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.
Recently retired NASA administrator Joseph Rothenberg reflects on project management during the Apollo era at the start of his career, as well as the history of, and changes in, project management over his years at NASA. He concludes by describing what he sees as NASA's most important needs in the near future.
Risk management strategies have become a recent important research topic to many aerospace organizations as they prepare to develop the revolutionary complex space systems of the future. Future multi-disciplinary complex space systems will make it absolutely essential for organizations to practice a rigorous, comprehensive risk management process, emphasizing thorough systems engineering principles to succeed. Project managers must possess strong leadership skills to direct high quality, cross-disciplinary teams for successfully developing revolutionary space systems that are ever increasing in complexity. Proactive efforts to reduce or eliminate risk throughout a project's lifecycle ideally must be practiced by all technical members in the organization. This paper discusses some of the risk management perspectives that were collected from senior managers and project managers of aerospace and aeronautical organizations by the use of interviews and surveys. Some of the programmatic risks which drive the success or failure of projects are revealed. Key findings lead to a number of insights for organizations to consider for proactively approaching the risks which face current and future complex space systems projects.
While it might not seem so radical these days to see the words 'story' and 'business' in the same sentence, that certainly wasn't the case when I set out to put together my first collection of business stories. Procter & Gamble hired me in the early 1990's as a management consultant. I participated in training programs, procedural reviews, and the like-but I wasn't satisfied with these traditional approaches. I sought to inspire significant change in the way that project practitioners approached their work, and I thought I had found the right vehicle: stories. I wanted to collect the stories of some of the most successful project managers and share them with others in the company. First, I found a sponsor with enough vision to support my idea, and then I assembled a team of eight highly successful project managers who were willing to examine the idea of writing stories about their project work. My long-term goal was to collect their stories in a full-length book.
Human exploration of the solar system can be said to have begun with the Apollo landings on the Moon. The Apollo Project was publicly funded with the narrow technical objective of landing human beings on the Moon. The transportation and life support systems were specialized technical designs, developed in a project management environment tailored to that objective. Most scenarios for future human exploration assume a similar long-term commitment of public funds to a narrowly focused project managed by a large, monolithic organization. Advocates of human exploration of space have not yet been successful in generating the political momentum required to initiate such a project to go to the Moon or to Mars. Alternative scenarios of exploration may relax some or all of the parameters of organizational complexity, great expense, narrow technical focus, required public funding, and control by a single organization. Development of the Moon using private investment is quite possibly a necessary condition for alternative scenarios to succeed.
My project at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) during the spring 2013 Project Management and Systems Engineering Internship was to functionalJy test and deploy the SharePoint Extranet system and ensure successful completion of the project's various lifecycle milestones as described by NASA Procedural Requirement (NPR) 7 120.7. I worked alongside NASA Project Managers, Systems Integration Engineers, and Information Technology (IT) Professionals to pilot this collaboration capability between NASA and its External Partners. The use of identity federation allows NASA to leverage externally-issued credentials of other federal agencies and private aerospace and defense companies, versus the traditional process of granting and maintaining full NASA identities for these individuals. This is the first system of its kind at NASA and it will serve as a pilot for the Federal Government. Recognizing the novelty of this service, NASA's initial approach for deployment included a pilot period where nearby employees of Patrick Air Force Base would assist in testing and deployment. By utilizing a credential registration process, Air Force users mapped their Air Force-issued Common Access Cards (CAC) to a NASA identity for access to the External SharePoint. Once the Air Force stands up an Active Directory Federation Services (ADFS) instance within their Data Center and establishes a direct trust with NASA, true identity federation can be established. The next partner NASA is targeting for collaboration is Lockheed Martin (LMCO), since they collaborate frequently for the ORION Program. Through the use of Exostar as an identity hub, LMCO employees will be able to access NASA data on a need to know basis, with NASA ultimately managing access. In a time when every dollar and resource is being scrutinized, this capability is an exciting new way for NASA to continue its collaboration efforts in a cost and resource effective manner.
