SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “programming”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 397 records · Page 22

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2004

Bolt Analysis Program

In designing and testing bolted joints there are multiple parameters to be considered and calculations that must be performed to predict the joint behavior. Each different set of parameters may call for a different set of equations. Determining every parameter in each bolted joint is impractical and in many cases impossible. On the other hand, it is much easier to reduce these calculations to a universal set that can be used for all bolted joints. This is the purpose of the Bolt Analysis Program. My project under the Mechanical and Rotating Systems branch of the Engineering Development and Analysis Division was to take the Bolt Analysis Program Version 2.0 and update the program to a modem and user-friendly format. Version 2.0 of the Bolt Analysis Program is a useful program, but lacks the dynamic capabilities that are needed for current applications. Version 2.0 of the Bolt Analysis Program was written in 1993 using the Pascal programming language in a DOS format. This program allows you to input data in a step-by-step format, calculates the data, and then on a final screen displays the input and the output fiom the calculations. Version 2.0 is still applicable for all bolted joint anaiysis, but has updates that are desired. First, the program runs in DOS format. With the applications available today, my mentor decided it would be best to update the program into Excel using Visual Basic for Applications (VBA). This would allow the program to have multiple Graphical User Interfaces (GUI s) while retaining all functions of the previous program. Version 2.0 only allows you to input data in a step-by-step process. If you make a mistake and need to go back, you must run through the entire program before you can return to fix your error. This becomes tedious when needing to change one parameter or test multiple sets of data. In Version 3.0, the program allows you to enter and change data at any time while displaying real-time output data. If you realize an error, it is as simple as scrolling back to your mistake and changing the data. Additional information is included in the original extended abstract.

Travis, Brandon E.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Infusing Stretch Goal Requirements into the Constellation Program

In 2004, the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE) was announced by the United States President's Administration in an effort to explore space and to extend a human presence across our solar system. Subsequently, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) established the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) to develop a constellation of new capabilities, supporting technologies, and foundational research that allows for the sustained and affordable exploration of space. Then, ESMD specified the primary mission for the Constellation Program to carry out a series of human expeditions, ranging from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) to the surface of Moon, Mars, and beyond for the purposes of conducting human exploration of space. Thus, the Constellation Program was established at the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (JSC) to manage the development of the flight and ground infrastructure and systems that can enable continued and extended human access to space. Constellation Program's "Design Objectives" call for an early attention to the program's life cycle costs management through the Program's Need, Goals, and Objectives (NGO) document, which provides the vision, scope, and key areas of focus for the Program. One general policy of the Constellation Program, found in the Constellation Architecture Requirements Document (CARD), states: "A sustainable program hinges on how effectively total life cycle costs are managed. Developmental costs are a key consideration, but total life cycle costs related to the production, processing, and operation of the entire architecture must be accounted for in design decisions sufficiently to ensure future resources are available for ever more ambitious missions into the solar system....It is the intent of the Constellation Program to aggressively manage this aspect of the program using the design policies and simplicity." To respond to the Program's strong desire to manage the program life cycle costs, special efforts were established to identify operability requirements to influence flight vehicle and ground infrastructure design in order to impact the life cycle operations costs, and stretch goal requirements were introduced to the Program. This paper will describe how these stretch goal requirements were identified, developed, refined, matured, approved, and infused into the CARD. The paper will also document several challenges encountered when infusing the stretch goal requirements into the Constellation Program.

Operability↗

NASA NTRS1989

Comparison study of gear dynamic computer programs at NASA Lewis Research Center

A comparison study was performed on four gear dynamic analysis computer programs developed under NASA/Army sponsorship. These programs are GRDYNMULT (a multimesh program applicable to a number of epicyclic systems), TELSGE (a single mesh program), PGT (a multimesh program applicable to a planetary system with three planets), and DANST (a single mesh program). The capabilities and features, input and output options, and technical aspects of the programs were reviewed and compared. Results are presented in a concise tabular form. Parametric studies of the program models were performed to investigate the predicted results of the programs as input parameters such as speed, torque, and mesh damping were varied. In general, the program models predicted similar dynamic load and stress levels as operating conditions were varied. Flash temperature predictions from programs GRDYNMULT and TELSGE indicated similar trends; however, actual values were not in close agreement. The program GRDYNMULT was found to be the most versatile in system size, type, and analysis capabilities. The programs DANST, TELSGE, and PGT are more specialized for specific systems; however, in specific areas they provide a more detailed treatment than GRDYNMULT.

