SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
This presentation focuses on project management, specifically addressing project issues using the scientific method of problem-solving. Two sample projects where this methodology has been applied are provided.
Basic tenets of safety as applied to developmental aircraft programs are presented. The integration of safety into the project management aspects of planning, organizing, directing and controlling is illustrated by examples. The basis for project management use of safety and the relationship of these management functions to 'real-world' situations is presented. The rationale which led to the safety-related project decision and the lessons learned as they may apply to future projects are presented.
What makes a successful team? In this issue our contributors look closely at the subject and come up with several answers. Working on team chemistry is the "Activation Energy" Dr. Owen Gadeken's story is about. Scott Cameron thinks it's getting to know people one to one. Tony Maturo says it's getting the most out of your support staff. Dr. Michael Hecht finds the best people he can and build the team around their talents. Teamwork is a theme we explore often in Academy Sharing Knowledge (ASK), but never so directly as in this issue. You'll not only find formulas for building successful teams, you'll see examples of ones in action, strategies for how project managers can motivate their teams, and expert advice on how to choose who to work with and who not to work with. It seems like all the stories make one common point: everyone on a team counts. Few project managers can pull off a project alone, and when the whole team is performing to everyone's potential, the chances of pulling off a successful project goes up exponentially. If that doesn't seem like enough by itself, listen to this... Discerning fans of ASK will note the last two issues our Special Feature was "There are no Mistakes, Only Lessons." We have not abandoned this feature, but for now we want to broaden our repertoire. In this issue we add a new Special Feature, "My Metaphor," starting with Paul Espinosa's article "My Big Wall" about his rock climbing adventures on El Capitan in Yosemite National Park. If you think getting to Mars is work, read what it's like to scale a 3,000-foot rock face. This issue we're also welcoming two new members to our Review Board, Hugh Woodward and Jody Kusek. Hugh and Jody are our first reviewers from outside NASA, and we are delighted to have them on our team. Read their bios on the ASK Review Board page and see why we feel privileged to have them on our team.
A continuation of the tests performed on the Space Shuttle Discovery in preparation for its return to flight is presented. The tests include: 1) Shuttle Robot Arm Recertification; 2) Michael Hiltz Systems Group Leader; 3) Orbiter Boom Fabrication; 4) Orbiter Boom Final Development; 5) Gary Searle Manager of Orbiter Boom Sensor System (OBSS) Manufacturing and Assembly; 6) Orbiter Boom Qualification Unit; 7) STS-114 Crew Inspects Orbiter Boom at Kennedy Space Center; 8) Orbiter Boom Inspection of Thermal Protection System Animation; 9) External Tank Bipod Redesign; 10) External Tank Flange Redesign; 11) External Tank Bellows Redesign; 12) Shuttle Main Engine Testing and Delivery to Kennedy Space Center; 13) Ronnie Rigney Project Manager Space Shuttle Main Engine Program Office; 14) Gene Goldmman NASA Project Manager Space Shuttle Main Engine Project; 15) Mike Cosgrove Boeing-Rocketdyne Flow Manager; 16) Shuttle Rocket Booster Build-Up; 17) Ascent Imagery Improvements; and 18) STS-114 Flight Control Team and Mission Management Team.
The Project Manager is one of the key individuals that can determine the success or failure of a project. NASA is fully committed to the training and development of Project Managers across the agency to ensure that highly capable individuals are equipped with the competencies and experience to successfully lead a project. An equally critical position is that of the Project Scientist. The Project Scientist provides the scientific leadership necessary for the scientific success of a project by insuring that the mission meets or exceeds the scientific requirements. Traditionally, NASA Goddard project scientists were appointed and approved by the Center Science Director based on their knowledge, experience, and other qualifications. However the process to obtain the necessary knowledge, skills and abilities was not documented or done in a systematic way. NASA Goddard's current Science Director, Nicholas White saw the need to create a pipeline for developing new projects scientists, and appointed a team to develop a process for training potential project scientists. The team members were Dr. Harley Thronson, Chair, Dr. Howard Kea, Mr. Mark Goldman, DACUM facilitator and the late Dr. Michael VanSteenberg. The DACUM process, an occupational analysis and evaluation system, was used to produce a picture of the project scientist's duties, tasks, knowledge, and skills. The output resulted in a 3-Day introductory course detailing all the required knowledge, skills and abilities a scientist must develop over time to be qualified for selections as a Project Scientist.
