SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “OSD”

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 37 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2013

Contingency Contractor Optimization: Phase 3, Model Description and Formulation

The goal of Phase 3 the OSD ATL Contingency Contractor Optimization (CCO) project is to create an engineering prototype of a tool for the contingency contractor element of total force planning during the Support for Strategic Analysis (SSA). An optimization model was developed to determine the optimal mix of military, Department of Defense (DoD) civilians, and contractors that accomplishes a set of user defined mission requirements at the lowest possible cost while honoring resource limitations and manpower use rules. An additional feature allows the model to understand the variability of the Total Force Mix when there is uncertainty in mission requirements.

Gearhart, Jared Lee↗

DOE OSTI2013

Contingency contractor optimization.

Gearhart, Jared Lee↗

DOE OSTI2013

Ceph Parallel File System Evaluation Report

We used Data Direct Networks’ (DDN) SFA10K as the storage backend during this evaluation. It consists of 200 SAS drives and 280 SATA drives, organized into various RAID levels by two active-active RAID controllers. The exported RAID groups by these controllers are driven by four hosts. Each host has two InfiniBand (IB) QDR connections to the storage backend. We used a single dualport Mellanox connectX IB card per host. By our calculation, this setup can saturate SFA10K’s maximum theoretical throughput (~12 GB/s). Our Ceph testbed employs a collection of testing nodes. These nodes and their roles are summarized in Table 1. In the following discussion, we use “servers”, “osd servers”, “server hosts” interchangeably. We will emphasize with “client” prefix when we want to distinguish it from above. All hosts (client and servers) were configured with Redhat 6.3 and kernel version 3.5.1 initially, and later upgraded to 3.9 (rhl-ceph image), Glibc 2.12 with syncfs support, locally patched. We used the Ceph 0.48 and 0.55 release in the initial tests, upgraded to 0.64 and then to 0.67RC for a final round of tests.

Wang, Feiyi↗

DOE OSTI2016

Contingency Contractor Optimization Phase 3 Sustainment Software Design Document - Contingency Contractor Optimization Tool - Prototype

This document describes the final software design of the Contingency Contractor Optimization Tool - Prototype. Its purpose is to provide the overall architecture of the software and the logic behind this architecture. Documentation for the individual classes is provided in the application Javadoc. The Contingency Contractor Optimization project is intended to address Department of Defense mandates by delivering a centralized strategic planning tool that allows senior decision makers to quickly and accurately assess the impacts, risks, and mitigation strategies associated with utilizing contract support. The Contingency Contractor Optimization Tool - Prototype was developed in Phase 3 of the OSD ATL Contingency Contractor Optimization project to support strategic planning for contingency contractors. The planning tool uses a model to optimize the Total Force mix by minimizing the combined total costs for selected mission scenarios. The model optimizes the match of personnel types (military, DoD civilian, and contractors) and capabilities to meet mission requirements as effectively as possible, based on risk, cost, and other requirements.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2016

Contingency Contractor Optimization Phase 3 Sustainment Platform Requirements - Contingency Contractor Optimization Tool - Prototype

Sandia National Laboratories (Sandia) is in Phase 3 Sustainment of development of a prototype tool, currently referred to as the Contingency Contractor Optimization Tool - Prototype (CCOTP), under the direction of OSD Program Support. CCOT-P is intended to help provide senior Department of Defense (DoD) leaders with comprehensive insight into the global availability, readiness and capabilities of the Total Force Mix. The CCOT-P will allow senior decision makers to quickly and accurately assess the impacts, risks and mitigating strategies for proposed changes to force/capabilities assignments, apportionments and allocations options, focusing specifically on contingency contractor planning. During Phase 2 of the program, conducted during fiscal year 2012, Sandia developed an electronic storyboard prototype of the Contingency Contractor Optimization Tool that can be used for communication with senior decision makers and other Operational Contract Support (OCS) stakeholders. Phase 3 used feedback from demonstrations of the electronic storyboard prototype to develop an engineering prototype for planners to evaluate. Sandia worked with the DoD and Joint Chiefs of Staff strategic planning community to get feedback and input to ensure that the engineering prototype was developed to closely align with future planning needs. The intended deployment environment was also a key consideration as this prototype was developed. Initial release of the engineering prototype was done on servers at Sandia in the middle of Phase 3. In 2013, the tool was installed on a production pilot server managed by the OUSD(AT&L) eBusiness Center. The purpose of this document is to specify the CCOT-P engineering prototype platform requirements as of May 2016. Sandia developed the CCOT-P engineering prototype using common technologies to minimize the likelihood of deployment issues. CCOT-P engineering prototype was architected and designed to be as independent as possible of the major deployment components such as the server hardware, the server operating system, the database, and the web server. This document describes the platform requirements, the architecture, and the implementation details of the CCOT-P engineering prototype.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2018

