Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Thinking systems”

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
DOE OSTI2025

Progress on the MARVEL Cybersecurity by Design Model-Based Systems Engineering Project

Formal model-based systems engineering (MBSE) combines a model, systems thinking, and systems engineering to visually depict the boundaries, context, and behavior of interconnected systems, facilitating effective design, development, and utilization of engineered systems throughout the systems engineering lifecycle. Although nuclear reactor vendors employ these tools to integrate functionality, performance, and safety, they are not yet addressing digital risk concerns introduced by use of operational technology, such as digital instrumentation and control systems. To accomplish this objective, the Microreactor Applications Research Validation and EvaLuation (MARVEL) microreactor was used as an MBSE case study. This real-world application provides a first-of-a-kind opportunity to demonstrate the benefits of integrating digital risk and cybersecurity into the MBSE design process of a nuclear reactor. This paper provides an update of the ongoing MARVEL Cyber MBSE project as it specifically relates to the integration of digital risk management and cybersecurity by design.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

FEW questions, many answers: using machine learning to assess how students connect food–energy–water (FEW) concepts

There is growing support and interest in postsecondary interdisciplinary environmental education which integrate concepts and disciplines in addition to providing varied perspectives. There is a need to assess student learning in these programs as well as rigorous evaluation of educational practices, especially of complex synthesis concepts. This work tests a text classification machine learning model as a tool to assess student systems thinking capabilities using two questions anchored by the Food-Energy-Water (FEW) Nexus phenomena by answering two questions (1) Can machine learning models be used to identify instructor-determined important concepts in student responses? (2) What do college students know about the interconnections between food, energy and water, and how have students assimilated systems thinking into their constructed responses about FEW? Reported here are a broad range of model performances across 26 text classification models associated with two different assessment items, with model accuracy ranging from 0.755 to 0.992. Expert-like responses were infrequent in our dataset compared to responses providing simpler, incomplete explanations of the systems presented in the question. For those students moving from describing individual effects to multiple effects, their reasoning about the mechanism behind the system indicates advanced systems thinking ability. Specifically, students exhibit higher expertise for explaining changing water usage than discussing tradeoffs for such changing usage. This research represents one of the first attempts to assess the links between foundational, discipline-specific concepts and systems thinking ability. These text classification approaches to scoring student FEW Nexus Constructed Responses (CR) indicate how these approaches can be used, in addition to several future research priorities for interdisciplinary, practice-based education research. Development of further complex question items using machine learning would allow evaluation of the relationship between foundational concept understanding and integration of those concepts as well as more nuanced understanding of student comprehension of complex interdisciplinary concepts.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
NASA NTRS2018

Leverage Points for System Health Management of Autonomous Systems

Systems Health Management (SHM) is one of three basic functionalities that constitute an autonomous capability of a system. The other two functionalities are Planning & Scheduling, and Task Execution. In an autonomous system, variable autonomy is often distinct from variable authority to sense, decide, and act. There are quantifiable Levels of Autonomy that can be achieved by tuning different portions of the Observe-Orient-Decide-Act loop to provide flexibility and control. This approach is tabulated for multiple domains such as spacecraft and aerial vehicles. Examining SHM through a Systems Thinking lens helps us understand its stocks and flows, loops, and delays. Systems thinking, and modeling, is a useful way to understand change and complexity of systems of many types. There are certain archetypes that underlie well-known autonomy architectures. And there often are leverage points - best places to intervene in a system - that can resolve or mitigate some fundamental challenges in the design and deployment of autonomous systems. I identify these levers and present the ones that have been successfully used in NASA missions.

Systems Thinking↗
DOE OSTI2024

A Model-Based Systems Engineering Approach for Effective Decision Support of Modern Energy Systems Depicted with Clean Hydrogen Production

A holistic approach to decision-making in modern energy systems is vital due to their increase in complexity and interconnectedness. However, decision makers often rely on narrowly-focused strategies, such as economic assessments, for energy system strategy selection. The approach in this paper helps considers various factors such as economic viability, technological feasibility, environmental impact, and social acceptance. By integrating these diverse elements, decision makers can identify more economically feasible, sustainable, and resilient energy strategies. While existing focused approaches are valuable since they provide clear metrics of a potential solution (e.g., an economic measure of profitability), they do not offer the much needed system-as-a-whole understanding. This lack of understanding often leads to selecting suboptimal or unfeasible solutions, which is often discovered much later in the process when a change may not be possible. This paper presents a novel evaluation framework to support holistic decision-making in energy systems. The framework is based on a systems thinking approach, applied through systems engineering principles and model-based systems engineering tools, coupled with a multicriteria decision analysis approach. The systems engineering approach guides the development of feasible solutions for novel energy systems, and the multicriteria decision analysis is used for a systematic evaluation of available strategies and objective selection of the best solution. The proposed framework enables holistic, multidisciplinary, and objective evaluations of solutions and strategies for energy systems, clearly demonstrates the pros and cons of available options, and supports knowledge collection and retention to be used for a different scenario or context. The framework is demonstrated in case study evaluation solutions for a novel energy system of clean hydrogen generation.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

