SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Critical Experiments Team”

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 55 records · Page 3

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1972

Outer planet Grand Tour missions photometry/polarimetry experiment critical components study

Work performed during this effort was limited to two primary areas of technical concern: optical design optimization, and sensor selection. An optical system concept was established, and various system components were evaluated through experimental test sequences. Photodetectors were investigated for the applicability in meeting OPGT requirements as constrained by the photometry/polarimetry team directives. The most promising (gallium arsenide PMT) was further experimentally tested to ascertain its behavior with respect to anticipated environmental conditions. Results of testing and summary of the preceding tradeoff study effort are presented.

Pellicori, S. F.↗

NASA NTRS2019

NASA Undergraduate Student Instrument (USIP) Project--Lessons Learned

NASA offers real-world experiences, with the goal of developing students’ skills and capabilities in science, technology, engineering and math, skills critical to building a STEM-literate workforce and achieving the nation's exploration goals. In 2016, the NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) and the Office of Education National Space Grant Program (OE Space Grant) awarded $8 million through the Undergraduate Student Instrument Project (USIP) to 47 student teams to conduct hands-on research with 23 of the projects being CubeSat projects. The USIP student teams proposed science or technology experiments that are relevant to NASA missions, and the platform to fly their payload. The platforms include sounding rockets, scientific and hand-held balloons, aircraft, suborbital reusable and commercial launch vehicles, and CubeSats launched as a secondary payload on an orbital vehicle. The mission management for USIP was the responsibility of NASA Goddard Space Flight Centers Wallops Flight Facility (WFF) in Virginia. The university faculty supporting USIP attest to the benefits students are receiving in the hands-on aspects of the projects, as well as the real-world problem resolution. The USIP university teams are receiving an authentic NASA educational experience that will encourage the students to be part of NASA’s or the Nations’ future workforce and leaders.

Winterton, Joyce L.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Correlative studies of astrophysical sources of very high and ultra high energy gamma-rays

During the period of this contract, June 1, 1991 to November 14, 1992, the major results of our research effort have come from the Whipple air shower experiment in Tucson, AZ. The most notable development has been the discovery of TeV photons from the BL Lac object, Markarian 421. This result depended critically on the identification of Mrk 421 by the EGRET team as a source of GeV gamma rays.

Akerlof, Carl W.↗

NASA NTRS2018

SORCE Daylight-Only Operations

The recent experience of the SORCE flight operations team offers an excellent example of innovative engineering using limited resources. The goal of this paper is to extend to the space operations community the lessons learned during this critical redesign in order to aid other missions facing equally daunting challenges. The end result is a mission extended well beyond its designed life continuing to return important data to the science community to extend the climate record.

Spacecraft Anomaly Recovery↗

NASA NTRS2008

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) GN and C Technical Discipline Team (TDT): Its Purpose, Practices and Experiences

This paper will briefly define the vision, mission, and purpose of the NESC organization. The role of the GN&C TDT will then be described in detail along with an overview of how this team operates and engages in its objective engineering and safety assessments of critical NASA projects. This paper will then describe key issues and findings from several of the recent GN&C-related independent assessments and consultations performed and/or supported by the NESC GN&C TDT. Among the examples of the GN&C TDT s work that will be addressed in this paper are the following: the Space Shuttle Orbiter Repair Maneuver (ORM) assessment, the ISS CMG failure root cause assessment, the Demonstration of Autonomous Rendezvous Technologies (DART) spacecraft mishap consultation, the Phoenix Mars lander thruster-based controllability consultation, the NASA in-house Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Smart Buyer assessment and the assessment of key engineering considerations for the Design, Development, Test & Evaluation (DDT&E) of robust and reliable GN&C systems for human-rated spacecraft.

