Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “concurrent design”

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 NTRS2011

Aerospace Concurrent Engineering Design Teams: Current State, Next Steps and a Vision for the Future

Over the past sixteen years, government aerospace agencies and aerospace industry have developed and evolved operational concurrent design teams to create novel spaceflight mission concepts and designs. These capabilities and teams, however, have evolved largely independently. In today's environment of increasingly complex missions with limited budgets it is becoming readily apparent that both implementing organizations and today's concurrent engineering teams will need to interact more often than they have in the past. This will require significant changes in the current state of practice. This paper documents the findings from a concurrent engineering workshop held in August 2010 to identify the key near term improvement areas for concurrent engineering capabilities and challenges to the long-term advancement of concurrent engineering practice. The paper concludes with a discussion of a proposed vision for the evolution of these teams over the next decade.

concurrent engineering design↗
NASA NTRS2021

The Evolution of Team-X: 25 Years of Concurrent Engineering Design Experience

Established in 1995 in response to NASA’s “Faster, Better, Cheaper” era, Team-X was born from a need to perform rapid space mission design for principal investigator-led competed proposals. The success and sustainability of Team-X over the 25 years that have followed is directly attributable to the Team-X business model and its evolution over time. While dozens of organizations and institutions have emulated the Team-X design process, there are nuances to the Team-X business model that are unique to JPL, and explain why it is different than other concurrent design teams. One of the key components of a business model is the customer segments that are served. Team-X was founded to conduct the Pre-Phase A work necessary to formulate a portfolio of multiple planetary mission concepts, but has since expanded to include the capability to conduct studies for Earth science, astrophysics, and heliophysics missions as well as Human Exploration and Operations missions and space technology development. Team-X delivers value to its clients both in terms of speed and cost. Team-X has also added value by creating teams to enable the development of Instrument and SmallSat Concepts. Value has further been enhanced through a revision of its process for reviews and the addition of pre-design architecting capabilities. Other aspects of the Team-X infrastructure, in addition to study process, have enabled it to succeed for over a quarter century. From our most important resource, the people, our tools, especially for cost estimating, as well as our increasing capable IT infrastructure have contributed to our capability to meet the demands of our clients. The Team-X business model and its evolution over time, position it well for success in the decades to come.

Murphy, Jonathan↗
NASA NTRS1997

Electronic Design Automation: Integrating the Design and Manufacturing Functions

As the complexity of electronic systems grows, the traditional design practice, a sequential process, is replaced by concurrent design methodologies. A major advantage of concurrent design is that the feedback from software and manufacturing engineers can be easily incorporated into the design. The implementation of concurrent engineering methodologies is greatly facilitated by employing the latest Electronic Design Automation (EDA) tools. These tools offer integrated simulation of the electrical, mechanical, and manufacturing functions and support virtual prototyping, rapid prototyping, and hardware-software co-design. This report presents recommendations for enhancing the electronic design and manufacturing capabilities and procedures at JSC based on a concurrent design methodology that employs EDA tools.

Bachnak, Rafic↗
NASA NTRS1996

Thermal Control Subsystem Design for the Avionics of a Space Station Payload

A case study of the thermal control subsystem development for a space based payload is presented from the concept stage through preliminary design. This payload, the Space Acceleration Measurement System 2 (SAMS-2), will measure the acceleration environment at select locations within the International Space Station. Its thermal control subsystem must maintain component temperatures within an acceptable range over a 10 year life span, while restricting accessible surfaces to touch temperature limits and insuring fail safe conditions in the event of loss of cooling. In addition to these primary design objectives, system level requirements and constraints are imposed on the payload, many of which are driven by multidisciplinary issues. Blending these issues into the overall system design required concurrent design sessions with the project team, iterative conceptual design layouts, thermal analysis and modeling, and hardware testing. Multiple tradeoff studies were also performed to investigate the many options which surfaced during the development cycle.

Moran, Matthew E.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Software For Drawing Design Details Concurrently

Software system containing five computer-aided-design programs enables more than one designer to work on same part or assembly at same time. Reduces time necessary to produce design by implementing concept of parallel or concurrent detailing, in which all detail drawings documenting three-dimensional model of part or assembly produced simultaneously, rather than sequentially. Keeps various detail drawings consistent with each other and with overall design by distributing changes in each detail to all other affected details.

Crosby, Dewey C., III↗
NASA NTRS2002

How to Quickly Import CAD Geometry into Thermal Desktop

There are several groups at JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) that are committed to concurrent design efforts, two are featured here. Center for Space Mission Architecture and Design (CSMAD) enables the practical application of advanced process technologies in JPL's mission architecture process. Team I functions as an incubator for projects that are in the Discovery, and even pre-Discovery proposal stages. JPL's concurrent design environment is to a large extent centered on the CAD (Computer Aided Design) file. During concurrent design sessions CAD geometry is ported to other more specialized engineering design packages.

