Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Organizational Objectives”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Standards Roadmapping for Mission Assurance in Commercial Spaceflight

This paper explores the application of established roadmapping approaches in standards planning and roadmap development to support mission assurance objectives. Mission assurance requires proactive planning across multiple domains including technical, schedule, cost, organizational, and policy. The intersection of these domains happens at the enterprise level, and enterprise systems engineering processes can systematically guide mission assurance activities, including development of standards roadmaps. Standards planning and development is a critical contributor to an effective mission assurance strategy, although standards are often developed and adopted reactively. Technology and standards planning is a key Enterprise Process Management activity, as identified by the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge, and technology and standards roadmaps are strategic tools used to enable that process. Technology roadmapping has proven effective in guiding enterprise architecture and concept design, and standards planning supports enterprise requirements definition and management. However, there are limited methodologies to guide such standards planning activities. The application of technology roadmapping principles to standards planning formalizes the process and establishes a repeatable framework for standards development and integration. The framework development described in this paper fills a methodological gap by adapting proven roadmapping techniques to standards planning. Through a comparison of roadmapping methodologies and a case study analysis, this approach outlines a systematic process for anticipating and planning standards needs. In the case of developing a standards integration roadmap for NASA’s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA), technology roadmapping principles were adapted to develop a roadmap framework to allow NASA and OSMA to define an agency-wide standards integration plan for commercial and industry safety and mission assurance standards. The outcome highlights key adaptations required for roadmapping in a standards context and describes the process steps to formalize a standards planning activity. The roadmapping framework adapted for standards development and integration enables more strategic, forward-looking standards planning and allows for better alignment between evolving capabilities and mission assurance requirements. Beyond its application to mission assurance, this methodology can be transferred to other domains requiring standards development, providing a systematic approach that integrates systems engineering principles into policy strategy and decision-making processes.

Enterprise Systems Engineering↗
NASA NTRS1990

NASA/DOD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project. Paper 5: Aerospace librarians and technical information specialists as information intermediaries: A report of phase 2 activities of the NASA/DOD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project

The objective of the NASA/DOD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project is to provide descriptive and analytical data regarding the flow of scientific and technical information (STI) at the individual, organizational, national, and international levels, placing emphasis on the systems used to diffuse the results of federally funded aerospace STI. An overview of project assumptions, objectives, and design is presented and preliminary results of the phase 2 aerospace library survey are summarized. Phase 2 addressed aerospace knowledge transfer and use within the larger social system and focused on the flow of aerospace STI in government and industry and the role of the information intermediary in knowledge transfer.

Pinelli, Thomas E.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Putting the Power of Configuration in the Hands of the Users

Goal was to reduce the overall cost of human space flight while maintaining the most demanding standards for safety and mission success. In support of this goal, a project team was chartered to replace 18 legacy Space Shuttle nonconformance processes and systems with one fully integrated system Problem Reporting and Corrective Action (PRACA) processes provide a closed-loop system for the identification, disposition, resolution, closure, and reporting of all Space Shuttle hardware/software problems PRACA processes are integrated throughout the Space Shuttle organizational processes and are critical to assuring a safe and successful program Primary Project Objectives Develop a fully integrated system that provides an automated workflow with electronic signatures Support multiple NASA programs and contracts with a single "system" architecture Define standard processes, implement best practices, and minimize process variations

Al-Shihabi, Mary-Jo↗
NASA NTRS1992

Commercial non-aerospace technology transfer program for the 2000s: Strategic analysis and implementation

This report presents a strategic analysis and implementation plan for NASA's Office of Commercial Programs (OCP), Technology Transfer Division's (TTD), Technology Transfer Program. The main objectives of this study are to: (1) characterize the NASA TTD's environment and past organizational structure; (2) clearly identify current and prospective programmatic efforts; (3) determine an evolutionary view of an organizational structure which could lead to the accomplishment of NASA's future technology transfer aims; and (4) formulate a strategy and plan to improve NASA's (and other federal agencies) ability to transfer technology to the non-aerospace sectors of the U.S. economy. The planning horizon for this study extends through the remainder of the 1990s to the year 2000.

