Results for “programmatic presentation” — Page 17

NASA NTRS2001

The Role of Space Medicine in Management of Risk in Spaceflight

The purpose of Space Medicine is to ensure mission success by providing quality and comprehensive health care throughout all mission phases to optimize crew health and performance and to prevent negative long-term health consequences. Space flight presents additional hazards and associated risks to crew health, performance, and safety. With an extended human presence in space it is expected that illness and injury will occur on orbit, which may present a significant threat to crew health and performance and to mission success. Maintaining crew health, safety and performance and preventing illness and injury are high priorities necessary for mission success and agency goals. Space flight health care should meet the standards of practice of evidence based clinical medicine. The function of Space Medicine is expected to meet the agency goals as stated in the 1998 NASA Strategic Plan and the priorities established by the Critical Path Roadmap Project. The Critical Path Roadmap Project is an integrated NASA cross-disciplinary strategy to assess, understand, mitigate, and manage the risks associated with long-term exposure to the space flight environment. The evidence based approach to space medicine should be standardized, objective process yielding expected results and establishing clinical practice standards while balancing individual risk with mission (programmatic) risk. The ability to methodically apply available knowledge and expertise to individual and mission health issues will ensure appropriate priorities are assigned and resources are allocated. NASA Space Medicine risk management process is a combined clinical and engineering approach. Competition for weight, power, volume, cost, and crew time must be balanced in making decisions about the care of individual crew with competing agency resources.

Clark, Jonathan B.↗

NASA NTRS2002

Options and Risk for Qualification of Electric Propulsion System

Electric propulsion vehicle systems envelop a wide range of propulsion alternatives including solar and nuclear, which present unique circumstances for qualification. This paper will address the alternatives for qualification of electric propulsion spacecraft systems. The approach taken will be to address the considerations for qualification at the various levels of systems definition. Additionally, for each level of qualification the system level risk implications will be developed. Also, the paper will explore the implications of analysis verses test for various levels of systems definition, while retaining the objectives of a verification program. The limitations of terrestrial testing will be explored along with the risk and implications of orbital demonstration testing. The paper will seek to develop a template for structuring of a verification program based on cost, risk and value return. A successful verification program should establish controls and define objectives of the verification compliance program. Finally the paper will seek to address the political and programmatic factors, which may impact options for system verification.

Bailey, Michelle↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Metal Additive Manufacturing for Rocket Engines: Successes and Failures

NASA has been developing additive manufacturing (AM) for various technical and programmatic advantages for complex rocket engine and aerospace components. This maturation has focused on various AM processes, new alloys, characterizing material properties, developing standards, producing demonstrator parts, and integrating AM hardware in liquid rocket engines through test-fail-fix cycles, as well as application and dissemination of lessons learned of the AM lifecycle. The importance of proper AM processing was made evident in the failure of a Laser Powder Bed Fusion (L-PBF) copper-alloy combustion chamber during a hot-fire test due to a degraded material quality. The hot-fire test aimed to demonstrate high duty cycle under a risk-tolerant development project, where consequences of component failure would be minimal. However, the unintentional component failure emphasized the necessity of robust material characterization and rigorous process control procedures for the safe use of AM components in critical applications. This presentation provides an overview of the development failure, a discussion on the evaluation of the failed chamber and supplemental chambers produced at the same time, a representative material samples that included intentional build witness lines, and a summary of the key results and recommendations from the evaluations. NASA continues to approach AM processes and designs with a level of risk and acceptance of failures that is appropriate for the project objectives, with the overall goal of safe implementation of AM technology and transferring AM technology into commercial space applications. This presentation with provide critical awareness to the community lessons learned on proper implementation of AM.

