Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “community leadership”

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 NTRS2012

Human Systems Integration in Practice: Constellation Lessons Learned

NASA's Constellation program provided a unique testbed for Human Systems Integration (HSI) as a fundamental element of the Systems Engineering process. Constellation was the first major program to have HSI mandated by NASA's Human Rating document. Proper HSI is critical to the success of any project that relies on humans to function as operators, maintainers, or controllers of a system. HSI improves mission, system and human performance, significantly reduces lifecycle costs, lowers risk and minimizes re-design. Successful HSI begins with sufficient project schedule dedicated to the generation of human systems requirements, but is by no means solely a requirements management process. A top-down systems engineering process that recognizes throughout the organization, human factors as a technical discipline equal to traditional engineering disciplines with authority for the overall system. This partners with a bottoms-up mechanism for human-centered design and technical issue resolution. The Constellation Human Systems Integration Group (HSIG) was a part of the Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I) organization within the program office, and existed alongside similar groups such as Flight Performance, Environments & Constraints, and Integrated Loads, Structures and Mechanisms. While the HSIG successfully managed, via influence leadership, a down-and-in Community of Practice to facilitate technical integration and issue resolution, it lacked parallel top-down authority to drive integrated design. This presentation will discuss how HSI was applied to Constellation, the lessons learned and best practices it revealed, and recommendations to future NASA program and project managers. This presentation will discuss how Human Systems Integration (HSI) was applied to NASA's Constellation program, the lessons learned and best practices it revealed, and recommendations to future NASA program and project managers on how to accomplish this critical function.

Zumbado, Jennifer Rochlis↗
NASA NTRS2000

Atmosphere of Freedom: Sixty Years at the NASA Ames Research Center

Throughout Ames History, four themes prevail: a commitment to hiring the best people; cutting-edge research tools; project management that gets things done faster, better and cheaper; and outstanding research efforts that serve the scientific professions and the nation. More than any other NASA Center, Ames remains shaped by its origins in the NACA (National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics). Not that its missions remain the same. Sure, Ames still houses the world's greatest collection of wind tunnels and simulation facilities, its aerodynamicists remain among the best in the world, and pilots and engineers still come for advice on how to build better aircraft. But that is increasingly part of Ames' past. Ames people have embraced two other missions for its future. First, intelligent systems and information science will help NASA use new tools in supercomputing, networking, telepresence and robotics. Second, astrobiology will explore lore the prospects for life on Earth and beyond. Both new missions leverage Ames long-standing expertise in computation and in the life sciences, as well as its relations with the computing and biotechnology firms working in the Silicon Valley community that has sprung up around the Center. Rather than the NACA missions, it is the NACA culture that still permeates Ames. The Ames way of research management privileges the scientists and engineers working in the laboratories. They work in an atmosphere of freedom, laced with the expectation of integrity and responsibility. Ames researchers are free to define their research goals and define how they contribute to the national good. They are expected to keep their fingers on the pulse of their disciplines, to be ambitious yet frugal in organizing their efforts, and to always test their theories in the laboratory or in the field. Ames' leadership ranks, traditionally, are cultivated within this scientific community. Rather than manage and supervise these researchers, Ames leadership merely guided them, represents them to NASA headquarters and the world outside, then steps out of the way before they get run over.

Bugos, Glenn E.↗
NASA NTRS2022

National Campaign (NC)-1 Strategic Conflict Management Simulation (X4) Community Based Rules

