Results for “Representative Key Risks” — Page 3

NASA NTRS1986

Implementation of and Ada real-time executive: A case study

Current Ada language implementations and runtime environments are immature, unproven and are a key risk area for real-time embedded computer system (ECS). A test-case environment is provided in which the concerns of the real-time, ECS community are addressed. A priority driven executive is selected to be implemented in the Ada programming language. The model selected is representative of real-time executives tailored for embedded systems used missile, spacecraft, and avionics applications. An Ada-based design methodology is utilized, and two designs are considered. The first of these designs requires the use of vendor supplied runtime and tasking support. An alternative high-level design is also considered for an implementation requiring no vendor supplied runtime or tasking support. The former approach is carried through to implementation.

Laird, James D.↗

NASA NTRS2023

Risk Assessment for Asteroid Impact Threat Scenarios

Asteroid impacts can cause a wide range of damage through multiple potential hazards, from localized blast waves or thermal radiation, to tsunami inundation, to global climatic effects. The level of risk posed by these hazards depends not only upon their extent and severity, but also upon the likelihood of the various damage ranges. Some consequences may be more moderate but very likely, while others may be unlikely but catastrophic. Evaluating the risk from these hazards involves substantial uncertainties across all aspects of the problem, including the properties of the asteroid itself, the specifics of its entry, and the complex high-energy damage physics involved. NASA’s Asteroid Threat Assessment Project performs Probabilistic Asteroid Impact Risk (PAIR) assessments that use fast-running entry and hazard models to evaluate millions of impact cases representing the distributions of these many uncertain parameters. This paper presents current probabilistic asteroid impact risk assessment modeling tools and approaches used for evaluating specific asteroid impact threat cases. We give an overview of the current PAIR model used to support impact threat scenarios and discuss some of the key applications of these assessment in supporting response decisions and planetary defense preparedness. We then present the results and key findings from the recent 2023 PDC hypothetical impact exercise as an example of the primary types of risk results and metrics being developed to inform and support those mitigation and response decisions.

SMD↗

NASA NTRS2008

Designing a Composable Geometric Toolkit for Versatility in Applications to Simulation Development

Conceived and implemented through the development of probabilistic risk assessment simulations for Project Constellation, the Geometric Toolkit allows users to create, analyze, and visualize relationships between geometric shapes in three-space using the MATLAB computing environment. The key output of the toolkit is an analysis of how emanations from one "source" geometry (e.g., a leak in a pipe) will affect another "target" geometry (e.g., another heat-sensitive component). It can import computer-aided design (CAD) depictions of a system to be analyzed, allowing the user to reliably and easily represent components within the design and determine the relationships between them, ultimately supporting more technical or physics-based simulations that use the toolkit. We opted to develop a variety of modular, interconnecting software tools to extend the scope of the toolkit, providing the capability to support a range of applications. This concept of simulation composability allows specially-developed tools to be reused by assembling them in various combinations. As a result, the concepts described here and implemented in this toolkit have a wide range of applications outside the domain of risk assessment. To that end, the Geometric Toolkit has been evaluated for use in other unrelated applications due to the advantages provided by its underlying design.

Reed, Gregory S.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Austere Human Missions to Mars

