SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Process Mission Teams”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 307 records · Page 17

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2008

Pre-Launch Algorithms and Risk Reduction in Support of the Geostationary Lightning Mapper for GOES-R and Beyond

The Geostationary Lightning Mapper (GLM) is a single channel, near-IR imager/optical transient event detector, used to detect, locate and measure total lightning activity over the full-disk as part of a 3-axis stabilized, geostationary weather satellite system. The next generation NOAA Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES-R) series with a planned launch in 2014 will carry a GLM that will provide continuous day and night observations of lightning from the west coast of Africa (GOES-E) to New Zealand (GOES-W) when the constellation is fUlly operational. The mission objectives for the GLM are to 1) provide continuous, full-disk lightning measurements for storm warning and nowcasting, 2) provide early warning of tornadic activity, and 3) accumulate a long-term database to track decadal changes of lightning. The GLM owes its heritage to the NASA Lightning Imaging Sensor (1997-Present) and the Optical Transient Detector (1995-2000), which were developed for the Earth Observing System and have produced a combined 13 year data record of global lightning activity. Instrument formulation studies were completed in March 2007 and the implementation phase to develop a prototype model and up to four flight models is expected to be underway in the latter part of 2007. In parallel with the instrument development, a GOES-R Risk Reduction Team and Algorithm Working Group Lightning Applications Team have begun to develop the Level 2 ground processing algorithms and applications. Proxy total lightning data from the NASA Lightning Imaging Sensor on the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) satellite and regional test beds (e.g., Lightning Mapping Arrays in North Alabama and the Washington DC Metropolitan area)

Goodman, Steven J.↗

NASA NTRS2005

An Overview of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) Project

The JWST project at the GSFC is responsible for the development, launch, operations and science data processing for the James Webb Space Telescope. The JWST project is currently in phase B with its launch scheduled for August 2011. The project is a partnership between NASA, ESA and CSA. The U.S. JWST team is now fully in place with the selection of Northrop Grumman Space Technology (NGST) as the prime contractor for the telescope and the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) as the mission operations and science data processing lead. This paper will provide an overview of the current JWST architecture and mission status including technology developments and risks.

Sabelhaus, Phillip A.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Station Program Note Pull Automation

Upon commencement of my internship, I was in charge of maintaining the CoFR (Certificate of Flight Readiness) Tool. The tool acquires data from existing Excel workbooks on NASA's and Boeing's databases to create a new spreadsheet listing out all the potential safety concerns for upcoming flights and software transitions. Since the application was written in Visual Basic, I had to learn a new programming language and prepare to handle any malfunctions within the program. Shortly afterwards, I was given the assignment to automate the Station Program Note (SPN) Pull process. I developed an application, in Python, that generated a GUI (Graphical User Interface) that will be used by the International Space Station Safety & Mission Assurance team here at Johnson Space Center. The application will allow its users to download online files with the click of a button, import SPN's based on three different pulls, instantly manipulate and filter spreadsheets, and compare the three sources to determine which active SPN's (Station Program Notes) must be reviewed for any upcoming flights, missions, and/or software transitions. Initially, to perform the NASA SPN pull (one of three), I had created the program to allow the user to login to a secure webpage that stores data, input specific parameters, and retrieve the desired SPN's based on their inputs. However, to avoid any conflicts with sustainment, I altered it so that the user may login and download the NASA file independently. After the user has downloaded the file with the click of a button, I defined the program to check for any outdated or pre-existing files, for successful downloads, to acquire the spreadsheet, convert it from a text file to a comma separated file and finally into an Excel spreadsheet to be filtered and later scrutinized for specific SPN numbers. Once this file has been automatically manipulated to provide only the SPN numbers that are desired, they are stored in a global variable, shown on the GUI, and transferred over to a new Excel worksheet for comparison. I managed to get my application to acquire the CSWG (Computer Safety Working Group) and the SPNWG (Space Station Working Group) SPN's with just two mouse clicks for each pull, as opposed to several from the original process. When all three pulls are performed, an Excel sheet containing all three different results will be generated for the user to compare and determine which SPN's will be presented or reviewed the following month. The experience from this internship has been spectacular. As a high school senior who will begin attending college in the fall, this internship has been both educationally and occupationally beneficial. The internship has allowed me the opportunities to learn new programming languages, effectively network with NASA personnel from a variety of departments at JSC, and allowed me to learn new professional skills and etiquette. My internship at NASA's Johnson Space Center has further motivated me to pursue a Master's degree in Software Engineering and strive for a prosperous career with NASA as a civil servant.

