Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “gap analysis”

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 NTRS2009

Surface Habitat Systems

The Surface Habitat Systems (SHS) Focused Investment Group (FIG) is part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Johnson Space Center (JSC) effort to provide a focused direction and funding to the various projects that are working on human surface habitat designs and technologies for the planetary exploration missions. The overall SHS-FIG effort focuses on directing and guiding those projects that: 1) develop and demonstrate new surface habitat system concepts, innovations, and technologies to support human exploration missions, 2) improve environmental systems that interact with human habitats, 3) handle and emplace human surface habitats, and 4) focus on supporting humans living and working in habitats on planetary surfaces. The activity areas of the SHS FIG described herein are focused on the surface habitat project near-term objectives as described in this document. The SHS-FIG effort focuses on mitigating surface habitat risks (as identified by the Lunar Surface Systems Project Office (LSSPO) Surface Habitat Element Team; and concentrates on developing surface habitat technologies as identified in the FY08 gap analysis. The surface habitat gap assessment will be updated annually as the surface architecture and surface habitat definition continues to mature. These technologies are mapped to the SHS-FIG Strategic Development Roadmap. The Roadmap will bring to light the areas where additional innovative efforts are needed to support the development of habitat concepts and designs and the development of new technologies to support of the LSSPO Habitation Element development plan. Three specific areas of development that address Lunar Architecture Team (LAT)-2 and Constellation Architecture Team (CxAT) Lunar habitat design issues or risks will be focused on by the SHS-FIG. The SHS-FIG will establish four areas of development that will help the projects prepare in their planning for surface habitat systems development. Those development areas are the 1) surface habitat concept definition, 2) inflatable surface habitat development, and 3) autonomous habitat operations, and 4) cross-cutting / systems engineering. In subsequent years, the SHS-FIG will solicit a call for innovations and technologies that will support the development of these four development areas. The other development areas will be assessed yearly and identified on the SHS-FIG s Strategic Development Roadmap. Initial investment projects that are funded by the Constellation Program Office (CxPO), LSSPO, or the Exploration Technology Development Projects (ETDP) will also be included on the Roadmap. For example, in one or two years from now, the autonomous habitat operations and testbed would collaborations with the Integrated Systems Health Management (ISHM) and Automation for Operations ETDP projects, which will give the surface habitat projects an integrated habitat autonomy testbed to test software and systems. The SHS-FIG scope is to provide focused direction for multiple innovations, technologies and subsystems that are needed to support humans at a remote planetary surface habitat during the concept development, design definition, and integration phases of that project. Subsystems include: habitability, lightweight structures, power management, communications, autonomy, deployment, outfitting, life support, wireless connectivity, lighting, thermal and more.

Kennedy, Kriss J.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Aircraft Analysis Using the Layered and Extensible Aircraft Performance System (LEAPS)

The Layered and Extensible Aircraft Performance System (LEAPS) is a new air- craft analysis tool being developed by members of the Aeronautics Systems Analysis Branch (ASAB) and the Vehicle Analysis Branch (VAB) at NASA Langley Research Center. LEAPS will enable the analysis of advanced aircraft concepts and architec- tures that include electric and hybrid-electric propulsion systems. The development of LEAPS is motivated by the analysis gaps found in traditional aircraft analysis tools such as the Flight Optimization System (FLOPS). FLOPS has been the tool of choice of the ASAB for over 30 years and has proven to be a reliable analysis tool for conventional aircraft. However, FLOPS is not suitable to analyze the cur- rent unconventional vehicles that are of interest to industry, government agencies, and academia. In contrast, LEAPS is being developed with a flexible architecture that leverages new analysis methodologies that will enable the analysis of unconven- tional aircraft. This paper presents the first complete working version of LEAPS by showing the analysi at include fuel-based and hybrid-electric conceptual aircraft.

Capristan, Francisco M.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Filtration of Spaceflight Propulsion and Pressurant Systems

NASA has provided little guidance for determining and implementing appropriate filtration of spaceflight propulsion and pressurant systems. Additionally, industry standards typically used for building and verifying filter performance are antiquated and lack applicability to propulsion systems. The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) was requested to perform a gap analysis, identify risks, and develop a mitigation plan for spaceflight propulsion filtration. This report contains the outcome of the NESC analysis.