L-PBF↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Successes and Failures of Metal Additive Manufacturing for Rocket Engines

NASA has been developing additive manufacturing (AM) for various technical and programmatic advantages for complex rocket engine and aerospace components. This maturation has focused on various AM processes, new alloys, characterizing material properties, developing standards, producing demonstrator parts, and integrating AM hardware in liquid rocket engines through test-fail-fix cycles, as well as application and dissemination of lessons learned of the AM lifecycle. The importance of proper AM processing was made evident in the failure of a Laser Powder Bed Fusion (L-PBF) copper-alloy combustion chamber during a hot-fire test due to a degraded material quality. The hot-fire test aimed to demonstrate high duty cycle under a risk-tolerant development project, where consequences of component failure would be minimal. However, the unintentional component failure emphasized the necessity of robust material characterization and rigorous process control procedures for the safe use of AM components in critical applications. This presentation provides an overview of the development failure, a discussion on the evaluation of the failed chamber and supplemental chambers produced at the same time, a representative material samples that included intentional build witness lines, and a summary of the key results and recommendations from the evaluations. NASA continues to approach AM processes and designs with a level of risk and acceptance of failures that is appropriate for the project objectives, with the overall goal of safe implementation of AM technology and transferring AM technology into commercial space applications. This presentation with provide critical awareness to the community lessons learned on proper implementation of AM.

Additive Manufacturing↗

NASA NTRS2009

Human Factors Interface with Systems Engineering for NASA Human Spaceflights

This paper summarizes the past and present successes of the Habitability and Human Factors Branch (HHFB) at NASA Johnson Space Center s Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD) in including the Human-As-A-System (HAAS) model in many NASA programs and what steps to be taken to integrate the Human-Centered Design Philosophy (HCDP) into NASA s Systems Engineering (SE) process. The HAAS model stresses systems are ultimately designed for the humans; the humans should therefore be considered as a system within the systems. Therefore, the model places strong emphasis on human factors engineering. Since 1987, the HHFB has been engaging with many major NASA programs with much success. The HHFB helped create the NASA Standard 3000 (a human factors engineering practice guide) and the Human Systems Integration Requirements document. These efforts resulted in the HAAS model being included in many NASA programs. As an example, the HAAS model has been successfully introduced into the programmatic and systems engineering structures of the International Space Station Program (ISSP). Success in the ISSP caused other NASA programs to recognize the importance of the HAAS concept. Also due to this success, the HHFB helped update NASA s Systems Engineering Handbook in December 2007 to include HAAS as a recommended practice. Nonetheless, the HAAS model has yet to become an integral part of the NASA SE process. Besides continuing in integrating HAAS into current and future NASA programs, the HHFB will investigate incorporating the Human-Centered Design Philosophy (HCDP) into the NASA SE Handbook. The HCDP goes further than the HAAS model by emphasizing a holistic and iterative human-centered systems design concept.

Wong, Douglas T.↗

NASA NTRS1983

Comet nucleus sample return mission

A comet nucleus sample return mission in terms of its relevant science objectives, candidate mission concepts, key design/technology requirements, and programmatic issues is discussed. The primary objective was to collect a sample of undisturbed comet material from beneath the surface of an active comet and to preserve its chemical and, if possible, its physical integrity and return it to Earth in a minimally altered state. The secondary objectives are to: (1) characterize the comet to a level consistent with a rendezvous mission; (2) monitor the comet dynamics through perihelion and aphelion with a long lived lander; and (3) determine the subsurface properties of the nucleus in an area local to the sampled core. A set of candidate comets is discussed. The hazards which the spacecraft would encounter in the vicinity of the comet are also discussed. The encounter strategy, the sampling hardware, the thermal control of the pristine comet material during the return to Earth, and the flight performance of various spacecraft systems and the cost estimates of such a mission are presented.

