Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “hardware and software”

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 NTRS2007

Scheduling Accessory Assists Patients with Cognitive Disorders

Recom Technologies Inc. received initial funding from NASA to research the commercial potential of an artificially intelligent planning reaction model to serve as a tool to help individuals suffering from various forms and levels of brain impairment. In 1993, the chief of the Artificial Intelligence Research Branch at Ames Research Center suggested collaborative research with Santa Clara Valley Medical Center. This partnership led to further development of the technology and funding to support clinical research from the U.S. Department of Education's National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research. In 1996, Attention Control Systems Inc. was founded to market the finished device, called the Planning and Execution Assistant and Trainer (PEAT). PEAT is a pocket-sized PDA-like device with a graphical display, touchscreen controls, an electronic calendar, an address book, and a built-in phone, that cues users to start or stop scheduled activities, monitors their progress, and adjusts schedules as necessary in response to delays or calendar changes. It uses an automatic planning model developed for NASA to adjust daily plans when a situation changes. PEAT is sold as a complete system that includes software, hardware, documentation, and technical support. In addition to the flagship Pocket PEAT device, there is PEAT Phone, PC PEAT, and PEAT Link. Clinical studies of PEAT continue at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2006

Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, Ground Data System, Receivables and Deliverables (REC/DELs)

This paper presents one JPL element manager's approach to describe a complex Ground Data System (GDS) with its receivables and deliverables (REC/DEL). The Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) Ground Data System is the integrated set of ground software, hardware, facilities and networks that support mission operation. REC/DEL is a powerful tool for specifying hierarchy of commitments among systems and teams. Receivable of a system is a deliverable of another system. Focusing on tangible products enables the manager to objectively measure progress in a schedule. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory mandates the use of REC/DEL for flight projects. Tutorial and training is provided for managers to create an integrated REC/DEL database using automated systems. Project schedules are based on REC/DELs. This paper is not focusing on the mechanics of REC/DEL database creation, but it provides a guideline how one systematically creates categories of deliverables and receivables for ground data system components...

ground data system (GDS)↗
NASA NTRS2008

Processing and Preparation of Advanced Stirling Convertors for Extended Operation at NASA Glenn Research Center

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Lockheed Martin Space Company (LMSC), Sunpower Inc., and NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) have been developing an Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator (ASRG) for use as a power system on space science missions. This generator will make use of the free-piston Stirling convertors to achieve higher conversion efficiency than currently available alternatives. NASA GRC is supporting the development of the ASRG by providing extended operation of several Sunpower Inc. Advanced Stirling Convertors (ASCs). In the past year and a half, eight ASCs have operated in continuous, unattended mode in both air and thermal vacuum environments. Hardware, software, and procedures were developed to prepare each convertor for extended operation with intended durations on the order of tens of thousands of hours. Steps taken to prepare a convertor for long-term operation included geometry measurements, thermocouple instrumentation, evaluation of working fluid purity, evacuation with bakeout, and high purity charge. Actions were also taken to ensure the reliability of support systems, such as data acquisition and automated shutdown checkouts. Once a convertor completed these steps, it underwent short-term testing to gather baseline performance data before initiating extended operation. These tests included insulation thermal loss characterization, low-temperature checkout, and full-temperature and power demonstration. This paper discusses the facilities developed to support continuous, unattended operation, and the processing results of the eight ASCs currently on test.

Oriti, Salvatore M.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Spaceflight Systems Training: A Comparison and Contrasting of Techniques for Training Ground Operators and Onboard Crewmembers

