Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Task scheduling”

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 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2006

Modeling the Scheduling of Eye Movements and Manual Responses in Performing a Sequence of Discrete Tasks

Common tasks in daily life are often accomplished by a sequence of actions that interleave information acquisition through the eyes and action execution by the hands. How are eye movements coordinated with the release of manual responses and how may their coordination be represented at the level of component mental operations? We have previously presented data from a typing-like task requiring separate choice responses to a series of five stimuli. We found a consistent pattern of results in both motor and ocular timing, and hypothesized possible relationships among underlying components. Here we report a model of that task, which demonstrates how the observed timing of eye movements to successive stimuli could be accounted for by assuming systems: an open-loop system generating saccades at a periodic rate, and a closed-loop system commanding a saccade based on stimulus processing. We relate this model to models of reading and discuss the motivation for dual control.

Wu, Shu-Chieh↗
NASA NTRS2011

Fatigue Management in Spaceflight Operations

Sleep loss and fatigue remain an issue for crewmembers working on the International Space Station, and the ground crews who support them. Schedule shifts on the ISS are required for conducting mission operations. These shifts lead to tasks being performed during the biological night, and sleep scheduled during the biological day, for flight crews and the ground teams who support them. Other stressors have been recognized as hindering sleep in space; these include workload, thinking about upcoming tasks, environmental factors, and inadequate day/night cues. It is unknown if and how other factors such as microgravity, carbon dioxide levels, or increased radiation, may also play a part. Efforts are underway to standardize and provide care for crewmembers, ground controllers and other support personnel. Through collaborations between research and operations, evidenced-based clinical practice guidelines are being developed to equip flight surgeons with the tools and processes needed for treating circadian desynchrony (and subsequent sleep loss) caused by jet lag and shift work. The proper implementation of countermeasures such as schedules, lighting protocols, and cognitive behavioral education can hasten phase shifting, enhance sleep and optimize performance. This panel will focus on Fatigue Management in Spaceflight Operations. Speakers will present on research-based recommendations and technologies aimed at mitigating sleep loss, circadian desynchronization and fatigue on-orbit. Gaps in current mitigations and future recommendations will also be discussed.

Whitmire, Alexandra↗
NASA NTRS1990

Schedule-Report-Generator Computer Program

Schedule Report Generator provides simple method for generating periodic schedule reports. Enables engineering manager to monitor tasks assigned to staff members on weekly basis. Sorts three types of reports by use of one or more data fields as sorting keys. Schedule Organizer (SO) (COSMIC program MSC-21525), Schedule Tracker (ST) (COSMIC program MSC-21526), and Schedule Report Generator (SRG) computer programs manipulating data-base files in ways advantageous in scheduling. Written in PL/1 and DEC Command Language (DCL).

Collazo, Fernando F.↗
DOE OSTI2024

IRIS: Exploring Performance Scaling of the Intelligent Runtime System and its Dynamic Scheduling Policies

High-Performance Computing is becoming increasingly heterogeneous, relying on a diverse mix of hardware to achieve good performance. Paradoxically, current drivers and frameworks for these devices typically require separate languages and implementations for each vendor. Furthermore, there are few tools and little support to schedule codes between these devices in a truly heterogeneous manner-partly because of this fragmentation between vendors and the languages each supports. To overcome both limitations, the Intelligent Runtime System (IRIS) was developed. It allows a common task abstraction to automatically be shared among contemporary vendors and is run from a single host-side API. At runtime, IRIS queries the host system and registers which frameworks and drivers are available, these determine which kernels can be used by the scheduler-CPUs via OpenMP, Nvidia GPUs (CUDA), AMD GPUs (HIP), and Intel and Xilinx FPGAs with OpenCL. IRIS enables tasks to be scheduled to any heterogeneous device and resolves to the appropriate kernel binary at runtimeit only uses the devices supported by the system on which it is run. IRIS supports single-task and graph-based expressions of dependencies of tasks. Additionally, IRIS features a range of dynamic scheduling policies, allowing complex chains of tasks and interactions to be executed, relieving the programmer/user from considering the system to assign tasks to devices optimally. This paper presents the peak performance attainable by IRIS over a range of systems-each with different numbers and types of accelerator devices, it highlights the flexibility of IRIS since these devices are truly heterogeneous, relying on different backends (drivers, frameworks, and languages) which historically required unique implementations to utilize them. We then use this peak performance as a baseline to compare increasingly complex chains of tasks (with increasingly complex task dependencies) and evaluate how IRIS copes. Finally, we consider the performance of different IRIS scheduling policies on this range of task graphs.