Source record↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

How to Educate Decision Makers on the Value and Necessity of Modal Testing and Model Correlation: Tips for Young Engineers

Engineers need to effectively communicate the justification and value of their modal testing and model correlation in terminology familiar to decision makers as it relates to the program’s risk tolerance. This communication must relate to the program’s risk tolerance and the metrics used to judge the performance of both the program and individual decision makers. The challenge is the terminologies familiar to engineers and decision makers are quite different and seemingly unrelated. The engineering profession has developed a specific terminology to solve highly technical issues, which are many times themselves unique to very specific engineering problems. It is all too easy for engineers to believe that everyone in their organization, including the decision makers, has an intrinsic understanding of what they do and the value it brings to the program’s success. This is especially true for young engineers who have recently spent the last four plus years in an academic engineering learning environment, which has a highly technical research oriented atmosphere. Effective communication with decision makers is increasingly important as the technical breadth and practical program and project experience level for up and coming decision makers diminishes. It is not unusual for the decision makers to have technical knowledge in a domain different from structural dynamics (e.g., electronics or systems). Competition among satellite manufactures has increased the focus on programmatic cost and ability to deliver on schedule. NASA programs are also seeing more restrictive programmatic cost and schedule constraints, which impact both analysis and testing. It should also be noted that a comprehensive suite of tests are required to verify a satellite’s design capability with some margin. These tests include static strength verification tests, shock, acoustic, and vibration tests (sine and random) of systems, subsystems, and components. Each of these verification tests provide opportunities for model correlation and risk reduction. It is important to recognize dynamic loads/modal test models may not include all of the flight hardware (i.e., harness, coax, waveguides, connectors, etc.) and the previously mentioned tests are still required for qualification/verification of the design. This paper provides tips to young engineers on how to bridge this communications gap, have a better understanding of the environment in which decision makers operate, and assist them to better support successful missions. While this paper primarily focuses on modal testing and model correlation as related to spacecraft missions, the concepts and recommendations presented here are equally applicable to other fields such as aeronautics, automotive, power generation, etc.

Decision Maker↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

How to Educate Decision Makers on the Value and Necessity of Modal Testing and Model Correlation: Tips for Young Engineers

Engineers need to effectively communicate the justification and value of their modal testing and model correlation in terminology familiar to decision makers as it relates to the program’s risk tolerance. This communication must relate to the program’s risk tolerance and the metrics used to judge the performance of both the program and individual decision makers. The challenge is the terminologies familiar to engineers and decision makers are quite different and seemingly unrelated. The engineering profession has developed a specific terminology to solve highly technical issues, which are many times themselves unique to very specific engineering problems. It is all too easy for engineers to believe that everyone in their organization, including the decision makers, has an intrinsic understanding of what they do and the value it brings to the program’s success. This is especially true for young engineers who have recently spent the last four plus years in an academic engineering learning environment, which has a highly technical research oriented atmosphere. Effective communication with decision makers is increasingly important as the technical breadth and practical program and project experience level for up and coming decision makers diminishes. It is not unusual for the decision makers to have technical knowledge in a domain different from structural dynamics (e.g., electronics or systems). Competition among satellite manufactures has increased the focus on programmatic cost and ability to deliver on schedule. NASA programs are also seeing more restrictive programmatic cost and schedule constraints, which impact both analysis and testing. It should also be noted that a comprehensive suite of tests are required to verify a satellite’s design capability with some margin. These tests include static strength verification tests, shock, acoustic, and vibration tests (sine and random) of systems, subsystems, and components. Each of these verification tests provide opportunities for model correlation and risk reduction. It is important to recognize dynamic loads/modal test models may not include all of the flight hardware (i.e., harness, coax, waveguides, connectors, etc.) and the previously mentioned tests are still required for qualification/verification of the design. This paper provides tips to young engineers on how to bridge this communications gap, have a better understanding of the environment in which decision makers operate, and assist them to better support successful missions. While this paper primarily focuses on modal testing and model correlation as related to spacecraft missions, the concepts and recommendations presented here are equally applicable to other fields such as aeronautics, automotive, power generation, etc.