TPSAS-NF1676L-18251-DND

The National Wildlife Federation (NWF) and its Eco-Schools USA program is focused providing an engaging educational experience to help students better understand the essential principles of Earth's systems and the impact of climate change on them. The program is aimed to provide those students with the ability to communicate about climate change and apply knowledge in decision making. To achieve these objectives, the NWF partnered with NASA scientists and developed the Eco-Schools USA Climate Change Connections (CCC) is a 9th-12th grade curriculum. CCC is designed to build upon and utilize the many NASA mission resources, programs, and associated interfaces to enhance authentic learning experiences for both educators and students. It seeks to develop an integrated systems-thinking approach to understanding and acting upon the issue of climate change. In collaboration with mission specialists from ICESat, LandSat, Terra, AQUA, AURA, a cross programmatic curriculum was developed to provide a unified or systems-thinking approach to addressing realworld Earth systems problems (see NWF web page below). In this presentation, we provide an overview of the Climate Change Connections lesson curriculum but focus specifically on a couple of example exercises where NASA data sets are used to teach basic lessons about aspects of the climate system as it pertains to the built environment. In particular, we show how data adapted from NASA’s GEWEX Surface Energy Budget are applied to a lesson in solar energy. These data sets are made available directly through NASA web portals entitled “My NASA Data” and the Prediction of Worldwide Renewable Energy Resource. At the POWER web portal there is a link to the Surface meteorology and Solar Energy web portal providing data sets tailored specifically to the assessment of solar energy resource at any location on the globe. Here, we depict the sources of these data and their subsequent usage in the Eco-Schools USA CCC Lessons.

Paul W Stackhouse↗
NASA NTRS2007

A Return to Innovative Engineering Design, Critical Thinking and Systems Engineering

I believe we are facing a critical time where innovative engineering design is of paramount importance to the success of our aerospace industry. However, the very qualities and attributes necessary for enhancing, educating, and mentoring a creative spirit are in decline in important areas. The importance of creativity and innovation in this country was emphasized by a special edition of the Harvard Business Review OnPoint entitled: "The Creative Company" which compiled a series of past and present articles on the subject of creativity and innovation and stressed its importance to our national economy. There is also a recognition of a lack of engineering, critical thinking and problem-solving skills in our education systems and a trend toward trying to enhance those skills by developing K-12 educational programs such as Project Lead the Way, "Science for All Americans", Benchmarks 2061 , etc. In addition, with respect to spacecraft development, we have a growing need for young to mid-level engineers with appropriate experience and skills in spacecraft design, development, analysis, testing, and systems engineering. As the Director of Engineering at NASA's Johnson Space Center, I realized that sustaining engineering support of an operational human spacecraft such as the Space Shuttle is decidedly different than engineering design and development skills necessary for designing a new spacecraft such as the Crew Exploration Vehicle of the Constellation Program. We learned a very important lesson post Columbia in that the Space Shuttle is truly an experimental and not an operational vehicle and the strict adherence to developed rules and processes and chains of command of an inherently bureaucratic organizational structure will not protect us from a host of known unknowns let alone unknown unknowns. There are no strict rules, processes, or procedures for understanding anomalous results of an experiment, anomalies with an experimental spacecraft like Shuttle, or in the conceptual design of a spacecraft. Engineering design is as much an art as it is a science. The critical thinking skills necessary to uncover lurking problems in an experimental design and creatively develop solutions are some of the same skills necessary to design a new spacecraft. Thus, I believe engineers unfamiliar with or removed from design and development need time to transition and develop the required skill set to be effective spacecraft designers. I believe the creative process necessary in design can be enhanced and even taught as early as grades K-12 and should continue to be nurtured and developed at the university level and beyond. I am going to present a strategy for developing learning teams to address complex multidisciplinary problems and to creatively develop solutions to those problems rapidly at minimal cost. I will frame a real problem, the development of on-orbit thermal protection system repair of the Space Shuttle, and step through the series of skills necessary to enhance the creative process. The case study I will illustrate is based on a real project, the R&D Reinforced Carbon-Carbon (RCC) Repair Team's development of on-orbit repair concepts for damaged Space Shuttle RCC nose cap and/or leading edges.