Johnston, Beau↗
NASA NTRS1990

Control framework for hand-arm coordination

Coordination of multiple manipulators requires cooperation at several levels in the control hierarchy. A distributed processing environment with no hardware dependencies except at the motor servo level would provide a flexible architecture for coordination. A system on these lines is being built to control an articulated hand and an arm. The four levels of control envisaged include a task decomposition level, a planning level, a scheduling level, and a server level. The hand will carry both force and tactile sensors, feedback from these are used to provide adaptive control in grasping tasks. The processing of the sensory information is performed by independent processes, with analyzed information being sent to the relevant layer of the system. The manipulators are also controlled by individual processes. All process can open communications with an active process sending commands or data, or receiving them. The scope of the system and the current setup are described along with future lines of development.

Agrawal, Sanjay↗
NASA NTRS1991

Constraint-based scheduling

The GERRY scheduling system developed by NASA Ames with assistance from the Lockheed Space Operations Company, and the Lockheed Artificial Intelligence Center, uses a method called constraint based iterative repair. Using this technique, one encodes both hard rules and preference criteria into data structures called constraints. GERRY repeatedly attempts to improve schedules by seeking repairs for violated constraints. The system provides a general scheduling framework which is being tested on two NASA applications. The larger of the two is the Space Shuttle Ground Processing problem which entails the scheduling of all inspection, repair, and maintenance tasks required to prepare the orbiter for flight. The other application involves power allocations for the NASA Ames wind tunnels. Here the system will be used to schedule wind tunnel tests with the goal of minimizing power costs. In this paper, we describe the GERRY system and its applications to the Space Shuttle problem. We also speculate as to how the system would be used for manufacturing, transportation, and military problems.

Zweben, Monte↗
NASA NTRS2020

History and Logic Model NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Instrument and Payload Systems Engineering Technical Performance Study

Historically, some NASA missions have exceeded schedule and cost commitments. Studies suggest technical performance is a contributor. The 1980 NASA Project Management Study concluded, "one of the most significant contributors to cost and schedule growth is inadequate definition of technical and management aspects of a program..." (as cited in GAO/NSIAD-93-97, p. 11). The 1991 NASA Roles and Missions Report identified a "need for increased emphasis on technological readiness and requirements on the front end of a program" (as cited in GAO/NSIAD-93-97, p. 11). The 1992 NASA Program Costs Report stated that NASA officials identified, among other things, "insufficient definition studies... [and] program redesigns and technical complexities" as reasons for cost and schedule overruns (GAO/NSAID-93-97, p. 11). The 2002 Task Force on Acquisition of National Security Space Programs found "requirements definition and control issues, unhealthy cost bias in proposal evaluation, widespread lack of budget reserves required to implement high risk programs on schedule, and an overall underappreciation of the importance of appropriately staffed and trained system engineering staff to manage the technologically demanding and unique aspects of space programs" (DoD, 2003, p.i.) In 2007, The NASA Office of the Chief Engineer chartered the NASA Instrument Capability Study (NICS) “to determine whether NASA instrument developers are facing challenges that impact the capability to design and build quality instruments or whether there are flaws in the acquisition strategy evidenced by schedule delays, cost overruns, and increased technical risk via design deficiencies. The... team was also chartered to determine if occurrences [are]... isolated cases or if there are generic issues... If the issues [are] found to be generic, the team [is] to offer solutions to recover such capability" (NICS Report, 2008, p. vi). The 2008 NICS Report, led by Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), identified challenges to instrument technical performance consistent with findings from previous reports. In 2017, the Instrument Project Division (IPD) Implementation Study was initiated to determine if there was a change in meeting schedule and cost commitments after implementing certain NICS recommendations. In 2018, the Instrument Technical Performance Study was initiated to determine the current state of Instrument Technical Performance in the GSFC Payload & Instrument Systems Engineering Branch. The purpose of the combined studies is to answer the question, "Is there a relationship between meeting NASA scientific instrument technical success and meeting schedule and cost commitments? If yes, what is the relationship?" References Department of Defense Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics. (2003). The report of the defense science board/ air force scientific advisory board joint task force on acquisition of national security space programs. Washington DC. Government Accounting Office. (1992). NASA program costs: Space missions require substantially more funding than initially estimated. GAO/NSIAD-93-97. Washington DC. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency, Department of Defense. (2008). The NASA instrument capability study final report. NP-2008-11-058-GSFC. Washington DC.