Propulsion System↗
NASA NTRS2010

GOATS - Orbitology Component

The GOATS Orbitology Component software was developed to specifically address the concerns presented by orbit analysis tools that are often written as stand-alone applications. These applications do not easily interface with standard JPL first-principles analysis tools, and have a steep learning curve due to their complicated nature. This toolset is written as a series of MATLAB functions, allowing seamless integration into existing JPL optical systems engineering modeling and analysis modules. The functions are completely open, and allow for advanced users to delve into and modify the underlying physics being modeled. Additionally, this software module fills an analysis gap, allowing for quick, high-level mission analysis trades without the need for detailed and complicated orbit analysis using commercial stand-alone tools. This software consists of a series of MATLAB functions to provide for geometric orbit-related analysis. This includes propagation of orbits to varying levels of generalization. In the simplest case, geosynchronous orbits can be modeled by specifying a subset of three orbit elements. The next case is a circular orbit, which can be specified by a subset of four orbit elements. The most general case is an arbitrary elliptical orbit specified by all six orbit elements. These orbits are all solved geometrically, under the basic problem of an object in circular (or elliptical) orbit around a rotating spheroid. The orbit functions output time series ground tracks, which serve as the basis for more detailed orbit analysis. This software module also includes functions to track the positions of the Sun, Moon, and arbitrary celestial bodies specified by right ascension and declination. Also included are functions to calculate line-of-sight geometries to ground-based targets, angular rotations and decompositions, and other line-of-site calculations. The toolset allows for the rapid execution of orbit trade studies at the level of detail required for the early stage of mission concept development.

Haber, Benjamin M.↗
NASA NTRS2007

A Risk-Based Approach for Aerothermal/TPS Analysis and Testing

The current status of aerothermal and thermal protection system modeling for civilian entry missions is reviewed. For most such missions, the accuracy of our simulations is limited not by the tools and processes currently employed, but rather by reducible deficiencies in the underlying physical models. Improving the accuracy of and reducing the uncertainties in these models will enable a greater understanding of the system level impacts of a particular thermal protection system and of the system operation and risk over the operational life of the system. A strategic plan will be laid out by which key modeling deficiencies can be identified via mission-specific gap analysis. Once these gaps have been identified, the driving component uncertainties are determined via sensitivity analyses. A Monte-Carlo based methodology is presented for physics-based probabilistic uncertainty analysis of aerothermodynamics and thermal protection system material response modeling. These data are then used to advocate for and plan focused testing aimed at reducing key uncertainties. The results of these tests are used to validate or modify existing physical models. Concurrently, a testing methodology is outlined for thermal protection materials. The proposed approach is based on using the results of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses discussed above to tailor ground testing so as to best identify and quantify system performance and risk drivers. A key component of this testing is understanding the relationship between the test and flight environments. No existing ground test facility can simultaneously replicate all aspects of the flight environment, and therefore good models for traceability to flight are critical to ensure a low risk, high reliability thermal protection system design. Finally, the role of flight testing in the overall thermal protection system development strategy is discussed.

Wright, Michael J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Capability Gaps Assessment and Identification of Critical Technology Elements for Mars Transit Habitat

