Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “concurrent programs”

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.

515 records · Page 29

Strategy for Developing Technologies for Megawatt-class Nuclear Electric Propulsion Systems

In late fiscal year 2020, the Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project began the process of formulating an investment strategy to support development of the technologies required for a high-power (megawatt-class) nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) system capable of performing human-scale missions. This activity was initiated concurrent with several high-level studies and assessments were either under way or had just concluded. Studies of human-scale Mars missions have been performed several times over the past two decades. One of the most recent studies examined opposition-class human Mars missions to occur in the late 2030s timeframe [1,2]. The mission architecture assumed a hybrid NEP/chem-propelled vehicle that used a high specific impulse (Isp) NEP-system and a liquid oxygen (LOx)-liquid methane high thrust chemical stage (two 110 kN (25 klbf) thrust, 365 s Isp engines) for maneuvers performed to enter and exit gravity wells. Trajectory analyses performed in this study showed that such a mission could be performed with 2-4 MWe directed into the electric propulsion system (operating for 20,000+ hours), with the large range representing different opposition-class Mars mission opportunities and permutations on the trajectory design, concept of operations, and technology choices. In 2020, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) performed a study to evaluate the maturity of the different technologies required for nuclear propulsion systems [3]. The executive summary of this report provided the following top-level conclusions: • “The majority of critical technologies for… NEP/Chem… systems are relatively immature” • “TRLs [technology readiness levels] in the literature are often overestimated” • “The majority of critical technologies… for NEP/Chem… systems are at a relatively high level of advancement degree of difficulty (AD2 > 4) for maturation, requiring a dual development approach” • “The proper assessment of baseline TRL and AD2 values and the estimation of requirements and resources required for advancement have been consistent issues for NEP,” • “Non-advocate reviews should occur at the start of a technology program and at all key milestones.” In 2021, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) issued a separate report [4] identifying the “primary technical and programmatic challenges, merits, and risks for maturing space nuclear propulsion technologies of interest to a future human Mars exploration mission.” That work contained several important findings, including: • “Developing a MWe-class NEP system for the baseline mission would require increasing power by orders of magnitude relative to NEP system flight- or ground-based technology demonstrations completed to date.” • “Subscale in-space flight testing of NEP systems cannot address many of the risks and potential failure modes associated with the baseline mission NEP system. With sufficient M&S [modeling & simulation] and ground testing, including modular subsystem tests at full scale and power, flight qualification requirements can be met by the cargo missions that will precede the first crewed mission to Mars. Fully integrated ground testing may not be required.” • “As a result of low and intermittent investment over the past several decades, it is unclear if even an aggressive program would be able to develop an NEP system capable of executing the baseline mission in 2039.” These efforts motivated the SNP project to investigate the technologies available for a megawatt-class high power nuclear electric propulsion system. That system is illustrated schematically in Figure 1 and is comprised of five separate top-level critical technology elements (CTEs). 1. Nuclear Reactor – Thermal power source for the system, utilizing high-assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) as the nuclear fuel. Reactor radiation shielding is also included in this CTE. 2. Power Conversion – Operates as a thermodynamic cycle, accepting nuclear reactor thermal power as an input and converting it to mechanical power. 3. Power Management and Distribution (PMAD) – Accepts as an input mechanical power from the power conversion system, which is used to generate electrical power. The PMAD system also distributes the generated electrical power to all other parts of the spacecraft, including the high-power EP system. The PMAD system may also perform duties such as isolation, fault detection, and power transformation/rectification for different spacecraft systems, including the thrusters. 4. Electric Propulsion (EP) – Accepts as an input electrical power, which is used to accelerate a propellant to high speeds to produce thrust. This system includes the power processing unit (PPU), which converts the power it receives to the correct current and voltage required by the thrusters, and the propellant storage and feed systems, which contain and meter the flow of propellant to the thrusters. 5. Thermal Management (Radiators/Heat Rejection) – The cold side of the thermodynamic power conversion cycle, accepts thermal power from the power conversion system and radiatively rejects that heat to space. In this paper, we describe the SNP project formulation and investment strategy that aims to accomplish the research and development required to advance the technology readiness for each CTE. The strategy relies heavily upon experimental testing supported by modeling and simulation to yield realistic assessments of the technologies, which in turn will be used to inform future NEP system-level design decisions and any potential technology downselects.

