Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “NASA requirements”

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 307 records · Page 17
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1994

NASA Technology Applications Team: Commercial applications of aerospace technology

The Research Triangle Institute (RTI) Team has maintained its focus on helping NASA establish partnerships with U.S. industry for dual use development and technology commercialization. Our emphasis has been on outcomes, such as licenses, industry partnerships and commercialization of technologies, that are important to NASA in its mission of contributing to the improved competitive position of U.S. industry. The RTI Team has been successful in the development of NASA/industry partnerships and commercialization of NASA technologies. RTI ongoing commitment to quality and customer responsiveness has driven our staff to continuously improve our technology transfer methodologies to meet NASA's requirements. For example, RTI has emphasized the following areas: (1) Methodology For Technology Assessment and Marketing: RTI has developed and implemented effective processes for assessing the commercial potential of NASA technologies. These processes resulted from an RTI study of best practices, hands-on experience, and extensive interaction with the NASA Field Centers to adapt to their specific needs. (2) Effective Marketing Strategies: RTI surveyed industry technology managers to determine effective marketing tools and strategies. The Technology Opportunity Announcement format and content were developed as a result of this industry input. For technologies with a dynamic visual impact, RTI has developed a stand-alone demonstration diskette that was successful in developing industry interest in licensing the technology. And (3) Responsiveness to NASA Requirements: RTI listened to our customer (NASA) and designed our processes to conform with the internal procedures and resources at each NASA Field Center and the direction provided by NASA's Agenda for Change. This report covers the activities of the Research Triangle Institute Technology Applications Team for the period 1 October 1993 through 31 December 1994.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA Risk Management Handbook

The purpose of this handbook is to provide guidance for implementing the Risk Management (RM) requirements of NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) document NPR 8000.4A, Agency Risk Management Procedural Requirements [1], with a specific focus on programs and projects, and applying to each level of the NASA organizational hierarchy as requirements flow down. This handbook supports RM application within the NASA systems engineering process, and is a complement to the guidance contained in NASA/SP-2007-6105, NASA Systems Engineering Handbook [2]. Specifically, this handbook provides guidance that is applicable to the common technical processes of Technical Risk Management and Decision Analysis established by NPR 7123.1A, NASA Systems Engineering Process and Requirements [3]. These processes are part of the \Systems Engineering Engine. (Figure 1) that is used to drive the development of the system and associated work products to satisfy stakeholder expectations in all mission execution domains, including safety, technical, cost, and schedule. Like NPR 7123.1A, NPR 8000.4A is a discipline-oriented NPR that intersects with product-oriented NPRs such as NPR 7120.5D, NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements [4]; NPR 7120.7, NASA Information Technology and Institutional Infrastructure Program and Project Management Requirements [5]; and NPR 7120.8, NASA Research and Technology Program and Project Management Requirements [6]. In much the same way that the NASA Systems Engineering Handbook is intended to provide guidance on the implementation of NPR 7123.1A, this handbook is intended to provide guidance on the implementation of NPR 8000.4A. 1.2 Scope and Depth This handbook provides guidance for conducting RM in the context of NASA program and project life cycles, which produce derived requirements in accordance with existing systems engineering practices that flow down through the NASA organizational hierarchy. The guidance in this handbook is not meant to be prescriptive. Instead, it is meant to be general enough, and contain a sufficient diversity of examples, to enable the reader to adapt the methods as needed to the particular risk management issues that he or she faces. The handbook highlights major issues to consider when managing programs and projects in the presence of potentially significant uncertainty, so that the user is better able to recognize and avoid pitfalls that might otherwise be experienced.

Dezfuli, Homayoon↗
NASA NTRS1981

Lessons from NASA

Particular requirements related to the design and the operation of spacecraft have forced NASA to take a reliability approach that differs somewhat from that used in many other applications. NASA has found that some of the traditional tools of reliability engineering, such as life testing, reliability demonstration testing, maintainability analysis, and direct failure analysis, are impractical for spacecraft. In place of a statistical approach, the space agency uses an engineering approach to mission reliability. Reliability is to be obtained with the aid of three different approaches, including the application of effective design principles, the control and screening of all parts, and the testing of the entire spacecraft or its prototype for predicted capabilities. Attention is given to failure-mode analysis, the enhancement of Voyager reliability by autonomous operation, the redundancy in Shuttle design, the weeding out of bad hardware, and the preference for off-the-shelf devices.