A briefing on the propulsion system modification of the STS-114 Discovery is presented. June Malone, NASA Public Affairs, introduces the panel who consists of: Sandy Coleman, External Tank Project Manager, Neil Otte, External Tank Chief Engineer, and Tom Williams, Solid Rocket Booster, Deputy Project Manager. Neil Otte presents charts on new requirements for foam debris reduction on the external tank. He also presents charts describing the Forward Bipod Redesign, LO2 Feedline Bellows Location, LH2 Intertank Flange Location, and In-Flight Imagery. Tom Williams presents charts describing Solid Rocket Booster Activities and Return to Flight efforts.
This report is intended to help NASA program and project managers incorporate Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) technologies into NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) projects. Other Government and commercial project managers interested in ARMD funding opportunities through NASA's SBIR program will find this report useful as well.
NASA is resuming X-plane research. It plans to build a low-boom supersonic flight demonstrator (LBFD), an all-electric general aviation aircraft (X-57), and possibly an ultra-efficient subsonic transport (UEST) demonstrator. In an attempt to define what levels of risk are appropriate in piloted X-plane research, the NASA Office of the Chief Engineer (OCE) evaluated numerous NASA, Department of Defense (DoD), and industry project management and risk assessment tools. Provided are the results of the evaluations of NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 7120.5, 7120.8, and 8705.4; Langley Research Center (LaRC) Procedural Requirement (LPR) 7120.5; Dryden (Armstrong) Center Procedures S-002 and X-009; and Military Handbook 516C. Some of these were applied to the LBFD and X-57 aircraft. The impacts on risk of budgeting decisions and specialized flight conditions were also considered. None of the evaluated processes were found to be fully appropriate for governing experimental aircraft projects, but many useful elements were found in some of them.
Internship opportunities can be immensely beneficial to both the students who pursue them and the labs that employ them. However, optimal results for all stakeholders can be uncertain. Several factors compound this issue. In this case study, the highly multidisciplinary nature of the BioEngineering Instrumentation Group at NASA Ames Research Center has made productively integrating short-term summer interns challenging. In general, taking on more undergraduate interns during a given time period can lead to diminishing returns, particularly if those interns are primarily short-time interns with few long-term senior students present.Introducing a level of industry-style project management processes can help. On the one hand, extreme formality can reduce the enthusiasm that students can bring; also, time constraints on internships make extensive training in formal process an investment with comparatively little return. On the other hand, lack of process can result in many forms of wastage. A moderate, lightweight level of process i.e., simple processes with high payoff to time invested ratios, including processes to effectively handle multidisciplinary issues can yield both a far more efficient lab, and a richer educational experience for the interns. In this case study, we implemented simple processes such as brief weekly stand-up meetings, a standard action item bug tracking process, and deadline-based scheduling with prudent reserves and critical path tracking.To evaluate these steps, several parameters were considered: the number of projects the lab could successfully pursue, the number of interns that could be successfully integrated onto each project, diversity of student intern educational backgrounds, student satisfaction, student understanding of expectations, and student preparation for industry-standard work. Generally, outcomes were enhanced across the board, even with imperfectly implemented processes. Lightweight process implementation is shown to be tremendously effective in a multidisciplinary internship context.
Live footage shows several speakers participating in the Magellan Press Conference. Speakers include the Director of Solar System Exploration Division West Huntress, Magellan Project Manager Tony Spear, Spacecraft Team Chief W. Ledbetter, Radar System Chief Engineer T. Johnson, and Magellan Project Manager from Hughes Aircraft Co. T. McCarthy. The speakers discuss the Venus Orbiting Insertion (VOI), radar system components, spacecraft development, mission objectives, and the flight plans. This is tape 1 of 2; tape 2 has a report number NONP-NASA-VT-2000036566.
If you could see the road ahead, you might pass up a fantastic opportunity because you're blinded by the potential pitfalls. In my case, I was testing the project management waters at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center after ten years of being a research engineer. I was an eager (but ignorant) rookie project manager (PM) and I was willing to engage in just about any project without knowing what it would entail. The assignment I accepted was to help NASA's Environment Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology (ERAST) Project, a partnership with a fledgling Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle (UAV) industry, to tackle stratospheric flight. I remember one of our industrial partners querying me about whether or not I understood what 1 was getting into. Like one of those bobble-head toys that have become quite popular, I nodded. But in reality, I didn't have a clue. His response was, "Hang on, it's going to be a wild ride." He was right. In retrospect, if I had clearly understood the ten years of pitfalls that were coming, I might not have "hung on." Now I can look back and say that I would not trade the experience for anything. The lows included the destruction of a number of UAVs on my watch. Later someone told me that we should not be surprised if we lost one UAV for every ten flights. We wrote many chapters in the book on what can go wrong with UAVs-and we are still writing. As you can imagine, each mishap was accompanied by an investigation. What an education!