Robbins, Geraldine↗
NASA NTRS1983

On Why It Is Impossible to Prove that the BDX90 Dispatcher Implements a Time-sharing System

The Software Implemented Fault Tolerance SIFT system, is written in PASCAL except for about a page of machine code. The SIFT system implements a small time sharing system in which PASCAL programs for separate application tasks are executed according to a schedule with real time constraints. The PASCAL language has no provision for handling the notion of an interrupt such as the B930 clock interrupt. The PASCAL language also lacks the notion of running a PASCAL subroutine for a given amount of time, suspending it, saving away the suspension, and later activating the suspension. Machine code was used to overcome these inadequacies of PASCAL. Code which handles clock interrupts and suspends processes is called a dispatcher. The time sharing/virtual machine idea is completely destroyed by the reconfiguration task. After termination of the reconfiguration task, the tasks run by the dispatcher have no relation to those run before reconfiguration. It is impossible to view the dispatcher as a time-sharing system implementing virtual BDX930s running concurrently when one process can wipe out the others.

Boyer, R. S.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Muscle Feasibility for Cosmos Rhesus

The following tasks were proposed for the Cosmos project: 1) Complete recordings of all preflight candidates during performance of a foot pedal motor control task while in the space capsule mock-up. 2) Complete recordings of all preflight candidates during locomotion and postural tasks. 3) Complete recordings of 24-hour spontaneous cage activity in the two flight monkeys before and after flight and of at least three control (non-flight) monkeys after the flight has been completed. 4) Complete recordings of the foot pedal and motor control tasks during flight and postflight as scheduled. 5) Complete recordings of the vertical drop test pre, during and postflight for the two flight and three control monkeys. 6) Complete recordings of locomotion and posture tests of the two flight monkeys postflight. 7) Complete recordings of locomotion and postural tests of at least three control (non-flight) monkeys during the postflight period. 8) Recalibrate buckles of the two flight and of at least three control monkeys postflight. 9) Complete analysis of the 24 hour EMG recordings of all monkeys. 10) Complete analysis of the foot pedal, locomotor and postural motor control tasks for the two flight and three control monkeys. It was proposed that efforts in the first postflight year be concentrated on the two flight animals and three postflight animals.

Edgerton, V. Reggie↗
NASA NTRS1976

Space Tug Docking Study. Volume 5: Cost Analysis

The cost methodology, summary cost data, resulting cost estimates by Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), technical characteristics data, program funding schedules and the WBS for the costing are discussed. Cost estimates for two tasks of the study are reported. The first, developed cost estimates for design, development, test and evaluation (DDT&E) and theoretical first unit (TFU) at the component level (Level 7) for all items reported in the data base. Task B developed total subsystem DDT&E costs and funding schedules for the three candidate Rendezvous and Docking Systems: manual, autonomous, and hybrid.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2023

Adaptive Mission Assurance (AMA) – A Conceptual Guide for NASA Missions

NASA is well acquainted with and skilled in conducting Risk Class A Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA). Class A missions are characterized as having highly specific performance with an ultra-low risk tolerance for risk and mission failure. But space is rapidly changing, and the space enterprise is challenged to pursue faster more agile mission developments with fewer resources and directed schedules. To meet this demand mission development teams face accepting more risk and trading performance within strict cost and schedule constraints. In responding to this challenge, The Aerospace Corporation has evolved the Adaptive Mission Assurance (AMA) approach. The benefit of an “adaptive” approach is most realized for smaller Research and Development (R&D), or Science and Technology (S&T) demonstration missions constrained by significantly smaller budgets and directed schedules. The challenge for these “risk tolerant, constraints-driven” missions is how to identify the most valuable mission assurance tasks that will fit within strict budgetary and schedule constraints for “gracefully” accepting risk that still achieves an agreeable expectation of mission success. AMA can respond to this challenge with little to no impact to team staffing or existing workload. This conceptual guide introduces AMA as a potential implementation for NASA Risk Class D and Sub-Class D missions.

Douglas A. Harris↗
NASA NTRS1998

Report of the Cost Assessment and Validation Task Force on the International Space Station

The Cost Assessment and Validation (CAV) Task Force was established for independent review and assessment of cost, schedule and partnership performance on the International Space Station (ISS) Program. The CAV Task Force has made the following key findings: The International Space Station Program has made notable and reasonable progress over the past four years in defining and executing a very challenging and technically complex effort. The Program size, complexity, and ambitious schedule goals were beyond that which could be reasonably achieved within the $2.1 billion annual cap or $17.4 billion total cap. A number of critical risk elements are likely to have an adverse impact on the International Space Station cost and schedule. The schedule uncertainty associated with Russian implementation of joint Partnership agreements is the major threat to the ISS Program. The Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 budget submission to Congress is not adequate to execute the baseline ISS Program, cover normal program growth, and address the known critical risks. Additional annual funding of between $130 million and $250 million will be required. Completion of ISS assembly is likely to be delayed from one to three years beyond December 2003.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1998