Decision Maker↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

TPSAS-NF1676L-13013-DND

Description, capabilities and utilization of the NASA Langley Aerothermodynamics Laboratory (LAL) are presented. The LAL consists of four hypersonic, blow-down-to-vacuum wind tunnels that collectively provide a range of Mach number from 6 to 10 (18 simulation), unit Reynolds number from 0.05 to 8 million per foot and, most importantly for blunt configurations, normal shock density ratio from 4 to 12. These wide ranges of hypersonic simulation parameters are due, in part, to the use of two different test gases (air and tetrafluoromethane, CF4), thereby making the facilities unique. The complex represents half of the conventional (as opposed to impulse) -type hypersonic wind tunnels operational in this country. LAL facilities are used to assess and optimize the hypersonic aerodynamic performance and aeroheating characteristics of aerospace vehicle concepts and to provide benchmark aerodynamic/aeroheating data for generating the flight aerodynamic databook and final design of the thermal protection system (TPS). Modifications and enhancements of LAL hardware components and instrumentation have been pursued to increase capability, reliability, and productivity in support of programmatic goals. The facilities are utilized to generate essentially all of the experimental hypersonic aerodynamic and aeroheating information for high-priority, fast-paced Agency programs and were a major contributor to the Shuttle Columbia Accident Investigation, space shuttle Return-to-Flight program and Hypersonic Thermodynamic Infrared Measurements (HYTHIRM) project. The LAL has also contributed to the development of the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, Ares launch system, Mars Science Laboratory, Genesis Sample Return Capsule and supported DOD programs including HIFiRE, X-37, Falcon HTV-2 and X-51A.

John R Micol↗

NASA NTRS2008

The Next Giant Leap: NASA's Ares Launch Vehicles Overview

The next chapter in NASA's history also promises to write the next chapter in America's history, as the Agency makes measurable strides toward developing new space transportation capabilities that wi!! put astronauts on course to explore the Moon as the next giant leap toward the first human footprint on Mars. This paper will present top-level plans and progress being made toward fielding the Ares I crew launch vehicle in the 2013 timeframe and the Ares V cargo launch vehicle in the 2018 timeframe. It also gives insight into the objectives for the first test flight, known as the Ares I-X, which is scheduled for April 2009. The U.S. strategy to scientifically explore space will fuel innovations such as solar power and water recycling, as well as yield new knowledge that directly benefits life on Earth. For the Ares launch vehicles, NASA is building on heritage hardware and unique capabilities; as well as almost 50 years of lessons learned from the Apollo Saturn, Space Shuttle, and commercial launch vehicle programs. In the Ares I Project's inaugural year, extensive trade studies and evaluations were conducted to improve upon the designs initially recommended by the Exploration Systems Architecture Study, resulting in significant reduction of near-term and long-range technical and programmatic risks; conceptual designs were analyzed for fitness against requirements; and the contractual framework was assembled to enable a development effort unparalleled in American space flight since the Space Shuttle. The Exploration Launch Projects team completed the Ares I System Requirements Review (SRR) at the end of 2006--the first such engineering milestone for a human-rated space transportation system in over 30 years.

Cook, Stephen A.↗

NASA NTRS2006

Assessment of Lithium-based Battery Electrolytes Developed under the NASA PERS Program

Recently, NASA formally completed the Polymer Energy Rechargeable System (PERS) Program, which was established in 2000 in collaboration with the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) to support the development of polymer-based, lithium-based cell chemistries and battery technologies to address the next generation of aerospace applications and mission needs. The goal of this program was to ultimately develop an advanced, space-qualified battery technology, which embodied a solid polymer electrolyte (SPE) and complementary components, with improved performance characteristics that would address future aerospace battery requirements. Programmatically, the PERS initiative exploited both interagency collaborations to address common technology and engineering issues and the active participation of academia and private industry. The initial program phases focused on R&D activities to address the critical technical issues and challenges at the cell level. A variety of cell and polymeric electrolyte concepts were pursued as part of the development efforts undertaken at numerous governmental, industrial and academic laboratories. Numerous candidate electrolyte materials were developed, synthesized and optimized for evaluation. Utilizing the component screening facility and the "standardized" test procedures developed at the NASA Glenn Research Center, electrochemical screening and performance evaluations of promising candidate materials were completed. This overview summarizes test results for a variety of candidate electrolyte materials that were developed under the PERS Program. Electrolyte properties are contrasted and compared to the original project goals, and the strengths and weaknesses of the electrolyte chemistries are discussed. Limited cycling data for full-cells using lithium metal and vanadium oxide electrodes are also presented. Based on measured electrolyte properties, the projected performance characteristics and temperature limitations of batteries utilizing the advanced electrolytes and components have been estimated. Limitations for the achievement of practical performance levels are also discussed, as well as needs for future research and development.