Zakrajsek, James J.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Transformational derivation of programs using the Focus system

A program derivation support system called Focus is being constructed. It will formally derive programs using the paradigm of program transformation. The following issues are discussed: (1) the integration of validation and program derivation activities in the Focus system; (2) its tree-based user interface; (3) the control of search spaces in program derivation; and (4) the structure and organization of program derivation records. The inference procedures of the system are based on the integration of functional and logic programming principles. This brings about a synthesis of paradigms that were heretofore considered far apart, such as logical and executable specifications and constructive and transformational approaches to program derivation. A great emphasis has been placed, in the design of Focus, on achieving small search spaces during program derivation. The program manipulation operations such as expansion, simplification and rewriting were designed with this objective. The role of operations that are expensive in search spaces, such as folding, has been reduced. Program derivations are documented in Focus in a way that the high level descriptions of derivations are expressed only using program level information. All the meta-level information, together with dependencies between derivations of program components, is automatically recorded by the system at a lower level of description for its own use in replay.

Reddy, Uday S.↗

NASA NTRS1992

The 1992 NASA/ASEE Summer Faculty Fellowship Program

This is the administrative report for the 1992 NASA/ASEE Summer Faculty Fellowship Program which was held at the George C. Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) for the 28th consecutive year. The nominal starting and finishing dates for the ten week program were June 1, 1992 through August 7, 1992. The program was sponsored by NASA Headquarters, Washington, D.C., and operated under the auspices of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). The program was one of eight such programs at eight NASA centers sponsored and funded by NASA Headquarters. The basic objectives of the program are the following: (1) to further the professional knowledge of qualified engineering and science faculty members; (2) to stimulate an exchange of ideas between participants and NASA; (3) to enrich and refresh the research and teaching activities at the participants' institutions; and (4) to contribute to the research objectives of the NASA centers. The major activities of the 1992 program were the following: (1) recruitment, selection, and assignment of faculty fellows; (2) research performed by the participants in collaboration with the MSFC colleague; (3) a seminar and tour program aimed at providing information concerning activities at MSFC; (4) an activities program of a social/non-technical nature aimed at providing the fellows and their families a means of learning about the MSFC/Huntsville area; and (5) preparation of a volume containing the written reports of the details of the research performed by each of the summer faculty. The success of the 1992 program activities in meeting the stated objectives was measured through questionnaires, which were filled out by participants and their MSFC colleagues. The following sections describe the major activities in more detail and the results of the questionnaires are summarized showing that the 1992 program was highly successful. This year's program also included 19 participants in the Summer Teacher Enrichment Program (STEP) which is comprised of middle school and high school math and science teachers.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1993

The ParaScope parallel programming environment

The ParaScope parallel programming environment, developed to support scientific programming of shared-memory multiprocessors, includes a collection of tools that use global program analysis to help users develop and debug parallel programs. This paper focuses on ParaScope's compilation system, its parallel program editor, and its parallel debugging system. The compilation system extends the traditional single-procedure compiler by providing a mechanism for managing the compilation of complete programs. Thus, ParaScope can support both traditional single-procedure optimization and optimization across procedure boundaries. The ParaScope editor brings both compiler analysis and user expertise to bear on program parallelization. It assists the knowledgeable user by displaying and managing analysis and by providing a variety of interactive program transformations that are effective in exposing parallelism. The debugging system detects and reports timing-dependent errors, called data races, in execution of parallel programs. The system combines static analysis, program instrumentation, and run-time reporting to provide a mechanical system for isolating errors in parallel program executions. Finally, we describe a new project to extend ParaScope to support programming in FORTRAN D, a machine-independent parallel programming language intended for use with both distributed-memory and shared-memory parallel computers.