Cost Assessment and Validation Task Force on the International Space Station

The Cost Assessment and Validation (CAV) Task Force was established for independent review and assessment of cost, schedule and partnership performance on the International Space Station (ISS) Program. The CAV Task Force has made the following key findings: The International Space Station Program has made notable and reasonable progress over the past four years in defining and executing a very challenging and technically complex effort; The Program, size, complexity, and ambitious schedule goals were beyond that which could be reasonably achieved within the $2.1 billion annual cap or $17.4 billion total cap; A number of critical risk elements are likely to have an adverse impact on the International Space Station cost and schedule; The schedule uncertainty associated with Russian implementation of joint Partnership agreements is the major threat to the ISS Program; The Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 budget submission to Congress is not adequate to execute the baseline ISS Program, cover normal program, growth, and address the known critical risks. Additional annual funding of between $130 million and $250 million will be required; and Completion of ISS assembly is likely to be delayed from, one to three years beyond December 2003.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1988

A scheduling and resource management system for space applications

Every spacecraft, whether in orbit around the earth or an a deep space flight, has at its disposal limited amounts of the resources for it to accomplish its mission. Activity scheduling is currently a costly, human intensive task which requires a great deal of expertise. It belongs to a class of problems whose complexity increases exponentially with the number of operations. NASA has in the past accomplished this task by using a great deal of manpower, a large number of negotiating sessions, interminable bouts of phone tag, and mountains of paperwork. Lately the situation has improved with the introduction of automated scheduling techniques, but these to date still require expert involvement and fall short in some important ways. A prototype activity scheduler, MAESTRO, is introduced which is capable of meeting the needs of many NASA missions, eventually to include the Space Station. The approach to resource constrained scheduling is first discussed, then the intended domain for MAESTRO is described along with its design and current capabilities. A description of planned enhancements and revisions to the systems is also presented.

Britt, Daniel L.↗
NASA NTRS1987

System engineering techniques for establishing balanced design and performance guidelines for the advanced telerobotic testbed

Novel system engineering techniques have been developed and applied to establishing structured design and performance objectives for the Telerobotics Testbed that reduce technical risk while still allowing the testbed to demonstrate an advancement in state-of-the-art robotic technologies. To estblish the appropriate tradeoff structure and balance of technology performance against technical risk, an analytical data base was developed which drew on: (1) automation/robot-technology availability projections, (2) typical or potential application mission task sets, (3) performance simulations, (4) project schedule constraints, and (5) project funding constraints. Design tradeoffs and configuration/performance iterations were conducted by comparing feasible technology/task set configurations against schedule/budget constraints as well as original program target technology objectives. The final system configuration, task set, and technology set reflected a balanced advancement in state-of-the-art robotic technologies, while meeting programmatic objectives and schedule/cost constraints.

Zimmerman, W. F.↗
NASA NTRS1984

Space platform expendables resupply concept definition study. Volume 3: Work breakdown structure and work breakdown structure dictionary

The work breakdown structure (WBS) for the Space Platform Expendables Resupply Concept Definition Study is described. The WBS consists of a list of WBS elements, a dictionary of element definitions, and an element logic diagram. The list and logic diagram identify the interrelationships of the elements. The dictionary defines the types of work that may be represented by or be classified under each specific element. The Space Platform Expendable Resupply WBS was selected mainly to support the program planning, scheduling, and costing performed in the programmatics task (task 3). The WBS is neither a statement-of-work nor a work authorization document. Rather, it is a framework around which to define requirements, plan effort, assign responsibilities, allocate and control resources, and report progress, expenditures, technical performance, and schedule performance. The WBS element definitions are independent of make-or-buy decisions, organizational structure, and activity locations unless exceptions are specifically stated.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1978

Flight experience with manually controlled unconventional aircraft motions

A modified YF-16 aircraft was used to flight demonstrate decoupled modes under the USAF Fighter Control Configured Vehicle (CCV) Program. The direct force capabilities were used to implement seven manually controlled unconventional modes on the aircraft, allowing flat turns, decoupled normal acceleration control, independent longitudinal and lateral translations, uncoupled elevation and azimuth aiming, and blended direct lift. This paper describes the design, development, and flight testing of these control modes. The need for task-tailored mode authorities, gain-scheduling and selected closed-loop design is discussed.

Barfield, A. F.↗