Wright, Shonte↗
NASA NTRS2011

Characterizing Distributed Concurrent Engineering Teams: A Descriptive Framework for Aerospace Concurrent Engineering Design Teams

As aerospace missions grow larger and more technically complex in the face of ever tighter budgets, it will become increasingly important to use concurrent engineering methods in the development of early conceptual designs because of their ability to facilitate rapid assessments and trades in a cost-efficient manner. To successfully accomplish these complex missions with limited funding, it is also essential to effectively leverage the strengths of individuals and teams across government, industry, academia, and international agencies by increased cooperation between organizations. As a result, the existing concurrent engineering teams will need to increasingly engage in distributed collaborative concurrent design. This paper is an extension of a recent white paper written by the Concurrent Engineering Working Group, which details the unique challenges of distributed collaborative concurrent engineering. This paper includes a short history of aerospace concurrent engineering, and defines the terms 'concurrent', 'collaborative' and 'distributed' in the context of aerospace concurrent engineering. In addition, a model for the levels of complexity of concurrent engineering teams is presented to provide a way to conceptualize information and data flow within these types of teams.

Concept Design↗
NASA NTRS1993

ACSYNT inner loop flight control design study

The NASA Ames Research Center developed the Aircraft Synthesis (ACSYNT) computer program to synthesize conceptual future aircraft designs and to evaluate critical performance metrics early in the design process before significant resources are committed and cost decisions made. ACSYNT uses steady-state performance metrics, such as aircraft range, payload, and fuel consumption, and static performance metrics, such as the control authority required for the takeoff rotation and for landing with an engine out, to evaluate conceptual aircraft designs. It can also optimize designs with respect to selected criteria and constraints. Many modern aircraft have stability provided by the flight control system rather than by the airframe. This may allow the aircraft designer to increase combat agility, or decrease trim drag, for increased range and payload. This strategy requires concurrent design of the airframe and the flight control system, making trade-offs of performance and dynamics during the earliest stages of design. ACSYNT presently lacks means to implement flight control system designs but research is being done to add methods for predicting rotational degrees of freedom and control effector performance. A software module to compute and analyze the dynamics of the aircraft and to compute feedback gains and analyze closed loop dynamics is required. The data gained from these analyses can then be fed back to the aircraft design process so that the effects of the flight control system and the airframe on aircraft performance can be included as design metrics. This report presents results of a feasibility study and the initial design work to add an inner loop flight control system (ILFCS) design capability to the stability and control module in ACSYNT. The overall objective is to provide a capability for concurrent design of the aircraft and its flight control system, and enable concept designers to improve performance by exploiting the interrelationships between aircraft and flight control system design parameters.

Bortins, Richard↗
NASA NTRS2019

Program Management for Concurrent University Satellite Programs, Including Propellant Feed System Design Elements

Propulsion options for CubeSats are limited but are necessary for the CubeSat industry to continue future growth. Challenges to CubeSat propulsion include volume/mass constraints, availability of sufficiently small and certified hardware, secondary payload status, safe storage of high energy, and power requirements. A multi-mode (chemical and electric) thruster was developed by at the Missouri University of Science and Technology (Missouri S&T) to enable CubeSat propulsion missions. Two satellite buses, a 3U and 6U, are being developed by the M-SAT satellite research team at Missouri S&T to demonstrate the multi-mode thruster's capabilities. Two key challenges related to these missions are the development of the feed system to support the thruster and management of the two programs' personnel, resources, timelines, and budgets. The feed system was designed to support the unique needs of the thruster including material compatibility with the custom ionic liquid, variable flow rate, high pressurization, and high voltage within the constraints and budget of a student-designed propulsion system. The feed system was also designed to minimize risk as a secondary payload. This resulted in the development of a unique method to pressurize propellant stored in the feed system tubing. Within the expected operating pressure range, the method was experimentally shown to provide sufficient pressure and propellant volume to the thruster to meet mission success criteria. The 3U and 6U CubeSat buses were designed concurrently with complimentary payloads, hardware, objectives, and team structures. Resources such as personnel, lab space, and time had to be carefully balanced between the two teams. With proper management, the two programs have been able to support one another, providing valuable insight and collaboration between the two teams. Lessons learned include experience with design, testing, and assembly of hardware, team training/mentoring and motivation, improved documentation practices, and risk management.

Withrow, Shannah Nichole↗
NASA NTRS1990

Concurrent engineering design and management knowledge capture

The topics are presented in viewgraph form and include the following: real-time management, personnel management, project management, conceptual design and decision making; the SITRF design problem; and the electronic-design notebook.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2018

Costing at the Speed of Light: How Your Concurrent Engineering Design Team can Bootstrap Your Organizations Programmatic Capabilities

What do you do when it is necessary to generate reasonable cost estimates at the earliest Concept Maturity Levels and you have never flown any similar missions before? This paper describes the current and future Team X cost processes and methods, how they are being used to expand our data frontiers and cost modelling capabilities, and how this enables the ability to estimate early and estimate often.

Ramirez, Matthew↗
NASA NTRS2020

Estimate Early and Estimate Often: How Your Concurrent Engineering Design Team Can Bootstrap Your Organizations Programmatic Capabilities

What do you do when it is necessary to generate reasonable cost estimates at the earliest Concept Maturity Levels and you have never flown any similar missions before? This paper describes the current and future Team X and A-Team cost processes and methods, how they are being used to expand our data frontiers, cost modelling capabilities and how this enables the ability to estimate early and estimate often.