Horsham, Gary A. P.↗
NASA NTRS2008

System Engineering on the Use for Ares I,V - the Simpler, the Better

The Ares I and Ares V Vehicles will utilize the J-2X rocket engine developed for NASA by the Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne Company. The J-2X is an improved higher power version of the original J-2 engine used during the Apollo program. With higher power and updated requirements for safety and performance, the J-2X becomes a new engine using state-of-the-art design methodology, materials and manufacturing processes. The implementation of Systems Engineering (SE) principles enables the rapid J-2X development program to remain aligned with the ARES I and V vehicle programs, Meeting the aggressive development schedule is a challenge. Coordinating the best expertise thai NASA and PWR have to offer requires effectively utilizing resources at multiple sites. This presents formidable communication challenges. SE allows honest and open discussions of issues and problems. This simple idea is often overlooked in large and complex SE programs. Regular and effective meetings linking SE objectives to component designs are used to voice differences of opinions with customer and contractor in attendance so that the best mutual decisions can be made on the shortest possible schedule. Regular technical interchange meetings on secure program wide computer networks and CM processes are effective,in the "Controlled Change" process that exemplifies good SE. Good communication is a key effective SE implementation. The System of Systems approach is the vision of the Orion program which facilitates the establishment of dynamic SE processes at all levels including the engine. SE enables requirements evolution by facilitating organizational and process agility. Flow down and distribution of requirements is controlled by Allocation Reports which breakdown numerical design objectives (weight, reliability, etc.) into quanta goals for each component area. Linked databases of design and verification requirements helps eliminate redundancy and potential mistakes inherent m separated systems. Another tool, the Architecture Design Description, is being used to control J-2X system architecture and effectively communicate configuration changes to those involved in the design process. But the proof is in successful program accomplishment. The SE is the methodology being used to meet the challenge of completing J-2X engine certification 2 years ahead of any engine program ever developed at PWR. The Ares I SE system of systems has delivered according to expectations thus far. All major design reviews (SRR. PDR, CDR) have been successfully conducted to satisfy overall program objectives using SE as the basis for accomplishment. The paper describes SE tools and techniques utilized to achieve this success.

Kelly, William↗
NASA NTRS1981

Department of Defense Precise Time and Time Interval program improvement plan

The United States Naval Observatory is responsible for ensuring uniformity in precise time and time interval operations including measurements, the establishment of overall DOD requirements for time and time interval, and the accomplishment of objectives requiring precise time and time interval with minimum cost. An overview of the objectives, the approach to the problem, the schedule, and a status report, including significant findings relative to organizational relationships, current directives, principal PTTI users, and future requirements as currently identified by the users are presented.

Bowser, J. R.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Summary results of the Industry Conference on the Commercial Use of Space

The future intentions of the Federal Republic of Germany in the area of the commercialization of space are presented. It is shown that significant advances in microgravity research, particulary in the areas of materials science, composite materials, physical chemistry, crystal growth, biology, and process engineering will have an effect on future plans for establishing sponsoring organizations to guide commercial interests in German space research. An organizational and functional outline of a proposed sponsoring organization to promote space commercialization under German supervision, including the objectives, the target group to be served, and the administrative structure, is presented. The role of the DFVLR (German Aerospace Research Establishment) and the BMFT (German Ministry for Research and Technology) as sponsoring organizations representing the interests of the German government is shown.