CRADA 376 Final Report Development of Protective Coatings for 1 kW Hot Zone

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) has extensive experience in the development, fabrication, and evaluation of surface treatments and protective coatings for metallic solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) components. For example, modified (Mn,Co)3O4 spinel coatings and coating/metal interfaces have been shown to substantially improve oxidation resistance, electrical performance, and oxide scale adhesion of ferritic stainless steel interconnects in planar SOFC stacks. At the time of the establishment of this CRADA, Protonex Technology Corporation had been working in the field of SOFC development for over 12 years and had demonstrated more than 250 thermal cycles with a less than 15 minutes start time and more than 2000 hours of continuous operation on a 250W tubular solid oxide hot zone module as part of a program for the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). An industrial version of the military system, denoted P200i, had been developed that was launched at the 2015 Fuel Cell Expo in Tokyo. Feedback during beta testing of this unit was very positive. However, Protonex recognized that to transition from military markets, the commercial system would require longer life time and higher power. Leveraging their novel thermal management strategy from the tubular hot zone that allowed for rapid and repeated thermal cycling, Protonex developed a planar 1kW module aimed at the industrial and commercial market. However, more robust interconnect coatings were needed to bring the system into the 1000+ hour life time requested by customers. Therefore, PNNL’s experience and technology were engaged to enable the 1kw system to transition from military applications to commercial and industrial applications. In this CRADA, PNNL teamed with Protonex to leverage PNNL’s expertise in protective coating techniques for solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) applications. As the first step in the collaboration, protective spinel coatings were fabricated at PNNL onto ten AISI 440 stainless steel bus bars provided by Protonex. A precursor slurry containing spinel powder was applied to the steel surfaces via an ultrasonic spray process. The coated bars were then subjected to a reducing atmosphere heat treatment (i.e., heated to 850°C at 3°C/min in a hydrogen atmosphere and held at that temperature for five hours). Five of the bars were left in this reduced condition; the other five bars were subjected to an oxidizing heat treatment (i.e., heated to 1000°C at 3°C/min in air and held at that temperature for one hour). The bars were then sent to Protonex for testing. Subsequently, Protonex decided to discontinue their SOFC development activities, so they had no further interest in continuing the collaboration with PNNL, and the CRADA activities were terminated.

30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗

DOE OSTI2015

Contingency Contractor Optimization Phase 3 Extension Quick Start Guide: Contingency Contractor Optimization Tool - Engineering Prototype (Release 2.3)

This Quick Start Guide is an abbreviated version of the Contingency Contractor Optimization Phase 3, User Manual for the Contingency Contractor Optimization Tool engineering prototype. It focuses on providing quick access instructions to the core activities of the two main user roles: Planning Manager and Analyst. Based on an electronic storyboard prototype developed in Phase 2, the Contingency Contractor Optimization Tool engineering prototype was refined in Phase 3 of the OSD ATL Contingency Contractor Optimization to support strategic planning for contingency contractors. The tool uses a model to optimize the total workforce mix by minimizing the combined total costs for the selected mission scenarios. The model will optimize the match of personnel types (military, DoD civilian, and contractors) and capabilities to meet the mission requirements as effectively as possible, based on risk, cost, and other requirements.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2015

Contingency Contractor Optimization Phase 3 Extension User Manual Contingency: Contractor Optimization Tool - Engineering Prototype (Release 2.3)