Bennett, William R.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Science on the International Space Station: Stepping Stones for Exploration

This viewgraph presentation reviews the state of science research on the International Space Station (ISS). The shuttle and other missions that have delivered science research facilities to the ISS are shown. The different research facilities provided by both NASA and partner organizations available for use and future facilities are reviewed. The science that has been already completed is discussed. The research facilitates the Vision for Space Exploration, in Human Life Sciences, Biological Sciences, Materials Science, Fluids Science, Combustion Science, and all other sciences. The ISS Focus for NASA involves: Astronaut health and countermeasure, development to protect crews from the space environment during long duration voyages, Testing research and technology developments for future exploration missions, Developing and validating operational procedures for long-duration space missions. The ISS Medical Project (ISSMP) address both space systems and human systems. ISSMP has been developed to maximize the utilization of ISS to obtain solutions to the human health and performance problems and the associated mission risks of exploration class missions. Including complete programmatic review with medical operations (space medicine/flight surgeons) to identify: (1) evidence base on risks (2) gap analysis.

Robinson, Julie A.↗

NASA NTRS2000

Integration of multiple research disciplines on the International Space Station

The International Space Station will provide an extremely high-quality, long-duration microgravity environment for the conduct of research. In addition, the ISS offers a platform for performing observations of Earth and Space from a high-inclination orbit, outside of the Earth's atmosphere. This unique environment and observational capability offers the opportunity for advancement in a diverse set of research fields. Many of these disciplines do not relate to one another, and present widely differing approaches to study, as well as different resource and operational requirements. Significant challenges exist to ensure the highest quality research return for each investigation. Requirements from different investigations must be identified, clarified, integrated and communicated to ISS personnel in a consistent manner. Resources such as power, crew time, etc. must be apportioned to allow the conduct of each investigation. Decisions affecting research must be made at the strategic level as well as at a very detailed execution level. The timing of the decisions can range from years before an investigation to real-time operations. The international nature of the Space Station program adds to the complexity. Each participating country must be assured that their interests are represented during the entire planning and operations process. A process for making decisions regarding research planning, operations, and real-time replanning is discussed. This process ensures adequate representation of all research investigators. It provides a means for timely decisions, and it includes a means to ensure that all ISS International Partners have their programmatic interests represented. c 2000 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Research/organization & administration↗

NASA NTRS2004

The Need for Analogue Missions in Scientific Human and Robotic Planetary Exploration

With the increasing challenges of planetary missions, and especially with the prospect of human exploration of the moon and Mars, the need for earth-based mission simulations has never been greater. The current focus on science as a major driver for planetary exploration introduces new constraints in mission design, planning, operations, and technology development. Analogue missions can be designed to address critical new integration issues arising from the new science-driven exploration paradigm. This next step builds on existing field studies and technology development at analogue sites, providing engineering, programmatic, and scientific lessons-learned in relatively low-cost and low-risk environments. One of the most important outstanding questions in planetary exploration is how to optimize the human and robotic interaction to achieve maximum science return with minimum cost and risk. To answer this question, researchers are faced with the task of defining scientific return and devising ways of measuring the benefit of scientific planetary exploration to humanity. Earth-based and spacebased analogue missions are uniquely suited to answer this question. Moreover, they represent the only means for integrating science operations, mission operations, crew training, technology development, psychology and human factors, and all other mission elements prior to final mission design and launch. Eventually, success in future planetary exploration will depend on our ability to prepare adequately for missions, requiring improved quality and quantity of analogue activities. This effort demands more than simply developing new technologies needed for future missions and increasing our scientific understanding of our destinations. It requires a systematic approach to the identification and evaluation of the categories of analogue activities. This paper presents one possible approach to the classification and design of analogue missions based on their degree of fidelity in ten key areas. Various case studies are discussed to illustrate the approach.