The Habitation Systems Development Office (HP40) at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center supports systems engineering, integration, and project management for next generation space habitats. For in space operations and eventual transport of humans to Mars, NASA will rely on a Mars Transit Habitat (TH). The TH will be designed for an up to 1,200-day Mars mission and will carry all food and supplies needed to support four crew for this duration. In the current concept of operations, Mars TH transfers to near rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO) following launch and docks at Gateway as a visiting vehicle. While there, the TH will complete system shakedown testing and a series of analog missions which will grow from 3 to 6+ months in duration TH also augments Gateway’s habitation capabilities beyond 60-days. Proposed Gateway-TH missions will far exceed the longest duration cislunar human missions to date. These shakedown missions will also be the first operational readiness tests of Mars TH’s long-duration deep space systems, and of the split crew (two crew on the surface, two crew in space) operations that are vital to the approach for the first human Mars mission. Once shakedown missions are complete, Mars TH departs Gateway to aggregate with the Mars propulsion system in NRHO before onboarding the crew and final supplies in Earth orbit via a co-manifested Orion-logistics module. Orion and the LM return to Earth prior to the now aggregated Deep Space Transport vehicle’s journey to Mars. Development of the Mars TH requires significant technology development and maturation. Each year the agency performs a capability gaps assessment, where gaps developed by subject matter experts (SMEs) in various engineering/science disciplines are linked to architectural elements in formulation and prioritized. A gap captures the difference between the current state-of-the-art and the maturity of the capability that is needed to enable or enhance a mission as it is currently envisioned in the government reference architecture. HP40 conducted a gap analysis for Mars TH which will be summarized in this poster. Gaps classified as enabling (which means the mission cannot achieve success without gap closure) were subsequently used to identify critical technology elements (CTEs) for Mars TH. This identification of CTEs was also informed by an examination of the product breakdown structure for Mars TH and focused conversations with SMEs in specific technology areas. CTEs identified for Mars TH to date include the following (note this is not a comprehensive list – CTEs listed represent those in MSFC’s capability areas): inflatable softgoods for habitation; enhanced CO2 recovery; life support systems with greater levels of reliability and maintainability; autonomous guidance, navigation, command and control; and radiators for the Mars TH application. The habitation systems development team is currently delving deeper into each CTE to assess technology approaches being pursued, their maturity, and the degree of difficulty in maturation to meet projected Mars TH timelines. This poster will summarize work to date on the identification of enabling capability gaps linked to Mars TH and provide insight into the associated CTEs and technology maturation efforts.

technology development↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploitation of a Validation Hierarchy for Modeling and Simulation

Across engineering there is an evolving need to increase reliance on physics-based simulation to develop, design and optimize engineering systems. This increased reliance on modeling and simulation has highlighted a growing need to transform the confidence that modeling and simulation analysts have in their results into credibility for systems engineers to design and field systems more quickly and with less physical testing. For isolated components of a complex system, where a single discipline may drive product design, this is less of a concern as the relationship is often straightforward and easy to explain. However, when these isolated components are integrated, and are expected to operate in a multi-disciplinary context in which safety critical systems are involved, new concepts and model assurance standards are required. In this paper we address this challenge by showing how a model validation hierarchy can be exploited to identify those model validation experiments that will contribute most to increasing confidence and credibility of modeling and simulation predictions. The approach that is adopted contains four main steps. The first step is the construction of a model validation hierarchy that links subsystems, assemblies, and components to a hierarchy of physical experiments that can be used support model validation. This hierarchy connects the concerns of systems engineers to those of the modeling and simulation analyst in a clear and logical way. The structure and content of this hierarchy is then used in a second step to establish which physical phenomena have the greatest impact on overall system performance metrics. A gap analysis technique, based upon modeling and simulation concerns, is then used to prioritize the important physical phenomenon. Unfortunately, a common outcome of such gap analyses is the identification of many important gaps and so, in the final step of our process, we advocate the use of a global sensitivity analysis as a means to complete the prioritization.

Verification and Validation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploitation of a Validation Hierarchy for Modeling and Simulation

Across engineering there is an evolving need to increase reliance on physics-based simulation to develop, design and optimize engineering systems. This increased reliance on modeling and simulation has highlighted a growing need to transform the confidence that modeling and simulation analysts have in their results into credibility for systems engineers to design and field systems more quickly and with less physical testing. For isolated components of a complex system, where a single discipline may drive product design, this is less of a concern as the relationship is often straightforward and easy to explain. However, when these isolated components are integrated, and are expected to operate in a multi-disciplinary context in which safety critical systems are involved, new concepts and model assurance standards are required. In this paper we address this challenge by showing how a model validation hierarchy can be exploited to identify those model validation experiments that will contribute most to increasing confidence and credibility of modeling and simulation predictions. The approach that is adopted contains four main steps. The first step is the construction of a model validation hierarchy that links subsystems, assemblies, and components to a hierarchy of physical experiments that can be used support model validation. This hierarchy connects the concerns of systems engineers to those of the modeling and simulation analyst in a clear and logical way. The structure and content of this hierarchy is then used in a second step to establish which physical phenomena have the greatest impact on overall system performance metrics. A gap analysis technique, based upon modeling and simulation concerns, is then used to prioritize the important physical phenomenon. Unfortunately, a common outcome of such gap analyses is the identification of many important gaps and so, in the final step of our process, we advocate the use of a global sensitivity analysis as a means to complete the prioritization.