Kurt A Polzin↗

Multidisciplinary Design Technology Development: A Comparative Investigation of Integrated Aerospace Vehicle Design Tools

This research effort is a joint program between the Departments of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering and the Computer Science and Engineering Department at the University of Notre Dame. Three Principal Investigators; Drs. Renaud, Brockman and Batill directed this effort. During the four and a half year grant period, six Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Ph.D. students and one Masters student received full or partial support, while four Computer Science and Engineering Ph.D. students and one Masters student were supported. During each of the summers up to four undergraduate students were involved in related research activities. The purpose of the project was to develop a framework and systematic methodology to facilitate the application of Multidisciplinary Design Optimization (N4DO) to a diverse class of system design problems. For all practical aerospace systems, the design of a systems is a complex sequence of events which integrates the activities of a variety of discipline "experts" and their associated "tools". The development, archiving and exchange of information between these individual experts is central to the design task and it is this information which provides the basis for these experts to make coordinated design decisions (i.e., compromises and trade-offs) - resulting in the final product design. Grant efforts focused on developing and evaluating frameworks for effective design coordination within a MDO environment. Central to these research efforts was the concept that the individual discipline "expert", using the most appropriate "tools" available and the most complete description of the system should be empowered to have the greatest impact on the design decisions and final design. This means that the overall process must be highly interactive and efficiently conducted if the resulting design is to be developed in a manner consistent with cost and time requirements. The methods developed as part of this research effort include; extensions to a sensitivity based Concurrent Subspace Optimization (CSSO) MDO algorithm; the development of a neural network response surface based CSSO-MDO algorithm; and the integration of distributed computing and process scheduling into the MDO environment. This report overviews research efforts in each of these focus. A complete bibliography of research produced with support of this grant is attached.

Renaud, John E.↗

Human Capabilities Assessments for Autonomous Missions: A Multi-Team Research Effort to Reduce Risk in the Human-System Integration Architecture for Future Deep-Space Missions

In future exploration missions beyond low earth-orbit, crew will have to execute complex operations and respond to off-nominal events, without real-time support from Mission Control. It is anticipated that increased reliance on automated systems, including human-centric vehicle and information architecture, will need to be designed to support the crew; increased risk to performance, health, and safety may occur if these are not implemented appropriately. The Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Element (HFBP) in the NASA Human Research Program supports research to characterize and mitigate such human health and performance risks, including the Risk of Adverse Outcome Due to Inadequate Human Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA). The HSIA risk addresses the integration of onboard capability and the crew roles and responsibilities necessary to enable the crew to respond effectively and efficiently in the increasingly autonomous mission operations environment. In 2017, HFBP released the “Human Capabilities Assessments for Autonomous Missions” (HCAAM) research topic to address HSIA related questions. HCAAM is a major NASA research effort that has assembled a multidisciplinary team from seven institutions to work closely with design and engineering efforts on research towards developing and refining human performance standards, guidelines and automation tools. The scientific focus is on quantitative assessment of human capabilities relevant to future deep-space missions during which earth/spacecraft communication is so delayed and intermittent that the crew must be able to function autonomously. The integrated strategy of the HCAAM project characterizes human capabilities and limitations related to potential performance decrements during long duration exploration mission spaceflight as relevant to both routine and complex task performance; defines system characteristics that reduce the likelihood or impact of potential decrements in human performance capabilities; performs integrated assessment of intelligent system responses within the context of an operational environment with relevant NASA tools, systems, and data structures in order to determine positive or negative interactions and validate recommended approaches; and proposes specific updates to existing standards and guidelines for inclusion in NASA handbooks for the design of future spacecraft intelligent systems that provide crew performance assessment/feedback, and to also serve as decision-support aids for the onboard crew (i.e., NASA-STD-3001, and NASA/SP-Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH)). The scientific research vectors being addressed by the seven HCAAM teams include: - crew task performance (accuracy, efficiency) (crew + automation) - crew performance (accuracy, efficiency) - crew Situation Awareness - procedure design and multi-modal enhancement - concurrent tasking (mixed manual + some level of autonomy) - task handover - crew self-planning and time-lining - task design - trust in automation, real-time calibration - human multi-sensory feedback and guidance - human trust in on-board software-based intelligent assistants - virtual assistants The presentation will highlight plans and progress made in each of these research areas as well as the methods by which surrogate astronaut crews in the NASA JSC HERA spaceflight analog facility will function as human test subjects for all of the HCAAM research projects.

