Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Operations Personnel”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Contribution of Pilots to Resilience in Normal Operations. Part II: A closer look at briefings: Anticipation and Monitoring Also Known as Planning and Coordination

Much of our knowledge about human performance in flight safety has come from the analysis of undesired events, whether accidents, incidents, or crew behaviors identified via flight exceedance monitoring or observational techniques. In recent years, there has been an acknowledgement that operational personnel are not merely sources of “human error”, but also make a unique human contribution to safe outcomes. In a few celebrated cases, this takes the form of “heroic saves”, but on many more occasions, operational personnel contribute to safety through everyday, often-unnoticed actions that turn potentially hazardous situations into non-events. An emerging approach to safety, frequently referred to as “Safety II,” proposes that the positive human contribution is an important and largely untapped source of safety information. Some airlines have successfully trained observers to identify and record the positive behaviors exhibited by the crew over the course of a flight. In other cases, flight crew are interviewed about good practices or positive behaviors. However, each of these methods are relatively limited in scale and resource intensive. A survey could provide a relatively low-cost approach to systematically gather this information on a larger scale. The primary purpose of the research was to develop and assess a surveys methodology for assessing crews' activities in normal flights and the operational perturbations encountered during normal operations. We hope that such a survey could be both a research tool as well as a safety management aid for the aviation industry. We collected responses concerning revenue flights from two groups of airline pilots (N = 25 & N= 65). The results indicated that relatively few flights proceeded exactly as in the original flight plan. Pilots routinely anticipated and adapted to changing circumstances. We will review the challenges encountered in developing the survey and summarize preliminary findings from two administrations of the survey to airline pilots.

human contribution safety↗
NASA NTRS1973

Medical operations: Crew surgeon's report

To assure the safety and well being of the Skylab environment simulation crewmembers it was necessary to develop a medical safety plan with emergency procedures. All medical and nonmedical test and operations personnel, except those specifically exempted, were required to meet the medical standards and proficiency levels as established. Implemented programs included health care of the test crew and their families, occupational medical services for chamber operating personnel, clinical laboratory support and hypobaric and other emergency support.

Ross, C. E.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Spacecraft Software Maintenance: An Effective Approach to Reducing Costs and Increasing Science Return

Flight software is a mission critical element of spacecraft functionality and performance. When ground operations personnel interface to a spacecraft, they are typically dealing almost entirely with the capabilities of onboard software. This software, even more than critical ground/flight communications systems, is expected to perform perfectly during all phases of spacecraft life. Due to the fact that it can be reprogrammed on-orbit to accommodate degradations or failures in flight hardware, new insights into spacecraft characteristics, new control options which permit enhanced science options, etc., the on- orbit flight software maintenance team is usually significantly responsible for the long term success of a science mission. Failure of flight software to perform as needed can result in very expensive operations work-around costs and lost science opportunities. There are three basic approaches to maintaining spacecraft software--namely using the original developers, using the mission operations personnel, or assembling a center of excellence for multi-spacecraft software maintenance. Not planning properly for flight software maintenance can lead to unnecessarily high on-orbit costs and/or unacceptably long delays, or errors, in patch installations. A common approach for flight software maintenance is to access the original development staff. The argument for utilizing the development staff is that the people who developed the software will be the best people to modify the software on-orbit. However, it can quickly becomes a challenge to obtain the services of these key people. They may no longer be available to the organization. They may have a more urgent job to perform, quite likely on another project under different project management. If they havn't worked on the software for a long time, they may need precious time for refamiliarization to the software, testbeds and tools. Further, a lack of insight into issues related to flight software in its on-orbit environment, may find the developer unprepared for the challenges. The second approach is to train a member of the flight operations team to maintain the spacecraft software. This can prove to be a costly and inflexible solution. The person assigned to this duty may not have enough work to do during a problem free period and may have too much to do when a problem arises. If the person is a talented software engineer, he/she may not enjoy the limited software opportunities available in this position; and may eventually leave for newer technology computer science opportunities. Training replacement flight software personnel can be a difficult and lengthy process. The third approach is to assemble a center of excellence for on-orbit spacecraft software maintenance. Personnel in this specialty center can be managed to support flight software of multiple missions at once. The variety of challenges among a set of on-orbit missions, can result in a dedicated, talented staff which is fully trained and available to support each mission's needs. Such staff are not software developers but are rather spacecraft software systems engineers. The cost to any one mission is extremely low because the software staff works and charges, minimally on missions with no current operations issues; and their professional insight into on-orbit software troubleshooting and maintenance methods ensures low risk, effective and minimal-cost solutions to on-orbit issues.