Cooper, Keith D.↗

NASA NTRS1995

Minority Engineering Program Pipeline: A Proposal to Increase Minority Student Enrollment and Retention in Engineering

The Cleveland State University Minority Engineering Program Pipeline consist of programs which foster engineering career awareness, academic enrichment, and professional development for historically underrepresented minority studies. The programs involved are the Access to Careers in Engineering (ACE) Program for high school pre-engineering students: the LINK Program for undergraduate students pursuing degree which include engineering; and the PEP (Pre-calculus Enrichment Program) and EPIC (Enrichment Program in Calculus) mathematics programs for undergraduate academic enrichment. The pipeline is such that high school graduates from the ACE Program who enroll at Cleveland State University in pursuit of engineering degrees are admitted to the LINK Program for undergraduate level support. LINK Program students are among the minority participants who receive mathematics enrichment through the PEP and EPIC Programs for successful completion of their engineering required math courses. THese programs are interdependent and share the goal of preparing minority students for engineering careers by enabling them to achieve academically and obtain college degree and career related experience.

Charity, Pamela C.↗

NASA NTRS2002

Institute for Scientific and Educational Technology (ISET)-Education, Research and Training Programs in Engineering and Sciences

The 'Institute for Scientific and Educational Technology' has been established to provide a mechanism through which universities and other research organizations may cooperate with one another and with different government agencies and industrial organizations to further and promote research, education, and training programs in science, engineering, and related fields. This effort has been undertaken consistent with the national vision to 'promote excellence in America s educational system through enhancing and expanding scientific and technological competence.' The specific programs are directed in promoting and achieving excellence for individuals at all levels (elementary and secondary schools, undergraduate and graduate education, and postdoctoral and faculty research). The program is consistent with the existing activities of the Institute for Computational and Applied Mechanics (ICAM) and the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) at NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC). The efforts will be directed to embark on other research, education, and training activities in various fields of engineering, scientific, and educational technologies. The specific objectives of the present program may be outlined briefly as follows: 1) Cooperate in the various research, education, and technology programs of the Office of Education at LaRC. 2) Develop procedures for interactions between precollege, college, and graduate students, and between faculty and students at all levels. 3) Direct efforts to increase the participation by women and minorities in educational programs at all levels. 4) Enhance existing activities of ICAM and ASEE in education, research, and training of graduate students and faculty. 5) Invite distinguished scholars as appropriate and consistent with ISET goals to spend their summers and/or sabbaticals at NASA Langley andor ODU and interact with different researchers and graduate students. Perform research and administrative activities as needed to carry out the above mentioned activities. 6) The implementation of various activities of the ISET programs is carried out through cooperative efforts between Old Dominion University (ODU) and the Office of Education at LaRC. At present, major efforts are directed on the following ISET Programs: ICAM Programs, Academic Programs, Educational Research, Outreach Programs, Educational Technology and Cooperative Programs. These programs are described in the following sections.

Tiwari, S. N.↗

NASA NTRS2001

Aspect-Oriented Programming

Computer science has experienced an evolution in programming languages and systems from the crude assembly and machine codes of the earliest computers through concepts such as formula translation, procedural programming, structured programming, functional programming, logic programming, and programming with abstract data types. Each of these steps in programming technology has advanced our ability to achieve clear separation of concerns at the source code level. Currently, the dominant programming paradigm is object-oriented programming - the idea that one builds a software system by decomposing a problem into objects and then writing the code of those objects. Such objects abstract together behavior and data into a single conceptual and physical entity. Object-orientation is reflected in the entire spectrum of current software development methodologies and tools - we have OO methodologies, analysis and design tools, and OO programming languages. Writing complex applications such as graphical user interfaces, operating systems, and distributed applications while maintaining comprehensible source code has been made possible with OOP. Success at developing simpler systems leads to aspirations for greater complexity. Object orientation is a clever idea, but has certain limitations. We are now seeing that many requirements do not decompose neatly into behavior centered on a single locus. Object technology has difficulty localizing concerns invoking global constraints and pandemic behaviors, appropriately segregating concerns, and applying domain-specific knowledge. Post-object programming (POP) mechanisms that look to increase the expressiveness of the OO paradigm are a fertile arena for current research. Examples of POP technologies include domain-specific languages, generative programming, generic programming, constraint languages, reflection and metaprogramming, feature-oriented development, views/viewpoints, and asynchronous message brokering. (Czarneclu and Eisenecker s book includes a good survey of many of these technologies).