Dennehy, Cornelius J.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Essentials for Team Based Rehearsals and the Differences Between Earth Orbiting and Deep Space Missions

The mission readiness environment is where spacecraft and ground systems converge to form the entire as built flight system for the final phase of operationally-themed testing. For most space missions, this phase starts between nine to twelve months prior to the planned launch. In the mission readiness environment, the goal is to perform sufficient testing to exercise the flight teams and systems through all mission phases in order to demonstrate that all elements are ready to support. As part of the maturation process, a mission rehearsal program is introduced to focus on team processes within the final flight system, in a more realistic operational environment. The overall goal for a mission rehearsal program is to: 1) ensure all flight system elements are able to meet mission objectives as a cohesive team; 2) reduce the risk in space based operations due to deficiencies in people, processes, procedures, or systems; and 3) instill confidence in the teams that will execute these first time flight activities. A good rehearsal program ensures critical events are exercised, discovers team or flight system nuances whose impact were previously unknown, and provides a real-time environment in which to interact with the various teams and systems. For flight team members, the rehearsal program provides experience and training in the event of planned (or unplanned) flight contingencies. To preserve the essence for team based rehearsals, this paper will explore the important elements necessary for a successful rehearsal program, document differences driven by Earth Orbiting (Aqua, Aura, Suomi-National Polar-orbiting Partnership (NPP)) and Deep Space missions (New Horizons, Mars Atmosphere and Volatile EvolutioN (MAVEN)) and discuss common challenges to both mission types. In addition, large scale program considerations and enhancements or additional steps for developing a rehearsal program will also be considered. For NASA missions, the mission rehearsal phase is a key milestone for predicting and ensuring on-orbit success.

Gomez-Rosa, Carlos↗

NASA NTRS2010

Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer Integration and Test

Integration and test (I&T) of the Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE) is presented. A collaborative NASA project between Goddard Space Flight Center and Ames Research Center, LADEE's mission is to explore the low lunar orbit environment and exosphere for constituents. Its instruments include two spectrometers, a dust detector, and a laser communication technology demonstration. Although a relatively low-cost spacecraft, LADEE has I&T requirements typical of most planetary probes, such as prelaunch contamination control, sterilization, and instrument calibration. To lead to a successful mission, I&T at the spacecraft, instrument, and observatory level must include step-by-step and end-to-end functional, environmental, and performance testing. Due to its compressed development schedule, LADEE I&T planning requires adjusting test flows and sequences to account for long-lead critical-path items and limited spares. A protoflight test-level strategy is also baselined. However, the program benefits from having two independent but collaborative teams of engineers, managers, and technicians that have a wealth of flight project experience. This paper summarizes the LADEE I&T planning, flow, facilities, and probe-unique processes. Coordination of requirements and approaches to I&T when multiple organizations are involved is discussed. Also presented are cost-effective approaches to I&T that are transferable to most any spaceflight project I&T program.

Wright, Michael R.↗

NASA NTRS2013

STS-114: Engine Cut-Off Sensors Are a No-Go: Teaching Notes for NASA Case Study

This case study format is intended to simulate the experience of facing the same difficult challenges and making the same critical decisions as managers, engineers, and scientists in the Space Shuttle Program. It has been designed for use in the classroom setting to help students develop skills related to decision-making. Students will read about the engine cut-off sensor anomaly which created challenges during the STS-114 mission and have the opportunity to make decisions as lead NASA engineers and Mission Management Team members. Included within this document are three case study presentation options - class discussion, group activity, and open-ended research. Please read the full case prior to in-class presentation to allow ample time for students' analysis and reflection, as well as to prepare additional questions. activities or exercises, material selection, etc. Depending upon the setting of your presentation and the number of participants, please choose at least one presentation format beforehand and plan accordingly. You may expect the following learning objectives by using the proposed formats. Learning Objectives: To enable students to experience the responsibilities of NASA management, engineers, and analysis; to discover possible procedures for investigating system anomalies; to become familiar with the liquid hydrogen low level engine cut-off sensor, including its function, connecting components, and location within the Space Shuttle; and to encourage critical analysis and stimulating discussion of Space Shuttle mission challenges.

Ransom, Khadijah S.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Aerospace Systems Design in NASA's Collaborative Engineering Environment

