mass for science is maximized. One cannot trade mission safety for mass when it comes to TPS. The robustness of the TPS is a paramount requirement as it is a single point of system failure. At the same time, TPS mass is carried for the entire mission duration prior to entry, and any excess TPS mass is at the cost of science payload. Future missions will benefit enormously from TPS options with mass and performance benefits far beyond advanced carbon-carbon (ACC) that is currently proposed for the DAVINCI mission. NASA STMD, and SMD jointly invested in the development of 3-D woven thermal protection systems in the last decade, and as a result, the Heat-shield for Extreme Entry Environment Technology (HEEET) TPS has been matured to TRL 6. It is ready for future mission use including Venus. The HEEET project focused on developing a broad technology base, applicable for missions not only to Venus, but also to Saturn, the Ice Giants, and higher speed sample return missions such as Mars Sample Return requiring extreme robustness due to bio-hazards. The dual-layer HEEET (DL-HEEET) is proven to be extremely robust. DL-HEEET performed well in arc jet and laser testing conditions where heritage carbon-phenolic failed. HEEET also proved to be more mass efficient compared to Carbon-Phenolic. Recently, the principal author was invited to present his perspectives to the 2023-2032 Planetary Sciences Decadal Venus subcommittee on the current state of TPS for future Venus missions [1]. In addition to pointing out successful TPS and other developments in the last decade in support of entry systems, the principal author made two findings: 1) importance of and need to sustain TPS capabilities that took nearly a decade to develop and 2) the opportunity to further optimize TPS mass without sacrificing robustness to further enable future in-situ missions. This talk will focus on the above two recommendations and provide the rationale for them. The intent of the talk is to seek advocacy from the VEXAG community for the criticality of TPS sustainment and the benefits of 3D woven TPS optimization. TPS Capability Sustainment: HEEET development was necessitated by the atrophy of heritage carbon-phenolic. Atrophy has impacted other TPS materials as well. Avcoat, the TPS that successfully allowed astronauts to explore the Moon in the 1960s and 70s, took nearly a decade and $10’sM to recover in support of Orion/Artemis. One of the most used TPS materials, SLA 561V, had to be recovered prior to its use on Mars Pathfinder. Phenolic Impregnated Carbon Ablator (PICA), the TPS that replaced SLA 561V on MSL, has undergone multiple replacements and recovery due to constituent rayon changes. Recently, NASA invested in a domestic rayon replacement program and also invested in FMI to consolidate PICA capability for NASA missions, as a result of FMI’s decision to discontinue commercial FiberForm, which is needed for PICA. TPS used for planetary missions are unique and have no other commercial or defense use. In addition, low mission cadence is also a driver for TPS atrophy. Hence, NASA, as the steward, must take steps to ensure and sustain TPS capabilities. In this talk, we outline steps NASA can take to keep abreast of emerging risks and target risk mitigation steps to ensure TPS capability sustainment for Venus and other extreme environment missions. Next Generation of Mass efficient and Robust TPS: NASA invested in an alternate TPS to PICA based on felt-technology called Conformal-PICA which has the potential to save 30% - 50% mass over PICA. The development was discontinued at a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of ~ 5. 3D Mid-Density Carbon Phenolic (3MDCP) is a single layer variant of HEEET, based on the insulating layer only (SL-HEEET) and currently baselined for the Mars Sample Return Mission Earth Entry System due to its mass efficiency (30% more mass efficient than DL- HEEET). Currently, SL-HEEET is limited to aeroshell diameters of < 1.3m. The SL-HEEET was compared to DL-HEEET in the recent ADVENT flag-ship class mission study in support of the Planetary Science Decadal. SL HEEET was the recommended TPS based on 30% mass savings for both the balloon and lander missions. Given C-PICA and SL-HEEET have superior reliability and mass efficiency, advocacy from VEXAG is sought for completing their further development to TRL 5/6 in this decade so as to enable TPS readiness for future missions.

Thermal Protection Systems↗
NASA NTRS1996

Risk/Requirements Trade-Off Guidelines for Faster, Better, Cheaper Missions

From preface: This document is a compendium of Risk/Requirements Tradeoff Guidelines for Faster, Better, Cheaper Missions. It summarizes the reduced-cost approach for the design, verification, and validation of flight equipment for assuring mission success of microspacecraft.

faster better cheaper risk risk tradeoffs↗
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

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.

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↗