Verification and Validation↗
NASA NTRS2004

Transportation Network Topologies

The existing U.S. hub-and-spoke air transportation system is reaching saturation. Major aspects of the current system, such as capacity, safety, mobility, customer satisfaction, security, communications, and ecological effects, require improvements. The changing dynamics - increased presence of general aviation, unmanned autonomous vehicles, military aircraft in civil airspace as part of homeland defense - contributes to growing complexity of airspace. The system has proven remarkably resistant to change. NASA Langley Research Center and the National Institute of Aerospace conducted a workshop on Transportation Network Topologies on 9-10 December 2003 in Williamsburg, Virginia. The workshop aimed to examine the feasibility of traditional methods for complex system analysis and design as well as potential novel alternatives in application to transportation systems, identify state-of-the-art models and methods, conduct gap analysis, and thus to lay a foundation for establishing a focused research program in complex systems applied to air transportation.

Alexandrov, Natalia↗
NASA NTRS2010

UAS Integration into the NAS Project

The goal of the UAS Integration in the NAS Project is to contribute capabilities that reduce technical barriers related to the safety and operational challenges associated with enabling routine UAS access to the NAS This goal will be accomplished through a two-phased approach of system-level integration of key concepts, technologies and/or procedures, and demonstrations of integrated capabilities in an operationally relevant environment. Technical objectives include: PHASE 1: a) Validating the key technical areas identified by this project. System-level analyses, a State of the Art Analysis (SOAA), and a ConOps will identify the challenges and barriers preventing routine UAS access to the NAS. b) Developing a national roadmap and gap analysis identifying specific deliverables in the area of operations, procedures, and technologies that will impact future policy decisions. PHASE 2: a) Provide regulators with a methodology for developing airworthiness requirements for UAS and data to support development of certifications standards and regulatory guidance. b) Provide systems-level integrated testing of concepts and/or capabilities that address barriers to routine access to the NAS. Through simulation and flight testing, address issues including separation assurance, communications requirements, and Pilot Aircraft Interfaces (PAIs) in operationally relevant environments

Bauer, Jeff↗
NASA NTRS2015

Risky Business

During my internship I worked on two major projects, recommending improvements for the Center's Risk Management Workshop and helping with the strategic planning efforts for Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA). The risk management improvements is the key project I worked on this semester through my internship, while the strategic planning is the secondary assignment. S&MA Business Office covers both aspects in its delegation, getting both spans some of the work done in the office. A risk is a future event with a negative consequence that has some probability of occurring. Safety and Mission Assurance identifies, analyzes, plans, and tracks risk. The directorate offers the Center a Risk Management Workshop, and part of the ongoing efforts of S&MA is to make continuous improvements to the RM Workshop. By using the Project Management Institute's (PMI) Standard for Risk Management, I performed a gap analysis to make improvements for our materials. I benchmarked the PMI's Risk Management Standard, compared our Risk Management Workshop materials to PMI's standard, and identified any gaps in our material. My major findings were presented to the Business Office of S&MA for a decision on whether or not to incorporate the improvements. These suggestions were made by attending JSC working group meetings, Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) panel reviews and various risk review meetings. The improvements provide better understanding of risk management processes and enhanced risk tracking knowledge and skills. Risk management is an integral part of any engineering discipline, getting exposed to this section of engineering will greatly help shape my career in the future. Johnson Space Center is a world leader in risk management processes; learning risk management here gives me a huge advantage over my peers, as well as understanding decision making in the context of risk management will help me to be a well-rounded engineer. Strategic planning is an area I had not previously studied. Helping with the strategic planning efforts in S&MA has taught me how organizations think and function as a whole. S&MA is adopting a balanced scorecard approach to strategic planning. As part of this planning method strategic themes, objectives, and initiatives are formed. I attended strategic theme team workshops that formed the strategy map for the directorate and gave shape to the plan. Also during these workshops the objectives were discussed and built. Learning the process for strategic planning has helped me better understand how organizations and businesses function, which also helps me to be a more effective employee. Other assignments I had during my internship included completing the Safety and Mission Assurance Technical Excellent Program (STEP) Level 1, as well as doing a two week rotation through the Space Exploration division in S&MA, specifically working with a thermal protection systems (TPS) engineer. While working there, I learned about the Orion capsule and the SpaceX Dragon cargo capsule. I attended meetings to prepare the engineers for the upcoming Critical Design Reviews for both capsules and reviewed test data. Learning risk management, strategic planning, and working in the Space Exploration division has taught me about many aspects of S&MA. My internship at NASA has given me new experiences and taught me numerous subjects that I would have otherwise not learned. This opportunity has expanded my educational horizons and is helping me to become a more useful engineer and employee.