HCAAM VNSCOR↗

Effect of a hypergravity environment on cortical bone elasticity in rats

There is considerable interest in determining whether hypergravity can be used as a countermeasure for microgravity-induced bone loss. This study was conducted on 20 immature male rats in order to investigate possible elastic adaptations of cortical bone in rapidly growing rats exposed to chronic hypergravity. Ten rats were continuously centrifuged for 14 days at twice gravitational acceleration (2G) on a 12.75 foot radius centrifuge and 10 rats concurrently acted as stationary controls. The effect of hypergravity on the elastic characteristics of cortical bone was quantified via ultrasonic wave propagation. Propagation velocities of longitudinal and shear waves were measured through cubic cortical specimens from the posterior femoral diaphyses. Density was measured with an Archimedes' technique. The orthotropic elastic properties were calculated and used to compare the difference between groups. Results showed an average increase in both the Young's moduli (Eii, + 2.2%) and shear moduli (Gij, + 4.3%) with a statistically significant increase only in G12 (+15.7%, P = 0.046). The ratio of transverse to axial strain (Poisson's ratio, nuij) demonstrated statistically significant changes in nu12, nu21, nu13, and nu31 (P < 0.05). These findings suggest that although slight elastic changes were incurred via a hypergravity environment, the treatment level or duration in this study do not dramatically perturb the normal elastic behavior of cortical bone and that dramatic biomechanical differences noted in previous studies were due more to structural changes than material elasticity changes. Hypergravity applied post facto to a microgravity environment would offer further illucidation of this method as treatment for a degenerative spaceflight experience.

Non-NASA Center↗

Influence of Combined Whole-Body Vibration Plus G-Loading on Visual Performance

Recent engineering analyses of the integrated Ares-Orion stack show that vibration levels for Orion crews have the potential to be much higher than those experienced in Gemini, Apollo, and Shuttle vehicles. Of particular concern to the Constellation Program (CxP) is the 12 Hz thrust oscillation (TO) that the Ares-I rocket develops during the final ~20 seconds preceding first-stage separation, at maximum G-loading. While the structural-dynamic mitigations being considered can assure that vibration due to TO is reduced to below the CxP crew health limit, it remains to be determined how far below this limit vibration must be reduced to enable effective crew performance during launch. Moreover, this "performance" vibration limit will inform the operations concepts (and crew-system interface designs) for this critical phase of flight. While Gemini and Apollo studies provide preliminary guidance, the data supporting the historical limits were obtained using less advanced interface technologies and very different operations concepts. In this study, supported by the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) Human Research Program, we investigated display readability-a fundamental prerequisite for any interaction with electronic crew-vehicle interfaces-while observers were subjected to 12 Hz vibration superimposed on the 3.8 G loading expected for the TO period of ascent. Two age-matched groups of participants (16 general population and 13 Crew Office) performed a numerical display reading task while undergoing sustained 3.8 G loading and whole-body vibration at 0, 0.15, 0.3, 0.5, and 0.7 g in the eyeballs in/out (x-axis) direction. The time-constrained reading task used an Orion-like display with 10- and 14-pt non-proportional sans-serif fonts, and was designed to emulate the visual acquisition and processing essential for crew system monitoring. Compared to the no-vibration baseline, we found no significant effect of vibration at 0.15 and 0.3 g on task error rates (ER) or response times (RT). Significant degradations in both ER and RT, however, were observed at 0.5 and 0.7 g for 10-pt, and at 0.7 g for 14-pt font displays. These objective performance measures were mirrored by participants' subjective ratings. Interestingly, we found that the impact of vibration on ER increased with distance from the center of the display, but only for vertical displacements. Furthermore, no significant ER or RT aftereffects were detected immediately following vibration, regardless of amplitude. Lastly, given that our reading task required no specialized spaceflight expertise, our finding that effects were not statistically distinct between our two groups is not surprising. The results from this empirical study provide initial guidance for evaluating the display readability trade-space between text-font size and vibration amplitude. However, the outcome of this work should be considered preliminary in nature for a number of reasons: 1. The single 12 Hz x-axis vibration employed was based on earlier load-cycle models of the induced TO environment at the end of Ares-I first stage flight. Recent analyses of TO mitigation designs suggest that significant concurrent off-axis vibration may also occur. 2. The shirtsleeve environment in which we tested fails to capture the full kinematic and dynamic complexity of the physical interface between crewmember and the still-to-bematured helmet-suit-seat designs, and the impact these will have for vibration transmission and consequent performance. 3. By examining performance in this reading and number processing task, we are only assessing readability, a first and necessary step that in itself does not directly address the performance of more sophisticated operational tasks such as vehicle-health monitoring or manual control of the vehicle.