Projected demand for transportation services in the urban environment has led to the development of several Concepts of Operation for Urban Air Mobility, or UAM. UAM is a concept for the transportation of people and goods in the metropolitan environment using small, efficient aircraft over short distances as part of an expanding multimodal transportation network. UAM will leverage emerging technologies including electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft, increasing levels of automation and a new operational paradigm in dense airspace where a set of agreed-upon rules govern the procedures and interactions defining a cooperative environment in which operators are entrusted with a range of functions typically conducted by Air Traffic Control (ATC). These rules, proposed in the FAA NextGen Office’s UAM Concept of Operations [1], were originally termed Community Based Rules or Community Business Rules (CBRs), and will in the future termed Cooperative Operating Practices (COPs); this document uses the original term, CBR. CBRs are a set of rules, developed by the UAM community and (where necessary) approved by the FAA that govern the interactions between UAM entities and limit the need for ATC services including, but not limited to, separation control by ATC, addressing a fundamental challenge to scaling UAM operations. UAM community development of CBRs is anticipated to accelerate the adoption of new practices while retaining the regulatory authority of the FAA within required domains (e.g., NAS safety, security and equal access). However, there currently exists no agreed industry forum or defined procedures for CBR development. Investigation of best practices for the development of UAM CBRs was identified by NASA and the FAA NextGen Office as a research need. In collaboration with seven industry partners, NASA participated in a series of simulations that investigated elements of the envisioned UAM operations, with a primary focus on Strategic Conflict Management (SCM). The development and conduct of cooperative UAM simulations with seven industry partners provided a unique opportunity to investigate CBR development practices. Development of CBRs for the UAM SCM simulations was conducted in parallel with simulation capability development and was closely related to requirements definition for the simulations. As such, the CBR development effort presented herein had two objectives: explore CBR development practices in collaboration with the industry partners and develop an initial set of UAM CBRs to support simulation requirements definition and development. Consensus was achieved among NASA and the industry partners on 24 CBRs that were developed to support the cooperative simulation operations across five topic areas: General (related to test requirements), Operational Intent, Conformance Monitoring, Demand Capacity Balancing, and Airspace Constraint Management. Additional topic areas and CBRs were discussed but were deemed outside the scope of the simulation; these are included in the appendices. A collaborative, iterative process was employed for developing the CBRs engaging both NASA and Industry; because CBR development is envisioned to be community-driven, opportunities were sought that provided industry partners leadership roles in developing CBRs. The following key observations and recommendations may aid the UAM industry in future CBR development efforts: - The lack of a defined process proved challenging initially. Stakeholder engagement in the early stages of CBR development was intermittent and may have been due to the lack of a clear definition of roles and responsibilities of those involved in the effort. - Industry leadership of CBR topic areas proved successful. Discussions in these topic areas were engaging, with alternate viewpoints freely discussed and detailed CBRs resulting. This points to the importance of identifying the best-suited leadership in technical areas for CBR development. - Discussions within a CBR topic area were typically dominated by only a few participants. Whereas all industry partners contributed to CBR development, within each topic area, technical leadership was evident even when not formally established. This observation may indicate that smaller, focused groups may be more effective in initial CBR development than an open forum or large standards development effort (although both maybe required prior to FAA review and approval for some CBRs). - Identifying suitable forums for initial UAM CBR development and identifying the most effective industry participants and leadership will be crucial for successful CBR development. Although the operational need for UAM CBRs may not be immediate, establishing the forums and leadership to define the processes for CBR development is a prudent early step to UAM realization.

Community Based Rules↗
NASA NTRS2005

Coupling of the Inner Magnetosphere with the Underlying Atmosphere and Ionosphere

The following is a final report summarizing our very successful inner magnetosphere research program through which we have made significant contributions to: (1) research through data analysis, modeling and participation in community-wide campaigns, (2) the development of the space science discipline through leadership in national and international campaigns, service on steering committees, review panels and the development and maintenance of campaign and community web sites, (3) education and human resources by the participation of graduate, undergraduate and high school students in our research programs and (4) outreach through development of web-based materials and interactive games. We describe each of these activities below.

Sharber, James M.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Bridging Informatics and Earth Science: a Look at Gregory Leptoukh's Contributions

With the tragic passing this year of Gregory Leptoukh, the Earth and Space Sciences community lost a tireless participant in--and advocate for--science informatics. Throughout his career at NASA, Dr. Leptoukh established a theme of bridging the gulf between the informatics and science communities. Nowhere is this more evident than his leadership in the development of Giovanni (GES DISC Interactive Online Visualization ANd aNalysis Infrastructure). Giovanni is an online tool that serves to hide the often-complex technical details of data format and structure, making science data easier to explore and use by Earth scientists. To date Giovanni has been acknowledged as a contributor in 500-odd scientific articles. In recent years, Leptoukh concentrated his efforts on multi-sensor data inter-comparison, merging and fusion. This work exposed several challenges at the intersection of data and science. One of these was the ease with which a naive user might generate spurious comparisons, a potential hazard that was the genesis of the Multi-sensor Data Synergy Advisor (MDSA). The MDSA uses semantic ontologies and inference rules to organize knowledge about dataset quality and other salient characteristics in order to advise users on potential caveats for comparing or merging two datasets. Recently, Leptoukh also led the development of AeroStat, an online Giovanni instance to investigate aerosols via statistics from station and satellite comparisons and merged maps of data from more than one instrument. Aerostat offers a neural net based bias adjustment to harmonize the data by removing systematic offsets between datasets before merging. These examples exhibit Leptoukh's talent for adopting advanced computer technologies in the service of making science data more accessible to researchers. In this, he set an example that is at once both vital and challenging for the ESSI community to emulate.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2014

FY15 Gravitational-Wave Mission Activities Project

The Gravitational-Wave (GW) team at Goddard provides leadership to both the US and international research communities through science and conceptual design competencies. To sustain the US effort to either participate in the GW mission that ESA selected for the L3 opportunity or to initiate a NASA-led mission, the Goddard team will engage in the advancement of the science and the conceptual design of a future GW mission. We propose two tasks: (1) deliver new theoretical tools to help the external research community understand how GW observations can contribute to their science and (2) explore new implementations for laser metrology systems based on techniques from time-domain reflectometry and laser communications.