REUSE↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Extravehicular Activity Technology Roadmaps for Exploration

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has developed and matured many technologies over the decades to advance extravehicular activity (EVA) systems. Over the last 15 years, major steps were taken to advance the technology with the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) government reference design at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas. The xEMU builds on the lessons learned of the Apollo, Space Shuttle, and International Space Station (ISS) EMUs, evolving the technology to increase performance for extreme environments. As NASA sets its goals toward Earth’s Moon and Mars, a spacesuit design tolerable of gravity and dust will be needed for these adverse environments. NASA has used roadmaps as the means of documenting actionable plans for strategizing technology developments needed to meet NASA’s mission and goals. To help reach and create a sustained presence on the Moon, NASA procured EVA services from industry through the Exploration EVA Services (xEVAS) contract. These services include certified contractor-provided spacesuits, tools, equipment, vehicle interfaces, and support to training and real-time operations. NASA will now focus on a mission to Mars. NASA leadership has set goals and objectives related to the Agency’s vision and a Moon to Mars (M2M) strategy. This paper presents an organizational framework to provide insight into how NASA’s vision is realized. Additionally, this paper covers the maturation and development of the spacesuit technology and reveals the EVA technology roadmaps for the M2M Program. These EVA roadmaps visualize an actionable path to EVA capabilities needed for Mars exploration.

Cinda Chullen↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Extravehicular Activity Technology Roadmaps for Exploration

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has developed and matured many technologies over the decades to advance extravehicular activity (EVA) systems. Over the last 15 years, major steps were taken to advance the technology with the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) government reference design at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas. The xEMU builds on the lessons learned of the Apollo, Space Shuttle, and International Space Station (ISS) EMUs, evolving the technology to increase performance for extreme environments. As NASA sets its goals toward Earth’s Moon and Mars, a spacesuit design tolerable of gravity and dust will be needed for these adverse environments. NASA has used roadmaps as the means of documenting actionable plans for strategizing technology developments needed to meet NASA’s mission and goals. To help reach and create a sustained presence on the Moon, NASA procured EVA services from industry through the Exploration EVA Services (xEVAS) contract. These services include certified contractor-provided spacesuits, tools, equipment, vehicle interfaces, and support to training and real-time operations. NASA will now focus on a mission to Mars. NASA leadership has set goals and objectives related to the Agency’s vision and a Moon to Mars (M2M) strategy. This paper presents an organizational framework to provide insight into how NASA’s vision is realized. Additionally, this paper covers the maturation and development of the spacesuit technology and reveals the EVA technology roadmaps for the M2M Program. These EVA roadmaps visualize an actionable path to EVA capabilities needed for Mars exploration.

Cinda Chullen↗
NASA NTRS2010

Adaptive Planning: Understanding Organizational Workload to Capability/ Capacity through Modeling and Simulation

In August 2003, the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) established the Adaptive Planning (AP) initiative [1] with an objective of reducing the time necessary to develop and revise Combatant Commander (COCOM) contingency plans and increase SECDEF plan visibility. In addition to reducing the traditional plan development timeline from twenty-four months to less than twelve months (with a goal of six months)[2], AP increased plan visibility to Department of Defense (DoD) leadership through In-Progress Reviews (IPRs). The IPR process, as well as the increased number of campaign and contingency plans COCOMs had to develop, increased the workload while the number of planners remained fixed. Several efforts from collaborative planning tools to streamlined processes were initiated to compensate for the increased workload enabling COCOMS to better meet shorter planning timelines. This paper examines the Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan (JSCP) directed contingency planning and staffing requirements assigned to a combatant commander staff through the lens of modeling and simulation. The dynamics of developing a COCOM plan are captured with an ExtendSim [3] simulation. The resulting analysis provides a quantifiable means by which to measure a combatant commander staffs workload associated with development and staffing JSCP [4] directed contingency plans with COCOM capability/capacity. Modeling and simulation bring significant opportunities in measuring the sensitivity of key variables in the assessment of workload to capability/capacity analysis. Gaining an understanding of the relationship between plan complexity, number of plans, planning processes, and number of planners with time required for plan development provides valuable information to DoD leadership. Through modeling and simulation AP leadership can gain greater insight in making key decisions on knowing where to best allocate scarce resources in an effort to meet DoD planning objectives.