Camarda, Charles J.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Target Diagnostic Menu Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory SYSM-5620: Design Thinking and Systems Engineering

Target Diagnostic’s Engineering Science (TDES) currently supports over 80 diagnostic systems, all of which draw from a fixed budget that covers staff time and procurement. As the division continues to add new diagnostics, demand on these limited resources increases, yet the budget remains unchanged. Shot Responsible Individuals (RIs) have unrestricted freedom to select any number or type of diagnostics for each experiment, often by copying previous shot configurations with only minor modifications. This practice makes it easy to generate new shots but does not encourage critical evaluation of diagnostic necessity. As a result, many diagnostics are routinely included in a shot without a clear justification, and in practice, much of the data collected is not analyzed. The ever-growing arsenal of diagnostics also increases the burden on TDES personnel, requiring more staff for support, maintenance, and service. This environment creates challenges in focusing resources on diagnostics that provide the greatest value to the NIF mission and raises concerns about the continued justification for maintaining all existing systems. The static TDES budget cannot sustain the ongoing growth in demand for new diagnostic systems. Shot RIs currently face no constraints on the number or type of diagnostics they assign to each experiment, often defaulting to previous configurations without critically assessing the necessity of each diagnostic. This results in the routine inclusion of diagnostics whose data may not be analyzed or may no longer directly support the NIF mission. Consequently, TDES is required to maintain and support an expanding set of diagnostics, straining limited resources and risking inefficient use of staff and funding. There is a need for TDES to efficiently allocate limited resources by establishing a process that requires shot RIs to critically evaluate and justify the inclusion of each diagnostic in their experiments. This process should discourage the routine, unexamined inclusion of diagnostics, support the identification of underutilized or obsolete systems, and ensure that only those diagnostics providing the greatest value to the NIF mission are maintained and supported. Ultimately, this approach must enable TDES to operate within budget constraints while maximizing scientific impact and operational efficiency.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thinking in Systems

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Katherine Dickenson↗
NASA NTRS2006

The Application of Architecture Frameworks to Modelling Exploration Operations Costs

Developments in architectural frameworks and system-of-systems thinking have provided useful constructs for systems engineering. DoDAF concepts, language, and formalisms, in particular, provide a natural way of conceptualizing an operations cost model applicable to NASA's space exploration vision. Not all DoDAF products have meaning or apply to a DoDAF inspired operations cost model, but this paper describes how such DoDAF concepts as nodes, systems, and operational activities relate to the development of a model to estimate exploration operations costs. The paper discusses the specific implementation to the Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) operational functions/activities currently being developed and presents an overview of how this powerful representation can apply to robotic space missions as well.

Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDA↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Trajectory Based Operations (TBO)

Today, the FAA is fully engaged in the development and deployment of TBO for the NAS. To realize TBO, the FAA and NAS user community recognize the importance of systems-of-systems thinking and of greater integration across systems, programs, teams, and between research and the field. The ATD-1 Operational Integration Assessment (OIA), helped blaze the trail for this important transition while moving TBFM Terminal Sequencing and Spacing (TSAS) down the path to deployment. Only a few years later, a comprehensive flight test of Flight Deck Interval Management (FIM) capabilities was executed, complementary and interoperable with traffic flow capabilities that were then emerging for TBO. Together, the ATD-1 tech transfers helped pave the way for the highly integrated systems-of-systems development and acquisition being undertaken for TBO. This session will chart that path to where we are today, and where we are going in the future.

ATD-1, TSAS, FIM, trajectory based operations↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Systemic Risk From the Perspective of Climate, Environmental and Disaster Risk Science and Practice

Understanding and managing systemic risk is more important than ever due to our immense global connectivity (e.g., between sectors, such as food-health-water-energy, countries and continents, down to individuals). Despite the fact that the notion of systemic risk is several decades old, the term is used in diverse ways across different disciplines (e.g., financial systems, medicine, earth system sciences, disaster risk research and climate science). Triggered by the repercussions of the global financial crisis of the late 2000s, and more recently the COVID-19 pandemic, which are clear realization of systemic risk, the perception of systemic risk has often been focused on global and catastrophic or even existential risks. Systemic risk, however, can be seen as a feature of systems at all possible scales (e.g., global, national, regional, local) with system boundaries varying depending on the context. Addressing current societal challenges, such as climate change, in terms of systemic risk requires integrating different systems perspectives and fostering system thinking, while implementing key intergovernmental agendas, such as the Paris Agreement, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Sustainable Development Goals. Based on insights gained and knowledge collected from an expert workshop, literature review and expert elicitation, we give an integrated perspective of climate, environmental and disaster risk science and practice on systemic risk as summarized in a Briefing Note to the International Science Council. We provide an overview of concepts of systemic risk that have evolved over time and identify commonalities across terminologies and perspectives associated with systemic risk used in different contexts. Key attributes of systemic risk are outlined without prescribing a single definition, and information and data requirements are discussed that are essential for a better and more actionable understanding of the systemic nature of risk. Finally, the opportunities to connect research and policy for addressing systemic risk are highlighted.