The Design Reference Architecture 5 (DRA 5) is the most recent concept developed by NASA to send humans to Mars in the 2030 time frame using Constellation Program elements. DRA 5 is optimized to meet a specific set of requirements that would provide for a robust exploration program to deliver a new six-person crew at each biennial Mars opportunity and provide for power and infrastructure to maintain a highly capable continuing human presence on Mars. This paper examines an alternate architecture that is scaled back from DRA 5 and might offer lower development cost, lower flight cost, and lower development risk. It is recognized that a mission set using this approach would not meet all the current Constellation Mars mission requirements; however, this 'austere' architecture may represent a minimum mission set that would be acceptable from a science and exploration standpoint. The austere approach is driven by a philosophy of minimizing high risk or high cost technology development and maximizing development and production commonality in order to achieve a program that could be sustained in a flat-funded budget environment. Key features that would enable a lower technology implementation are as follows: using a blunt-body entry vehicle having no deployable decelerators, utilizing aerobraking rather than aerocapture for placing the crewed element into low Mars orbit, avoiding the use of liquid hydrogen with its low temperature and large volume issues, using standard bipropellant propulsion for the landers and ascent vehicle, and using radioisotope surface power systems rather than a nuclear reactor or large area deployable solar arrays. Flat funding within the expected NASA budget for a sustained program could be facilitated by alternating cargo and crew launches for the biennial Mars opportunities. This would result in two assembled vehicles leaving Earth orbit for Mars per Mars opportunity. The first opportunity would send two cargo landers to the Mars surface to preposition a habitat, supplies, and exploration equipment. The next opportunity, two years later, would send to Mars orbit 1) a lander with a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) and 2) a crewed Mars Transit Habitat with an Orion CEV for Earth return. The following opportunity, two years after the first crew, would go back to cargo-only launches. This alternation of cargo and crew opportunities results in a sustainable launch rate of six Ares V launches every two years. It is notable that four of the six launches per Mars opportunity are identical, build-to-print, Tran-Mars Injection stages. This type of production rate could lend itself well to a COTStype service provider, and would make it feasible to have a live spare in place in the event of a single launch failure.

landers↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Probabilistic Modeling of a Three-Stage Human Landing System Architecture

Unmitigated uncertainties are known to have previously led to failed development programs; in order to combat these uncertainties, risks and their impacts must be understood and handled to ensure program success. In this paper, a probabilistic methodology to handle uncertainties is demonstrated on a three-element Human Landing System (HLS) concept, which allows tracking of current best estimates of the vehicle’s performance and assessment of its robustness against uncertainties. This methodology has two key parts: ﬁrst, the creation of a dynamic architecture model of a three-element HLS concept; and second, its use with surrogate modeling and range estimating techniques to capture and propagate uncertainties. The DYnamic Rocket EQuation Tool (DYREQT), a space systems synthesis and sizing framework used by NASA, was used as to model the HLS architecture. For the probabilistic analysis, uncertainties of interest within the HLS concept were enumerated and represented as parameters within the DYREQT model as inputs for vehicle stages or mission proﬁle events. Range estimating — a probabilistic method that combines Monte Carlo sampling, focus on critical parameters, and heuristics to assess risk and opportunities — is then adapted with operational parameters as well as vehicle parameters in the DYREQT model to capture mission uncertainty alongside vehicle uncertainty. To perform the range estimation portion of this methodology, the DYREQT model was sampled using a Design of Experiments (DoE) to eﬃciently explore the architecture design space with respect to the set of uncertainty parameters. Then, the results were used to create surrogate models, multivariate regressions that can visualize hypercube trends in the design space, of the architecture with respect to the uncertainty parameters. Using a correlation matrix constructed for the uncertainty parameters, previously independent samples were transformed to perform a Correlated Monte Carlo on the surrogate models. This probabilistic methodology was proved to provide insight into the underlying uncertainties of the three-element HLS architecture.

Stephanie Y Zhu↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Probabilistic Modeling of a Three-Stage Human Landing System Architecture

Unmitigated uncertainties are known to have previously led to failed development programs; in order to combat these uncertainties, risks and their impacts must be understood and handled to ensure program success. In this paper, a probabilistic methodology to handle uncertainties is demonstrated on a three-element Human Landing System (HLS) concept, which allows tracking of current best estimates of the vehicle’s performance and assessment of its robustness against uncertainties. This methodology has two key parts: ﬁrst, the creation of a dynamic architecture model of a three-element HLS concept; and second, its use with surrogate modeling and range estimating techniques to capture and propagate uncertainties. The DYnamic Rocket EQuation Tool (DYREQT), a space systems synthesis and sizing framework used by NASA, was used as to model the HLS architecture. For the probabilistic analysis, uncertainties of interest within the HLS concept were enumerated and represented as parameters within the DYREQT model as inputs for vehicle stages or mission proﬁle events. Range estimating — a probabilistic method that combines Monte Carlo sampling, focus on critical parameters, and heuristics to assess risk and opportunities — is then adapted with operational parameters as well as vehicle parameters in the DYREQT model to capture mission uncertainty alongside vehicle uncertainty. To perform the range estimation portion of this methodology, the DYREQT model was sampled using a Design of Experiments (DoE) to eﬃciently explore the architecture design space with respect to the set of uncertainty parameters. Then, the results were used to create surrogate models, multivariate regressions that can visualize hypercube trends in the design space, of the architecture with respect to the uncertainty parameters. Using a correlation matrix constructed for the uncertainty parameters, previously independent samples were transformed to perform a Correlated Monte Carlo on the surrogate models. This probabilistic methodology was proved to provide insight into the underlying uncertainties of the three-element HLS architecture.