Hase, Chris↗
NASA NTRS1984

The dynamics of software development project management: An integrative systems dynamic perspective

Rather than continuing to focus on software development projects per se, the system dynamics modeling approach outlined is extended to investigate a broader set of issues pertaining to the software development organization. Rather than trace the life cycle(s) of one or more software projects, the focus is on the operations of a software development department as a continuous stream of software products are developed, placed into operation, and maintained. A number of research questions are ""ripe'' for investigating including: (1) the efficacy of different organizational structures in different software development environments, (2) personnel turnover, (3) impact of management approaches such as management by objectives, and (4) the organizational/environmental determinants of productivity.

Vandervelde, W. E.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Using CASE to Adopt Organizational Learning at NASA

The research direction was articulated in a statement of work created in collaboration between two program colleagues, an outside researcher and an internal user. The researcher was to deliver an implemented CASE tool (CasewiseTM) that was to be used to serve non-traditional (i.e., not software development related) organizational purposes. The explicitly stated functions of the tool were the support of 1) ISO-9000 compliance in the documentation of processes and 2) the management of process improvement. The collaborative team consisted of the researcher (GT), a full-time accompanying student (CRO), and the user (JD). The team originally focused on populating the CASE repository for the purpose of solving the two primary objectives. Consistent with the action research approach, several additional user requirements emerged as the project evolved, needs became apparent in discussions about how the tool would be used to solve organizational problems. These deliverables were contained within the CASE repository: 1) the creation of a paradigm diagram 2) the creation of a context diagram 3) the creation of child diagrams 4) the generation of 73 issues relating to organizational change 5) a compendium of stakeholder interview transcripts All record keeping was done manually and then keyed into the CASE interface. An issue is the difference between an organization s current situation (action) and its collective ideals.

Templeton, Gary F.↗
NASA NTRS1995

TRISTAR 1: Evaluation methods for testing head-up display (HUD) flight symbology

The first in a series of piloted head-up display (HUD) flight symbology studies (TRISTAR) measuring pilot task performance was conducted at the NASA Ames Research Center by the Tri-Service Flight Symbology Working Group (FSWG). Sponsored by the U.S. Army Aeroflightdynamics Directorate, this study served as a focal point for the FSWG to examine HUD test methodology and flight symbology presentations. HUD climb-dive marker dynamics and climb-dive ladder presentations were examined as pilots performed air-to-air (A/A), air-to-ground (A/G), instrument landing system (ILS), and unusual attitude (UA) recover tasks. Symbolic presentations resembled pitch ladder variations used by the U.S. Air Force (USAF), U.S. Navy (USN), and Royal Air Force (RAF). The study was initiated by the FSWG to address HUD flight symbology deficiencies, standardization, issue identification, and test methodologies. It provided the mechanism by which the USAF, USN, RAF, and USA could integrate organizational ideas and reduce differences for comparisons. Specifically it examined flight symbology issues collectively identified by each organization and the use of objective and subjective text methodology and flight tasking proposed by the FSWG.

Newman, R. L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway Implementation of Cybersecurity Requirements