systemic risk↗
NASA NTRS2022

Systemic Risk

Systemic risk is the name given to impacts that spread within and across systems and sectors (e.g. ecosystems, health, infrastructure and the food sector) via the movements of people, goods, capital and information within and across boundaries (e.g. regions, countries and continents). The spread of these impacts can lead to potentially existential consequences and system collapse across a range of time horizons. Globalization contributes to systemic risk affecting people worldwide. The impacts of climate change or COVID-19 show how the challenges of addressing systemic risk go beyond conventional risk management and governance. Critical system interdependencies, amplified by underlying vulnerabilities, highlight that there is a growing need to better understand cascading impacts, systemic risks and the possible political (governance) and societal responses. This includes improving our understanding of the root causes of systemic risk, both biophysical and socio-economic, and related information needs. Addressing contemporary challenges in terms of systemic risk requires integrating different systems perspectives and fostering system thinking, while implementing key intergovernmental agendas, such as the Paris Agreement, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Sustainable Development Goals.

systemic risk↗
DOE OSTI2023

Alignment among environmental programs in higher education: What Food-Energy-Water Nexus concepts are covered in introductory courses?

Interdisciplinary environmental and sustainability (IES) programs are different from other fields because they focus on a complex integration of humanities, social, and natural sciences concepts centered on the interactions of coupled human and natural systems. The interdisciplinary nature of IES programs does not lend itself to traditional discipline-specific concept inventory frameworks for critically evaluating preconceptions and learning. We discuss the results of the first phase of a research project to develop a next generation concept inventory for evaluating interdisciplinary concepts important for introductory IES courses. Using the Food-Energy-Water (FEW) Nexus (the intersections/interdependencies of food, energy, and water sectors) as our focus, we conducted a content analysis of eight representative college-level introductory environmental course syllabi and course materials (e.g., textbooks, journal articles, print media) to identify common interdisciplinary FEW Nexus concepts taught in introductory IES courses. Results demonstrate that all IES introductory course materials reference the FEW Nexus. Food, energy, and/or water resources as individual elements of the FEW Nexus are frequently described, but connections between these resource systems are included less often. Biology, energy systems, waste and pollution in the natural environment, agriculture, earth sciences and geology, climate change, behavioral social sciences, and economics concepts are most associated with FEW concepts, hinting at commonalities across IES topics that anchor systems thinking. Despite differences in IES programs, there appears to be some alignment between core concepts being taught at the FEW Nexus in introductory courses.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2017

A Systems Approach to Nitrogen Delivery

A systems based approach will be used to evaluate the nitrogen delivery process. This approach involves principles found in Lean, Reliability, Systems Thinking, and Requirements. This unique combination of principles and thought process yields a very in depth look into the system to which it is applied. By applying a systems based approach to the nitrogen delivery process there should be improvements in cycle time, efficiency, and a reduction in the required number of personnel needed to sustain the delivery process. This will in turn reduce the amount of demurrage charges that the site incurs. In addition there should be less frustration associated with the delivery process.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2017

A Systems Approach to Nitrogen Delivery

A systems based approach will be used to evaluate the nitrogen delivery process. This approach involves principles found in Lean, Reliability, Systems Thinking, and Requirements. This unique combination of principles and thought process yields a very in depth look into the system to which it is applied. By applying a systems based approach to the nitrogen delivery process there should be improvements in cycle time, efficiency, and a reduction in the required number of personnel needed to sustain the delivery process. This will in turn reduce the amount of demurrage charges that the site incurs. In addition there should be less frustration associated with the delivery process.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
NASA NTRS2004

Doing Systems Engineering Without Thinking About It at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center

When asked about his processes in designing a new airplane, Burt Rutan responded: ...there is always a performance requirement. So I start with the basic physics of an airplane that can get those requirements, and that pretty much sizes an airplane... Then I look at the functionality... And then I try a lot of different configurations to meet that, and then justify one at a time, throwing them out... Typically I'll have several different configurations... But I like to experiment, certainly. I like to see if there are other ways to provide the utility. This kind of thinking engineering as a total systems engineering approach is what is being instilled in all engineers at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center.

Bohn-Meyer, Marta↗