readability↗

CERES Monthly TOA and SRB Averages (SRBAVG) data in HDF-EOS Grid (CER_SRBAVG_Terra-FM1-MODIS_Edition2C)

The Monthly TOA/Surface Averages (SRBAVG) product contains a month of space and time averaged Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) data for a single scanner instrument. The SRBAVG is also produced for combinations of scanner instruments. The monthly average regional flux is estimated using diurnal models and the 1-degree regional fluxes at the hour of observation from the CERES SFC product. A second set of monthly average fluxes are estimated using concurrent diurnal information from geostationary satellites. These fluxes are given for both clear-sky and total-sky scenes and are spatially averaged from 1-degree regions to 1-degree zonal averages and a global average. For each region, the SRBAVG also contains hourly average fluxes for the month and an overall monthly average. The cloud properties from SFC are column averaged and are included on the SRBAVG. [Location=GLOBAL] [Temporal_Coverage: Start_Date=1998-02-01; Stop_Date=2003-02-28] [Spatial_Coverage: Southernmost_Latitude=-90; Northernmost_Latitude=90; Westernmost_Longitude=-180; Easternmost_Longitude=180] [Data_Resolution: Latitude_Resolution=1 degree; Longitude_Resolution=1 degree; Horizontal_Resolution_Range=100 km - < 250 km or approximately 1 degree - < 2.5 degrees; Temporal_Resolution=1 month; Temporal_Resolution_Range=Monthly - < Annual].

ICE PARTICLE DIAMETER↗

CERES Monthly TOA and SRB Averages (SRBAVG) data in HDF-EOS Grid (CER_SRBAVG_Terra-FM2-MODIS_Edition2D)

The Monthly TOA/Surface Averages (SRBAVG) product contains a month of space and time averaged Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) data for a single scanner instrument. The SRBAVG is also produced for combinations of scanner instruments. The monthly average regional flux is estimated using diurnal models and the 1-degree regional fluxes at the hour of observation from the CERES SFC product. A second set of monthly average fluxes are estimated using concurrent diurnal information from geostationary satellites. These fluxes are given for both clear-sky and total-sky scenes and are spatially averaged from 1-degree regions to 1-degree zonal averages and a global average. For each region, the SRBAVG also contains hourly average fluxes for the month and an overall monthly average. The cloud properties from SFC are column averaged and are included on the SRBAVG. [Location=GLOBAL] [Temporal_Coverage: Start_Date=1998-02-01; Stop_Date=2004-05-31] [Spatial_Coverage: Southernmost_Latitude=-90; Northernmost_Latitude=90; Westernmost_Longitude=-180; Easternmost_Longitude=180] [Data_Resolution: Latitude_Resolution=1 degree; Longitude_Resolution=1 degree; Horizontal_Resolution_Range=100 km - < 250 km or approximately 1 degree - < 2.5 degrees; Temporal_Resolution=1 month; Temporal_Resolution_Range=Monthly - < Annual].

CLEAR-SKY SHORTWAVE FLUX↗

CERES Monthly TOA and SRB Averages (SRBAVG) data in HDF-EOS Grid (CER_SRBAVG_Terra-FM2-MODIS_Edition2C)

The Monthly TOA/Surface Averages (SRBAVG) product contains a month of space and time averaged Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) data for a single scanner instrument. The SRBAVG is also produced for combinations of scanner instruments. The monthly average regional flux is estimated using diurnal models and the 1-degree regional fluxes at the hour of observation from the CERES SFC product. A second set of monthly average fluxes are estimated using concurrent diurnal information from geostationary satellites. These fluxes are given for both clear-sky and total-sky scenes and are spatially averaged from 1-degree regions to 1-degree zonal averages and a global average. For each region, the SRBAVG also contains hourly average fluxes for the month and an overall monthly average. The cloud properties from SFC are column averaged and are included on the SRBAVG. [Location=GLOBAL] [Temporal_Coverage: Start_Date=1998-02-01; Stop_Date=2003-02-28] [Spatial_Coverage: Southernmost_Latitude=-90; Northernmost_Latitude=90; Westernmost_Longitude=-180; Easternmost_Longitude=180] [Data_Resolution: Latitude_Resolution=1 degree; Longitude_Resolution=1 degree; Horizontal_Resolution_Range=100 km - < 250 km or approximately 1 degree - < 2.5 degrees; Temporal_Resolution=1 month; Temporal_Resolution_Range=Monthly - < Annual].