Cyber threats are a constant present-day reality for any type of business -- Space exploration is not excluded from these threats either. The Gateway Program is one of NASA’s latest initiatives that extend space exploration beyond low earth orbit. Gateway allows for NASA to prove technologies and mature systems necessary to live and work on another celestial body before embarking on multi-year missions to Mars. The Gateway is a small, human-tended space station in orbit around the Moon. With the increased autonomy, distance and criticality of systems, cybersecurity is one of the critical subsystems that touches and integrates with most if not all subsystems of the Gateway. Building a gateway to the lunar orbit is no simple task. In this presentation, we outline an approach that the Gateway team adopted in creating a cyber safe and robust vehicle to support operations and assure protection of the critical functions. Gateway Program is required to implement National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) guidelines to adhere to the Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA). NIST provides a framework for managing and controlling cybersecurity risks by defining cybersecurity controls and methodologies for implementation. The NIST framework is based upon the system, data within the system, integrations with external systems, and risk assessments to determine impacts for each of those systems. The goals and objectives are to identify appropriate security controls that fulfill and map to the NIST 800-53 framework. The implementation process involves developing an organizational understanding to manage cybersecurity risk to systems, people, assets, data, and capabilities. NIST Security controls are interpreted and defined within the Gateway vehicle requirements subsystems specifications. This paper details the approach, implementation, and challenges faced during the development and design phases to address cyber threats during the Gateway vehicle operations.

Svetlana Hanson↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway Implementation of Cybersecurity Requirements

Cybersecurity threats are a constant present-day reality for any type of business -- Space exploration is not excluded from these threats either. The Gateway Program is one of NASA’s latest initiatives that extend space exploration beyond low earth orbit. Gateway allows for NASA to prove technologies and mature systems necessary to live and work on another celestial body before embarking on multi-year missions to Mars. The Gateway is a small, human-tended space station in orbit around the Moon. With the increased autonomy, distance and criticality of systems, cybersecurity is a critical discipline that touches and integrates with most if not all subsystems of the Gateway. Building a gateway to the lunar orbit is no simple task. In this presentation, we outline an approach that the Gateway team adopted in creating a cyber safe and robust vehicle to support operations and assure protection of the critical functions. Gateway Program is required to implement National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) guidelines to adhere to the Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA). NIST provides a framework for managing and controlling cybersecurity risks by defining cybersecurity controls and methodologies for implementation. The NIST framework is based upon the system, data within the system, integrations with external systems, and risk assessments to determine impacts for each of those systems. The goals and objectives are to identify appropriate security controls that fulfil and map to the NIST 800-53 framework. The implementation process involves developing an organizational understanding to manage cybersecurity risk to systems, people, assets, data, and capabilities. NIST Security controls are interpreted and defined within the Gateway vehicle requirements subsystems specifications. This paper details the approach, implementation, and challenges faced during the development and design phases to address cyber threats during the Gateway vehicle operations.

Cybersecurity↗
NASA NTRS1994

STS-59 Space Shuttle mission report

The STS-59 Space Shuttle Program Mission Report summarizes the Payload activities as well as the Orbiter, External Tank (ET), Solid Rocket Booster (SRB), Redesigned Solid Rocket Motor (RSRM), and the Space Shuttle main engine (SSME) systems performance during the sixty-second flight of the Space Shuttle Program and sixth flight of the Orbiter vehicle Endeavor (OV-105). In addition to the Orbiter, the flight vehicle consisted of an ET designated as ET-63; three SSME's which were designated as serial numbers 2028, 2033, and 2018 in positions 1, 2, and 3, respectively; and two SRB's which were designated BI-065. The RSRM's that were installed in each SRB were designated as 360W037A (welterweight) for the left SRB, and 360H037B (heavyweight) for the right SRB. This STS-59 Space Shuttle Program Mission Report fulfills the Space Shuttle Program requirement as documented in NSTS 07700, Volume 8, Appendix E. That document requires that each major organizational element supporting the Program report the results of its hardware evaluation and mission performance plus identify all related in-flight anomalies. The primary objective of the STS-59 mission was to successfully perform the operations of the Space Radar Laboratory-1 (SRL-1). The secondary objectives of this flight were to perform the operations of the Space Tissue Loss-A (STL-A) and STL-B payloads, the Visual Function Tester-4 (VFT-4) payload, the Shuttle Amateur Radio Experiment-2 (SAREX-2) experiment, the Consortium for Materials Development in Space Complex Autonomous Payload-4 (CONCAP-4), and the three Get-Away Special (GAS) payloads.