Delgado, Ivan↗

NASA NTRS2000

HESSI Spacecraft Model

The acronym, HESSI, stnds for the High Energy Solar Spectroscopic Imager. HESSI is a NASA mission proposed by astrophysicists who study the Sun. Their goal is to learn more about the basic physical processes that occur in solar flares. Teams of astrophysicists and engineers worked together to decide what kinds of observations HESSI would make and what kinds of scientific instrumentation would be required. The HESSI teams will achieve their goal by making "color" pictures of solar flares in X rays and gamma rays. This model is designed to help students understand the operation and objectives of HESSI.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2008

Overview of 2008 Outer Planet Flagship Studies

This slide presentation reviews the process involved in the Phase-2 studies for the next Outer Planets Flagship (OPF). These studies will be a cooperative effort with ESA and JAXA in partnership with NASA. The annoucement of oppurtunity (AO) for the science instruments and the launch approval/planetary protection processes are reviewed. There is also discussion about capturing relevant lessons from the Cassini team, supporting international collaboration, and support for science definition teams. Some mission specific tasks are also reviewed, for the three missions being proposed: (1) Europa Explorer, (2) Jupiter System Observer and (3) Titan Explorer. A timeline for the studies is also included.

outer planets↗

NASA NTRS2014

Low-Cost, Class D Testing of Spacecraft Photovoltaic Systems Can Reduce Risk

The end-to-end verification of a spacecraft photovoltaic power generation system requires light! Specifically, the standard practice for doing so is the Large Area Pulsed Solar Simulation (LAPSS). A LAPSS test can characterize a photovoltaic system's efficiency via its response to rapidly applied impulses of simulated sunlight. However, a Class D program on a constrained budget and schedule may not have the resources to ship an entire satellite for a LAPSS test alone. Such was the case with the Lunar Atmospheric and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE) program, which was also averse to the risk of hardware damage during shipment. When the Electrical Power System (EPS) team was denied a spacecraft-level LAPSS test, the lack of an end-to-end power generation test elevated to a project-level technical risk. The team pulled together very limited resources to not only eliminate the risk, but build a process to monitor the health of the system through mission operations. We discuss a process for performing a low-cost, end-to-end test of the LADEE photovoltaic system. The approach combines system-level functional test, panel-level performance results, and periodic inspection (and repair) up until launch. Following launch, mission operations tools are utilized to assess system performance based on a scant amount of data. The process starts in manufacturing at the subcontractor. The panel manufacturer provides functional test and LAPSS data on each individual panel. We apply an initial assumption that the per-panel performance is sufficient to meet the power generation requirements. The manufacturer's data is also carried as the performance allocation for each panel during EPS system modeling and initial mission operations. During integration and test, a high-power, professional theater lamp system provides simulated sunlight to each panel on the spacecraft, thereby permitting a true end-to-end system test. A passing test results in a step response to nearly full-rated current at the appropriate solar array switch in the power system. A metal-halide bulb, infrared imagers, and onboard spacecraft measurements are utilized to minimize risk of thermal damage during test. Data is provided to support test results for both passing and marginal panels. Prior to encapsulation in the launch vehicle, each panel is inspected for damage by the panel manufacturer. Cracked cells or other damage is amended on-site. Because the photovoltaic test system is inexpensive and portable, each repaired panel can be re-verified immediately. Post-launch, the photovoltaic system is again characterized for per-panel deviations from the manufacturer's performance test. This proved especially tricky as the LADEE spacecraft performs only one current measurement on the entire array. The algorithm for Matlab tools to assess panel performance based on spacecraft attitude is discussed. While not as precise and comprehensive as LAPSS, the LADEE approach leverages minimal resources into an ongoing assessment program that can be applied through numerous stages of the mission. The project takes a true Class D approach in assessing the technical value of a spacecraft level performance test versus the programmatic risk of shipping the spacecraft to another facility. The resources required are a fraction of that for a LAPSS test, and is easy to repeat. Further, the test equipment can be handed down to future projects without building an on-site facility.