Yarbrough, Katherine↗
NASA NTRS2018

GTTC Future of Ground Testing Meta-Analysis of 20 Documents

National research, development, test, and evaluation ground testing capabilities in the United States are at risk. There is a lack of vision and consensus on what is and will be needed, contributing to a significant threat that ground test capabilities may not be able to meet the national security and industrial needs of the future. To support future decisions, the AIAA Ground Testing Technical Committee’s (GTTC) “Future of Ground Test” (FoGT) Working Group selected and reviewed 20 “seminal” documents related to the application and direction of ground testing. Each document was reviewed, with the content main points collected and organized into sections in the form of a gap analysis – current state, future state, major challenges/gaps, and recommendations. This paper includes key findings and selected commentary by an editing team.

Dunn, Steven C.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Call To Action To Engage The Community To Meet The Challenges That Must Be Tackled To Make Electrified Aircraft Propulsion Real

Technology risk reduction is essential, as it is necessary to demonstrate the potential of Electrified Aircraft Propulsion (EAP). However, more is needed for implementation. The industry is leading EAP by developing a diverse community of novel vehicles from short-haul, small, urban-focused electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) to regional air mobility (RAM) and hybrid-electric, single-aisle transport category airplanes. There are a variety of novel EAP technologies for each of these novel vehicles. And the industry is not only looking at novel technology to advance the state of the art. Instead, the industry is looking to certify these novel aircraft through their regulatory authorities, such as the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the European Union Aviation Safety Authority (EASA), Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), and Brazil’s Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (National Civil Aviation Agency, ANAC), as well as other regulatory authorities. The NASA Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration (EPFD) project has partnered with two industry partners to advance integrated MW-class powertrain system technology demonstration that includes an assessment of their regulatory and standards gaps in their technology. The EPFD has conducted a generic regulatory gap analysis of hybrid electric engines that aligns with the industry partners’ efforts. The EPFD regulations and standards team is integrated into the industry standards community. The international industry standards community is wrestling with critical key challenges to certification. While some certification elements are proprietary, several technology elements cut across company propriety in aircraft engines (US 14 CFR Part 33 and EASA CS-E, regulations that only reflect reciprocating and turbine engines). The approach that several of these regulatory authorities have taken is to collaborate to address their challenges. The Certification Management Team (CMT) consists of the EASA, FAA, TCCA, and ANAC, and they have begun to address common questions, such as the Loss of Power Control (LOPC) for electric engines. They have reached out to the standards community to seek answers. The industry standards development organizations (SDO) have also looked ahead to address current regulations and standards gaps. The ASTM has built key committees in its ASTM F44 General Aviation Committee and F39 Aircraft Systems Committee. The SAE has established the E-40 Electric Propulsion and AE-10 High Voltage committees.

Standards↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Call To Action To Engage The Community To Meet The Challenges That Must Be Tackled To Make Electrified Aircraft Propulsion Real

Technology risk reduction is essential, as it is necessary to demonstrate the potential of Electrified Aircraft Propulsion (EAP). However, more is needed for implementation. The industry is leading EAP by developing a diverse community of novel vehicles from short-haul, small, urban-focused electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) to regional air mobility (RAM) and hybrid-electric, single-aisle transport category airplanes. There are a variety of novel EAP technologies for each of these novel vehicles. And the industry is not only looking at novel technology to advance the state of the art. Instead, the industry is looking to certify these novel aircraft through their regulatory authorities, such as the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the European Union Aviation Safety Authority (EASA), Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), and Brazil’s Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (National Civil Aviation Agency, ANAC), as well as other regulatory authorities. The NASA Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration (EPFD) project has partnered with two industry partners to advance integrated MW-class powertrain system technology demonstration that includes an assessment of their regulatory and standards gaps in their technology. The EPFD has conducted a generic regulatory gap analysis of hybrid electric engines that aligns with the industry partners’ efforts. The EPFD regulations and standards team is integrated into the industry standards community. The international industry standards community is wrestling with critical key challenges to certification. While some certification elements are proprietary, several technology elements cut across company propriety in aircraft engines (US 14 CFR Part 33 and EASA CS-E, regulations that only reflect reciprocating and turbine engines). The approach that several of these regulatory authorities have taken is to collaborate to address their challenges. The Certification Management Team (CMT) consists of the EASA, FAA, TCCA, and ANAC, and they have begun to address common questions, such as the Loss of Power Control (LOPC) for electric engines. They have reached out to the standards community to seek answers. The industry standards development organizations (SDO) have also looked ahead to address current regulations and standards gaps. The ASTM has built key committees in its ASTM F44 General Aviation Committee and F39 Aircraft Systems Committee. The SAE has established the E-40 Electric Propulsion and AE-10 High Voltage committees.