ESA selected for LS opportunity↗
NASA NTRS2024

Proceedings of the Quantum Sensing Workshop, September 2022

To understand the NASA needs for quantum-sensing technologies and the capabilities developed internal and external to NASA, a workshop was held on September 27 through 29, 2022, in Newport News, VA. This workshop brought together senior leadership within NASA, technical experts within the quantum sensing community, NASA scientists and potential end-users of quantum-sensing technologies, and external stakeholders. This document contains the papers and presentations given at the Workshop.

Quantum Sensing↗
NASA NTRS2002

Second Generation RLV Space Vehicle Concept

NASA has a long history of conducting development programs and projects in a consistent fashion. Systems Engineering within those programs and projects has also followed a given method outlined by such documents as the NASA Systems Engineering Handbook. The relatively new NASA Space Launch Initiative (SLI) is taking a new approach to developing a space vehicle, with innovative management methods as well as new Systems Engineering processes. With the program less than a year into its life cycle, the efficacy of these new processes has yet to be proven or disproven. At $776M for phase 1, SLI represents a major portion of the NASA focus; however, the new processes being incorporated are not reflected in the training provided by NASA to its engineers. The NASA Academy of Program and Project Leadership (APPL) offers core classes in program and project management and systems engineering to NASA employees with the purpose of creating a "knowledge community where ideas, skills, and experiences are exchanged to increase each other's capacity for strong leadership". The SLI program is, in one sense, a combination of a conceptual design program and a technology program. The program as a whole doesn't map into the generic systems engineering project cycle as currently, and for some time, taught. For example, the NASA APPL Systems Engineering training course teaches that the "first step in developing an architecture is to define the external boundaries of the system", which will require definition of the interfaces with other systems and the next step will be to "define all the components that make up the next lower level of the system hierarchy" where fundamental requirements are allocated to each component. Whereas, the SLI technology risk reduction approach develops architecture subsystem technologies prior to developing architectures. The higher level architecture requirements are not allowed to fully develop and undergo decomposition and allocation down to the subsystems before the subsystems must develop allocated requirements based on the highest level of requirements. In the vernacular of the project cycles prior to the mid 1990's, the architecture definition portion of the program appears to be at a generic Phase A stage, while the subsystems are operating at Phase B. Even the management structure of the SLI program is innovative in its approach to Systems Engineering and is not reflected in the APPL training modules. The SLI program has established a Systems Engineering office as an office separate from the architecture development or the subsystem technology development, while that office does have representatives within these other offices. The distributed resources of the Systems Engineering Office are co-located with the respective Project Offices. This template is intended to provide systems engineering as an integrated function at the Program Level. the program management of SLI and the MAT agree that "program/project managers and the systems engineering team must work closely together towards the single objective of delivering quality products that meet the customer needs". This paper will explore the differences between the methods being taught by NASA, which represent decades of ideas, and those currently in practice in SLI. Time will tell if the innovation employed by SLI will prove to be the model of the future. For now, it is suggested that the training of the present exercise the flexibility of recognizing the new processes employed by a major new NASA program.

Bailey, Michelle↗
NASA NTRS1997

American Indian Education Opportunities Program

Activities of the American Indian Educational Opportunities Program (AIEOP) at Hampton University for this reporting period included the establishment of a student chapter of the American Indian Science & Engineering Society (AISES), a move to new office space, hosting events on campus for visiting students from the American Indian Education Program of Oxon Hill, Maryland and Onondaga Community College in Syracuse, New York, collaboration with the Multicultural Leadership Team at NASA Langley Research Center for a Native American elder to serve as a speaker, participation in Native American conferences and other events, and continuing efforts to recruit and retain American Indian students.