Snook, K. J.↗

NASA NTRS2021

Operability on the Europa Clipper Mission: Challenges and Opportunities

Flight and ground system operability has been a focus area on the Europa Clipper Project since early in its formulation phase. This has given the operations team the opportunity to influence the design, with a goal of increasing overall system operability. This paper presents example operability challenges, opportunities, and solutions arising from the Critical Design Review (CDR) system design. The integrated wing assembly design directly couples a scientific instrument (the REASON sounding radar) to the spacecraft’s power source (solar array wing panels). Impacts to mission operations of this design include: increased slew durations; solar array pointing constraints during inner cruise, Europa flybys, and orbit trim maneuvers; and stray light intrusions into the stellar reference units’ keep out zones. The use of CCSDS File Delivery Protocol (CFDP) Class-2 for reliable downlink of the large volume of Europa Clipper science data is described, along with nominal and off-nominal use cases. The effort to improve post-launch spacecraft visibility by adding a third low-gain antenna to the spacecraft is detailed. The design of the bulk data store has necessitated the implementation of accountable data products (ADPs), accountability identifiers (AIDs), and metadata packets to provide end-to-end science data accountability. To streamline and automate the flight rules generation and checking process, a first order and temporal logic-based solution of expressing flight rules without ambiguity, and whose programmatic implementation can be automated, is proposed. The focus on operability has had a positive influence on Europa Clipper design decisions, although cost, schedule, budget, heritage, and other technical concerns have many times outweighed operability concerns. However, experience to date demonstrates that this approach to operability results in more thorough, balanced consideration of the effect of early design trades and decisions on the operations phase of a mission than seen in many previous missions, and provides operations development insight into prioritizing work to go.

Kumar, Meghana↗

NASA NTRS2020

Operability on the Europa Clipper Mission: Challenges and Opportunities

Flight and ground system operability has been a focus area on the Europa Clipper Project since early in its formulation phase. This has given the operations team the opportunity to influence the design, with a goal of increasing overall system operability. This paper presents example operability challenges, opportunities, and solutions arising from the pre-Critical Design Review (CDR) system design. The integrated wing assembly design directly couples a scientific instrument (the REASON sounding radar) to the spacecraft’s power source (solar array wing panels). Impacts to mission operations of this design include: increased slew durations; solar array pointing constraints during inner cruise, Europa flybys, and orbit trim maneuvers; and stray light intrusions into the stellar reference units’ keep out zones. The use of CCSDS File Delivery Protocol (CFDP) Class-2 for reliable downlink of the large volume of Europa Clipper science data is described, along with nominal and off-nominal use cases. The effort to improve post-launch spacecraft visibility by adding a third low-gain antenna to the spacecraft is detailed. The design of the bulk data store has necessitated the implementation of accountable data products (ADPs), accountability identifiers (AIDs), and metadata packets to provide end-to-end science data accountability. To streamline and automate the flight rules generation and checking process, a first order and temporal logic-based solution of expressing flight rules without ambiguity, and whose programmatic implementation can be automated, is proposed. The focus on operability has had a positive influence on Europa Clipper design decisions, although cost, schedule, budget, heritage, and other technical concerns have many times outweighed operability concerns. However, experience to date demonstrates that this approach to operability results in more thorough, balanced consideration of the effect of early design trades and decisions on the operations phase of a mission than seen in many previous missions, and provides operations development insight into prioritizing work to go.