This User Manual provides step-by-step instructions on the Contingency Contractor Optimization Tool's major features. Activities are organized by user role. The Contingency Contractor Optimization project is intended to address former Secretary Gates' mandate in a January 2011 memo and DoDI 3020.41 by delivering a centralized strategic planning tool that allows senior decision makers to quickly and accurately assess the impacts, risks, and mitigation strategies associated with utilizing contract support. Based on an electronic storyboard prototype developed in Phase 2, the Contingency Contractor Optimization Tool engineering prototype was refined in Phase 3 of the OSD ATL Contingency Contractor Optimization project to support strategic planning for contingency contractors. The planning tool uses a model to optimize the Total Force mix by minimizing the combined total costs for the selected mission scenarios. The model will optimize the match of personnel groups (military, DoD civilian, and contractors) and capabilities to meet the mission requirements as effectively as possible, based on risk, cost, and other requirements.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2015

Contingency Contractor Optimization Phase 3 User Manual - Contingency Contractor Optimization Tool Prototype - Release 2.2

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2015

Contingency Contractor Optimization Phase 3 Quick Start Guide Contingency Contractor Optimization Tool Prototype - Release 2.2

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2016

Contingency Contractor Optimization Engineering Prototype – Release 2.3 (Phase 3 Extension – Training Examples)

This document provides training examples to provide users practice in using the tool. Detailed instructions on how to use the tool can be found in the User Manual (SAND2015-6028).The Contingency Contractor Optimization project is intended to address former Secretary Gates’ mandate in a January 2011 memo and DoDI 3020.41 by delivering a centralized strategic planning tool that allows senior decision makers to quickly and accurately assess the impacts, risks, and mitigation strategies associated with utilizing contract support. Based on an electronic storyboard prototype developed in Phase 2, the CCOT-P engineering prototype was refined in Phase 3 of the OSD ATL Contingency Contractor Optimization project to support strategic planning for contingency contractors. CCOT-P uses a model to optimize the total workforce mix by minimizing the combined total costs for the selected mission scenarios. The model will optimize the match of personnel groups (military, DoD civilian, and contractors) and capabilities to meet the mission requirements as effectively as possible, based on risk, cost, and other requirements.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗

DOE OSTI2020

Defending the Homeland: Growing Foreign Challenges to the U.S. Missile Defense Posture

The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) for Policy requested that Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory conduct a Congressionally directed study on homeland missile defense, pursuant to Section 1692 of the fiscal year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act. In accordance with the statutory language, this study considers whether the security benefits obtained by deployment of homeland missile defenses of the United States are undermined or counterbalanced by adverse reactions of potential adversaries, and considers the effectiveness of homeland missile defense efforts of the United States to deter the development of ballistic missiles. Almost a half-century has elapsed since the United States and the Soviet Union signed the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, and almost two decades since the former withdrew. Since withdrawing, the United States has sought to develop and deploy a layered missile defense system to defend against regional threats to U.S. and allied interests abroad and to counter limited threats to the U.S. homeland. As such, missile defense supports key national defense policy objectives. Protecting the U.S. homeland, forces abroad, allies, and partners. Deterring attacks against the United States, its allies, and partners. Assuring allies an strengthening U.S. diplomatic activities in peacetime and crisis. We offer five key findings: 1. The primary benefit of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system is the protection it provides the U.S. homeland against a limited but evolving rogue-state missile threat. While this system has never been tested in combat, it appears thus far to have effectively paced North Korea’s development and deployment of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). In the absence of such a defensive capability, the United States would likely have been more heavily exposed to North Korean actions, would have operated at a much higher-risk posture, and would have had less negotiating room with which to navigate coercive tactics and crises. Its allies would have been more concerned about U.S. willingness in time of crisis and war to run the risks of protecting them. The GMD system also serves as a hedge against Iranian breakout. 2. Potential adversaries continue to develop long-range ballistic missiles despite deployment of a U.S. homeland missile defense system. This includes both rogue states and major power rivals whose long-range missile programs predated the deployment of U.S. missile defenses. While North Korea has continued its long-range missile developments and achieved an intercontinental capability, Iran has not yet reached this threshold. The broader proliferation of long-range missiles anticipated in the late 1990s has not materialized. 3. While Russia has used the existence of a U.S. homeland missile defense system as a justification for its substantial and continuing weapon modernization program, neither Russian force modernization nor the limited U.S. homeland missile defense system has altered the strategic balance. Russia has long considered U.S. missile defenses—both theater and homeland—as directed against its strategic forces and as a capability that could rapidly advance, thereby eroding Russian confidence in its nuclear deterrent. Russia’s political and military actions appear excessive and negatively impact areas such as arms control, but they do not undermine the primary benefit of the U.S. system cited in Key Finding 1. 4. China’s expansion and diversification of nuclear and missile forces has been influenced by its concerns about U.S. homeland missile defense, but those concerns are only one of many factors in China’s force planning. Although China’s actions to preserve and expand its assured retaliation prospects have not fundamentally altered the strategic balance, its buildup and lack of transparency about its force modernization goals are troubling. Taken together, the aggregate pattern of China’s modernization activities over the past two decades strongly suggests a concerted effort to develop a modern military force commensurate with its intended geopolitical status. Whatever China’s legacy concerns over the survivability of its strategic nuclear forces, its ability to overwhelm the GMD system appears intact today and will be further strengthened in the years ahead as it continues its long-term modernization program. China’s political and military actions negatively affect U.S. security interests but do not undermine the primary benefit of the U.S. system cited in Key Finding 1. 5. The basic finding that benefits have not so far been undermined by adverse reactions is a function of circumstances that are increasingly in flux. The existing GMD-centered system is under increasing pressure from the pace and scope of North Korean missile deployments. The proposed “layered” system seeks to mitigate this impending capability gap in the near term and to complement future capabilities, such as the Next Generation Interceptor, when they come online. Given the pace of U.S. missile defense developments since 2000, it is possible that adversary advances in capability will outpace the U.S. system’s ability to adapt. Additionally, because this layered system is in principle more readily scaled, it will almost certainly be viewed skeptically by China and Russia. In a context of growing great-power security competition, the Department of Defense (DoD) should consider undertaking a broader net assessment of the U.S., Russian, and Chinese force balance.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗

DOE OSTI2016

IDC Re-Engineering Phase 2 Iteration E2. Draft Component Interface Specification: Signal Detection Control

This report contains a draft Component Interface Specification (CIS) for an application controlling signal detection calculations. It is an example of the contents and level of detail of information in a CIS. The classes, interfaces, and data types in this report reflect current understanding of system concepts and potential implementation patterns but should not be interpreted as containing the finalized interface specifications, classes, etc. The primary purpose of this report is to discuss the potential OSD APIs represented in class diagrams for the Waveform, QC Mask, and Signal Detection Repository interfaces.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2022

The False Dilemma: Rethinking AF Science and Technology Officer Talent Management

In 2019, Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) Heather Wilson launched the 2030 Science and Technology (S&T) Strategy by stating, “The advantage will go to those who create the best technologies and who integrate and field them in creative operational ways that provide military advantages.” In 2021, 15% of Air Force general officers responsible for creating and integrating this technological edge had a science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) graduate degree, and less than 1% of generals had a STEM doctorate. As one point of comparison, at least 32% and 13% of founding CEOs of Fortune 500 technology companies had a master’s and doctoral STEM degree, respectively. The gulf is larger when you consider that these CEOs used their technical degrees throughout their careers whereas most general officers do not. In large organizations, if the leader does not possess technical knowledge, it is difficult to drive innovation systems and connect ideas to reality. The evidence for this disconnect is abundant in acquisition challenges for high-tech systems, significant pushback to the “revolution in military affairs”, and failure of the “Third Offset” to take hold and deliver capabilities to offset Chinese and Russian capabilities. Indeed, when the former Air Force and Space Force Chief Software Officer, Nicolas M. Chaillan, offered his resignation, one of the main reasons for leaving was “the failure of OSD and the Joint Staff to deliver on their own alleged top ‘priority’, JADC2 – they couldn’t ‘walk the walk.’” Senior leaders have recognized this disconnect, and several inquiries and studies regarding STEM competency have been conducted. Many have posed a false dilemma: a large, STEM-cognizant or small, STEM-expert force. However, current and future STEM human capital needs are managed at the unit and functional area level. This leads to “silos” and the tactical “needs of the present” dominating the strategic “needs of the future”, highlighted by only two functional areas systematically tracking future STEM needs. Therefore, the decision on force structure appears to have been historically made by default through these and other perceived structural realities, and a vast majority of recommendations have focused on the small STEM community – an exercise in diminishing returns. In essence, the solution often boils down to finding unicorns – officers that have chartered the unforgiving pathway through the traditional “gates” to general officer while obtaining sufficient STEM proficiency along the way. Fortunately for the Air Force, these officers exist, albeit at a rate below what the evidence would suggest is necessary. However, this approach fundamentally limits the ability to develop a deep pool of officers with the ability to create and integrate technologies and ensures the Dunning-Kruger effect is prevalent. The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias where those with limited knowledge in an area lack the expertise necessary to recognize their lack of expertise and consequently are prone to overestimate their knowledge and performance. In short, we need less leaders overestimating their STEM knowledge and more with hard-earned STEM competency required to “walk the walk” to create and integrate technologies for military advantage. This will not be accomplished by restricting the emphasis to the traditional scientists and engineering (S&E) career fields – the pool, only 10% of line officers, and general officer progression is just too small. Fortunately, the recent SECAF’s Management Initiatives and Chief of Staff’s (CSAF) Action Orders, both containing emphasis on organic expertise to “accrue advantage in military-technological competition,” present an opportunity to truly develop a framework for the force of the future.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2014