Past designs of complex aerospace systems involved an environment consisting of collocated design teams with project managers, technical discipline experts, and other experts (e.g. manufacturing and systems operations). These experts were generally qualified only on the basis of past design experience and typically had access to a limited set of integrated analysis tools. These environments provided less than desirable design fidelity, often lead to the inability of assessing critical programmatic and technical issues (e.g., cost risk, technical impacts), and generally derived a design that was not necessarily optimized across the entire system. The continually changing, modern aerospace industry demands systems design processes that involve the best talent available (no matter where it resides) and access to the best design and analysis tools. A solution to these demands involves a design environment referred to as collaborative engineering. The collaborative engineering environment evolving within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a capability that enables the Agency's engineering infrastructure to interact and use the best state-of-the-art tools and data across organizational boundaries. Using collaborative engineering, the collocated team is replaced with an interactive team structure where the team members are geographically distributed and the best engineering talent can be applied to the design effort regardless of physical location. In addition, a more efficient, higher quality design product is delivered by bringing together the best engineering talent with more up-to-date design and analysis tools. These tools are focused on interactive, multidisciplinary design and analysis with emphasis on the complete life cycle of the system, and they include nontraditional, integrated tools for life cycle cost estimation and risk assessment. NASA has made substantial progress during the last two years in developing a collaborative engineering environment. NASA is planning to use this collaborative engineering infrastructure to provide better aerospace systems life cycle design and analysis, which includes analytical assessment of the technical and programmatic aspects of a system from "cradle to grave." This paper describes the recent NASA developments in the area of collaborative engineering, the benefits (realized and anticipated) of using the developed capability, and the long-term plans for implementing this capability across the Agency.

Monell, Donald W.↗

NASA NTRS2000

Aerospace Systems Design in NASA's Collaborative Engineering Environment

Past designs of complex aerospace systems involved an environment consisting of collocated design teams with project managers, technical discipline experts, and other experts (e.g., manufacturing and systems operation). These experts were generally qualified only on the basis of past design experience and typically had access to a limited set of integrated analysis tools. These environments provided less than desirable design fidelity, often lead to the inability of assessing critical programmatic and technical issues (e.g., cost, risk, technical impacts), and generally derived a design that was not necessarily optimized across the entire system. The continually changing, modern aerospace industry demands systems design processes that involve the best talent available (no matter where it resides) and access to the the best design and analysis tools. A solution to these demands involves a design environment referred to as collaborative engineering. The collaborative engineering environment evolving within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a capability that enables the Agency's engineering infrastructure to interact and use the best state-of-the-art tools and data across organizational boundaries. Using collaborative engineering, the collocated team is replaced with an interactive team structure where the team members are geographical distributed and the best engineering talent can be applied to the design effort regardless of physical location. In addition, a more efficient, higher quality design product is delivered by bringing together the best engineering talent with more up-to-date design and analysis tools. These tools are focused on interactive, multidisciplinary design and analysis with emphasis on the complete life cycle of the system, and they include nontraditional, integrated tools for life cycle cost estimation and risk assessment. NASA has made substantial progress during the last two years in developing a collaborative engineering environment. NASA is planning to use this collaborative engineering engineering infrastructure to provide better aerospace systems life cycle design and analysis, which includes analytical assessment of the technical and programmatic aspects of a system from "cradle to grave." This paper describes the recent NASA developments in the area of collaborative engineering, the benefits (realized and anticipated) of using the developed capability, and the long-term plans for implementing this capability across Agency.

Monell, Donald W.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Vehicle Integrated Performance Analysis, the VIPA Experience: Reconnecting with Technical Integration

Today's NASA is facing significant challenges and changes. The Exploration initiative indicates a large increase in projects with limited increase in budget. The Columbia report has criticized NASA for its lack of insight and technical integration impacting its ability to provide safety. The Aldridge report is advocating NASA find new ways of doing business. Very early in the Space Launch Initiative (SLI) program a small team of engineers at MSFC were asked to propose a process for performing a system level assessment of a launch vehicle. The request was aimed primarily at providing insight and making NASA a "smart buyer." Out of this effort the VIPA team was created. The difference between the VIPA effort and many integration attempts is that VIPA focuses on using experienced people from various disciplines and a process which focuses them on a technically integrated assessment. Most previous attempts have focused on developing an all encompassing software tool. In addition, VIPA anchored its process formulation in the experience of its members and in early developmental Space Shuttle experience. The primary reference for this is NASA-TP-2001-210092, "Launch Vehicle Design Process: Characterization, Technical Integration, and Lessons Learned," and discussions with its authors. The foundations of VIPA's process are described. The VIPA team also recognized the need to drive detailed analysis earlier in the design process. Analyses and techniques typically done in later design phases, are brought forward using improved computing technology. The intent is to allow the identification of significant sensitivities, trades, and design issues much earlier in the program. This process is driven by the T-model for Technical Integration described in the aforementioned reference. VIPA's approach to performing system level technical integration is discussed in detail. Proposed definitions are offered to clarify this discussion and the general systems integration dialog. VIPA's capabilities and process can now be used to significantly enhance the development and monitoring of realizable project requirements. This is done through the use of VIPA's V-model. Starting with a given concept, VIPA's assessment validates the concept's stated performance, identifies significant issues either with the concept or the requirements, and then re-integrates these issues to determine impacts. This process is discussed along with a description of how it may be integrated into a program's insight and review process. The VIPA process has been employed successfully on several projects including SLI, Orbital Space Plane (OSP), and several heavy lift concepts for Exploration. It has also been proposed for use on the Jupiter Icy Moon (JIMO) spacecraft. The VIPA process has gained favor with both engineering and project organizations for being responsive and insightful. Selected results from these assessments will be presented.