photovoltaic↗

NASA NTRS2024

An Integrated Architecture Study for Autonomous Lunar Construction

Lunar construction is an expanding field within NASA’s Moon to Mars objectives that presents many challenges and requires innovative and reliable forms of autonomous operations on the surface of the Moon to further the technologies needed for human space exploration. Marshal Space Flight Center’s (MSFC) Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) addressed Lunar Infrastructure Objective LI-4 l by developing a Pre-Phase A, integrated architecture to inform a demonstration for lunar construction operations. The ACO study traded three architectures that would survey and prepare a construction area to build a landing pad out of lunar regolith using MMPACT (Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technology) platforms, rovers, and navigation outposts. The main trades examined navigation for the system/architecture, options for rover navigation, battery vs continuous tether power for the MMPACT robotic arm, and assigning site prep functionality to the rovers vs the platforms. Results of the study determined that the best options for the scenario provided would be local navigation (more accurate and continuous), a combination of Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) for initial site mapping with subsequent Smart Video Guidance Sensors (SVGS) to save power for construction, and using tethered power to decrease mission duration. The team also concluded that assigning site prep functionality to either the rovers or the platforms has benefits and challenges; future studies could explore having that functionality on both the rovers and platforms. Lastly, the team provided a Concept of Operations (ConOps) timeline that can be used in real-time ground demonstrations to explore the mission timeline, construction processes, autonomous operations, and communication systems that can be tested using MSFC’s lunar regolith field and Lunar Utilization Control Area (LUCA).

Sarah Triana↗

NASA NTRS2019

Supporting Crew Autonomy in Deep Space Exploration: Preliminary Onboard Capability Requirements and Proposed Research Questions. Technical Report of the Autonomous Crew Operations Technical Interchange Meeting