When developing techniques and products for instruction on manned spaceflight systems, training organizations are often faced with two very different customers: ground operators and onboard crewmembers. Frequently, instructional development focuses on one of these customers with the assumption that the other s needs will be met by default. Experience teaches us that differing approaches are required when developing training tailored to the specific needs of each customer. As a rule, ground operators require focused instruction on specific areas of expertise. Their knowledge should be of the details of the hardware, software, and operational techniques associated with that system. They often benefit from historical knowledge of how their system has operated over its lifetime. Since several different ground operators may be interfacing with the same system, each individual operator must understand the agreed-to principles by which that system will be run. In contrast, onboard crewmembers require a more broad, hands-on awareness of their operational environment. Their training should be developed with an understanding of the physical environment in which they live and work and the day-to-day tasks they are most likely to perform. Rarely do they require a deep understanding of the details of a system; it is often sufficient to teach them just enough to maintain situational awareness and perform basic tasks associated with maintenance and operation of onboard systems. Crewmembers may also develop unique onboard operational techniques that differ from preceding crews. They should be taught what flexibility they have in systems operations and how their specific habits can be communicated to ground support personnel. This paper will explore the techniques that can be employed when developing training for these unique customers. We will explore the history of International Space Station training development and how past efforts can guide us in creating training for users of future manned spaceflight efforts.

Balmain, Clinton↗
NASA NTRS2008

Processing and Preparation of Advanced Stirling Convertors for Extended Operation

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Lockheed Martin Space Company (LMSC), Sunpower Inc., and NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) have been developing an Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator (ASRG) for use as a power system on space science missions. This generator will make use of the free-piston Stirling convertors to achieve higher conversion efficiency than currently available alternatives. NASA GRC is supporting the development of the ASRG by providing extended operation of several Sunpower Inc. Advanced Stirling Convertors (ASCs). In the past year and a half, eight ASCs have operated in continuous, unattended mode in both air and thermal vacuum environments. Hardware, software, and procedures were developed to prepare each convertor for extended operation with intended durations on the order of tens of thousands of hours. Steps taken to prepare a convertor for long-term operation included geometry measurements, thermocouple instrumentation, evaluation of working fluid purity, evacuation with bakeout, and high purity charge. Actions were also taken to ensure the reliability of support systems, such as data acquisition and automated shutdown checkouts. Once a convertor completed these steps, it underwent short-term testing to gather baseline performance data before initiating extended operation. These tests included insulation thermal loss characterization, low-temperature checkout, and full-temperature and power demonstration. This paper discusses the facilities developed to support continuous, unattended operation, and the processing results of the eight ASCs currently on test.

Oriti, Salvatore M.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Emergency Flight Control of a Twin-Jet Commercial Aircraft using Manual Throttle Manipulation

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) created the PCAR (Propulsion-Controlled Aircraft Recovery) project in 2005 to mitigate the ManPADS (man-portable air defense systems) threat to the commercial aircraft fleet with near-term, low-cost proven technology. Such an attack could potentially cause a major FCS (flight control system) malfunction or other critical system failure onboard the aircraft, despite the extreme reliability of current systems. For the situations in which nominal flight controls are lost or degraded, engine thrust may be the only remaining means for emergency flight control [ref 1]. A computer-controlled thrust system, known as propulsion-controlled aircraft (PCA), was developed in the mid 1990s with NASA, McDonnell Douglas and Honeywell. PCA's major accomplishment was a demonstration of an automatic landing capability using only engine thrust [ref 11. Despite these promising results, no production aircraft have been equipped with a PCA system, due primarily to the modifications required for implementation. A minimally invasive option is TOC (throttles-only control), which uses the same control principles as PCA, but requires absolutely no hardware, software or other aircraft modifications. TOC is pure piloting technique, and has historically been utilized several times by flight crews, both military and civilian, in emergency situations stemming from a loss of conventional control. Since the 1990s, engineers at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center (DFRC) have studied TOC, in both simulation and flight, for emergency flight control with test pilots in numerous configurations. In general, it was shown that TOC was effective on certain aircraft for making a survivable landing. DHS sponsored both NASA Dryden Flight Research Center (Edwards, CA) and United Airlines (Denver, Colorado) to conduct a flight and simulation study of the TOC characteristics of a twin-jet commercial transport, and assess the ability of a crew to control an aircraft down to a survivable runway landing using TOC. The PCAR project objective was a set of pilot procedures for operation of a specific aircraft without hydraulics that (a) have been validated in both simulation and flight by relevant personnel, and (b) mesh well with existing commercial operations, maintenance, and training at a minimum cost. As a result of this study, a procedure has been developed to assist a crew in making a survivable landing using TOC. In a simulation environment, line pilots with little or no previous TOC experience performed survivable runway landings after a few practice TOC approaches. In-flight evaluations put line pilots in a simulated emergency situation where TOC was used to recover the aircraft, maneuver to a landing site, and perform an approach down to 200 feet AGL. The results of this research, including pilot observations, procedure comments, recommendations, future work and lessons learned, will he discussed. Flight data and video footage of TOC approaches may also be shown.