CLEAR-SKY SOLAR INCIDENCE↗

CERES Monthly TOA and SRB Averages (SRBAVG) data in HDF-EOS Grid (CER_SRBAVG_TRMM-PFM-VIRS_Edition2B)

The Monthly TOA/Surface Averages (SRBAVG) product contains a month of space and time averaged Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) data for a single scanner instrument. The SRBAVG is also produced for combinations of scanner instruments. The monthly average regional flux is estimated using diurnal models and the 1-degree regional fluxes at the hour of observation from the CERES SFC product. A second set of monthly average fluxes are estimated using concurrent diurnal information from geostationary satellites. These fluxes are given for both clear-sky and total-sky scenes and are spatially averaged from 1-degree regions to 1-degree zonal averages and a global average. For each region, the SRBAVG also contains hourly average fluxes for the month and an overall monthly average. The cloud properties from SFC are column averaged and are included on the SRBAVG. [Location=GLOBAL] [Temporal_Coverage: Start_Date=1998-02-01; Stop_Date=2000-03-31] [Spatial_Coverage: Southernmost_Latitude=-90; Northernmost_Latitude=90; Westernmost_Longitude=-180; Easternmost_Longitude=180] [Data_Resolution: Latitude_Resolution=1 degree; Longitude_Resolution=1 degree; Horizontal_Resolution_Range=100 km - < 250 km or approximately 1 degree - < 2.5 degrees; Temporal_Resolution=1 month; Temporal_Resolution_Range=Monthly - < Annual].

CLEAR-SKY ALBEDO↗

CERES Monthly TOA and SRB Averages (SRBAVG) data in HDF-EOS Grid (CER_SRBAVG_Terra-FM1-MODIS_Edition2D)

The Monthly TOA/Surface Averages (SRBAVG) product contains a month of space and time averaged Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) data for a single scanner instrument. The SRBAVG is also produced for combinations of scanner instruments. The monthly average regional flux is estimated using diurnal models and the 1-degree regional fluxes at the hour of observation from the CERES SFC product. A second set of monthly average fluxes are estimated using concurrent diurnal information from geostationary satellites. These fluxes are given for both clear-sky and total-sky scenes and are spatially averaged from 1-degree regions to 1-degree zonal averages and a global average. For each region, the SRBAVG also contains hourly average fluxes for the month and an overall monthly average. The cloud properties from SFC are column averaged and are included on the SRBAVG. [Location=GLOBAL] [Temporal_Coverage: Start_Date=1998-02-01; Stop_Date=2004-05-31] [Spatial_Coverage: Southernmost_Latitude=-90; Northernmost_Latitude=90; Westernmost_Longitude=-180; Easternmost_Longitude=180] [Data_Resolution: Latitude_Resolution=1 degree; Longitude_Resolution=1 degree; Horizontal_Resolution_Range=100 km - < 250 km or approximately 1 degree - < 2.5 degrees; Temporal_Resolution=1 month; Temporal_Resolution_Range=Monthly - < Annual].

EOSDIS↗

Recommendations on the Use of Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts for NASA Missions - Phase II