Molin, Paulette F.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Putting Universities in Charge Yields Early Success for NASA Aeronautics

The process by which NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) interacts with the university community has been augmented with the introduction of the University Leadership Initiative (ULI). ULI represents a new approach that asks universities to propose what they want to work on as long as it is in line with the ARMD’s vision for aviation. In ULI, NASA is seeing academia working with industry to solve important aviation problems. Multi-disciplinary, multi-university teams are researching diverse and relevant topics spanning the various ARMD strategic thrusts. Undergraduate and graduate student involvement in ULI research is already having a significant impact in student education and next generation workforce development. Through ULI, ARMD seeks to develop several novel technologies that will complement the NASA-internal portfolio.

Koushik Datta↗
NASA NTRS2020

The “Gearamid” Model: Transforming NASA Langley’s Role in the Aerospace Technology Ecosystem

NASA’s operating environment is evolving: numerous new emerging technologies are converging to create breakthrough solutions, many nontraditional players are partnering to create those solutions, and a diverse array of new public-private funding models are being employed. A team at NASA’s Langley Research Center (LaRC) developed a model to describe the challenges that must be addressed for an emerging breakthrough technology to penetrate the appropriate market sector, and how all the players in the relevant ecosystem can collaborate to accelerate the market infusion process. This model, which the team dubbed the “Gearamid,” originated from a narrower study to determine what LaRC should do to capitalize on and advance autonomous technology as a “game changer” in the civil aerospace domain. The elements in the original version of the Gearamid depict the various challenges that need to be addressed as an autonomous technology proceeds from initial development to market infusion. In addition, the Gearamid indicates the “actors” best suited to address each challenge element. The study team noted that all challenge elements in the Gearamid must be worked concurrently to assure successful infusion of autonomous solutions. The team also found that NASA expertise naturally positions Agency organizations—including LaRC—to lead contributions that address certain challenge elements and to play a supplemental role in other areas where entities external to NASA are actively working and investing to solve challenges. Furthermore, the team concluded that NASA can play a leadership role in coordinating efforts of the diverse entities across the civil aerospace community. After determining the center’s optimal role in the autonomous technology development ecosystem, the study team then extrapolated the Gearamid model for autonomous technologies into a broader, more general model depicting the challenge elements that must be overcome to develop and infuse any emerging technology. LaRC has embraced the Gearamid model and is using it to drive changes that will transform the center and allow it to function optimally in the evolving landscape. Given LaRC’s successes, the study team suggests that other organizations may also be able to use the Gearamid model to inform future planning/strategy efforts.

Jill M Marlowe↗
NASA NTRS2017

Radioisotope Power Systems Program Status and Expectations

The Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) Programs goal is to make RPS available for the exploration of the solar system in environments where conventional solar or chemical power generation is impractical or impossible to use to meet mission needs. To meet this goal, the RPS Program manages investments in RPS system development and RPS technologies. The RPS Program exists to support NASA's Science Mission Directorate (SMD). The RPS Program provides strategic leadership for RPS, enables the availability of RPS for use by the planetary science community, successfully executes RPS flight projects and mission deployments, maintains a robust technology development portfolio, manages RPS related National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Nuclear Launch Safety (NLS) approval processes for SMD, maintains insight into the Department of Energy (DOE) implementation of NASA funded RPS production infrastructure operations, including implementation of the NASA funded Plutonium-238 production restart efforts. This paper will provide a status of recent RPS activities.

Radioisotope↗
NASA NTRS2008

Modeling and Simulation at Tidewater Community College

Investment of $1.5 million in medical simulation technology. Integration of medical simulation activities into the curriculum. Support from TCC leadership. Individual and team activities. Skill development and critical thinking/problem solving skills.