Stephanie Y. Zhu↗

NASA NTRS2009

The Importance of Technology Readiness in NASA Earth Venture Missions

The first set of Venture-class investigations share the characteristic that the technology should be mature and all investigations must use mature technology that has been modeled or demonstrated in a relevant environment (Technology Readiness Level (TRL) >5). Technology Readiness Levels are a systematic metric/measurement system that supports assessments of the maturity of a particular technology and the consistent comparison of maturity between different types of technology. The TRL is used in NASA technology planning. A major step in the level of fidelity of the technology demonstration follows the completion of TRL 5. At TRL 6, a system or subsystem model or prototype must be demonstrated in a relevant environment (ground or space) representative model or prototype system or system, which would go well beyond ad hoc, "patch-cord," or discrete component level breadboarding. These TRL levels are chosen as target objectives for the Program. The challenge for offerors is that they must identify key aspects (uncertainty, multi subsystem complexity, etc) of the TRL estimate that should be properly explained in a submitted proposal. Risk minimization is a key component of the Earth Venture missions. Experiences of prior airborne missions will be shared. The discussion will address aspects of uncertainty and issues surrounding three areas of airborne earth science missions: (1) Aircraft or proposed flight platform -- Expressing the capability of the aircraft in terms of the supporting mission requirements. These issues include airplane performance characteristics (duration, range, altitude, among others) and multiship complexities. (2) Instruments -- Establishing that the instruments have been demonstrated in a relevant environment. Instruments with heritage in prior space missions meet this requirement, as do instruments tested on the ground. Evidence that the instruments have demonstrated the ability to collect data as advertised will be described. The complexity of the integration of multiple subsystems will also be addressed. Issues associated with tailoring the instrument to meet the specific Venture mission objectives must be thoroughly explained and justified. (3) Aircraft/Instrument Integration -- Explicitly defining what development may be required to harden the instrument and integrate the instrument. The challenges associated with this key aspect of major airborne earth science investigations will be presented.

Wells, James E.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Simulation of Liquid Rocket Engine Failure Propagation Using Self-Evolving Scenarios

Traditional probabilistic risk assessment approaches often require failure scenarios to be explicitly defined through event sequences that are then quantified as part of the integrated analysis. This approach becomes difficult when failure propagation paths change as a function of the system operation. Additionally, if the propagation paths represent interactions among even a modest number of components, the scenario count becomes combinatorially intractable. This paper presents an alternate approach for quantifying the probability of failure propagation in such a case. Rather than explicitly defining scenario sequences, simple physical models are created for each of the components. In this way, only the physical states and rules of component interactions must be defined, rather than event sequences for each individual scenario. Initiating failures are introduced into the system, either randomly or as defined by relative likelihood, and the failures cascade through the system via the interaction rules. This process is repeated using Monte Carlo methods and, as a result, the most probable scenarios “self-evolve” in terms of both sequence path and frequency. This approach was applied to failures occurring in the engine compartment of a space launch vehicle with four liquid rocket engines and four high-pressure helium tanks. Each engine was modeled with key components, such as turbomachinery, combustion chamber, propellant lines, and additional support systems. Three test cases were conducted with different high-energy engine failures. End results of interest included an additional engine-out failure and tank burst, which represent the loss-of-mission (LOM) and loss-of-crew (LOC) failure environments, respectively. Observations show that almost every scenario outcome is unique and that many scenarios involve complex chain reactions that are difficult to predict. This validates the usefulness of the modeling approach in assessing the overall risks to the crew during a launch vehicle abort.