Communication delays are a critical challenge posed by long duration deep space exploration. Space missions historically have relied on an ever-present Mission Control Center (MCC) to direct operations in near real-time. As unanticipated anomalies that defeat fault detection and resolution systems do arise, the lack of real-time communication will significantly weaken what the MCC support represents: a reliable safety net for the flight crew through its deep and diverse areas of expertise and investigative resources. As a consequence, future space vehicles and habitats need to be equipped with capabilities to support the flight crew to operate with little or no ground support. Considerations must be given to vehicle and mission designs that will fortify the traditionally ground-centered safety net and forge new support systems, when communication delays exist. In August 2018, NASA’s Human Research Program, through its Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Element, convened a Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) on Autonomous Crew Operations at NASA Ames Research Center. The goal of the meeting was to gather input from NASA centers, industry, academia, and branches of the Department of Defense (DoD) to address how intelligent technologies can be applied to augment onboard capabilities to support crew anomaly response. The TIM featured 24 presentations by 29 speakers and hosted a total of 59 attendees, including 43 from 5 NASA centers (Ames, Johnson, Langley, Marshall, and Jet Propulsion Lab) and 4 from the DoD (3 from Army Research Lab and 1 from Naval Postgraduate School), with remaining attendees from academia (e.g., UC Davis, CMU) and industry (e.g., IBM, Siemens). Discussions were centered around three themes: standards and guidelines, lessons learned in analog environments, and technologies. To help provide a framework for discussion, a concept matrix describing anomaly response processes was created prior to the TIM (Figure 1, page 6). The matrix captures the steps involved (monitoring and detection, diagnosis, solution development and evaluation, solution implementation and verification, resolution documentation) as well as the resources and capabilities required to support these steps (data, knowledge, analysis, synthesis, resource management). A wallpaper size printout of the matrix was utilized at the TIM to solicit attendee inputs along the three themes; the activity garnered 108 submissions of ideas. Overall, what emerged from TIM discussions was a picture of mismatch between crew anomaly response needs and support that can be provided by existing intelligent technologies. The needs are broad, spanning multiple steps and processes/resources, with many of which lacking support from existing technologies, such as knowledge management throughout the steps of problem solving (especially in resolution documentation) and manpower management. The solutions provided by existing intelligent technologies are specific to the steps/processes that they are designed to support and constrained to solving only problems similar to those that have occurred before. What is lacking from technologies is typically made up by humans, specifically their complex critical thinking, creative problem solving, and domain expertise. In the end, the TIM highlighted the pressing need to support responses to onboard anomalies during autonomous crew operations, particularly those that have eluded the system tests, inspection, and other assurance processes. Such anomalies can potentially threaten crew and vehicle safety, as well as significantly impact overall operations with additional workload. These fairly rare events are difficult to anticipate and prepare for, given the state-of-the-art in intelligent technologies. This is true even for anomalies that stem from “unknown knowns”—cases in which there is sufficient external information to characterize the problem but the overall pattern fails to be recognized by the problem solver, or in which the internal knowledge needed to solve a problem is held tacitly and potentially accessible by the problem solver but not articulated. It follows that the ability to tackle anomalies lies not only with the availability of relevant information and knowledge but also their accessibility in times of need. To that end, we propose research questions along the following three broad themes: • How intelligent technologies can help make relevant knowledge and information available? • How intelligent technologies can help make relevant knowledge and information accessible? • How intelligent technologies can help support the crew operating as a team in anomaly response processes?

autonomous crew operations↗

NASA NTRS2006

Lessons Learned from Daily Uplink Operations during the Deep Impact Mission

The Deep Impact mission to comet Tempel-1 produced some of the more spectacular science results ever collected by a spacecraft. On July 4, 2005 the Deep Impact Flyby vehicle observed the Deep Impact Impactor vehicle's collision with the comet. 24 hours earlier the Flyby vehicle released the Impactor vehicle into the path of comet Tempel-1. The process to command the spacecraft was a challenge to the entire flight operations team. This paper presents an overview of the process used prepare command products for uplink and the lessons that were learned from this process.

mission operations↗

NASA NTRS2025

Navigating Team Dynamics: Automated Detection of Micro-Behaviors Between Team Members Through Longitudinal Interaction Data

The success in future long term space exploration missions will depend on the cooperation, coordination, and mutual understanding among the crew members. Micro-behaviors are momentary, subtle linguistic and paralinguistic indicators of thinking and feeling toward another member of the team (Cortina et al., 2001; Smith & Griffiths, 2022) that can significantly impact team dynamics and influence the overall team performance (Paromita & Chaspari, 2024). Due to their interactive nature, micro-behaviors have a sender (i.e., the team member expressing the micro-behavior) and a target (the team member impacted by the micro-behavior). Detection of these behaviors can assist in avoiding possible conflict among crew members and promoting the overall team success. Our prior research focused on an initial proof of concept of machine learning (ML) models and natural language processing (NLP) techniques that were used for automatically detect micro-behaviors among crew members of the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) Campaigns 4 and 5 missions (Paromita et al., 2023). Results underscored the importance of incorporating contextual information in the ML models in the form of sentiment analysis, type of task, and dyadic interaction among team members. Here, we expand the scope of our prior work in two ways. First, we assess ML/NLP methods on new behavioral annotations coded using an adapted version of Smith & Griffins (2022) theoretical framework in terms of Violation (i.e., presence of valenced behavior, uplifting/positive or discouraging/negative), Intensity (i.e., force of behavior in terms of how uplifting or discouraging is the behavior), and Intent (i.e., motive of the behavior in terms of whether it was deliberate or unintentional). Second, we expand the design of the ML model to preserve information about the role of each team member within the occurrence of the micro-behavior (in contrast to the previous model that only considered the sender and the target without determining the team member role). This allows to consider all team members' contributions in the conversation and model long-term dependencies in the dialogue. Our experiments for this study are conducted on data from 5 teams of the NASA HERA C4 (NASA grant NNX16AQ48G (PI: Bell)). Conversations were extracted from the 1.5 hour Team Interaction Battery (TIB) task that occurred 5 times in-mission per crew. This resulted in a total of 13,058 conversational turns (i.e., 17.8% uplifting, 3.3% discouraging, 75.76% neutral, 3.14% nulls). Our findings with the revised behavioral coding and ML/NLP models indicate a 43.66% macro F1-score (i.e., 38.29% precision (P), 50.8% recall (R)) for a dialog state-tracking model that includes information from the sender only, and a 40.9% F1-score (i.e., 38.7% P, 43.36% R) for the same model that includes information from both the sender and the target of the micro-behavior. These are significantly higher compared to simple random forest models that classify behaviors strictly based on speech content and do not consider iterative team dynamics, achieving a 36.07% F1-score (i.e., 39.04% R, 33.53% P). Our findings demonstrate potential ways to leverage large conversational datasets to better capture complex team dynamics. We will discuss future directions including proposed models that can incorporate additional mission days and tasks beyond the TIB for objectively quantifying team behavior at high temporal resolution in space exploration missions.