Williams, W. C.↗
NASA NTRS2023

NASA Standing Review Board Handbook

This handbook provides guidance based on best practices for the planning, preparation, review, reporting, and closeout of Standing Review Board (SRB) activities. Revision C updates the Revision B version of the SRB Handbook published in 2016 to incorporate updates to NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 7120.5F, NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements. These updates include: - Changing the Dissenting Opinion process to the Formal Dissent process, which retains the current process augmented with an expedited escalation path. - Updates to requirements for establishing an Agency Baseline Commitment (ABC) and for performing Joint Cost and Schedule Confidence Level (JCL) analyses for tightly coupled programs. - Additional requirements for performing a JCL analysis for single-project programs and projects over $1B Life-Cycle Cost (LCC). - Use of initial capability cost estimates instead of LCC estimates in specific, identified instances for single-project programs and projects that plan continuing operations and production, including integration of capability upgrades, with an unspecified Phase E end point. These single-project programs and projects define an initial capability during Phase A and develop an initial capability cost that establishes the ABC at Key Decision Point (KDP) C. Initial capability is the first operational mission flight (or as defined in the KDP B Review Plan) and is documented in the KDP B Decision Memorandum. Initial capability cost includes operations cost for the initial capability. The Phase E cost estimate for continuing operations and production is established separately as part of the Operational Readiness Review (ORR) and KDP E for the 5 years after initial capability and subsequently updated and documented annually for the next 5-year period. Upgrades during Phase E that meet the Agency criteria for a major project for external reporting are treated as projects for the purposes of establishing their own development ABC outside the Phase E cost estimate. The Phase E cost estimate is updated to include production and operations costs associated with these upgrades. Development, production, and operations costs of other (i.e., non-major) upgrades are included in the Phase E cost estimate. (See NPR 7120.5, Sections 2.4.1.5 and 2.4.1.6 and the NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Handbook (PM Handbook), Section 5.5.4 for additional information.) The scope of the SRB’s assessment with respect to initial capability, Phase E cost estimate, and major upgrades for these single-project programs and projects is defined in the Terms of Reference (ToR).

Kevin Michael Gilligan↗
NASA NTRS2001

High Power MPD Thruster Development at the NASA Glenn Research Center

Propulsion requirements for large platform orbit raising, cargo and piloted planetary missions, and robotic deep space exploration have rekindled interest in the development and deployment of high power electromagnetic thrusters. Magnetoplasmadynamic (MPD) thrusters can effectively process megawatts of power over a broad range of specific impulse values to meet these diverse in-space propulsion requirements. As NASA's lead center for electric propulsion, the Glenn Research Center has established an MW-class pulsed thruster test facility and is refurbishing a high-power steady-state facility to design, build, and test efficient gas-fed MPD thrusters. A complimentary numerical modeling effort based on the robust MACH2 code provides a well-balanced program of numerical analysis and experimental validation leading to improved high power MPD thruster performance. This paper reviews the current and planned experimental facilities and numerical modeling capabilities at the Glenn Research Center and outlines program plans for the development of new, efficient high power MPD thrusters.

LaPointe, Michael R.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Evolving directions in NASA's planetary rover requirements and technology

This paper reviews the evolution of NASA's planning for planetary rovers (i.e. robotic vehicles which may be deployed on planetary bodies for exploration, science analysis, and construction) and some of the technology that has been developed to achieve the desired capabilities. The program is comprised of a variety of vehicle sizes and types in order to accommodate a range of potential user needs. This includes vehicles whose weight spans a few kilograms to several thousand kilograms; whose locomotion is implemented using wheels, tracks, and legs; and whose payloads vary from microinstruments to large scale assemblies for construction. We first describe robotic vehicles, and their associated control systems, developed by NASA in the late 1980's as part of a proposed Mars Rover Sample Return (MRSR) mission. Suggested goals at that time for such an MRSR mission included navigating for one to two years across hundreds of kilometers of Martian surface; traversing a diversity of rugged, unknown terrain; collecting and analyzing a variety of samples; and bringing back selected samples to the lander for return to Earth. Subsequently, we present the current plans (considerably more modest) which have evolved both from technological 'lessons learned' in the previous period, and modified aspirations of NASA missions. This paper describes some of the demonstrated capabilities of the developed machines and the technologies which made these capabilities possible.