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 Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) projects. Other Government and commercial projects managers can also find this useful. Space Transportation; Life Support and Habitation Systems; Extra-Vehicular Activity; High EfficiencySpace Power; Human Exploration and Operations Mission,
This report contains instructional guidelines for the resources planning and control of research and development (R&D) projects managed by NASA's Langley Research Center (LaRC). Although written to serve primarily as a practical guide and reference for those LaRC personnel who perform resources planning, analysis, control, and reporting functions, it should also be meaningful to other NASA personnel who are directly or indirectly involved in or affected by these functions, especially project technical managers whose responsibilities include resources management. Certain sections should help Contractor personnel to better understand what resources information must usually be submitted on LaRC projects and what use is made of such information. The Project Manager of a large R&D project typicaly receives support from an Analyst in the area of resources management. The Analyst provides assistance in four functional areas: Planning, Analysis/Control, Administration, and Reporting. Each of these functions are discussed in detail. Examples of techniques used effectively on LaRC projects have been included where applicable. A considerable amount of information has been included on the use of Performance Measurement (Earned Value) Systems for contract cost control and reporting as little information is currently available on this subject in NASA publications.
The presentation gives an overview of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Earned Value Management (EVM) structure. We briefly talk about the current EVM high-level policies within NASA and the EVM governing structure. It touches on the roles and responsibilities of EVM Focal Points within the Agency. We will also discuss the approach that MSFC followed in implementing EVM and better data analysis within the Habitat Holding Racks (HHR) Project. We will address the approach used at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) to effectively equip and support MSFC projects in applying a sound EVM and data analysis process. In addition, we will show metrics associated with the HHR project before and after the implementation of EVM on the project. We will discuss the monthly report, using sample data, that the project manager used each month to assess the performance of the project. The data received from EVM helped create a solid method for assessing the project s performance. The use of EVM data analysis can be an effective and efficient tool in today s environment with increasing workloads and downsizing workforces. EVM provides project managers with information that can be used in the decision making process.
This design process error-proofing case study describes a design review practice implemented by a project manager at NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. There are many types of reviews at NASA: required and not, formalized and informal, programmatic and technical. Standing project formal reviews such as the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and Critical Design Review (CDR) are a required part of every project and mission development. However, the engineering peer reviews that support teams technical work on such projects are often informal, ad hoc, and inconsistent across the organization. This case study discusses issues and innovations identified by a project manager at JPL and implemented in "engineering peer meetings" for his group.
This design process error-proofing case study describes a design review practice implemented by a project manager at NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. There are many types of reviews at NASA: required and not, formalized and informal, programmatic and technical. Standing project formal reviews such as the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and Critical Design Review (CDR) are a required part of every project and mission development. However, the engineering peer reviews that support teams technical work on such projects are often informal, ad hoc, and inconsistent across the organization. This case study discusses issues and innovations identified by a project manager at JPL and implemented in 'engineering peer meetings' for his group.
This report is intended to help NASA program and project managers incorporate Glenn ResearchCenter Small Business Innovation Research/Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR)/(STTR)technologies into NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) programs/projects. Other Government and commercial project managers can also find this useful.
IN MANY INSTANCES THERE IS NO FOREWARNING; SCHEDULES slip, costs soar, and the project manager is faced with the near impossible task of explaining why each impact occurred. With contractors performing the majority of the work, the management job can become even more obscure. The simple lack of proximity to the contractor can limit effective communication. Add to that a mixture of cultural differences and a desire for the contractor to portray the most optimistic view of their performance, and you create an even more difficult task for the project manager. This was the scenario when the Habitat Holding Rack (HHR) manager at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), Stacy Counts, was introduced to the overall concept of Earned Value Management (EVM). Faced with increased costs (which eventually resulted in decreased scope of the project), continued schedule slides, and several technical anomalies, she was looking for a way to gain a better handle on the project performance. As a component of the Space Station Biological Research Program (SSBRP), the HHR project is an integral piece of the Program content. The HHR is the first rack hardware to be delivered for the Program and has therefore been the first rack to move through the trials of test and verification-documenting anomalies and technical difficulties that will benefit the other SSBRP rack projects. For these reasons, the HHR maintained high visibility throughout the manufacturing and assembly process, continuing through test and verification activities. Needless to say, the higher visibility emphasized the need for improved performance on this project. And to improve project performance, Stacy first had to figure out how to measure the cost, schedule and technical objectives effectively.
A new Microsystems Fabrication Laboratory (MFL), a Class 100 cleanroom fabrication facility, was completed and certified in 2002 at the NASA Glenn Research Center. This facility, to be used by Glenn's Instrumentation and Controls Division, was designed and built as part of the NASA Construction of Facilities Program. The design, construction, and certification phases were managed by personnel from Glenn s Facilities and Test Engineering Division. Because of time constraints and the need for specialized cleanroom expertise, this 1000 ft2 laboratory was completed using a design-build procurement. Facility Planning & Resources (Pittsburgh, PA) was selected as the prime contractor and provided the architectural design and project management. A major subcontractor, AdvanceTEC, LLC (Richmond, VA), provided the mechanical and electrical design and performed the construction services. Throughout this fast-track project, Facilities and Test Engineering Division personnel provided overall project management and worked closely with the contractors to ensure that the customers needs were addressed and that the impact of the project implementation was minimized.