Hihn, Jairus↗
NASA NTRS2012

Early Formulation Model-centric Engineering on NASA's Europa Mission Concept Study

The proposed Jupiter Europa Orbiter and Jupiter Ganymede Orbiter missions were formulated using current state-of-the-art MBSE facilities: - JPL's TeamX, Rapid Mission Architecting - ESA's Concurrent Design Facility - APL's ACE Concurrent Engineering Facility. When JEO became an official "pre-project" in Sep 2010, we had already developed a strong partnership with JPL's Integrated Model Centric Engineering (IMCE) initiative; decided to apply Architecting and SysML-based MBSE from the beginning, begun laying these foundations to support work in Phase A. Release of Planetary Science Decadal Survey and FY12 President's Budget in March 2011 changed the landscape. JEO reverted to being a pre-phase A study. A conscious choice was made to continue application of MBSE on the Europa Study, refocused for early formulation. This presentation describes the approach, results, and lessons.

early formulation↗
NASA NTRS1999

X-33 Attitude Control Using the XRS-2200 Linear Aerospike Engine

The Vehicle Control Systems Team at Marshall Space Flight Center, Structures and Dynamics Laboratory, Guidance and Control Systems Division is designing, under a cooperative agreement with Lockheed Martin Skunkworks, the Ascent, Transition, and Entry flight attitude control systems for the X-33 experimental vehicle. Test flights, while suborbital, will achieve sufficient altitudes and Mach numbers to test Single Stage To Orbit, Reusable Launch Vehicle technologies. Ascent flight control phase, the focus of this paper, begins at liftoff and ends at linear aerospike main engine cutoff (MECO). The X-33 attitude control system design is confronted by a myriad of design challenges: a short design cycle, the X-33 incremental test philosophy, the concurrent design philosophy chosen for the X-33 program, and the fact that the attitude control system design is, as usual, closely linked to many other subsystems and must deal with constraints and requirements from these subsystems. Additionally, however, and of special interest, the use of the linear aerospike engine is a departure from the gimbaled engines traditionally used for thrust vector control (TVC) in launch vehicles and poses certain design challenges. This paper discusses the unique problem of designing the X-33 attitude control system with the linear aerospike engine, requirements development, modeling and analyses that verify the design.

Hall, Charles E.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Collaborative Mission Design at NASA Langley Research Center

NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) has developed and tested two facilities dedicated to increasing efficiency in key mission design processes, including payload design, mission planning, and implementation plan development, among others. The Integrated Design Center (IDC) is a state-of-the-art concurrent design facility which allows scientists and spaceflight engineers to produce project designs and mission plans in a real-time collaborative environment, using industry-standard physics-based development tools and the latest communication technology. The Mission Simulation Lab (MiSL), a virtual reality (VR) facility focused on payload and project design, permits engineers to quickly translate their design and modeling output into enhanced three-dimensional models and then examine them in a realistic full-scale virtual environment. The authors were responsible for envisioning both facilities and turning those visions into fully operational mission design resources at LaRC with multiple advanced capabilities and applications. In addition, the authors have created a synergistic interface between these two facilities. This combined functionality is the Interactive Design and Simulation Center (IDSC), a meta-facility which offers project teams a powerful array of highly advanced tools, permitting them to rapidly produce project designs while maintaining the integrity of the input from every discipline expert on the project. The concept-to-flight mission support provided by IDSC has shown improved inter- and intra-team communication and a reduction in the resources required for proposal development, requirements definition, and design effort.

Gough, Kerry M.↗
NASA NTRS1998

X-33 Attitude Control System Design for Ascent, Transition, and Entry Flight Regimes

The Vehicle Control Systems Team at Marshall Space Flight Center, Systems Dynamics Laboratory, Guidance and Control Systems Division is designing under a cooperative agreement with Lockheed Martin Skunkworks, the Ascent, Transition, and Entry flight attitude control system for the X-33 experimental vehicle. Ascent flight control begins at liftoff and ends at linear aerospike main engine cutoff (NECO) while Transition and Entry flight control begins at MECO and concludes at the terminal area energy management (TAEM) interface. TAEM occurs at approximately Mach 3.0. This task includes not only the design of the vehicle attitude control systems but also the development of requirements for attitude control system components and subsystems. The X-33 attitude control system design is challenged by a short design cycle, the design environment (Mach 0 to about Mach 15), and the X-33 incremental test philosophy. The X-33 design-to-launch cycle of less than 3 years requires a concurrent design approach while the test philosophy requires design adaptation to vehicle variations that are a function of Mach number and mission profile. The flight attitude control system must deal with the mixing of aerosurfaces, reaction control thrusters, and linear aerospike engine control effectors and handle parasitic effects such as vehicle flexibility and propellant sloshing from the uniquely shaped propellant tanks. The attitude control system design is, as usual, closely linked to many other subsystems and must deal with constraints and requirements from these subsystems.

Hall, Charles E.↗