Rocket Engine↗

NASA NTRS2009

Probabilistic Risk Assessment for Decision Making During Spacecraft Operations

Decisions made during the operational phase of a space mission often have significant and immediate consequences. Without the explicit consideration of the risks involved and their representation in a solid model, it is very likely that these risks are not considered systematically in trade studies. Wrong decisions during the operational phase of a space mission can lead to immediate system failure whereas correct decisions can help recover the system even from faulty conditions. A problem of special interest is the determination of the system fault protection strategies upon the occurrence of faults within the system. Decisions regarding the fault protection strategy also heavily rely on a correct understanding of the state of the system and an integrated risk model that represents the various possible scenarios and their respective likelihoods. Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) modeling is applicable to the full lifecycle of a space mission project, from concept development to preliminary design, detailed design, development and operations. The benefits and utilities of the model, however, depend on the phase of the mission for which it is used. This is because of the difference in the key strategic decisions that support each mission phase. The focus of this paper is on describing the particular methods used for PRA modeling during the operational phase of a spacecraft by gleaning insight from recently conducted case studies on two operational Mars orbiters. During operations, the key decisions relate to the commands sent to the spacecraft for any kind of diagnostics, anomaly resolution, trajectory changes, or planning. Often, faults and failures occur in the parts of the spacecraft but are contained or mitigated before they can cause serious damage. The failure behavior of the system during operations provides valuable data for updating and adjusting the related PRA models that are built primarily based on historical failure data. The PRA models, in turn, provide insight into the effect of various faults or failures on the risk and failure drivers of the system and the likelihood of possible end case scenarios, thereby facilitating the decision making process during operations. This paper describes the process of adjusting PRA models based on observed spacecraft data, on one hand, and utilizing the models for insight into the future system behavior on the other hand. While PRA models are typically used as a decision aid during the design phase of a space mission, we advocate adjusting them based on the observed behavior of the spacecraft and utilizing them for decision support during the operations phase.

dynamic fault trees↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Designing for Advanced Aerial Mobility: Human-Autonomy Teaming and In-Time System-Wide Safety Assurance