Standards↗
NASA NTRS2014

Preparing GMAT for Operational Maneuver Planning of the Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE)

The General Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT) is an open-source space mission design, analysis and trajectory optimization tool. GMAT is developed by a team of NASA, private industry, public and private contributors. GMAT is designed to model, optimize and estimate spacecraft trajectories in flight regimes ranging from low Earth orbit to lunar applications, interplanetary trajectories and other deep space missions. GMAT has also been flight qualified to support operational maneuver planning for the Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) mission. ACE was launched in August, 1997 and is orbiting the Sun-Earth L1 libration point. The primary science objective of ACE is to study the composition of both the solar wind and the galactic cosmic rays. Operational orbit determination, maneuver operations and product generation for ACE are conducted by NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Flight Dynamics Facility (FDF). This paper discusses the entire engineering lifecycle and major operational certification milestones that GMAT successfully completed to obtain operational certification for the ACE mission. Operational certification milestones such as gathering of the requirements for ACE operational maneuver planning, gap analysis, test plans and procedures development, system design, pre-shadow operations, training to FDF ACE maneuver planners, shadow operations, Test Readiness Review (TRR) and finally Operational Readiness Review (ORR) are discussed. These efforts have demonstrated that GMAT is flight quality software ready to support ACE mission operations in the FDF.

Trajectory analysis↗
NASA NTRS2019

Preparing General Mission Analysis Tool for Operational Maneuver Planning of the Advanced Composition Explorer Mission

The General Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT) is an open-source space mission design, analysis and trajectory optimization tool. GMAT is developed by a team of NASA, private industry, public and private contributors. GMAT is designed to model, optimize and estimate spacecraft trajectories in flight regimes ranging from low Earth orbit to lunar applications, interplanetary trajectories and other deep space missions. GMAT has also been flight qualified to support operational maneuver planning for the Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) mission. ACE was launched in August, 1997 and is orbiting the Sun-Earth L1 libration point. The primary science objective of ACE is to study the composition of both the solar wind and the galactic cosmic rays. Operational orbit determination, maneuver operations and product generation for ACE are conducted by NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Flight Dynamics Facility (FDF). This paper discusses the entire engineering lifecycle and major operational certification milestones that GMAT successfully completed to obtain operational certification for the ACE mission. Operational certification milestones such as gathering of the requirements for ACE operational maneuver planning, gap analysis, test plans and procedures development, system design, pre-shadow operations, training to FDF ACE maneuver planners, shadow operations, Test Readiness Review (TRR) and finally Operational Readiness Review (ORR) are discussed. These efforts have demonstrated that GMAT is flight quality software ready to support ACE mission operations in the FDF.

mission design↗
NASA NTRS1992

Effects of habitat map generalization in biodiversity assessment

Species richness is being mapped as part of an inventory of biological diversity in California (i.e., gap analysis). Species distributions are modeled with a GIS on the basis of maps of each species' preferred habitats. Species richness is then tallied in equal-area sampling units. A GIS sensitivity analysis examined the effects of the level of generalization of the habitat map on the predicted distribution of species richness in the southern Sierra Nevada. As the habitat map was generalized, the number of habitat types mapped within grid cells tended to decrease with a corresponding decline in numbers of species predicted. Further, the ranking of grid cells in order of predicted numbers of species changed dramatically between levels of generalization. Areas predicted to be of greatest conservation value on the basis of species richness may therefore be sensitive to GIS data resolution.

Stoms, David M.↗