Fricke, Robert W., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1994

STS-62 Space Shuttle mission report

The STS-62 Space Shuttle Program Mission Report summarizes the Payload activities as well as the Orbiter, External Tank (ET), Solid Rocket Booster (SRB), Redesigned Solid Rocket Motor (RSRM), and the Space Shuttle main engine (SSHE) systems performance during the sixty-first flight of the Space Shuttle Program and sixteenth flight of the Orbiter vehicle Columbia (OV-102). In addition to the Orbiter, the flight vehicle consisted of an ET designated as ET-62; three SSME's which were designated as serial numbers 2031, 2109, and 2029 in positions 1, 2, and 3, respectively; and two SRB's which were designated BI-064. The RSRM's that were installed in each SRB were designated as 360L036A (lightweight) for the left SRB, and 36OWO36B (welterweight) for the right SRB. This STS-62 Space Shuttle Program Mission Report fulfills the Space Shuttle Program requirement as documented in NSTS 07700, Volume 8, Appendix E. That document requires that each major organizational element supporting the Program report the results of its hardware evaluation and mission performance plus identify all related in-flight anomalies. The primary objectives of the STS-62 mission were to perform the operations of the United States Microgravity Payload-2 (USMP-2) and the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology-2 (OAST-2) payload. The secondary objectives of this flight were to perform the operations of the Dexterous End Effector (DEE), the Shuttle Solar Backscatter Ultraviolet/A (SSBUV/A), the Limited Duration Space Environment Candidate Material Exposure (LDCE), the Advanced Protein Crystal Growth (APCG), the Physiological Systems Experiments (PSE), the Commercial Protein Crystal Growth (CPCG), the Commercial Generic Bioprocessing Apparatus (CGBA), the Middeck Zero-Gravity Dynamics Experiment (MODE), the Bioreactor Demonstration System (BDS), the Air Force Maui Optical Site Calibration Test (AMOS), and the Auroral Photography Experiment (APE-B).

Fricke, Robert W., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1994

STS-61 Space Shuttle mission report

The STS-61 Space Shuttle Program Mission Report summarizes the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) servicing mission as well as the Orbiter, External Tank (ET), Solid Rocket Booster (SRB), Redesigned Solid Rocket Motor (RSRM), and the Space Shuttle main engine (SSME) systems performance during the fifty-ninth flight of the Space Shuttle Program and fifth flight of the Orbiter vehicle Endeavour (OV-105). In addition to the Orbiter, the flight vehicle consisted of an ET designated as ET-60; three SSME's which were designated as serial numbers 2019, 2033, and 2017 in positions 1, 2, and 3, respectively; and two SRB's which were designated BI-063. The RSRM's that were installed in each SRB were designated as 360L023A (lightweight) for the left SRB, and 360L023B (lightweight) for the right SRB. This STS-61 Space Shuttle Program Mission Report fulfills the Space Shuttle Program requirement as documented in NSTS 07700, Volume 8, Appendix E. That document requires that each major organizational element supporting the Program report the results of its hardware evaluation and mission performance plus identify all related in-flight anomalies. The primary objective of the STS-61 mission was to perform the first on-orbit servicing of the Hubble Space Telescope. The servicing tasks included the installation of new solar arrays, replacement of the Wide Field/Planetary Camera I (WF/PC I) with WF/PC II, replacement of the High Speed Photometer (HSP) with the Corrective Optics Space Telescope Axial Replacement (COSTAR), replacement of rate sensing units (RSU's) and electronic control units (ECU's), installation of new magnetic sensing systems and fuse plugs, and the repair of the Goddard High Resolution Spectrometer (GHRS). Secondary objectives were to perform the requirements of the IMAX Cargo Bay Camera (ICBC), the IMAX Camera, and the Air Force Maui Optical Site (AMOS) Calibration Test.

Fricke, Robert W., Jr.↗