This assessment had two Phases. Phase I captured NASA Centers’ current practices for commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts 1 used in spaceflight systems and ground support equipment (available at https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205011579) [ref. 1]. The Phase II report provides guidance for selecting and using COTS parts in NASA missions. The approaches proposed in this report differ from current agency practices. This top-level executive summary touches on these new approaches for using COTS parts but does not provide the detailed information that is critical in understanding the rationale behind these new approaches. Readers will need to read the entire report to gain full understanding and effectively use the recommendations herein. NASA’s historical approach to selecting and applying parts has been to define certain parts, primarily specific classes of military specification (MIL-SPEC) parts, as “standard”, leaving all others, including COTS parts, as nonstandard. Standard parts typically are used without further testing (“use-as-is”). Nonstandard parts are subjected to initial screening and subsequent lot acceptance testing of representative samples from each procured lot per MIL-SPEC or similar requirements. Decades later, top-tier commercial part manufacturers have evolved significant manufacturing, statistical control, and technological improvements that can now provide parts as reliable or more reliable than MIL-SPEC parts, when used within their datasheet limits. Concurrently, the space science and exploration community’s needs demand technological advances unavailable with MIL-SPEC parts. This ongoing change necessitates using COTS parts for space missions. Properly selected COTS parts in appropriate applications can offer performance and supply availability advantages compared to MIL-SPEC parts. Their utility and demonstrated reliability result from large volumes and automated production and testing processes. However, careful review and a thorough understanding of their specifications (i.e., datasheet limitations) is needed, and verifying that manufacturer specifications and reliability meet space hardware application needs are necessary. This report recommends MIL-SPEC screening and non-radiation-related lot acceptance testing be reduced or eliminated in cases where evidence of sufficient quality and reliability exists for COTS parts. The extent of NASA's insight into COTS manufacturers and the amount and nature of the needed evidence will differ by mission and will likely be driven by a mission's resources and associated risk posture. To facilitate this goal, two new terminologies have been defined and described: “Industry Leading Parts Manufacturer (ILPM)” and “Established COTS parts.” An ILPM is a COTS manufacturer that produces high quality and reliable parts. Some parts produced by ILPMs, defined as Established COTS parts, do not need any additional MIL-SPEC or NASA screening and lot acceptance testing to be used in space applications. This report provides guidance for selecting, procuring, and applying COTS parts and for performing part-, board-, and system-level COTS parts verification. The recommendation to select Established COTS parts from ILPMs will assure those COTS parts will have comparable quality to corresponding MIL-SPEC parts. Selecting, applying, and verifying Established COTS parts from ILPMs requires a holistic team approach, engaging parts engineers, circuit designers, quality, reliability, and systems engineers, procurement specialists, radiation specialists, avionics leads, and program/project managers. A mission-specific approach tailored to a project’s Mission, Environment, Applications and Lifetime (MEAL) [ref. 2] requirements should be developed and approved by program/project managers. Any associated risks should be clearly identified, quantified, mitigated, and/or accepted. Different approaches are recommended according to program/project Risk Classes A, B, C, and D [ref. 3] and human-rated missions [ref. 4]: 1. Recommend Classes A and B and human-rated missions consider a “MIL-SPEC parts- based design” approach. ”MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach is one in which most parts are MIL-SPEC parts and Established COTS parts from ILPMs are used only when an equivalent MIL-SPEC part does not meet functional or size, weight, and power (SWaP) or performance requirements, or is not available. 2. Recommend Classes D and Sub-D missions consider a “System of COTS” approach. “System of COTS” approach is one which most parts are Established COTS parts from ILPMs. 3. Recommend Class C missions determine which approach is the best for their projects; that is, use either a “MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach, “System of COTS” approach, or a combined approach utilizing elements of both. This report intends to provide guidance in using COTS parts for NASA missions with risk classifications of A through D and human-rated missions; but it does not address the costs of using COTS parts. Costs of using COTS parts in different NASA mission classes can vary significantly even if the same parts are used in different risk postures, due to differing verification levels needed. The guidance does not distinguish between critical or non-critical systems, and a given project will need to apply the appropriate guidance based on their risk posture. The intended audience of this report are NASA personnel and commercial practitioners who support NASA’s spaceflight missions, including spaceflight program or project managers, parts engineers, parts manufacturers, radiation engineers, avionics engineers, system engineers, circuit design engineers, reliability engineers, safety and mission assurance (SMA) personnel, and parts procurement specialists. The NEPP Program will perform a pathfinder study to explore implementing the guidance in this NESC report. An ILPM verification process is not the same as conventional vendor qualification processes performed according to military standards and specifications. This NESC report intends to provide guidance in utilizing available parts data from ILPM manufacturers for parts assurance assessments needed for NASA missions. The report also captured the current practices from DoD and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in Section 10. Note each DoD and FAA report was provided by the corresponding agencies regarding their practices, which are independent from the NESC recommendations in the report.

Commercial-Off-The-Shelf↗