Cole, Jennifer H.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Problem Reporting System

The Problem Reporting System (PRS) is a Web application, running on two Web servers (load-balanced) and two database servers (RAID-5), which establishes a system for submission, editing, and sharing of reports to manage risk assessment of anomalies identified in NASA's flight projects. PRS consolidates diverse anomaly-reporting systems, maintains a rich database set, and incorporates a robust engine, which allows tracking of any hardware, software, or paper process by configuring an appropriate life cycle. Global and specific project administration and setup tools allow lifecycle tailoring, along with customizable controls for user, e-mail, notifications, and more. PRS is accessible via the World Wide Web for authorized user at most any location. Upon successful log-in, the user receives a customizable window, which displays time-critical 'To Do' items (anomalies requiring the user s input before the system moves the anomaly to the next phase of the lifecycle), anomalies originated by the user, anomalies the user has addressed, and custom queries that can be saved for future use. Access controls exist depending on a user's role as system administrator, project administrator, user, or developer, and then, further by association with user, project, subsystem, company, or item with provisions for business-to-business exclusions, limitations on access according to the covert or overt nature of a given project, all with multiple layers of filtration, as needed. Reporting of metrics is built in. There is a provision for proxy access (in which the user may choose to grant one or more other users to view screens and perform actions as though they were the user, during any part of a tracking life cycle - especially useful during tight build schedules and vacations to keep things moving). The system also provides users the ability to have an anomaly link to or notify other systems, including QA Inspection Reports, Safety, GIDEP (Government-Industry Data Exchange Program) Alert, Corrective Actions, and Lessons Learned. The PRS tracking engine was designed as a very extensible and scalable system, able to support additional applications, with future development possibilities already discussed, including Incident Surprise Anomalies (for anomalies occurring during Operations phases of NASA Flight projects), GIDEP and NASA Alerts, and others.

Potter, Don↗
NASA NTRS2009

Knowledge Discovery/A Collaborative Approach, an Innovative Solution

Collaboration between Medical Informatics and Healthcare Systems (MIHCS) at NASA/Johnson Space Center (JSC) and the Texas Medical Center (TMC) Library was established to investigate technologies for facilitating knowledge discovery across multiple life sciences research disciplines in multiple repositories. After reviewing 14 potential Enterprise Search System (ESS) solutions, Collexis was determined to best meet the expressed needs. A three month pilot evaluation of Collexis produced positive reports from multiple scientists across 12 research disciplines. The joint venture and a pilot-phased approach achieved the desired results without the high cost of purchasing software, hardware or additional resources to conduct the task. Medical research is highly compartmentalized by discipline, e.g. cardiology, immunology, neurology. The medical research community at large, as well as at JSC, recognizes the need for cross-referencing relevant information to generate best evidence. Cross-discipline collaboration at JSC is specifically required to close knowledge gaps affecting space exploration. To facilitate knowledge discovery across these communities, MIHCS combined expertise with the TMC library and found Collexis to best fit the needs of our researchers including:

Fitts, Mary A.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Formal Methods at Intel - An Overview

Since the 1990s, Intel has invested heavily in formal methods, which are now deployed in several domains: hardware, software, firmware, protocols etc. Many different formal methods tools and techniques are in active use, including symbolic trajectory evaluation, temporal logic model checking, SMT-style combined decision procedures, and interactive higher-order logic theorem proving. I will try to give a broad overview of some of the formal methods activities taking place at Intel, and describe the challenges of extending formal verification to new areas and of effectively using multiple formal techniques in combination