Shell, Elaine M.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Spacecraft Onboard Software Maintenance: An Effective Approach which Reduces Costs and Increases Science Return

Flight software (FSW) is a mission critical element of spacecraft functionality and performance. When ground operations personnel interface to a spacecraft, they are dealing almost entirely with onboard software. This software, even more than ground/flight communications systems, is expected to perform perfectly at all times during all phases of on-orbit mission life. Due to the fact that FSW can be reconfigured and reprogrammed to accommodate new spacecraft conditions, the on-orbit FSW maintenance team is usually significantly responsible for the long-term success of a science mission. Failure of FSW can result in very expensive operations work-around costs and lost science opportunities. There are three basic approaches to staffing on-orbit software maintenance, namely: (1) using the original developers, (2) using mission operations personnel, or (3) assembling a Center of Excellence for multi-spacecraft on-orbit FSW support. This paper explains a National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Goddard Space Flight Center (NASA/GSFC) experience related to the roles of on-orbit FSW maintenance personnel. It identifies the advantages and disadvantages of each of the three approaches to staffing the FSW roles, and demonstrates how a cost efficient on-orbit FSW Maintenance Center of Excellence can be established and maintained with significant return on the investment.

Shell, Elaine M.↗
NASA NTRS1978

Satellite Power Systems (SPS) concept definition study. Volume 5: Transportation and operations analysis

The development of transportation systems to support the operations required for the orbital assembly of a 5-gigawatt satellite is discussed as well as the construction of a ground receiving antenna (rectenna). Topics covered include heavy lift launch vehicle configurations for Earth-to LEO transport; the use of chemical, nuclear, and electric orbit transfer vehicles for LEO to GEO operations; personnel transport systems; ground operations; end-to-end analysis of the construction, operation, and maintenance of the satellite and rectenna; propellant production and storage; and payload packaging.

Hanley, G.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Interpreted Cooper-Harper for broader use

The current aircraft assessment process typically makes extensive use of operational personnel during simulations and operational evaluations, with increased emphasis on evaluating the many pilot and/or operator/aircraft control loops. The need for a crew assessment in this broader arena has produced a variety of rating scales. The Cooper-Harper Rating Scale is frequently misused and routinely overlooked in the process, for these applications often extend the scale's use beyond its originally intended application. This paper agrees with the broader application of the Cooper-Harper Rating Scale and presents a concept for the development of a 'use unique' Interpreted Cooper-Harper Scale to help achieve this objective. This interpreted scale concept was conceived during efforts to support an FAA evaluation of a night vision enhancement system. It includes descriptive extensions, which are faithful to the intent of the current Cooper-Harper Scale and should provide the kind of detail that has historically been provided by trained test pilots in their explanatory comments.

Green, David L.↗
NASA NTRS1994

The Virtual Mission Operations Center

Spacecraft management is becoming more human intensive as spacecraft become more complex and as operations costs are growing accordingly. Several automation approaches have been proposed to lower these costs. However, most of these approaches are not flexible enough in the operations processes and levels of automation that they support. This paper presents a concept called the Virtual Mission Operations Center (VMOC) that provides highly flexible support for dynamic spacecraft management processes and automation. In a VMOC, operations personnel can be shared among missions, the operations team can change personnel and their locations, and automation can be added and removed as appropriate. The VMOC employs a form of on-demand supervisory control called management by exception to free operators from having to actively monitor their system. The VMOC extends management by exception, however, so that distributed, dynamic teams can work together. The VMOC uses work-group computing concepts and groupware tools to provide a team infrastructure, and it employs user agents to allow operators to define and control system automation.

Moore, Mike↗
NASA NTRS1990

Telescience - Optimizing aerospace science return through geographically distributed operations

The paper examines the objectives and requirements of teleoperations, defined as the means and process for scientists, NASA operations personnel, and astronauts to conduct payload operations as if these were colocated. This process is described in terms of Space Station era platforms. Some of the enabling technologies are discussed, including open architecture workstations, distributed computing, transaction management, expert systems, and high-speed networks. Recent testbedding experiments are surveyed to highlight some of the human factors requirements.