Projna Paromita↗

NASA NTRS2004

An Overview of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) Project

The JWST project at the GSFC is responsible for the development, launch, operations and science data processing for the James Webb Space Telescope. The JWST project is currently in phase B with its launch scheduled for August 2011. The project is a partnership between NASA, ESA and CSA. The U.S. JWST team is now fully in place with the recent selection of Northrop Grumman Space Technology (NGST) as the prime contractor for the telescope and the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) as the mission operations and science data processing lead. This paper will provide an overview of the current JWST architecture and mission status including technology developments and risks.

Sabelhaus, Phillip A.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Mission Operations Working Group (MOWG) Report to the Aura Science Team

This PowerPoint presentation will discuss Aura's current spacecraft and instrument status, highlight any performance trends and impacts to operations, identify any operational changes and express concerns or potential process improvements. Reviewed by Eric Moyer, ESMO Deputy Project Manager.

Fisher, Dominic M.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Results from the NASA Capability Roadmap Team for In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU)

On January 14, 2004, the President of the United States unveiled a new vision for robotic and human exploration of space entitled, "A Renewed Spirit of Discovery". As stated by the President in the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE), NASA must "... implement a sustained and affordable human and robotic program to explore the solar system and beyond " and ".. .develop new technologies and harness the moon's abundant resources to allow manned exploration of more challenging environments." A key to fulfilling the goal of sustained and affordable human and robotic exploration will be the ability to use resources that are available at the site of exploration to "live off the land" instead of bringing everything from Earth, known as In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU). ISRU can significantly reduce the mass, cost, and risk of exploration through capabilities such as: mission consumable production (propellants, fuel cell reagents, life support consumables, and feedstock for manufacturing & construction); surface construction (radiation shields, landing pads, walls, habitats, etc.); manufacturing and repair with in-situ resources (spare parts, wires, trusses, integrated systems etc.); and space utilities and power from space resources. On January 27th, 2004 the President's Commission on Implementation of U.S. Space Exploration Policy (Aldridge Committee) was created and its final report was released in June 2004. One of the report's recommendations was to establish special project teams to evaluate enabling technologies, of which "Planetary in situ resource utilization" was one of them. Based on the VSE and the commission's final report, NASA established fifteen Capability Roadmap teams, of which ISRU was one of the teams established. From Oct. 2004 to May 2005 the ISRU Capability Roadmap team examined the capabilities, benefits, architecture and mission implementation strategy, critical decisions, current state-of-the-art (SOA), challenges, technology gaps, and risks of ISRU for future human Moon and Mars exploration. This presentation will provide an overview of the ISRU capability, architecture, and implementation strategy examined by the ISRU Capability Roadmap team, along with a top-level review of ISRU benefits, resources and products of interest, and the current SOA in ISRU processes and systems. The presentation will also highlight the challenges of incorporating ISRU into future missions and the gaps in technologies and capabilities that need to be filled to enable ISRU.