Harrison, John↗
NASA NTRS2010

NASA Spacecraft Fault Management Workshop Results

Fault Management is a critical aspect of deep-space missions. For the purposes of this paper, fault management is defined as the ability of a system to detect, isolate, and mitigate events that impact, or have the potential to impact, nominal mission operations. The fault management capabilities are commonly distributed across flight and ground subsystems, impacting hardware, software, and mission operations designs. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Discovery & New Frontiers (D&NF) Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for 5 missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that 4 out of the 5 missions studied had significant overruns due to underestimating the complexity and support requirements for fault management. As a result of this and other recent experiences, the NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) Planetary Science Division (PSD) commissioned a workshop to bring together invited participants across government, industry, academia to assess the state of the art in fault management practice and research, identify current and potential issues, and make recommendations for addressing these issues. The workshop was held in New Orleans in April of 2008. The workshop concluded that fault management is not being limited by technology, but rather by a lack of emphasis and discipline in both the engineering and programmatic dimensions. Some of the areas cited in the findings include different, conflicting, and changing institutional goals and risk postures; unclear ownership of end-to-end fault management engineering; inadequate understanding of the impact of mission-level requirements on fault management complexity; and practices, processes, and tools that have not kept pace with the increasing complexity of mission requirements and spacecraft systems. This paper summarizes the findings and recommendations from that workshop, as well as opportunities identified for future investment in tools, processes, and products to facilitate the development of space flight fault management capabilities.

Newhouse, Marilyn↗
NASA NTRS2010

Results from the NASA Spacecraft Fault Management Workshop: Cost Drivers for Deep Space Missions

Fault Management, the detection of and response to in-flight anomalies, is a critical aspect of deep-space missions. Fault management capabilities are commonly distributed across flight and ground subsystems, impacting hardware, software, and mission operations designs. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Discovery & New Frontiers (D&NF) Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for five missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that four out of the five missions studied had significant overruns due to underestimating the complexity and support requirements for fault management. As a result of this and other recent experiences, the NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) Planetary Science Division (PSD) commissioned a workshop to bring together invited participants across government, industry, and academia to assess the state of the art in fault management practice and research, identify current and potential issues, and make recommendations for addressing these issues. The workshop was held in New Orleans in April of 2008. The workshop concluded that fault management is not being limited by technology, but rather by a lack of emphasis and discipline in both the engineering and programmatic dimensions. Some of the areas cited in the findings include different, conflicting, and changing institutional goals and risk postures; unclear ownership of end-to-end fault management engineering; inadequate understanding of the impact of mission-level requirements on fault management complexity; and practices, processes, and tools that have not kept pace with the increasing complexity of mission requirements and spacecraft systems. This paper summarizes the findings and recommendations from that workshop, particularly as fault management development issues affect operations and the development of operations capabilities.

Newhouse, Marilyn E.↗
NASA NTRS2010

The ICARE Method

The ICARE method is a flexible, widely applicable method for systems engineers to solve problems and resolve issues in a complete and comprehensive manner. The method can be tailored by diverse users for direct application to their function (e.g. system integrators, design engineers, technical discipline leads, analysts, etc.). The clever acronym, ICARE, instills the attitude of accountability, safety, technical rigor and engagement in the problem resolution: Identify, Communicate, Assess, Report, Execute (ICARE). This method was developed through observation of Space Shuttle Propulsion Systems Engineering and Integration (PSE&I) office personnel approach in an attempt to succinctly describe the actions of an effective systems engineer. Additionally it evolved from an effort to make a broadly-defined checklist for a PSE&I worker to perform their responsibilities in an iterative and recursive manner. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Systems Engineering Handbook states, 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. ICARE is a method that can be applied within the boundaries and requirements of NASA s systems engineering set of processes to provide an elevated sense of duty and responsibility to crew and vehicle safety. The importance of a disciplined set of processes and a safety-conscious mindset increases with the complexity of the system. Moreover, the larger the system and the larger the workforce, the more important it is to encourage the usage of the ICARE method as widely as possible. According to the NASA Systems Engineering Handbook, elements of a system can include people, hardware, software, facilities, policies and documents; all things required to produce system-level results, qualities, properties, characteristics, functions, behavior and performance. The ICARE method can be used to improve all elements of a system and, consequently, the system-level functional, physical and operational performance. Even though ICARE was specifically designed for a systems engineer, any person whose job is to examine another person, product, or process can use the ICARE method to improve effectiveness, implementation, usefulness, value, capability, efficiency, integration, design, and/or marketability. This paper provides the details of the ICARE method, emphasizing the method s application to systems engineering. In addition, a sample of other, non-systems engineering applications are briefly discussed to demonstrate how ICARE can be tailored to a variety of diverse jobs (from project management to parenting).