Rasmussen, Daryl N.↗
NASA NTRS2014

LADEE Multi-Domain Simulation

The Lunar Atmosphere Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE) was a small explorer class spacecraft that was launched on Sept 7, 2013 and that was de-orbited and successfully impacted the Moons surface on April 17, 2014 after completing all of the mission objectives. The low-cost rapidly prototyped hardware design used for the spacecraft was extend to the development of the software base. To achieve this goal, a Model Based Design approach was utilized to develop the onboard flight software, and out of this development a model based multipurpose simulator was created of the LADEE spacecraft and its mission environment. This simulator extended the traditional function of propagating the vehicle's kinematic and rotational states and included the electrical and thermal states propagation. Traditionally, these domains are handled by domain specific high fidelity simulations that use the states histories from other domains as input. By reducing the fidelity and abstracting the relevant features being monitored and controlled by the flight software, it was possible to model the coupling across these domains resulting in more accurate overall system behavior. A faster than real-time workstation (WSIM) version of the LADEE simulator was used to develop and test the software control algorithms in the Simulink environment. To maximize the performance of the simulation, modeling knobs were introduced to reduce the resolution of the some of the domains models when the effects of that domain were not significant for the scope of that simulation. The automatic code generation feature in Simulink was used to port the simulation to several real-time environments to support Processor-in-the-Loop (PIL) and Hardware-in-the-Loop (HIL) testing, verification and validation. The real-time environment required that the design of each of the domain models be deterministic as possible in the time required to perform all of the calculations to update its states. The simulation interface was designed to be compatible with the command interface employed by the LADEE mission operation team. The WSIM, PIL, and HIL simulators thus used a common interface and thus were used for flight software testing, for mission operations personnel training (nominal and off-nominal operations) prior to the mission and to perform command sequence verification during the mission. This presentation will look at the modeling strategies used to create a common interface to the simulator and to model and couple multiple domains within the simulation, the results of those strategies, and the lessons learned.

Multi-Domain↗
NASA NTRS1994

Cargo systems manual: Heat Pipe Performance (HPP) STS-66

The purpose of the cargo systems manual (CSM) is to provide a payload reference document for payload and shuttle flight operations personnel during shuttle mission planning, training, and flight operations. It includes orbiter-to-payload interface information and payload system information (including operationally pertinent payload safety data) that is directly applicable to the Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) role in the payload mission. The primary objectives of the heat pipe performance (HPP) are to obtain quantitative data on the thermal performance of heat pipes in a microgravity environment. This information will increase understanding of the behavior of heat pipes in space and be useful for application to design improvements in heat pipes and associated systems. The purpose of HPP-2 is to establish a complete one-g and zero-g data base for axial groove heat pipes. This data will be used to update and correlate data generated from a heat pipe design computer program called Grooved Analysis Program (GAP). The HPP-2 objectives are to: determine heat transport capacity and conductance for open/closed grooved heat pipes and different Freon volumes (nominal, under, and overcharged) using a uniform heat load; determine heat transport capacity and conductance for single/multiple evaporators using asymmetric heat loads; obtain precise static, spin, and rewicking data points for undercharged pipes; investigate heat flux limits (asymmetric heat loads); and determine effects of positive body force on thermal performance.

Napp, Robert↗
NASA NTRS1996

User participation in the development of the human/computer interface for control centers

Technological advances coupled with the requirements to reduce operations staffing costs led to the demand for efficient, technologically-sophisticated mission operations control centers. The control center under development for the earth observing system (EOS) is considered. The users are involved in the development of a control center in order to ensure that it is cost-efficient and flexible. A number of measures were implemented in the EOS program in order to encourage user involvement in the area of human-computer interface development. The following user participation exercises carried out in relation to the system analysis and design are described: the shadow participation of the programmers during a day of operations; the flight operations personnel interviews; and the analysis of the flight operations team tasks. The user participation in the interface prototype development, the prototype evaluation, and the system implementation are reported on. The involvement of the users early in the development process enables the requirements to be better understood and the cost to be reduced.