JPL has been attempting to apply EVM techniques for the last 15 years with mixed success, especially when applied to software tasks. One of the main causes is that software presents particular challenges that were not considered during the genesis of EVM. A small number of tasks have been able to use EVM effectively and derive great benefits. This paper discusses challenges specific to software management and how they can be successfully addressed. Specifically, it details lessons learned from the $28 million dollar Next Generation Navigation Software Project that replaced NASA’s deep space navigation software for operations. The project was able to successfully use EVM techniques during a four year period, producing 12 releases on their promised delivery dates and projects actual costs that were within 0.3% of the planned budget (under), in contrast to performance before the techniques were put into practice.
This report is intended to help NASA program and project managers incorporate Small Business Innovation Research/Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) technologies that have gone through Phase II of the SBIR program into NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) programs. Other Government and commercial project managers can also find this information useful.
Introduction: Lunabotics provides accredited institutions of higher learning students (vocational-technical, college, university) an opportunity to apply the NASA systems engineering process to design and build a prototype robot. This robot would be capable of performing the proposed operations on the Lunar surface in support of future Artemis mission goals. Lunabotics features a systems engineering design challenge to engage students in the next phase of hu-man space exploration supporting the Artemis missions. This two-semester event encourages students to design and build an autonomous or telerobotic robot designed to traverse the simulated Lunar surface and complete the assigned construction tasks. The number of teams accepted into this challenge is not predetermined but is based on the scores and overall quality of the Project Management Plans received and other factors. The culmination of the Lunabotics virtual challenge will be the design, build and operation of a functional prototype Lunar robot. Teams are required to submit the following: (1) Project Management Plan, (2) Systems Engineering Paper, a (3) STEM Engage-ment Report, and a (4) Proof of Life Video. This is an optional item, but to qualify for the grand prize a team must also submit a: (5) Presentation and Demonstration. Background: The NASA Lunabotics University Competition was first held in 2010 as a follow on to the NASA Regolith Excavation Challenge [1]. The high level of interest and participation from over 50 universities each year has led to a sustained annual competi-ion cadence: it has been held every May for the past 14 years [2,3]. Over 6,000 students have participated and been inspired to pursue Science, Technology, En-gineering and Mathematics careers (STEM). 2024 Competition: The necessary lunar surface tasks are evolving to meet the NASA Artemis Mission requirements. In the past Lunabotics challenges we gathered data to support Lunar mining for consuma-bles in the Lunar regolith. Now, in 2024, the task is to gather data on Lunar site preparation and construction by designing and building a robot that will traverse the chaotic Lunar terrain and construct a regolith-based berm. The goal is to build a berm structure which would be useful to the Artemis Mission for blast and ejecta protection during lunar landings and launches, shading cryogenic propellant tank farms, providing radiation protection around a nuclear power plant and other mission critical uses. Lunabotics will consist of three separate events this year. The first event is NASA’s Lunabotics Project Development Challenge, where teams submit various deliverables to be scored by judges. The second event will be the University of Central Florida (UCF) Lunabotics Qualification challenge, in the Exolith laboratory, where teams will put their de-signs to the test. The top ten scoring teams from the Qualification challenge are then invited to the third and final event, NASA’s Lunabotics On-Site Challenge at Kennedy Space Center in Florida. This presentation will summarize the results and lessons learned from the NASA Lunabotics University Competition held in May 2024.
As the complexity of space missions grows, development of Fault Management (FM) capabilities is an increasingly common driver for significant cost overruns late in the development cycle. FM issues and the resulting cost overruns are rarely caused by a lack of technology, but rather by a lack of planning and emphasis by project management. A recent NASA FM Workshop brought together FM practitioners from a broad spectrum of institutions, mission types, and functional roles to identify the drivers underlying FM overruns and recommend solutions. They identified a number of areas in which increased program and project management focus can be used to control FM development cost growth. These include up-front planning for FM as a distinct engineering discipline; managing different, conflicting, and changing institutional goals and risk postures; ensuring the necessary resources for a disciplined, coordinated approach to end-to-end fault management engineering; and monitoring FM coordination across all mission systems.
This report is intended to help NASA program and project managers incorporate Small Business Innovation Research/Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) technologies that have gone through Phase II of the SBIR program into NASA Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) programs. Other Government and commercial project managers can also find this information useful.