Weisbin, C. R.↗
NASA NTRS1993

An overview of NASA's projected mission requirements for space nuclear systems

The near-term ongoing NASA space nuclear program is the Cassini mission to Saturn which will use three radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs). Beyond that NASA is studying a Pluto Fast Flyby mission which will challenge the space power community to produce a low-mass RTG. Another candidate RTG mission is the Mars Environmental Survey (MESUR) mission to emplace a number of probes on the surface of Mars to obtain a more global survey of the planet than was accomplished with the two Viking Landers. Looking toward the 21st century, there are a number of exciting planetary missions, such as the Jupiter Grand Tour, Outer Planet Orbiters/Probes, comet/asteroid rendezvous/sample return, which are enabled or greatly enhanced by nuclear reactor power coupled with electric propulsion.

Bennett, Gary L.↗
NASA NTRS1992

A risk-based approach to robotic mission requirements

A NASA Risk Team has developed a method for the application of risk management to the definition of robotic mission requirements for the Space Exploration Initiative. These requirements encompass environmental information, infrastructural emplacement in advance, and either technology testing or system/subsystems demonstration. Attention is presently given to a method for step-by-step consideration and analysis of the risk component inherent in mission architecture, followed by a calculation of the subjective risk level. Mitigation strategies are then applied with the same rules, and a comparison is made.

Dias, William C.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Deep UV to NIR Space Telescopes and Exoplanet Coronagraphs: A Trade Study on Throughput, Polarization, Mirror Coating Options and Requirements

The NASA Exoplanet program and the Cosmic Origins program are exploring technical options to combine the visible to NIR performance requirements of a space coronagraph with the general astrophysics requirements of a space telescope covering the deep UV spectrum. Are there compatible options in terms of mirror coatings and telescope architecture to satisfy both goals? In this paper, we address some of the main concerns, particularly relating to polarization in the visible and throughput in the UV. Telescope architectures employing different coating options compatible with current technology are considered in this trade study.

coronagraph↗
NASA NTRS1982

NASA payload interface verification requirements - Process and implementation

The separate and combinatorial roles played by NASA and STS payload contractors in the processes of interfacing cargo with the Shuttle are described. NASA personnel aid payload interface verification beginning at the hardware development level and perform independent interface verification once the payload is delivered to the payload processing facility. The cargo is first checked for operational and flight readiness, including inspection of installed devices to specification for the interface connections. Checklists furnished to the user are returned to NASA prior to integration simulation unless formal statements of compliance or waivers are exchanged. The continuance of strict adherence to predelivery interface verification testing is emphasized as necessary for meeting the turnaround times projected for the Orbiter fleet.

Huffstetler, W. J.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Mission Operations Report (MOR) for the Solar, Anomalous, and Magnetosphere Particle Explorer (SAMPEX)

MISSION OPERATIONS REPORTS are published for use by NASA senior management, as required by NASA Headquarters Management Instruction HQMI 8610. lC, effective November 26, 1991. The purpose of these reports is to provide a documentation system that represents an internal discipline to establish critical discriminators selected in advance to measure mission accomplishment, provide a formal written assessment of mission accomplishment, and provide an accountability of technical achievement. Prelaunch reports are prepared and issued for each flight project just prior to launch. Following launch, updating (Post Launch) reports are issued to provide mission status and progress in meeting mission objectives. Primary distribution of these reports is intended for personnel having program/project management responsibilities.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2019

NASA-STD-7012 Leak Test Requirements: Potential Reference for ASNT Nondestructive Testing Handbook for Leak Testing