Sanders, Gerald B.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS) 2010 Science Operations: Operational Approaches and Lessons Learned for Managing Science during Human Planetary Surface Missions

Desert Research and Technology Studies (Desert RATS) is a multi-year series of hardware and operations tests carried out annually in the high desert of Arizona on the San Francisco Volcanic Field. These activities are designed to exercise planetary surface hardware and operations in conditions where long-distance, multi-day roving is achievable, and they allow NASA to evaluate different mission concepts and approaches in an environment less costly and more forgiving than space.The results from the RATS tests allows election of potential operational approaches to planetary surface exploration prior to making commitments to specific flight and mission hardware development. In previous RATS operations, the Science Support Room has operated largely in an advisory role, an approach that was driven by the need to provide a loose science mission framework that would underpin the engineering tests. However, the extensive nature of the traverse operations for 2010 expanded the role of the science operations and tested specific operational approaches. Science mission operations approaches from the Apollo and Mars-Phoenix missions were merged to become the baseline for this test. Six days of traverse operations were conducted during each week of the 2-week test, with three traverse days each week conducted with voice and data communications continuously available, and three traverse days conducted with only two 1-hour communications periods per day. Within this framework, the team evaluated integrated science operations management using real-time, tactical science operations to oversee daily crew activities, and strategic level evaluations of science data and daily traverse results during a post-traverse planning shift. During continuous communications, both tactical and strategic teams were employed. On days when communications were reduced to only two communications periods per day, only a strategic team was employed. The Science Operations Team found that, if communications are good and down-linking of science data is ensured, high quality science returns is possible regardless of communications. What is absent from reduced communications is the scientific interaction between the crew on the planet and the scientists on the ground. These scientific interactions were a critical part of the science process and significantly improved mission science return over reduced communications conditions. The test also showed that the quality of science return is not measurable by simple numerical quantities but is, in fact, based on strongly non-quantifiable factors, such as the interactions between the crew and the Science Operations Teams. Although the metric evaluation data suggested some trends, there was not sufficient granularity in the data or specificity in the metrics to allow those trends to be understood on numerical data alone.

Eppler, Dean↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA CARA Prelaunch Analysis and Process

NASA implemented an official Procedural Requirement (NPR) 8079.1 in June 2023, establishing the minimum collision avoidance requirements and associated operational protocols for NASA space flight programs, projects, and spacecraft to protect the space environment by reducing the risk of collision to an acceptable level. Part of the requirement employs a two-fold approach to analyze the satellite design process with conjunction assessment and risk mitigation in mind, during the pre-launch process, led by the Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis (CARA) Program for non-Human Space Flight (HSF) Missions. This presentation outlines CARA coordination with missions, informed by the NPR, that spans early mission development to operations. CARA is an Agency-level resource that provides support to all NASA non-HSF missions. CARA protects the orbital environment from collision between NASA non-HSF missions and other tracked on-orbit objects. During the pre-formulation and formulation phases, NASA missions undergo a series of conjunction assessment analyses captured in the Orbital Collision Avoidance Plan (OCAP) prior to transitioning to the implementation phase (typically at the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) or equivalent). The OCAP analyses consist of a thorough review of the spacecraft(s) orbit selection and placement, deployment, cataloguing performance, trackability, ephemeris generation, conjunction mitigation options, autonomous maneuvering, and risk assessment parameters which are performed by a dedicated CARA Analysis Team. The results of these analyses, CARA’s formal recommendations, and the mission’s methods for implementing them, are documented in the OCAP. The intent of engaging in this process so early in the mission design phase, is to ensure that conjunction assessment is considered from the outset, thus mitigating costly design changes and operational risks down the road. NASA missions are also required to coordinate their operational processes and conjunction mitigation procedures with CARA in a Conjunction Assessment Operations Implementation Agreement (CAOIA). The aim of this process is to document the conjunction assessment screening process, conjunction risk assessment parameters, conjunction mitigation steps, flight dynamics operations concepts and maneuvers, and the communication and coordination process between the mission’s project manager and CARA. The intent of the CAOIA document is for it to be completed iteratively, and as missions update these elements, corresponding changes are made in the CAOIA. With this process in place, the engagement and coordination between the missions and CARA from early in the design process into mission operations, helps to ensure that missions not only have a robust conjunction assessment concept of operations to reduce conjunction risk for space sustainability, but are also able to achieve their science goals and have a successful mission.