Broome, Richard↗
NASA NTRS2014

Real-Time Science Operations to Support a Lunar Polar Volatiles Rover Mission

Future human exploration of the Moon will likely rely on in situ resource utilization (ISRU) to enable long duration lunar missions. Prior to utilizing ISRU on the Moon, the natural resources (in this case lunar volatiles) must be identified and characterized, and ISRU demonstrated on the lunar surface. To enable future uses of ISRU, NASA and the CSA are developing a lunar rover payload that can (1) locate near subsurface volatiles, (2) excavate and analyze samples of the volatile-bearing regolith, and (3) demonstrate the form, extractability and usefulness of the materials. Such investigations are important both for ISRU purposes and for understanding the scientific nature of these intriguing lunar volatile deposits. Temperature models and orbital data suggest near surface volatile concentrations may exist at briefly lit lunar polar locations outside persistently shadowed regions. A lunar rover could be remotely operated at some of these locations for the approx. 2-14 days of expected sunlight at relatively low cost. Due to the limited operational time available, both science and rover operations decisions must be made in real time, requiring immediate situational awareness, data analysis, and decision support tools. Given these constraints, such a mission requires a new concept of operations. In this paper we outline the results and lessons learned from an analog field campaign in July 2012 which tested operations for a lunar polar rover concept. A rover was operated in the analog environment of Hawaii by an off-site Flight Control Center, a rover navigation center in Canada, a Science Backroom at NASA Ames Research Center in California, and support teams at NASA Johnson Space Center in Texas and NASA Kennedy Space Center in Florida. We find that this type of mission requires highly efficient, real time, remotely operated rover operations to enable low cost, scientifically relevant exploration of the distribution and nature of lunar polar volatiles. The field demonstration illustrated the need for science operations personnel in constant communications with the flight mission operators and the Science Backroom to provide immediate and continual science support and validation throughout the mission. Specific data analysis tools are also required to enable immediate data monitoring, visualization, and decision making. The field campaign demonstrated that this novel methodology of real-time science operations is possible and applicable to providing important new insights regarding lunar polar volatiles for both science and exploration.

Moon; Volatiles; Rover; Missions↗
NASA NTRS2014

Automated Scheduling of Personnel to Staff Operations for the Mars Science Laboratory

Leveraging previous work on scheduling personnel for space mission operations, we have adapted ASPEN (Activity Scheduling and Planning Environment) [1] to the domain of scheduling personnel for operations of the Mars Science Laboratory. Automated scheduling of personnel is not new. We compare our representations to a sampling of employee scheduling systems available with respect to desired features. We described the constraints required by MSL personnel schedulers and how each is handled by the scheduling algorithm.

MSL↗
NASA NTRS1990

A report on SHARP (Spacecraft Health Automated Reasoning Prototype) and the Voyager Neptune encounter

The development and application of the Spacecraft Health Automated Reasoning Prototype (SHARP) for the operations of the telecommunications systems and link analysis functions in Voyager mission operations are presented. An overview is provided of the design and functional description of the SHARP system as it was applied to Voyager. Some of the current problems and motivations for automation in real-time mission operations are discussed, as are the specific solutions that SHARP provides. The application of SHARP to Voyager telecommunications had the goal of being a proof-of-capability demonstration of artificial intelligence as applied to the problem of real-time monitoring functions in planetary mission operations. AS part of achieving this central goal, the SHARP application effort was also required to address the issue of the design of an appropriate software system architecture for a ground-based, highly automated spacecraft monitoring system for mission operations, including methods for: (1) embedding a knowledge-based expert system for fault detection, isolation, and recovery within this architecture; (2) acquiring, managing, and fusing the multiple sources of information used by operations personnel; and (3) providing information-rich displays to human operators who need to exercise the capabilities of the automated system. In this regard, SHARP has provided an excellent example of how advanced artificial intelligence techniques can be smoothly integrated with a variety of conventionally programmed software modules, as well as guidance and solutions for many questions about automation in mission operations.

Martin, R. G.↗
NASA NTRS2018

History and Archives Contribute to the Success of Space Flight Programs

Final Paper, not the Abstract, is attached: This report discusses how history can be used by management, engineering, and operations personnel within space flight programs. Works by professional historians and sociologists inform key decision makers and policy specialists on lessons learned from space flight program management successes and failures, as well as from legislative affairs, policy making, and commercial space efforts. Vehicle engineering history written by engineers for an engineering or operations audience informs project management and technical personnel on lessons learned, best practices, and the rationale behind the design and operation of flight vehicles and supporting ground systems. Archives play a critical role in supporting the efforts of both professional historians and flight program personnel. Suggestions are made concerning how professional historians could leverage the interests and knowledge of flight program personnel to obtain more insight that is needed to support historical research efforts.

