SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Project Management”

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 NTRS2003

Case Study of "Engineering Peer Meetings" in JPL's ST-6 Project

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.

Tumer, Irem Y.↗

NASA NTRS2004

Case Study of 'Engineering Peer Meetings' in JPL's ST-6 Project

Chao, Lawrence P.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Funding and Strategic Alignment Guidance for Infusing Small Business Innovation Research Technology Into Science Mission Directorate Projects at Glenn Research Center for 2015

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.

Spacecraft and Platform Subsystems↗

NASA NTRS2005

Putting EVM to the Test

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.

Kerby, Jerald↗

NASA NTRS2003

Microsystems Fabrication Laboratory-New Class 100 Cleanroom Completed and Certified

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.

Borato, Frances M.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Earned Value Management Software Projects

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.

Hanna, Robert A.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Funding and Strategic Alignment Guidance for Infusing Small Business Innovation Research Technology into NASA Programs Associated with the Science Mission Directorate

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.

earth science↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

2024 Nasa Lunabotics University Competition: Site Preparation With Bulk Regolith

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.

Lunabotics↗

NASA NTRS2010

Managing Fault Management Development

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.

McDougal, John M.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Funding and Strategic Alignment Guidance for Infusing Small Business Innovation Research Technology Into NASA Programs Associated With the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate

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.

space and flight support.↗

NASA NTRS2003

An Old Dog and New Tricks

As I approach my 55th birthday, the old adage 'you can't teach an old dog new tricks' keeps coming to mind. I'm not sure why, because I don't feel old and I'm still interested in taking on new challenges and learning new tricks. However, as I mentor new project managers, I am also aware that others may consider me an old dog unable to learn new tricks. To the contrary, the people I mentor continue to teach me new tricks and challenge my assumptions about project management.

Cameron, W. Scott↗

NASA NTRS2007

Program Management Tool

The Program Management Tool (PMT) is a comprehensive, Web-enabled business intelligence software tool for assisting program and project managers within NASA enterprises in gathering, comprehending, and disseminating information on the progress of their programs and projects. The PMT provides planning and management support for implementing NASA programmatic and project management processes and requirements. It provides an online environment for program and line management to develop, communicate, and manage their programs, projects, and tasks in a comprehensive tool suite. The information managed by use of the PMT can include monthly reports as well as data on goals, deliverables, milestones, business processes, personnel, task plans, monthly reports, and budgetary allocations. The PMT provides an intuitive and enhanced Web interface to automate the tedious process of gathering and sharing monthly progress reports, task plans, financial data, and other information on project resources based on technical, schedule, budget, and management criteria and merits. The PMT is consistent with the latest Web standards and software practices, including the use of Extensible Markup Language (XML) for exchanging data and the WebDAV (Web Distributed Authoring and Versioning) protocol for collaborative management of documents. The PMT provides graphical displays of resource allocations in the form of bar and pie charts using Microsoft Excel Visual Basic for Application (VBA) libraries. The PMT has an extensible architecture that enables integration of PMT with other strategic-information software systems, including, for example, the Erasmus reporting system, now part of the NASA Integrated Enterprise Management Program (IEMP) tool suite, at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). The PMT data architecture provides automated and extensive software interfaces and reports to various strategic information systems to eliminate duplicative human entries and minimize data integrity issues among various NASA systems that impact schedules and planning.

Gawadiak, Yuri↗

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 NTRS2007

POLARIS: Helping Managers Get Answers Fast!

This viewgraph presentation reviews the Project Online Library and Resource Information System (POLARIS) system. It is NASA-wide, web-based system, providing access to information related to Program and Project Management. It will provide a one-stop shop for access to: a searchable, sortable database of all requirements for all product lines, project life cycle diagrams with reviews, project life cycle diagrams with reviews, project review definitions with products review information from NPR 7123.1, NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements, templates and examples of products, project standard WBSs with dictionaries, and requirements for implementation and approval, information from NASA s Metadata Manager (MdM): Attributes of Missions, Themes, Programs & Projects, NPR7120.5 waiver form and instructions and much more. The presentation reviews the plans and timelines for future revisions and modifications.

program management↗

NASA NTRS1976

A methodology for the evaluation of program cost and schedule risk for the SEASAT program

An interactive computerized project management software package (RISKNET) is designed to analyze the effect of the risk involved in each specific activity on the results of the total SEASAT-A program. Both the time and the cost of each distinct activity can be modeled with an uncertainty interval so as to provide the project manager with not only the expected time and cost for the completion of the total program, but also with the expected range of costs corresponding to any desired level of significance. The nature of the SEASAT-A program is described. The capabilities of RISKNET and the implementation plan of a RISKNET analysis for the development of SEASAT-A are presented.

Abram, P.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Composite Crew Module: Primary Structure

In January 2007, the NASA Administrator and Associate Administrator for the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate chartered the NASA Engineering and Safety Center to design, build, and test a full-scale crew module primary structure, using carbon fiber reinforced epoxy based composite materials. The overall goal of the Composite Crew Module project was to develop a team from the NASA family with hands-on experience in composite design, manufacturing, and testing in anticipation of future space exploration systems being made of composite materials. The CCM project was planned to run concurrently with the Orion project's baseline metallic design within the Constellation Program so that features could be compared and discussed without inducing risk to the overall Program. This report discusses the project management aspects of the project including team organization, decision making, independent technical reviews, and cost and schedule management approach.

Kirsch, Michael T.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Seven Key Principles of Program and Project Success: A Best Practices Survey

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Organization Design Team (ODT), consisting of 20 seasoned program and project managers and systems engineers from a broad spectrum of the aerospace industry, academia, and government, was formed to support the Next Generation Launch Technology (NGLT) Program and the Constellation Systems Program. The purpose of the ODT was to investigate organizational factors that can lead to success or failure of complex government programs, and to identify tools and methods for the design, modeling, and analysis of new and more-efficient program and project organizations. The ODT conducted a series of workshops featuring invited lectures from seasoned program and project managers representing 25 significant technical programs spanning 50 years of experience. The result was the identification of seven key principles of program success that can be used to help design and operate future program organizations. This paper presents the success principles and examples of best practices that can significantly improve the design of program, project, and performing technical line organizations, the assessment of workforce needs and organization performance, and the execution of programs and projects.

Bilardo, Vincent J.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Defining a Space Mission Architectural Framework: Guiding Robotic Space Mission Design and Development at NASA Goddard Spaceflight Center

Modern Systems Engineering activities for robotic science missions face increased complexity due to evolving measurement requirements, increased collaboration amongst stakeholders and increased collaboration between human and robotic systems. While NASA has employed standard process frameworks for project management and systems engineering for years, it has not yet established an architecture framework (AF) by which its mission systems are described. While an architecture framework is not a necessary component of an organization's operations, the value of a specified AF greatly enhances an organization's ability to define systems consistently and aid in communication across project and organizational boundaries. The current effort identifies an approach to establishing a Space Mission Architecture Framework (SMAF), an AF with roots in ISO 42010 (Systems and Software Engineering-Architecture Description), NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 7120.5 (NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements) and 7123.1B (NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements). The heart of the AF lies in its viewpoints and work products, artifacts that represent a set of information from the viewpoint of a particular stakeholder. This effort articulates the needs, goals and objectives that the SMAF addresses, as well as the approach to creating the framework and establishing the various work products. A full set of work products, sufficient to satisfy the Mission System reporting requirements of NPR 7120/7123 at Key Decision Point (KDP) A is identified in this paper.

Architecture↗