Elrad, Tzilla↗

NASA NTRS2007

Science and the Constellation Systems Program Office

An underlying tension has existed throughout the history of NASA between the human spaceflight programs and the external scientific constituencies of the robotic exploration programs. The large human space projects have been perceived as squandering resources that might otherwise be utilized for scientific discoveries. In particular, the history of the relationship of science to the International Space Station Program has not been a happy one. The leadership of the Constellation Program Office, created in NASA in October, 2005, asked me to serve on the Program Manager s staff as a liaison to the science community. Through the creation of my position, the Program Manager wanted to communicate and elucidate decisions inside the program to the scientific community and, conversely, ensure that the community had a voice at the highest levels within the program. Almost all of my technical contributions at NASA, dating back to the Apollo Program, has been within the auspices of what is now known as the Science Mission Directorate. However, working at the Johnson Space Center, where human spaceflight is the principal activity, has given me a good deal of incidental contact and some more direct exposure through management positions to the structures and culture of human spaceflight programs. I entered the Constellation family somewhat naive but not uninformed. In addition to my background in NASA science, I have also written extensively over the past 25 years on the topic of human exploration of the Moon and Mars. (See, for example, Mendell, 1985). I have found that my scientific colleagues generally have little understanding of the structure and processes of a NASA program office; and many of them do not recognize the name, Constellation. In many respects, the international ILEWG community is better informed. Nevertheless, some NASA decision processes on the role of science, particularly with respect to the formulation of a lunar surface architecture, are not well known, even in ILEWG. At the recent annual Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, I reviewed the evolution of the program as a function of Agency leadership and the constraints put on NASA by the President in his 2004 announcement. I plan to continue my long-time ILEWG tradition of reporting a personal view of the state of development of human exploration of the solar system, this time coming from within the program office tasked to implement the vision for the United States. The current NASA implementation of the Vision for Space Exploration is consistent with certain classical scenarios that have been discussed extensively in the literature. I will discuss the role of science within the Vision, both from official policy and from a de facto interaction. While science goals are not officially driving the implementation of the Vision, the tools of scientific exploration are integral to defining the extraterrestrial design environments. In this respect the sharing of results from international missions to the Moon can make significant contributions to the success of the future human activities.

Mendell, Wendell↗

NASA NTRS2024

Moon to Mars (M2M) Cross Program Utilization Payload Safety Process

It is the goal of Moon to Mars (M2M) to establish a single consolidated set of safety requirements and a safety review process for utilization payloads that will cross program vehicle hatches or operate externally on multiple program vehicles during transport or operation that satisfies Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Orion, EVA, and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP), Gateway (GW), and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. This document defines the Cross Program Utilization Payload (xPUP) safety review process for mission effectivity of Artemis III and beyond. This review process will help ensure protection of the overall Moon to Mars integrated system from potential hazards created by cross program payloads that either cross a program vehicle hatch or can interface with more than one M2M lunar exploration program vehicle. The process will identify payload hazards and controls that will protect ground personnel, flight crew, the integrated vehicle, ground equipment, or facilities. This process is also applicable to samples that cross hatches between vehicles including for return to Earth. The xPUP safety review process will be led by one of the M2M programs' integration safety panels, chosen on a per-payload basis. After the lead integration safety panel is determined, the common safety process is established, based on pre-determined criteria, which includes ad-hoc members from other stakeholder programs. Stakeholder programs are those that interface with the utilization payload in any way (e.g., operating on a lunar exploration vehicle or crossing program vehicle hatches). The xPUP will execute this safety review process for flight and ground utilization payload hardware design, its ground support equipment, and landing and recovery in accordance with the applicable safety requirements as specified in M2M-30043: Moon to Mars Cross Program Utilization Payload Safety Requirements. The xPUP safety process will follow the lead integration safety panel’s safety process requirements. Formal agreements will be communicated with the payload developer using the payload integration processes documented in M2M-30037, Artemis Payload Integration Implementation Plan.

payloads↗

NASA NTRS1978

NASA engine system technology programs - An overview

The various propulsion systems technology programs are examined. The Stratospheric Cruise Emission Reduction program has the objective to explore and demonstrate advanced technology fuel preparation and combustion systems which produce very low emission levels, particularly with respect to the oxides of nitrogen, during high altitude cruising flight. Other programs considered include the Quiet, Clean, General Aviation Turbofan program, the Variable Cycle Engine Technology program, the Helicopter Transmission Technology program, the Broad Specification Fuels Technology program, the Engine Component Improvement program, the Advanced Turboprop Technology program, the Supersonic Cruise Propulsion Technology program, the Materials for Advanced Turbine Engines program, and the Aeroelasticity of Turbine Engines program.