Summers, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2018

Updated Benefits for Humanity from the International Space Station

Final document is attached. In 2018, the International Space Station (ISS) [Figure 1] partnership completed a revision for the third edition of the International Space Station Benefits for Humanity, a compilation of case studies of benefits being realized from ISS activities in the areas of human health, Earth observations and disaster response, innovative technology, global education, and economic development of space. The revision included new assessments of economic value and scientific value with more detail than the second edition. The third edition contains updated statistics on the impacts of the benefits as well as new benefits that have developed since the previous publication. This presentation will summarize the updates on behalf of the ISS Program Science Forum, which consists of senior science representatives across the ISS international partnership. An independent consultant determined the economic valuation (EV) of ISS research benefits case studies and the third edition contains the results. The process involved a preliminary assessment of economic, social, and innovation factors. A more detailed assessment followed, which included factors such as addressable market, market penetration, revenue generation, ability to leverage across other applications or customer groups, quality of life improvements, health benefits, environmental benefits, cultural and community cohesion, inspiration, new knowledge, novel approaches, creation of a unique market niche, and research leadership. Because of the unique microgravity environment of the ISS laboratory, the multidisciplinary and international nature of the research, and the significance of the investment in its development, analyzing ISS scientific impacts is an exceptional challenge. As a result, the ISS partnership determined the scientific valuation (SV) of ISS research using a combination of citation analyses, bibliometrics, and narratives of important ISS utilization results. Approximately 2,100 ISS results publications comprised of scientific journal articles, conference proceedings, and gray literature, representing over 5,000 authors and co-authors on Earth were used in this evaluation to enable the communication of impacts of ISS research on various science and technology fields across many countries. The publication also updates and expands the previously described benefits of research results in the areas of space commerce, technology development, human health, environmental change and disaster response, and education activities. Distinct benefits return to Earth from the only orbiting multidisciplinary laboratory of its kind. The ISS is a stepping-stone for future space exploration while also providing findings that develop low Earth orbit as a place for sustained human activity and improve life on our planet.

research↗
NASA NTRS2018

Updated Benefits for Humanity, Third Edition (B4H3), from the International Space Station (ISS)

In 2018, the International Space Station (ISS) [Figure 1] partnership completed a revision for the third edition of the International Space Station Benefits for Humanity, a compilation of case studies of benefits being realized from ISS activities in the areas of human health, Earth observations and disaster response, innovative technology, global education, and economic development of space. The revision included new assessments of economic value and scientific value with more detail than the second edition. The third edition contains updated statistics on the impacts of the benefits as well as new benefits that have developed since the previous publication. This presentation will summarize the updates on behalf of the ISS Program Science Forum, which consists of senior science representatives across the ISS international partnership. An independent consultant determined the economic valuation (EV) of ISS research benefits case studies and the third edition contains the results. The process involved a preliminary assessment of economic, social, and innovation factors. A more detailed assessment followed, which included factors such as addressable market, market penetration, revenue generation, ability to leverage across other applications or customer groups, quality of life improvements, health benefits, environmental benefits, cultural and community cohesion, inspiration, new knowledge, novel approaches, creation of a unique market niche, and research leadership. Because of the unique microgravity environment of the ISS laboratory, the multidisciplinary and international nature of the research, and the significance of the investment in its development, analyzing ISS scientific impacts is an exceptional challenge. As a result, the ISS partnership determined the scientific valuation (SV) of ISS research using a combination of citation analyses, bibliometrics, and narratives of important ISS utilization results. Approximately 2,100 ISS results publications comprised of scientific journal articles, conference proceedings, and gray literature, representing over 5,000 authors and co-authors on Earth were used in this evaluation to enable the communication of impacts of ISS research on various science and technology fields across many countries. The publication also updates and expands the previously described benefits of research results in the areas of space commerce, technology development, human health, environmental change and disaster response, and education activities. Distinct benefits return to Earth from the only orbiting multidisciplinary laboratory of its kind. The ISS is a stepping-stone for future space exploration while also providing findings that develop low Earth orbit as a place for sustained human activity and improve life on our planet.

ISS↗
NASA NTRS1991

Systems for COMET

The Centers for Commercial Development of Space (CCDS) have become the nation's primary focus for stimulating private sector investment in space. In establishing the COMmercial Experiment Transporter (COMET) program, the CCDS's have taken a major step toward the full scale commercial development of space. The COMET program will enable the CCDS community to turn the goal of commercial space into reality, and in the process, establish U.S. leadership in the global market for space systems and services. Some details are presented on the systems that make up the COMET missions, specifically as they describe the accommodation for potential users and mission parameters.

Andrews, Harry↗
NASA NTRS1992

Virtual reality and planetary exploration

Exploring planetary environments is central to NASA's missions and goals. A new computing technology called Virtual Reality has much to offer in support of planetary exploration. This technology augments and extends human presence within computer-generated and remote spatial environments. Historically, NASA has been a leader in many of the fundamental concepts and technologies that comprise Virtual Reality. Indeed, Ames Research Center has a central role in the development of this rapidly emerging approach to using computers. This ground breaking work has inspired researchers in academia, industry, and the military. Further, NASA's leadership in this technology has spun off new businesses, has caught the attention of the international business community, and has generated several years of positive international media coverage. In the future, Virtual Reality technology will enable greatly improved human-machine interactions for more productive planetary surface exploration. Perhaps more importantly, Virtual Reality technology will democratize the experience of planetary exploration and thereby broaden understanding of, and support for, this historic enterprise.

Mcgreevy, Michael W.↗