Henke, Luke↗
NASA NTRS2011

The Traverse Planning Process for the Drats 2010 Analog Field Simulations

Traverse planning concentrates on optimizing the science return within the overall objectives of planetary surface missions or their analog field simulations. Such simulations were conducted in the San Francisco Volcanic Field, northern Arizona, from Aug. 26 to Sept 17, 2010 and involved some 200 individuals in the field, with some 40 geoscientists composing the science team. The purpose of these Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS) is to exercise and evaluate developmental hardware, software and operational concepts in a mission-like, fully-integrated, setting under the direction of an onsite Mobile Mission Control Center(MMCC). DRATS 2010 focused on the simultaneous operation of 2 rovers, a historic first. Each vehicle was manned by an astronaut-commander and an experienced field geologist. Having 2 rovers and crews in the field mandated substantially more complex science and mission control operations compared to the single rover DRATS tests of 2008 and 2009, or the Apollo lunar missions. For instance, the science support function was distributed over 2 "back rooms", one for each rover, with both "tactical" teams operating independently and simultaneously during the actual traverses. Synthesis and integration of the daily findings and forward planning for the next day(s) was accomplished overnight by yet another "strategic" science team.

Horz, Friedrich↗
NASA NTRS2002

Managing Risk in Safety Critical Operations - Lessons Learned from Space Operations

The Mission Control Center (MCC) at Johnson Space Center (JSC) has a rich legacy of supporting Human Space Flight operations throughout the Apollo, Shuttle and International Space Station eras. Through the evolution of ground operations and the Mission Control Center facility, NASA has gained a wealth of experience of what it takes to manage the risk in Safety Critical Operations, especially when human life is at risk. The focus of the presentation will be on the processes (training, operational rigor, team dynamics) that enable the JSC/MCC team to be so successful. The presentation will also share the evolution of the Mission Control Center architecture and how the evolution was introduced while managing the risk to the programs supported by the team. The details of the MCC architecture (e.g., the specific software, hardware or tools used in the facility) will not be shared at the conference since it would not give any additional insight as to how risk is managed in Space Operations.

Gonzalez, Steven A.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Handbook

The purpose of this document is to provide program/project teams necessary instruction and guidance in the best practices for Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and WBS dictionary development and use for project implementation and management control. This handbook can be used for all types of NASA projects and work activities including research, development, construction, test and evaluation, and operations. The products of these work efforts may be hardware, software, data, or service elements (alone or in combination). The aim of this document is to assist project teams in the development of effective work breakdown structures that provide a framework of common reference for all project elements. The WBS and WBS dictionary are effective management processes for planning, organizing, and administering NASA programs and projects. The guidance contained in this document is applicable to both in-house, NASA-led effort and contracted effort. It assists management teams from both entities in fulfilling necessary responsibilities for successful accomplishment of project cost, schedule, and technical goals. Benefits resulting from the use of an effective WBS include, but are not limited to: providing a basis for assigned project responsibilities, providing a basis for project schedule development, simplifying a project by dividing the total work scope into manageable units, and providing a common reference for all project communication.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2011