Report of the 14th Genomic Standards Consortium Meeting, Oxford, UK, September 17-21, 2012.

This report summarizes the proceedings of the 14th workshop of the Genomic Standards Consortium (GSC) held at the University of Oxford in September 2012. The primary goal of the workshop was to work towards the launch of the Genomic Observatories (GOs) Network under the GSC. For the first time, it brought together potential GOs sites, GSC members, and a range of interested partner organizations. It thus represented the first meeting of the GOs Network (GOs1). Key outcomes include the formation of a core group of “champions” ready to take the GOs Network forward, as well as the formation of working groups. The workshop also served as the first meeting of a wide range of participants in the Ocean Sampling Day (OSD) initiative, a first GOs action. Three projects with complementary interests – COST Action ES1103, MG4U and Micro B3 – organized joint sessions at the workshop. A two-day GSC Hackathon followed the main three days of meetings.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS1985

System integration report

Several areas that arise from the system integration issue were examined. Intersystem analysis is discussed as it relates to software development, shared data bases and interfaces between TEMPUS and PLAID, shaded graphics rendering systems, object design (BUILD), the TEMPUS animation system, anthropometric lab integration, ongoing TEMPUS support and maintenance, and the impact of UNIX and local workstations on the OSDS environment.

Badler, N. I.↗

NASA NTRS1995

Major weapon system environmental life-cycle cost estimating for Conservation, Cleanup, Compliance and Pollution Prevention (C3P2)

The Titan 4 Space Launch Vehicle Program is one of many major weapon system programs that have modified acquisition plans and operational procedures to meet new, stringent environmental rules and regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Defense (DOD) mandate to reduce the use of ozone depleting chemicals (ODC's) is just one of the regulatory changes that has affected the program. In the last few years, public environmental awareness, coupled with stricter environmental regulations, has created the need for DOD to produce environmental life-cycle cost estimates (ELCCE) for every major weapon system acquisition program. The environmental impact of the weapon system must be assessed and budgeted, considering all costs, from cradle to grave. The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) has proposed that organizations consider Conservation, Cleanup, Compliance and Pollution Prevention (C(sup 3)P(sup 2)) issues associated with each acquisition program to assess life-cycle impacts and costs. The Air Force selected the Titan 4 system as the pilot program for estimating life-cycle environmental costs. The estimating task required participants to develop an ELCCE methodology, collect data to test the methodology and produce a credible cost estimate within the DOD C(sup 3)P(sup 2) definition. The estimating methodology included using the Program Office weapon system description and work breakdown structure together with operational site and manufacturing plant visits to identify environmental cost drivers. The results of the Titan IV ELCCE process are discussed and expanded to demonstrate how they can be applied to satisfy any life-cycle environmental cost estimating requirement.

Hammond, Wesley↗

NASA NTRS1999

Stereo Vision Based Velocity Control

The next phase of the unmanned ground vehicle development sponsored by OSD calls for intelligent velocity control to support cross-country driving speeds of 10 mph by day and 5 mph by night.

vision speed control spline↗