McGhee, David S.↗

NASA NTRS2018

International Space Station Medical Projects - Full Services to Mars

The International Space Station Medical Projects (ISSMP) Element provides planning, integration, and implementation services for HRP research studies for both spaceflight and flight analog research. Through the implementation of these two efforts, ISSMP offers an innovative way of guiding research decisions to meet the unique challenges of understanding the human risks to space exploration. Flight services provided by ISSMP include leading informed consent briefings, developing and validating in-flight crew procedures, providing ISS crew and ground-controller training, real-time experiment monitoring, on-orbit experiment and hardware operations and facilitating data transfer to investigators. For analog studies at the NASA Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA), the ISSMP team provides subject recruitment and screening, science requirements integration, data collection schedules, data sharing agreements, mission scenarios and facilities to support investigators. The ISSMP also serves as the HRP interface to external analog providers including the :envihab bed rest facility (Cologne, Germany), NEK isolation chamber (Moscow, Russia) and the Antarctica research stations. Investigators working in either spaceflight or analog environments requires a coordinated effort between NASA and the investigators. The interdisciplinary nature of both flight and analog research requires investigators to be aware of concurrent research studies and take into account potential confounding factors that may impact their research objectives. Investigators must define clear research requirements, participate in Investigator Working Group meetings, obtain human use approvals, and provide study-specific training, sample and data collection and procedures all while adhering to schedule deadlines. These science requirements define the technical, functional and performance operations to meet the research objectives. The ISSMP maintains an expert team of professionals with the knowledge and experience to guide investigators science through all aspects of mission planning, crew operations, and research integration. During this session, the ISSMP team will discuss best-practices approaches for successfully preparing and conducting studies in both the flight and analog environments. Critical tips and tricks will be shown to greatly improve your chances of successfully completing your research aboard the International Space Station and in Spaceflight Analogs.

Pietrzyk, R. A.↗

NASA NTRS2026

Raising TRL of Your Lunar Payload

Preparing payloads for the lunar surface requires rigorous testing that accurately captures the extreme environmental and operational conditions. This presentation provides an overview of the lunar relevant test capabilities at NASA JSC’s Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science (ARES) laboratories as well as the Energy System Test Area (ESTA) Lunar Development and Test Facility. These facilities allow teams to assess hardware performance in dusty vacuum environments, characterize interactions with high fidelity lunar regolith simulants, evaluate mechanical and thermal durability, and understand the effects of micrometeoroid and orbital debris impacts—critical factors for certifying payloads that will operate on the lunar surface or in orbit. While Lunar power challenges such as variable illumination, extreme temperatures, and dust driven degradation will be briefly summarized, the focus of this talk is on how JSC’s test infrastructure enables developers to validate designs, reduce mission risk, and ensure compatibility with CLPS and Artemis objectives. NASA JSC’s expertise and experience help industry, academic, and government teams prepare robust hardware ready for successful delivery and operation on the surface of the Moon.