Developed in 2018-2019, NASA-STD-7012 Leak Test Requirements, has been drafted based mostly on the NASA technical requirement documents applicable to the International Space Station (ISS) hardware and payloads that were developed over the years taking into consideration many known references such as Leakage Testing Handbook prepared by General Electric for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, the ASTM International standards for leak testing, and last, but not least, the ASNT Nondestructive Testing Handbook for Leak Testing. Thus, NASA-STD-7012 has a reference to the above-mentioned handbook in the leak test method/technique descriptions. However, there are some technical details that are described differently in NASA standard and ASNT Handbook. Those technical details are mostly related to the classification of the leak test methods/techniques, and also to tracer gas to working fluid (gas or liquid) leakage rate conversion methodology, and to some definitions used in the text of both NASA standard and ASNT Handbook. Those differences are going to be briefly described in this paper to let ASNT leak test experts decide if they want to refer to NASA-STD-7012 while working on the next edition of the ASNT Handbook, Volume 2 for Leak Testing.

Lvovsky, Oleg M.↗
NASA NTRS2007

NASA Systems Engineering Handbook

This handbook is intended to provide general guidance and information on systems engineering that will be useful to the NASA community. It provides a generic description of Systems Engineering (SE) as it should be applied throughout NASA. A goal of the handbook is to increase awareness and consistency across the Agency and advance the practice of SE. This handbook provides perspectives relevant to NASA and data particular to NASA. The coverage in this handbook is limited to general concepts and generic descriptions of processes, tools, and techniques. It provides information on systems engineering best practices and pitfalls to avoid. There are many Center-specific handbooks and directives as well as textbooks that can be consulted for in-depth tutorials. This handbook describes systems engineering as it should be applied to the development and implementation of large and small NASA programs and projects. NASA has defined different life cycles that specifically address the major project categories, or product lines, which are: Flight Systems and Ground Support (FS&GS), Research and Technology (R&T), Construction of Facilities (CoF), and Environmental Compliance and Restoration (ECR). The technical content of the handbook provides systems engineering best practices that should be incorporated into all NASA product lines. (Check the NASA On-Line Directives Information System (NODIS) electronic document library for applicable NASA directives on topics such as product lines.) For simplicity this handbook uses the FS&GS product line as an example. The specifics of FS&GS can be seen in the description of the life cycle and the details of the milestone reviews. Each product line will vary in these two areas; therefore, the reader should refer to the applicable NASA procedural requirements for the specific requirements for their life cycle and reviews. The engineering of NASA systems requires a systematic and disciplined set of processes that are applied recursively and iteratively for the design, development, operation, maintenance, and closeout of systems throughout the life cycle of the programs and projects.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2022

Evolution of the NISAR Feed Antenna Design due to Environmental Requirements

NISAR (NASA ISRO SAR, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Indian Space Research Organization, Synthetic Aperture Radar) is an Earth science project currently in its final development phases at NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and at ISRO. Due for launch in 2023 it will assess how our planet changes over time by measuring differences in the Earth’s solid surface due to factors like climate change, movement and melting of glaciers, earthquakes, land-slides, deforestation, agriculture and others. The enabling instrument for this mission is a dual band radar (L-Band and S-Band) that feeds a 12m deployable mesh reflector. Given the extreme accuracy needed to perform these measurements from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) some of the most stringent requirements were pushed onto the antenna subsystem to control phase and gain stability over time. In this paper we describe how environmental requirements affected the antenna design and what techniques were used to meet these requirements.

Vacchione, Joseph D.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Coordinating Innovative Technology Development at NASA

