Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “concurrent engineering 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 NTRS1998

A Survey of Applications and Research in Integrated Design Systems Technology

The initial part of the study was begun with a combination of literature searches, World Wide Web searches, and contacts with individuals and companies who were known to members of our team to have an interest in topics that seemed to be related to our study. There is a long list of such topics, such as concurrent engineering, design for manufacture, life-cycle engineering, systems engineering, systems integration, systems design, design systems, integrated product and process approaches, enterprise integration, integrated product realization, and similar terms. These all capture, at least in part, the flavor of what we describe here as integrated design systems. An inhibiting factor in this inquiry was the absence of agreed terminology for the study of integrated design systems. It is common for the term to be applied to what are essentially augmented Computer-Aided Design (CAD) systems, which are integrated only to the extent that agreements have been reached to attach proprietary extensions to proprietary CAD programs. It is also common for some to use the term integrated design systems to mean a system that applies only, or mainly, to the design phase of a product life cycle. It is likewise common for many of the terms listed earlier to be used as synonyms for integrated design systems. We tried to avoid this ambiguity by adopting the definition of integrated design systems that is implied in the introductory notes that we provided to our contacts, cited earlier. We thus arrived at this definition: Integrated Design Systems refers to the integration of the different tools and processes that comprise the engineering, of complex systems. It takes a broad view of the engineering of systems, to include consideration of the entire product realization process and the product life cycle. An important aspect of integrated design systems is the extent to which they integrate existing, "islands of automation" into a comprehensive design and product realization environment. As the study progressed, we relied increasingly upon a networking approach to lead us to new information. The departure point for such searches often was a government-sponsored project or a company initiative. The advantage of this approach was that short conversations with knowledgeable persons would usually cut through confusion over differences of terminology, thereby somewhat reducing the search space of the study. Even so, it was not until late in our eight-month inquiry that we began to see signs of convergence of the search, in the sense that a number of the latest inquiries began to turn up references to earlier contacts. As suggested above, this convergence often occurred with respect to particular government or company projects.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2011

Cost Validation Using PRICE H

PRICE H was introduced into the JPL cost estimation tool set circa 2003. It became more available at JPL when IPAO funded the NASA-wide site license for all NASA centers. PRICE H was mainly used as one of the cost tools to validate proposal grassroots cost estimates. Program offices at JPL view PRICE H as an additional crosscheck to Team X (JPL Concurrent Engineering Design Center) estimates. PRICE H became widely accepted ca, 2007 at JPL when the program offices moved away from grassroots cost estimation for Step 1 proposals. PRICE H is now one of the key cost tools used for cost validation, cost trades, and independent cost estimates.

cost estimation↗
NASA NTRS2020

Compass Final Report: Venus Bridge Orbiter and Surface Study (V-BOSS)

The Venus Bridge Orbiter and Surface Study (V-BOSS) Compass concurrent engineering design team study shows that new, high-priority Venus science can be achieved using a linked Orbiter + Surface Element (Lander) mission concept within a $200M cost cap with assumptions. This is feasible through optimizing investment in early technologies and platforms, such as the Long-Lived In-Situ Solar System Explorer (LLISSE), leveraging known and flight-ready technology, and the overall use of simple, small, robust systems in innovative approaches to Venus exploration. This architecture allows a range of science investigations through modification of Orbiter-Lander platforms in this study through choice of other instruments (often sensors), science themes, or operational modes. In particular, a fundamental strength of this approach is to provide science not available in other ways by using simplified architectures including rugged systems operable in-situ on the Venus surface. Such investigations would be pathfinders for more complex, and more expensive, future missions. Additionally, the results of this study can be used to further champion the need, value and return of early investment technology programs for the hard problem of in-situ investigations at Venus.

Venus Bridge↗
NASA NTRS2019

An Exploration of Mission Concepts That Could Utilize Small RPS

The NASA Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) Program Mission Analysis Team at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) requested a JPL Innovation Foundry Architecture Team (A-Team) study to assess mission pull for small RPS (1 mWe - 40 We) in order to inform the RPS Program Office on what future power system developments should be focused on. The A-Team is JPL’s concurrent engineering design team for science definition and early mission concept development, targeting concept maturation levels of 1 through 3. The requested small RPS study was tasked to identify the architecture space of potential small RPS missions, and suggest power levels that could enable or enhance potential future small spacecraft missions. This paper describes the collaborative engineering processes that the A-Team and Mission Analysis Team used to reach results quickly and the findings to inform the RPS Program about mission concept power requirements on RPS for small missions.