Johnson, H. W.↗

NASA NTRS1978

Human operator identification model and related computer programs

Four computer programs which provide computational assistance in the analysis of man/machine systems are reported. The programs are: (1) Modified Transfer Function Program (TF); (2) Time Varying Response Program (TVSR); (3) Optimal Simulation Program (TVOPT); and (4) Linear Identification Program (SCIDNT). The TV program converts the time domain state variable system representative to frequency domain transfer function system representation. The TVSR program computes time histories of the input/output responses of the human operator model. The TVOPT program is an optimal simulation program and is similar to TVSR in that it produces time histories of system states associated with an operator in the loop system. The differences between the two programs are presented. The SCIDNT program is an open loop identification code which operates on the simulated data from TVOPT (or TVSR) or real operator data from motion simulators.

Kessler, K. M.↗

NASA NTRS1984

A new implementation of the programming system for structural synthesis (PROSSS-2)

This new implementation of the PROgramming System for Structural Synthesis (PROSSS-2) combines a general-purpose finite element computer program for structural analysis, a state-of-the-art optimization program, and several user-supplied, problem-dependent computer programs. The results are flexibility of the optimization procedure, organization, and versatility of the formulation of constraints and design variables. The analysis-optimization process results in a minimized objective function, typically the mass. The analysis and optimization programs are executed repeatedly by looping through the system until the process is stopped by a user-defined termination criterion. However, some of the analysis, such as model definition, need only be one time and the results are saved for future use. The user must write some small, simple FORTRAN programs to interface between the analysis and optimization programs. One of these programs, the front processor, converts the design variables output from the optimizer into the suitable format for input into the analyzer. Another, the end processor, retrieves the behavior variables and, optionally, their gradients from the analysis program and evaluates the objective function and constraints and optionally their gradients. These quantities are output in a format suitable for input into the optimizer. These user-supplied programs are problem-dependent because they depend primarily upon which finite elements are being used in the model. PROSSS-2 differs from the original PROSSS in that the optimizer and front and end processors have been integrated into the finite element computer program. This was done to reduce the complexity and increase portability of the system, and to take advantage of the data handling features found in the finite element program.

Rogers, James L., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Automatic programming for critical applications

The important phases of a software life cycle include verification and maintenance. Usually, the execution performance is an expected requirement in a software development process. Unfortunately, the verification and the maintenance of programs are the time consuming and the frustrating aspects of software engineering. The verification cannot be waived for the programs used for critical applications such as, military, space, and nuclear plants. As a consequence, synthesis of programs from specifications, an alternative way of developing correct programs, is becoming popular. The definition, or what is understood by automatic programming, has been changed with our expectations. At present, the goal of automatic programming is the automation of programming process. Specifically, it means the application of artificial intelligence to software engineering in order to define techniques and create environments that help in the creation of high level programs. The automatic programming process may be divided into two phases: the problem acquisition phase and the program synthesis phase. In the problem acquisition phase, an informal specification of the problem is transformed into an unambiguous specification while in the program synthesis phase such a specification is further transformed into a concrete, executable program.

Loganantharaj, Raj L.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Minimum Hamiltonian Ascent Trajectory Evaluation (MASTRE) program (update to automatic flight trajectory design, performance prediction, and vehicle sizing for support of Shuttle and Shuttle derived vehicles) engineering manual