The continued growth of aviation shall require new innovative technologies and operational concepts to meet the ever-increasing demands on air transportation. The NASA Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) project focuses on emerging aviation markets, such as Urban Air Mobility (UAM). UAM is defined as “...a safe and efficient system for air passenger and cargo transportation within an urban area. It is inclusive of small package delivery and other urban unmanned aerial system services and supports a mix of onboard/ground-piloted and increasingly autonomous operations” ([1]). The AAM project emphasizes technology development and validating system-level concepts and solutions in coordination with other NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) projects to enable UAM metro- and micro-plex vertiport and airspace concepts of operations. The NASA AAM research portfolio includes the concepts of Remote Supervisor-in-Command (RSC) and Fleet and Airspace Manager (FAM) as possible human roles for consumer fleet providers. NASA research in RSC is focused on development of guidelines and standards for remote pilots/operators passively and actively controlling a large fleet of autonomous aircraft. For FAM, flight and ground system concepts and technologies to enable high density homogeneous operations at increased scale from vertiport(s), and coordination with other humans in the systems (e.g., UAM urban airspace manager, Air Traffic Control) are key research areas. The envisioned UAM operations are posited to require autonomous systems to enable functions ranging from fleet and resource management to vehicle control. Although automation has become increasingly sophisticated and ubiquitous in civil aviation, autonomy represents a significant evolution in automation, which has generally been limited in functional scope and capability. As autonomy takes on increasing responsibilities, humans and machines will be required to work together in new and different ways [2], rather than traditional design approaches focused on how machines (i.e., autonomy) can do the work of people. The emerging field of human-autonomy teaming (HAT) represents a comprehensive and prioritized research-driven approach to enable the success of future emerging aviation market applications through capabilities and principles that facilitate humans and machine working and thinking better together. The NASA Transformational Tools and Technologies (TTT) Autonomous System (AS) Sub-project was created to assist with the transition into higher levels of autonomy to enable new modes of air transportation, such as UAM. TTT-AS has identified HAT as a key research need to enable UAM while maintaining today’s ultra-safe aviation system safety levels. The latter challenge has been taken up by the NASA System-Wide Safety (SWS) Project, which recognizes that aviation safety, as it evolves, shall require new ways of thinking about safety to include integration of a wide-range of existing and new safety systems and practices, enhanced tools and technologies, increased access to data and data fusion, improved data analysis capabilities, enhanced in-time risk monitoring and detection, hazard prioritization and mitigation, safety assurance decision-support, and in-time integrated system analytics [3].The operational concept of UAM represents a variety of work that has been termed, “work-as-imagined” to characterize the idea that how people think that work is done and how work is actually done are often not the same [4]. To ensure design success and system safety, looking at “work-as-done” provides a comparative approach toward UAM concept and technology design through examination of corresponding analogs found today in aviation (e.g., on-demand operations) and other transportation domains (e.g., port operations). The paper shall discuss various alternative applications with specific focus on airline operation center (AOC) operations, and unmanned aerial system (UAS) command-and-control to inform scaled-versions of FAM and RSC, respectively, and with consideration of the national airspace system contextual environment. The tenets and principles of the HAT field and current NASA research efforts under the TTT-AS sub-project shall also be described. Finally, the SWS sub-project efforts to develop In-Time System-Wide Safety Assurance (ISSA) and In-Time Safety Management Systems (IASMS) are discussed in terms of how “in-time” safety assurance may be conceptualized for the on-demand mobility air taxi “work-as-imagined” operational concept [5]. As part of this effort, concepts from the emerging field of resilience engineering, are being studied. Traditional approaches to aviation safety have focused on what can go wrong and how to prevent it. Another approach to thinking about system safety should reflect not only “avoiding things that go wrong” (protective safety) but also “ensuring that things go right” (productive safety), that enables a system to exhibit the resilient performance [6] necessary for the success of the future aviation system emerging concepts of operations. The paper shall describe efforts focused on how productive safety and resilience may enable a more complete approach to system safety thinking and design of ISSA and IASMS for UAM. Future directions and research needs shall also be discussed.

resilience↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Technology Readiness Assessment for Stirling Power Convertor

Stirling-based power conversion system could represent a critical enabling technology for future NASA missions, offering significantly enhanced power efficiency over traditional thermoelectric systems. To ensure the successful infusion of this technology into deep space and planetary surface missions, a rigorous evaluation of its maturity and associated risks is essential. The objective of this Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) is to determine the current technology readiness level (TRL) of the Stirling power convertor and identify key technical risks and challenges associated with its maturation and potential infusion into a targeted flight system. The evaluation process will rigorously follow the NASA TRA procedure: (1) determining the requirements that underpin the design, function, and performance; (2) finding and listing all new technology elements (NTEs) and critical technology elements (CTEs); (3) identifying the level of integration assumed for the assessment; and (4) assessing the TRL for each NTE and CTE. The overall subassembly TRL will then be determined via a roll-up using the “weakest link” criterion, culminating in a final (5) assessment of risks to further progression of maturity. This paper will present the results of a comprehensive technology readiness assessment (TRA) conducted on the Stirling-based dynamic power conversion subassembly, excluding the radioisotope heat source. The paper will also describe a detailed breakdown of the TRL roll-up and a matrix of identified risks and recommended mitigation paths, along with identified key technical risks and challenges to achieve the required long-duration performance. Key Words: Radioisotope Power Conversion, Technology Readiness Assessment

Radioisotope Power Conversion↗

NASA NTRS2018

Coordinating AgMIP Data and Models Across Global and Regional Scales for 1.5°C and 2.0°C Assessments