Bairstow, Brian K.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Use of Concurrent Engineering in Space Mission Design

In recent years, conceptual-phase (proposal level) design of space missions has been improved considerably. Team structures, tool linkage, specialized facilities known as design centers and scripted processes have been demonstrated to cut proposal-level engineering design time from a few months to a few weeks.

concurent Engineering-Space Mission Design↗
NASA NTRS2016

Risk Reduction for the System Design of an Enhanced MMRTG

Engineering of an enhanced Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (eMMRTG) began 3 years ago with agreement between the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). The Jet Propulsion Laboratory is leading the transfer of skutterudite thermoelectric couple technology to industry and leading the systems engineering of the proposed eMMRTG. Should NASA fund the flight development of an eMMRTG, the DOE would lead the flight system development. The analytical models and design of the MMRTG have been enhanced to use skutterudite couples developed at Jet Propulsion Laboratory over the last two decades. This required a thorough evaluation of the MMRTG design, and concurrent engineering of an enhanced MMRTG to shed light on potential design issues or risks. At the end of the U.S. fiscal year (FY) 2015, a complete catalog of risks was produced. Tests, hardware development, and analyses have now been put in place to mitigate those risks to acceptable levels. Few risks can ever be truly eliminated unless a design is modified to eliminate specific risks and not introduce more severe risks. The design imperative for the eMMRTG is to change only a few MMRTG features; therefore, risks can largely only be mitigated, not eliminated, through design changes. However, many risks can be effectively - though not totally - eliminated without design changes. This paper briefly describes some of the documented risks and mitigations or reduction approaches to be applied in the coming 3 years, on the way to completing the eMMRTG concept.

eMMRTG↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A New Concurrent Engineering Tool for the New Mission Design Center at NASA Ames Research Center

The NASA Ames Mission Design Center (MDC) has undergone a significant transformation process in recent years, culminating in becoming a true Concurrent Engineering Center. The underlying goal of this transformation is to better serve the Ames PI community in a cost-effective and rapidly-responsive way, providing quality products pivotal to the decision-making proposal strategy of our center. The four pillars of the change focus on four areas: personnel, physical places, tools, and training. Personnel: the MDC switched from using a dedicated pool of engineers—mostly entry-level career—for a matrixed approach with more experienced Subject Matter Experts, usually involved in spaceflight projects. These SMEs get detailed to the MDC for the duration of the study on a part-time or full-time basis. Physical places: The physical aspect pertains mostly to the layout of the new Engineering building and the dedicated concurrent engineering layout to foster collaboration. The current plan includes a dedicated space for concurrent engineering sessions as well as dedicated project rooms for concept studies. Tool: the MDC team is developing a new in-house concurrent engineering tool to facilitate concurrent engineering sessions. The team leveraged the many lessons learned and insight gained from using the current concurrent engineering tool, in use since 2007. SMEs have been involved throughout its design and development, ensuring accuracy and providing validity to the implementation approach. This new tool is database-driven and allows a team to work concurrently on the same model of a mission concept. “Workspaces” are provided for each of the traditional spacecraft mission design disciplines, including cost accounting and systems engineering. There are multiple tiers of fidelity available within each workspace, which can be completed parametrically or independently from the other disciplines as needed or synchronously with the other disciplines. A “commit” step synchronizes a workspace with the mission database and identifies any potential conflicts, along with the user who entered the conflicting data. A Mission Summary workspace enables a Study Lead to run an effective CE session, displaying key graphics, workspace status information, and technical and monetary budget information. This new CE tool will be undergoing Beta Testing with its primary user base and a limited Parts database in the summer of 2020. The team plans to release the first fully operational version in December 2020. Training: working in early concept development and maturation for a space mission requires a unique mindset and being comfortable with uncertainties in an environment where requirements are not yet fully developed, and where changes and trade-offs happen at a high tempo. The MDC started a weekly training program to ensure a common knowledge base on how do develop and mature early concept studies, as well as how to operate in a concurrent engineering environment. In conclusion, the MDC transformation will provide the overall PI community focused on cost-effective small satellite scientific missions with a powerful tool to address and mature early concepts more effectively and efficiently.