The Minimum Hamiltonian Ascent Trajectory Evaluation (MASTRE) program and its predecessors, the ROBOT and the RAGMOP programs, have had a long history of supporting MSFC in the simulation of space boosters for the purpose of performance evaluation. The ROBOT program was used in the simulation of the Saturn 1B and Saturn 5 vehicles in the 1960's and provided the first utilization of the minimum Hamiltonian (or min-H) methodology and the steepest ascent technique to solve the optimum trajectory problem. The advent of the Space Shuttle in the 1970's and its complex airplane design required a redesign of the trajectory simulation code since aerodynamic flight and controllability were required for proper simulation. The RAGMOP program was the first attempt to incorporate the complex equations of the Space Shuttle into an optimization tool by using an optimization method based on steepest ascent techniques (but without the min-H methodology). Development of the complex partial derivatives associated with the Space Shuttle configuration and using techniques from the RAGMOP program, the ROBOT program was redesigned to incorporate these additional complexities. This redesign created the MASTRE program, which was referred to as the Minimum Hamiltonian Ascent Shuttle TRajectory Evaluation program at that time. Unique to this program were first-stage (or booster) nonlinear aerodynamics, upper-stage linear aerodynamics, engine control via moment balance, liquid and solid thrust forces, variable liquid throttling to maintain constant acceleration limits, and a total upgrade of the equations used in the forward and backward integration segments of the program. This modification of the MASTRE code has been used to simulate the new space vehicles associated with the National Launch Systems (NLS). Although not as complicated as the Space Shuttle, the simulation and analysis of the NLS vehicles required additional modifications to the MASTRE program in the areas of providing additional flexibility in the use of the program, allowing additional optimization options, and providing special options for the NLS configuration.

Lyons, J. T.↗

NASA NTRS1998

NASA Ambassadors: A Speaker Outreach Program

The work done on this project this summer has been geared toward setting up the necessary infrastructure and planning to support the operation of an effective speaker outreach program. The program has been given the name, NASA AMBASSADORS. Also, individuals who become participants in the program will be known as "NASA AMBASSADORS". This summer project has been conducted by the joint efforts of this author and those of Professor George Lebo who will be issuing a separate report. The description in this report will indicate that the NASA AMBASSADOR program operates largely on the contributions of volunteers, with the assistance of persons at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). The volunteers include participants in the various summer programs hosted by MSFC as well as members of the NASA Alumni League. The MSFC summer participation programs include: the Summer Faculty Fellowship Program for college and university professors, the Science Teacher Enrichment Program for middle- and high-school teachers, and the NASA ACADEMY program for college and university students. The NASA Alumni League members are retired NASA employees, scientists, and engineers. The MSFC offices which will have roles in the operation of the NASA AMBASSADORS include the Educational Programs Office and the Public Affairs Office. It is possible that still other MSFC offices may become integrated into the operation of the program. The remainder of this report will establish the operational procedures which will be necessary to sustain the NASA AMBASSADOR speaker outreach program.

McDonald, Malcolm W.↗

NASA NTRS2002

Processes and Procedures of the Higher Education Programs at Marshall Space Flight Center

The purpose of my research was to investigate the policies, processes, procedures and timelines for the higher education programs at Marshall Space Flight Center. The three higher education programs that comprised this research included: the Graduate Student Researchers Program (GSRP), the National Research Council/Resident Research Associateships Program (NRC/RRA) and the Summer Faculty Fellowship Program (SFFP). The GSRP award fellowships each year to promising U.S. graduate students whose research interest coincides with NASA's mission. Fellowships are awarded for one year and are renewable for up to three years to competitively selected students. Each year, the award provides students the opportunity to spend a period in residence at a NASA center using that installation's unique facilities. This program is renewable for three years, students must reapply. The National Research Council conducts the Resident Research Associateships Program (NRC/RRA), a national competition to identify outstanding recent postdoctoral scientists and engineers and experience senior scientists and engineers, for tenure as guest researchers at NASA centers. The Resident Research Associateship Program provides an opportunity for recipients of doctoral degrees to concentrate their research in association with NASA personnel, often as a culmination to formal career preparation. The program also affords established scientists and engineers an opportunity for research without any interruptions and distracting assignments generated from permanent career positions. All opportunities for research at NASA Centers are open to citizens of the U.S. and to legal permanent residents. The Summer Faculty Fellowship Program (SFFP) is conducted each summer. NASA awards research fellowships to university faculty through the NASA/American Society for Engineering Education. The program is designed to promote an exchange of ideas between university faculties, NASA scientists and engineers. Selected participants in fields of science, engineering, math, and other disciplines spend approximately 10 weeks working with their professional peers on research projects at NASA facilities. Workshops and seminars further enrich the experience. This program is only for U.S. citizens.

Pamala D. Heard↗