Lunar Regolith Simulant↗

NASA NTRS2026

Raising TRL of Your Lunar Payload

Laboratories↗

NASA NTRS2010

The Right Stuff: A Look Back at Three Decades of Flight Controller Training for Space Shuttle Mission Operations

This paper will summarize the thirty-year history of Space Shuttle operations from the perspective of training in NASA Johnson Space Center's Mission Control Center. It will focus on training and development of flight controllers and instructors, and how training practices have evolved over the years as flight experience was gained, new technologies developed, and programmatic needs changed. Operations of human spaceflight systems is extremely complex, therefore the training and certification of operations personnel is a critical piece of ensuring mission success. Mission Control Center (MCC-H), at the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, in Houston, Texas manages mission operations for the Space Shuttle Program, including the training and certification of the astronauts and flight control teams. This paper will give an overview of a flight control team s makeup and responsibilities during a flight, and details on how those teams are trained and certified. The training methodology for developing flight controllers has evolved significantly over the last thirty years, while the core goals and competencies have remained the same. In addition, the facilities and tools used in the control center have evolved. These changes have been driven by many factors including lessons learned, technology, shuttle accidents, shifts in risk posture, and generational differences. Flight controllers will share their experiences in training and operating the Space Shuttle throughout the Program s history. A primary method used for training Space Shuttle flight control teams is by running mission simulations of the orbit, ascent, and entry phases, to truly "train like you fly." The audience will learn what it is like to perform a simulation as a shuttle flight controller. Finally, we will reflect on the lessons learned in training for the shuttle program, and how those could be applied to future human spaceflight endeavors.

Dittemore, Gary D.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Methods for Developing Successful Systems Engineers

Systems Engineering (SE) is a complex and challenging field that incorporates the knowledge of systems engineering processes, the ability to synthesize a wide-range of engineering disciplines, and the ability to lead a team of people to successfully accomplish the goals of a project. It requires hard technical skills and soft-skill leadership savvy. As a result, three main development needs are identified: 1) Knowledge of SE processes, the benefits of these processes to a project and their tailored application 2) Knowledge of a wide-range of engineering disciplines, how they interrelate in a system, and the development of sound technical judgement 3) Team leadership to direct and motivate a team of subsystem and discipline experts This paper describes the establishment of a comprehensive training and development program for Systems Engineers at NASA Ames Research Center that addresses in part each of these three areas from the perspective of the implementing manager. A variety of methods have been utilized including the establishment of a SE Community of Practice, a unique and innovative web tool, on-line videos, classroom training in NASA’s 17 Common Technical Processes, guidance on the tailored application of these processes, monthly technical talks, mentoring in both technical judgment and team leadership, and NASA’s Leadership Development Programs. While much of professional SE development must come through project experience, the approaches listed above can accelerate development. The diversity of skills required of Systems Engineering demands a multi-faceted approach to successfully train and develop this critical skill.

development↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Methods for Developing Successful Systems Engineers

Systems Engineering (SE) is a complex and challenging field that incorporates the knowledge of systems engineering processes, the ability to synthesize a wide-range of engineering disciplines, and the ability to lead a team of people to successfully accomplish the goals of a project. It requires hard technical skills and soft-skill leadership savvy. As a result, three main development needs are identified: 1. Knowledge of SE processes, the benefits of these processes to a project and their tailored application 2. Knowledge of a wide-range of engineering disciplines, how they interrelate in a system, and the development of sound technical judgement 3. Team leadership to direct and motivate a team of subsystem and discipline experts This paper describes the establishment of a comprehensive training and development program for Systems Engineers at NASA Ames Research Center that addresses in part each of these three areas from the perspective of the implementing manager. A variety of methods have been utilized including the establishment of a SE Community of Practice, a unique and innovative web tool, on-line videos, classroom training in NASA’s 17 Common Technical Processes, guidance on the tailored application of these processes, monthly technical talks, mentoring in both technical judgment and team leadership, and NASA’s Leadership Development Programs. While much of professional SE development must come through project experience, the approaches listed above can accelerate development. The diversity of skills required of Systems Engineering demands a multi-faceted approach to successfully train and develop this critical skill.

development↗

NASA NTRS1991

Innovative nuclear thermal propulsion technology evaluation - Results of the NASA/DOE task team study

In response to findings from two NASA/DOE nuclear propulsion workshops, six task teams were created to continue evaluation of various propulsion concepts, from which evolved an innovative concepts subpanel to evaluate thermal propulsion concepts which did not utilize solid fuel. This subpanel endeavored to evaluate each concept on a level technology basis, and to identify critical issues, technologies, and early proof-of-concept experiments. Results of the concept studies including the liquid core fission, the gas core fission, the fission foil reactors, explosively driven systems, fusion, and antimatter are presented.

Howe, Steven D.↗