David Mauro↗
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↗
DOE OSTI2023

Multidisciplinary concurrent optimization framework for multi-phase building design process

Modern day building design projects require multidisciplinary expertise from architects and engineers across various phases of the design (conceptual, preliminary, and detailed) and construction processes. The Architecture Engineering and Construction (AEC) community has recently shifted gears toward leveraging design optimization techniques to make well-informed decisions in the design of buildings. However, most of the building design optimization efforts are either multidisciplinary optimization confined to just a specific design phase (conceptual/preliminary/detailed) or single disciplinary optimization (structural/thermal/daylighting/energy) spanning across multiple phases. Complexity in changing the optimization setup as the design progresses through subsequent phases, interoperability issues between modeling and physics-based analysis tools used at later stages, and the lack of an appropriate level of design detail to get meaningful results from these sophisticated analysis tools are few challenges that limit multi-phase multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) in the AEC field. Here this paper proposes a computational building design platform leveraging concurrent engineering techniques such as interactive problem structuring, simulation-based optimization using meta models for energy and daylighting (machine learning based) and tradespace visualization. The proposed multi-phase concurrent MDO framework is demonstrated by using it to design and optimize a sample office building for energy and daylighting objectives across multiple phases. Furthermore, limitations of the proposed framework and future avenues of research are listed.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

Accelerating Learning with Set-Based Concurrent Engineering

The traditional design approach for product development is to develop a design based on customer requirements and technical knowledge, build the product according to the detail requirements provided, and then test the product to validate that it works as intended. The team typically starts by identifying a single design approach and spends their time validating a single design during testing. Design teams often encounter issues in the course of development with performance, manufacturability, interfaces and more. To compensate for test failures, teams often build in time into the schedule for additional design loopbacks. Further, when the loopbacks lead to change, the late changes are costly and risky, causing the team to focuses on "fixing the bare minimum" to meet cost and schedule expectations.

42 ENGINEERING↗
NASA NTRS1994

Concurrent engineering: Spacecraft and mission operations system design

Despite our awareness of the mission design process, spacecraft historically have been designed and developed by one team and then turned over as a system to the Mission Operations organization to operate on-orbit. By applying concurrent engineering techniques and envisioning operability as an essential characteristic of spacecraft design, tradeoffs can be made in the overall mission design to minimize mission lifetime cost. Lessons learned from previous spacecraft missions will be described, as well as the implementation of concurrent mission operations and spacecraft engineering for the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR) program.

Landshof, J. A.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Concurrent optimization of airframe and engine design parameters

An integrated system for the multidisciplinary analysis and optimization of airframe and propulsion design parameters is being developed. This system is known as IPAS, the Integrated Propulsion/Airframe Analysis System. The traditional method of analysis is one in which the propulsion system analysis is loosely coupled to the overall mission performance analysis. This results in a time consuming iterative process. First, the engine is designed and analyzed. Then, the results from this analysis are used in a mission analysis to determine the overall aircraft performance. The results from the mission analysis are used as a guide as the engine is redesigned and the entire process repeated. In IPAS, the propulsion system, airframe, and mission are closely coupled. The propulsion system analysis code is directly integrated into the mission analysis code. This allows the propulsion design parameters to be optimized along with the airframe and mission design parameters, significantly reducing the time required to obtain an optimized solution.

Lavelle, Thomas M.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Concurrent optimization of airframe and engine design parameters

An integrated system for the multidisciplinary analysis and optimization of airframe and propulsion design parameters is being developed. This system is known as IPAS, the Integrated Propulsion/Airframe Analysis System. The traditional method of analysis is one in which the propulsion system analysis is loosely coupled to the overall mission performance analysis. This results in a time consuming iterative process. First, the engine is designed and analyzed. Then, the results from this analysis are used in a mission analysis to determine the overall aircraft performance. The results from the mission analysis are used as a guide as the engine redesigned and the entire process repeated. In IPAS, the propulsion system, airframe, and mission are closely coupled. The propulsion system analysis code is directly integrated into the mission analysis code. This allows the propulsion design parameters to be optimized along with the airframe and mission design parameters, significantly reducing the time required to obtain an optimized solution.

Lavelle, Thomas M.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Compass Final Report: Europa Tunnelbot

The Compass Final Report: Europa Tunnelbot, is a summary of three Compass concurrent engineering team designs for penetrating the ice of Europa and reaching the ocean, while sampling for biomarkers and communicating back to the surface. These conceptual designs, while providing complete conceptual layouts for these penetrators, or 'Tunnelbots' along with the associated communication 'Repeaters' primarily focused on the power and thermal systems needed for these devices. Trades for these systems will provide advantages and challenges for each option. These results will be used to guide power technology development.

probe↗