The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP) has developed novel methods for Coordinated Global and Regional Assessments (CGRA) of agriculture and food security in a changing world. The present study aims to perform a proof of concept of the CGRA to demonstrate advantages and challenges of the proposed framework. This effort responds to the request by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) for the implications of limiting global temperature increases to 1.5°C and 2.0°C above pre-industrial conditions. The protocols for the 1.5°C/2.0°C assessment establish explicit and testable linkages across disciplines and scales, connecting outputs and inputs from the Shared Socio-economic Pathways (SSPs), Representative Agricultural Pathways (RAPs), Half a degree Additional warming, Prognosis and Projected Impacts (HAPPI) and Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) ensemble scenarios, global gridded crop models, global agricultural economics models, site-based crop models and within-country regional economics models. The CGRA consistently links disciplines, models and scales in order to track the complex chain of climate impacts and identify key vulnerabilities, feedbacks and uncertainties in managing future risk. CGRA proof-of-concept results show that, at the global scale, there are mixed areas of positive and negative simulated wheat and maize yield changes, with declines in some bread basket regions, at both 1.5°C and 2.0°C. Declines are especially evident in simulations that do not take into account direct CO2 effects on crops. These projected global yield changes mostly resulted in increases in prices and areas of wheat and maize in two global economics models. Regional simulations for 1.5°C and 2.0°C using site-based crop models had mixed results depending on the region and the crop. In conjunction with price changes from the global economics models, productivity declines in the Punjab, Pakistan, resulted in an increase in vulnerable households and the poverty rate. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels’.

interdisciplinary↗

NASA NTRS2019

Implementation of Human System Integration Workshop at NASA for Human Spaceflight

The human is a key element in the complex system of systems underlying space exploration missions. As a critical system, its operating bands and requirements need to be characterized and integrated with other systems. Optimal integration of the human system with hardware and software elements has an impact on multiple aspects of mission execution, including human health and performance, risk mitigation, effective design and functionality, enhanced safety, and reduced lifecycle costs. The field of Human Systems Integration (HSI) represents an interdisciplinary and comprehensive cross-cutting approach encompassing technical and management processes for integrating human as a system consideration and objective within and across all other system components and multiple domains. In addition to human activities, HSI covers training, operations and support dimensions. Moreover, HSI is an essential enabler to systems engineering practice, emphasizing human system aspects toward optimizing fully integrated system of systems performance while systematically infusing the needs of all users during the earliest stages of development. Consistent with the National Space Exploration Campaign, NASA is developing the Gateway, a lunar orbiting platform that will serve as astronaut habitat, support transit to deep space, validate new technologies and systems, and function as a science laboratory and communications hub, among other uses. It is an essential element of a phase that will extend human exploration into deep space through evolvable infrastructure and advanced technology, supporting assembly and logistics of other exploration architecture elements. In an effort to explore the current status and forward plan of HSI implementation in the mission (system of systems) lifecycle, the HSI Employee Resource Group conducted an HSI workshop using the Gateway Program as a case study. It revealed how different organizations at the Johnson Space Center incorporate HSI in their processes in preparation for the development and operation of the Gateway. The workshop focused on HSI methodology for implementation of the six NASA HSI domains: Human Factors Engineering, Operations Resources, Habitability and Environment, Maintainability and Supportability, Safety, and Training. Results from the workshop are reported on this paper, as well as some historical background of HSI at NASA, and the success in using an Employee Resource Group to promote technical knowledge. The authors hope that this information can be used to disseminate best practices for translational applications to other space exploration systems.

Silva-Martinez, Jackelynne↗

NASA NTRS2019

Implementation of Human System Integration Workshop at NASA for Human Spaceflight