Signorelli, Joel↗

NASA NTRS2005

Implementation of Programmatic Quality and the Impact on Safety

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the implementation of a programmatic quality assurance discipline within the International Space Station Program and the resulting impact on safety. NASA culture has continued to stress safety at the expense of quality when both are extremely important and both can equally influence the success or failure of a Program or Mission. Although safety was heavily criticized in the media after Col~imbiaa, strong case can be made that it was the failure of quality processes and quality assurance in all processes that eventually led to the Columbia accident. Consequently, it is possible to have good quality processes without safety, but it is impossible to have good safety processes without quality. The ISS Program quality assurance function was analyzed as representative of the long-term manned missions that are consistent with the President s Vision for Space Exploration. Background topics are as follows: The quality assurance organizational structure within the ISS Program and the interrelationships between various internal and external organizations. ISS Program quality roles and responsibilities with respect to internal Program Offices and other external organizations such as the Shuttle Program, JSC Directorates, NASA Headquarters, NASA Contractors, other NASA Centers, and International Partner/participants will be addressed. A detailed analysis of implemented quality assurance responsibilities and functions with respect to NASA Headquarters, the JSC S&MA Directorate, and the ISS Program will be presented. Discussions topics are as follows: A comparison of quality and safety resources in terms of staffing, training, experience, and certifications. A benchmark assessment of the lessons learned from the Columbia Accident Investigation (CAB) Report (and follow-up reports and assessments), NASA Benchmarking, and traditional quality assurance activities against ISS quality procedures and practices. The lack of a coherent operational and sustaining quality assurance strategy for long-term manned space flight. An analysis of the ISS waiver processes and the Problem Reporting and Corrective Action (PRACA) process implemented as quality functions. Impact of current ISS Program procedures and practices with regards to operational safety and risk A discussion regarding a "defense-in-depth" approach to quality functions will be provided to address the issue of "integration vs independence" with respect to the roles of Programs, NASA Centers, and NASA Headquarters. Generic recommendations are offered to address the inadequacies identified in the implementation of ISS quality assurance. A reassessment by the NASA community regarding the importance of a "quality culture" as a component within a larger "safety culture" will generate a more effective and value-added functionality that will ultimately enhance safety.

Huls, Dale Thomas↗

NASA NTRS2007

Mission Risk Reduction Regulatory Change Management

NASA Headquarters Environmental Management Division supports NASA's mission to pioneer the future in space exploration, scientific discovery, and aeronautics research by integrating environmental considerations into programs and projects early-on, thereby proactively reducing NASA's exposure to institutional, programmatic and operational risk. As part of this effort, NASA established the Principal Center for Regulatory Risk Analysis and Communication (RRAC PC) as a resource for detecting, analyzing, and communicating environmental regulatory risks to the NASA stakeholder community. The RRAC PC focuses on detecting emerging environmental regulations and other operational change drivers that may pose risks to NASA programs and facilities, and effectively communicating the potential risks. For example, regulatory change may restrict how and where certain activities or operations may be conducted. Regulatory change can also directly affect the ability to use certain materials by mandating a production phase-out or restricting usage applications of certain materials. Regulatory change can result in significant adverse impacts to NASA programs and facilities due to NASA's stringent performance requirements for materials and components related to human-rated space vehicles. Even if a regulation does not directly affect NASA operations, U.S. and international regulations can pose program risks indirectly through requirements levied on manufacturers and vendors of components and materials. For example, manufacturers can change their formulations to comply with new regulatory requirements. Such changes can require time-consuming and costly requalification certification for use in human spaceflight programs. The RRAC PC has implemented a system for proactively managing regulatory change to minimize potential adverse impacts to NASA programs and facilities. This presentation highlights the process utilized by the RRACPC to communicate regulatory change and the associated potential risks within NASA, as well as the process for communicating and cooperating with other government agencies and industry partners, both domestic and international, to ensure mission success.

Scroggins, Sharon↗