SRMS History, Evolution and Lessons Learned

Early in the development of the Space Shuttle, it became clear that NASA needed a method of deploying and retrieving payloads from the payload bay. The Shuttle Remote Manipulator System (SRMS) was developed to fill this need. The 50 foot long robotic arm is an anthropomorphic design consisting of three electromechanical joints, six degrees of freedom, and two boom segments. Its composite boom construction provided a light weight solution needed for space operations. Additionally, a method of capturing payloads with the arm was required and a unique End Effector was developed using an electromechanical snare mechanism. The SRMS is operated using a Displays and Controls Panel and hand controllers located within the aft crew compartment of the shuttle. Although the SRMS was originally conceived to deploy and retrieve payloads, its generic capabilities allowed it to perform many other functions not originally conceived of. Over the years it has been used for deploying and retrieving constrained and free flying payloads, maneuvering and supporting EVA astronauts, satellite repair, International Space Station construction, and as a viewing aid for on-orbit International Space Station operations. After the Columbia accident, a robotically compatible Orbiter Boom Sensor System (OBSS) was developed and used in conjunction with the SRMS to scan the Thermal Protection System (TPS) of the shuttle. These scans ensure there is not a breach of the TPS prior to shuttle re-entry. Ground operations and pre mission simulation, analysis and planning played a major role in the success of the SRMS program. A Systems Engineering Simulator (SES) was developed to provide a utility complimentary to open loop engineering simulations. This system provided a closed-loop real-time pilot-driven simulation giving visual feedback, display and control panel interaction, and integration with other vehicle systems, such as GN&C. It has been useful for many more applications than traditional training. Evolution of the simulations, guided by the Math Model Working Group, showed the utility of input from multiple modeling groups with a structured forum for discussion.There were many unique development challenges in the areas of hardware, software, certification, modeling and simulation. Over the years, upgrades and enhancements were implemented to increase the capability, performance and safety of the SRMS. The history and evolution of the SRMS program provided many lessons learned that can be used for future space robotic systems.

Jorgensen, Glenn↗
NASA NTRS2011

Constellation Program Lessons Learned: Detailed Lessons Learned - Volume 2

These lessons learned are part of a suite of hardware, software, test results, designs, knowledge base, and documentation that comprises the legacy of the Constellation Program. The context, summary information, and lessons learned are presented in a factual format, as known and described at the time. While our opinions might be discernable in the context, we have avoided all but factually sustainable statements. Statements should not be viewed as being either positive or negative; their value lies in what we did and what we learned that is worthy of passing on. The lessons include both "dos" and "don ts." In many cases, one person s "do" can be viewed as another person s "don t"; therefore, we have attempted to capture both perspectives when applicable and useful. While Volume I summarizes the views of those who managed the program, this Volume II encompasses the views at the working level, describing how the program challenges manifested in day-to-day activities. Here we see themes that were perhaps hinted at, but not completely addressed, in Volume I: unintended consequences of policies that worked well at higher levels but lacked proper implementation at the working level; long-term effects of the "generation gap" in human space flight development, the need to demonstrate early successes at the expense of thorough planning, and the consequences of problems and challenges not yet addressed because other problems and challenges were more immediate or manifest. Not all lessons learned have the benefit of being operationally vetted, since the program was cancelled shortly after Preliminary Design Review. We avoid making statements about operational consequences (with the exception of testing and test flights that did occur), but we do attempt to provide insight into how operational thinking influenced design and testing. The lessons have been formatted with a description, along with supporting information, a succinct statement of the lesson learned, and recommendations for future programs and projects that may be placed in similar circumstances.

Jennifer Rhatigan↗
NASA NTRS2012

Dynamically Reconfigurable Systolic Array Accelerator

A polymorphic systolic array framework has been developed that works in conjunction with an embedded microprocessor on a field-programmable gate array (FPGA), which allows for dynamic and complimentary scaling of acceleration levels of two algorithms active concurrently on the FPGA. Use is made of systolic arrays and a hardware-software co-design to obtain an efficient multi-application acceleration system. The flexible and simple framework allows hosting of a broader range of algorithms, and is extendable to more complex applications in the area of aerospace embedded systems. FPGA chips can be responsive to realtime demands for changing applications needs, but only if the electronic fabric can respond fast enough. This systolic array framework allows for rapid partial and dynamic reconfiguration of the chip in response to the real-time needs of scalability, and adaptability of executables.

Dasu, Aravind↗