Data exchange and data management programs have been evolving over many years. Within the international community there are two main programs to support the exchange, management and processing of real time and delayed mode data. The Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) operate the International Oceanographic Data and Information Exchange (IODE) program which coordinates the exchange of delayed mode data between national oceanographic data centers, World Data Centers and the user community. The Integrated Global Ocean Services System is a joint IOC/World Meteorological Organization (WMO) program for the exchange and management of real-time data. These two programs are complemented by mechanisms that have been established within scientific programs to exchange and manage project data sets. In particular TOGA and WOCE have identified a data management requirement and established the appropriate infrastructure to achieve this. Where GTSPP fits into this existing framework is discussed.
Software project managers need tools to estimate and track project goals in a continuous fashion before, during, and after development of a system. In addition, they need an ability to compare the current project status with past project profiles to validate management intuition, identify problems, and then direct appropriate resources to the sources of problems. This paper describes a measurement-based approach to calculating the risk inherent in meeting project goals that leverages past project metrics and existing estimation and tracking models. We introduce the IV&V Goal/Questions/Metrics model, explain its use in the software development life cycle, and describe our attempts to validate the model through the reverse engineering of existing projects.
This report is intended to help NASA program and project managers incorporate Glenn Research Center Small Business Innovation Research/Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR)/(STTR) technologies into NASA Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) programs and projects. Other Government and commercial project managers can also find this useful. Introduction Incorporating Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)-developed technology into NASA projects is important, especially given the Agency's limited resources for technology development. The SBIR program's original intention was for technologies that had completed Phase II to be ready for integration into NASA programs, however, in many cases there is a gap between Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) 5 and 6 that needs to be closed. After SBIR Phase II projects are completed, the technology is evaluated against various parameters and a TRL rating is assigned. Most programs tend to adopt more mature technologies-at least TRL 6 to reduce the risk to the mission rather than adopt TRLs between 3 and 5 because those technologies are perceived as too risky. The gap between TRLs 5 and 6 is often called the "Valley of Death" (Figure 1), and historically it has been difficult to close because of a lack of funding support from programs. Several papers have already suggested remedies on how to close the gap (Refs. 1 to 4).
This report is intended to help NASA program and project managers incorporate Small Business Innovation Research/Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR)/(STTR) technologies into NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) projects. Other Government and commercial projects managers can also find this useful.
Attempts to apply space age management to social problems were plagued with difficulties. Recent experience in the State of Delaware and in New York City, however, indicate new possibilities. Project management as practiced in NASA was applied with promising results in programs dealing with housing and social services. Such applications are feasible, according to recent research, because project management utilizes social and behavioral approaches, as well as advanced management tools, such as PERT, to achieve results.
The Advanced Exploration Systems Program's Atmosphere Resource Recovery and Environmental Monitoring (ARREM) project is working to further optimize atmosphere revitalization and environmental monitoring system architectures. This paper discusses project management strategies that tap into skill sets across multiple engineering disciplines, projects, field centers, and industry to achieve the project success. It is the project's objective to contribute to system advances that will enable sustained exploration missions beyond Lower Earth Orbit (LEO) and improve affordability by focusing on the primary goals of achieving high reliability, improving efficiency, and reducing dependence on ground-based logistics resupply. Technology demonstrations are achieved by infusing new technologies and concepts with existing developmental hardware and operating in a controlled environment simulating various crewed habitat scenarios. The ARREM project's strengths include access to a vast array of existing developmental hardware that perform all the vital atmosphere revitalization functions, exceptional test facilities to fully evaluate system performance, and a well-coordinated partnering effort among the NASA field centers and industry partners to provide the innovative expertise necessary to succeed.
The Mission Operations Assurance (MOA) discipline actively participates as a project member to achieve their common objective of full mission success while also providing an independent risk assessment to the Project Manager and Office of Safety and Mission Success staff. The cornerstone element of MOA is the independent assessment of the risks the project faces in executing its mission. Especially as the project approaches critical mission events, it becomes imperative to clearly identify and assess the risks the project faces. Quite often there are competing options for the project to select from in deciding how to execute the event. An example includes choices between proven but aging hardware components and unused but unproven components. Timing of the event with respect to visual or telecommunications visibility can be a consideration in the case of Earth reentry or hazardous maneuver events. It is in such situations that MOA is called upon for a risk balance assessment or risk trade study to support their recommendation to the Project Manager for a specific option to select. In the following paragraphs we consider two such assessments, one for the Stardust capsule Earth return and the other for the choice of telecommunications system configuration for the EPOXI flyby of the comet Hartley 2. We discuss the development of the trade space for each project's scenario and characterize the risks of each possible option. The risk characterization we consider includes a determination of the severity or consequence of each risk if realized and the likelihood of its occurrence. We then examine the assessment process to arrive at a MOA recommendation. Finally we review each flight project's decision process and the outcome of their decisions.