Archive↗
NASA NTRS1986

Operations planning and analysis handbook for NASA/MSFC phase B development projects

Current operations planning and analysis practices on NASA/MSFC Phase B projects were investigated with the objectives of (1) formalizing these practices into a handbook and (2) suggesting improvements. The study focused on how Science and Engineering (S&E) Operational Personnel support Program Development (PD) Task Teams. The intimate relationship between systems engineering and operations analysis was examined. Methods identified for use by operations analysts during Phase B include functional analysis, interface analysis methods to calculate/allocate such criteria as reliability, Maintainability, and operations and support cost.

Batson, Robert C.↗
NASA NTRS2005

New Directions in Space Operations Services in Support of Interplanetary Exploration

To gain access to the necessary operational processes and data in support of NASA's Lunar/Mars Exploration Initiative, new services, adequate levels of computing cycles and access to myriad forms of data must be provided to onboard spacecraft and ground based personnel/systems (earth, lunar and Martian) to enable interplanetary exploration by humans. These systems, cycles and access to vast amounts of development, test and operational data will be required to provide a new level of services not currently available to existing spacecraft, on board crews and other operational personnel. Although current voice, video and data systems in support of current space based operations has been adequate, new highly reliable and autonomous processes and services will be necessary for future space exploration activities. These services will range from the more mundane voice in LEO to voice in interplanetary travel which because of the high latencies will require new voice processes and standards. New services, like component failure predictions based on data mining of significant quantities of data, located at disparate locations, will be required. 3D or holographic representation of onboard components, systems or family members will greatly improve maintenance, operations and service restoration not to mention crew morale. Current operational systems and standards, like the Internet Protocol, will not able to provide the level of service required end to end from an end point on the Martian surface like a scientific instrument to a researcher at a university. Ground operations whether earth, lunar or Martian and in flight operations to the moon and especially to Mars will require significant autonomy that will require access to highly reliable processing capabilities, data storage based on network storage technologies. Significant processing cycles will be needed onboard but could be borrowed from other locations either ground based or onboard other spacecraft. Reliability will be a key factor with onboard and distributed backup processing an absolutely necessary requirement. Current cluster processing/Grid technologies may provide the basis for providing these services. An overview of existing services, future services that will be required and the technologies and standards required to be developed will be presented. The purpose of this paper will be to initiate a technological roadmap, albeit at a high level, of current voice, video, data and network technologies and standards (which show promise for adaptation or evolution) to what technologies and standards need to be redefined, adjusted or areas where new ones require development. The roadmap should begin the differentiation between non manned and manned processes/services where applicable. The paper will be based in part on the activities of the CCSDS Monitor and Control working group which is beginning the process of standardization of the these processes. Another element of the paper will be based on an analysis of current technologies supporting space flight processes and services at JSC, MSFC, GSFC and to a lesser extent at KSC. Work being accomplished in areas such as Grid computing, data mining and network storage at ARC, IBM and the University of Alabama at Huntsville will be researched and analyzed.

Bradford, Robert N.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Component-Based Visualization System

A software system has been developed that gives engineers and operations personnel with no "formal" programming expertise, but who are familiar with the Microsoft Windows operating system, the ability to create visualization displays to monitor the health and performance of aircraft/spacecraft. This software system is currently supporting the X38 V201 spacecraft component/system testing and is intended to give users the ability to create, test, deploy, and certify their subsystem displays in a fraction of the time that it would take to do so using previous software and programming methods. Within the visualization system there are three major components: the developer, the deployer, and the widget set. The developer is a blank canvas with widget menu items that give users the ability to easily create displays. The deployer is an application that allows for the deployment of the displays created using the developer application. The deployer has additional functionality that the developer does not have, such as printing of displays, screen captures to files, windowing of displays, and also serves as the interface into the documentation archive and help system. The third major component is the widget set. The widgets are the visual representation of the items that will make up the display (i.e., meters, dials, buttons, numerical indicators, string indicators, and the like). This software was developed using Visual C++ and uses COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) software where possible.

Delgado, Francisco↗