Innovation requires continually using and coordinating new knowledge on the current, anticipated, and even unanticipated developments in a given area. You do not want to simply repeat what others are doing, so you must remain aware of other activities in your area of interest. You also have to maintain awareness of where the cutting edge is, because the limit of what’s possible is continually pushed and redefined. Finally, “smart” innovation involves not only seeking innovative solutions to anticipated problems but also being prepared to respond to unanticipated problems or even unanticipated solutions. As the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) must remain at the forefront of innovation. NASA enables innovation in technology development through a coordinated effort among its internal mission directorates and its partners in government, commercial, and academic sectors. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) provides the coordination effort necessary to ensure innovation. OTPS uses and coordinates inputs from a broad community of experts. With these inputs, OTPS identifies and communicates shared needs and opportunities for partnership. OTPS provides strategic advice to synergize and ultimately facilitate innovative technology development both within and outside NASA. This paper summarizes NASA’s approach to ensuring innovation through a deliberately coordinated effort. In this paper, we first provide examples of how this coordination has enabled innovative technology development. We then describe how NASA’s mission directorates use input from a broad community of experts to inform innovative technology development. Finally, we describe OTPS’s role in coordinating inputs from both internal and external experts, including standardizing communication about technology developments, facilitating conversations with external partners on shared technology needs and solutions, and advising on strategies and policies to ensure innovative technology development. This paper can help members of the aerospace community understand their role in NASA’s innovation efforts and how to engage OTPS in conversations about potential partnership.

Erica Rodgers↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Coordinating Innovative Technology Development at NASA

Innovation requires continually using and coordinating new knowledge on the current, anticipated, and even unanticipated developments in a given area. You do not want to simply repeat what others are doing, so you must remain aware of other activities in your area of interest. You also have to maintain awareness of where the cutting edge is, because the limit of what’s possible is continually pushed and redefined. Finally, “smart” innovation involves not only seeking innovative solutions to anticipated problems but also being prepared to respond to unanticipated problems or even unanticipated solutions. As the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) must remain at the forefront of innovation. NASA enables innovation in technology development through a coordinated effort among its internal mission directorates and its partners in government, commercial, and academic sectors. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) provides the coordination effort necessary to ensure innovation. OTPS uses and coordinates inputs from a broad community of experts. With these inputs, OTPS identifies and communicates shared needs and opportunities for partnership. OTPS provides strategic advice to synergize and ultimately facilitate innovative technology development both within and outside NASA. This paper summarizes NASA’s approach to ensuring innovation through a deliberately coordinated effort. In this paper, we first provide examples of how this coordination has enabled innovative technology development. We then describe how NASA’s mission directorates use input from a broad community of experts to inform innovative technology development. Finally, we describe OTPS’s role in coordinating inputs from both internal and external experts, including standardizing communication about technology developments, facilitating conversations with external partners on shared technology needs and solutions, and advising on strategies and policies to ensure innovative technology development. This paper can help members of the aerospace community understand their role in NASA’s innovation efforts and how to engage OTPS in conversations about potential partnership.

Erica Rodgers↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Coordinating Innovative Technology Development at NASA

Innovation requires continually using and coordinating new knowledge on the current, anticipated, and even unanticipated developments in a given area. You do not want to simply repeat what others are doing, so you must remain aware of other activities in your area of interest. You also have to maintain awareness of where the cutting edge is, because the limit of what’s possible is continually pushed and redefined. Finally, “smart” innovation involves not only seeking innovative solutions to anticipated problems but also being prepared to respond to unanticipated problems or even unanticipated solutions. As the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) must remain at the forefront of innovation. NASA enables innovation in technology development through a coordinated effort among its internal mission directorates and its partners in government, commercial, and academic sectors. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) provides the coordination effort necessary to ensure innovation. OTPS uses and coordinates inputs from a broad community of experts. With these inputs, OTPS identifies and communicates shared needs and opportunities for partnership. OTPS provides strategic advice to synergize and ultimately facilitate innovative technology development both within and outside NASA. This paper summarizes NASA’s approach to ensuring innovation through a deliberately coordinated effort. In this paper, we first provide examples of how this coordination has enabled innovative technology development. We then describe how NASA’s mission directorates use input from a broad community of experts to inform innovative technology development. Finally, we describe OTPS’s role in coordinating inputs from both internal and external experts, including standardizing communication about technology developments, facilitating conversations with external partners on shared technology needs and solutions, and advising on strategies and policies to ensure innovative technology development. This paper can help members of the aerospace community understand their role in NASA’s innovation efforts and how to engage OTPS in conversations about potential partnership.

Erica Rodgers↗