conjunction assessment↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA CARA Prelaunch Analysis and Process

conjunction assessment↗

NASA NTRS2006

Aerocapture Technologies

Aeroassist technology development is a vital part of the NASA In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) Program. One of the main focus areas of ISPT is aeroassist technologies through the Aerocapture Technology (AT) Activity. Within the ISPT, the current aeroassist technology development focus is aerocapture. Aerocapture relies on the exchange of momentum with an atmosphere to achieve thrust, in this case a decelerating thrust leading to orbit capture. Without aerocapture, a substantial propulsion system would be needed on the spacecraft to perform the same reduction of velocity. This could cause reductions in the science payload delivered to the destination, increases in the size of the launch vehicle (to carry the additional fuel required for planetary capture) or could simply make the mission impossible due to additional propulsion requirements. The AT is advancing each technology needed for the successful implementation of aerocapture in future missions. The technology development focuses on both rigid aeroshell systems as well as the development of inflatable aerocapture systems, advanced aeroshell performance sensors, lightweight structure and higher temperature adhesives. Inflatable systems such as tethered trailing ballutes ('balloon parachutes'), clamped ballutes, and inflatable aeroshells are also under development. Aerocapture-specific computational tools required to support future aerocapture missions are also an integral part of the ATP. Tools include: engineering reference atmosphere models, guidance and navigation, aerothermodynamic modeling, radiation modeling and flight simulation. Systems analysis plays a key role in the AT development process. The NASA in-house aerocapture systems analysis team has been taken with multiple systems definition and concept studies to complement the technology development tasks. The team derives science requirements, develops guidance and navigation algorithms, as well as engineering reference atmosphere models and aeroheating specifications. The study team also creates designs for the overall mission spacecraft. Presentation slides are provided to further describe the aerocapture project.

Keys, Andrew S.↗

NASA NTRS2021

The Evolution of Team-X: 25 Years of Concurrent Engineering Design Experience

Established in 1995 in response to NASA’s “Faster, Better, Cheaper” era, Team-X was born from a need to perform rapid space mission design for principal investigator-led competed proposals. The success and sustainability of Team-X over the 25 years that have followed is directly attributable to the Team-X business model and its evolution over time. While dozens of organizations and institutions have emulated the Team-X design process, there are nuances to the Team-X business model that are unique to JPL, and explain why it is different than other concurrent design teams. One of the key components of a business model is the customer segments that are served. Team-X was founded to conduct the Pre-Phase A work necessary to formulate a portfolio of multiple planetary mission concepts, but has since expanded to include the capability to conduct studies for Earth science, astrophysics, and heliophysics missions as well as Human Exploration and Operations missions and space technology development. Team-X delivers value to its clients both in terms of speed and cost. Team-X has also added value by creating teams to enable the development of Instrument and SmallSat Concepts. Value has further been enhanced through a revision of its process for reviews and the addition of pre-design architecting capabilities. Other aspects of the Team-X infrastructure, in addition to study process, have enabled it to succeed for over a quarter century. From our most important resource, the people, our tools, especially for cost estimating, as well as our increasing capable IT infrastructure have contributed to our capability to meet the demands of our clients. The Team-X business model and its evolution over time, position it well for success in the decades to come.

Murphy, Jonathan↗