The human is a key element in the complex system of systems underlying space exploration missions. As a critical system, its operating bands and requirements need to be characterized and integrated with other systems. Optimal integration of the human system with hardware and software elements has an impact on multiple aspects of mission execution, including human health and performance, risk mitigation, effective design and functionality, enhanced safety, and reduced lifecycle costs. The field of Human Systems Integration (HSI) represents an interdisciplinary and comprehensive cross-cutting approach encompassing technical and management processes for integrating human as a system consideration and objective within and across all other system components and multiple domains. In addition to human activities, HSI covers training, operations and support dimensions. Moreover, HSI is an essential enabler to systems engineering practice, emphasizing human system aspects toward optimizing fully integrated system of systems performance while systematically infusing the needs of all users during the earliest stages of development. Consistent with the National Space Exploration Campaign, NASA is developing the Gateway, a lunar orbiting platform that will serve as astronaut habitat, support transit to deep space, validate new technologies and systems, and function as a science laboratory and communications hub, among other uses. It is an essential element of a phase that will extend human exploration into deep space through evolvable infrastructure and advanced technology, supporting assembly and logistics of other exploration architecture elements. In an effort to explore the current status and forward plan of HSI implementation in the mission (system of systems) lifecycle, the HSI Employee Resource Group conducted an HSI workshop using the Gateway Program as a case study. It revealed how different organizations at the Johnson Space Center incorporate HSI in their processes in preparation for the development and operation of the Gateway. The workshop focused on HSI methodology for implementation of the six NASA HSI domains: Human Factors Engineering, Operations Resources, Habitability and Environment, Maintainability and Supportability, Safety, and Training. Results from the workshop are reported on this paper, as well as some historical background of HSI at NASA, and the success in using an Employee Resource Group to promote technical knowledge. The authors hope that this information can be used to disseminate best practices for translational applications to other space exploration systems.

Silva-Martinez, Jackelynne↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling NASA’s Procedural Requirement Processes - Implications for Digital Future

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has an ongoing Digital Transformation effort and to leverage and showcase the power of Digital Transformation, an effort is underway to develop an integrated, datacentric, model representing NASA’s key process requirements. The task was divided into three phases: As Is modeling, Analysis, and To Be Planning. As part of this effort, a team has completed the first Phase I of the modeling task and is nearing completion of the second phase. This effort will capture the key elements as requirements, responsibilities, allocations, roles, products, and associated lifecycle elements. The scope of modeling included NASA’s NPR 7120.5 (Project and Program Management), NPR 7123.1 (Systems Engineering) and NPRs 8705.2 (Risk classification for Robotic Missions) and 8705.4 (Human-Rating Requirements for Space Missions). This paper will summarize the approach, scope, parsing patterns applied, metamodel, and associated workflows for the As-Is modeling. It will also summarize the results and insights gleaned during that phase, including the review process. These insights have informed the analysis and will be discussed. The analysis modeling phase will also be summarized including how the stakeholders were engaged, how the common elements were handled and dispositioned, and will also describe some of the plans for the future of NASA NPDs and NPRs.

Systems Engineering↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling NASA’s Procedural Requirement Processes – Implications for a Digital Future

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has an ongoing Digital Transformation effort and to leverage and showcase the power of Digital Transformation, an effort is underway to develop an integrated, datacentric, model representing NASA’s key process requirements. The task was divided into three phases: As Is modeling, Analysis, and To Be Planning. As part of this effort, a team has completed the first Phase I of the modeling task and is nearing completion of the second phase. This effort will capture the key elements as requirements, responsibilities, allocations, roles, products, and associated lifecycle elements. The scope of modeling included NASA’s NPR 7120.5 (Project and Program Management), NPR 7123.1 (Systems Engineering) and NPRs 8705.2 (Risk classification for Robotic Missions) and 8705.4 (Human-Rating Requirements for Space Missions).

NPR↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Impact of Airborne Radar Uncertainties on Detect-and-Avoid Systems’ Performance

Impact of sensor uncertainty on Detect-and-Avoid (DAA) systems’ performance is investigated. Key metrics analyzed are the loss of DAA well clear ratio, the near-mid-air-collision risk ratio, the alert ratio, and the number of maneuvers per loss of DAA well clear. Sensitivity of these metrics to the magnitude of sensor uncertainty, pilots’ selection of maneuver, and surveillance range is investigated. Benefits of a dynamic buffer around the DAA well clear separation boundary, computed based on track accuracies, are also analyzed. These metrics are computed from open- and closed-loop simulations of a large number of representative encounters between an unmanned aircraft system and a manned aircraft. Results show that sensor uncertainty degrades safety metrics considerably but has only a minor effect on the number of maneuvers per loss of DAA well clear. The number of maneuvers, nonetheless, can be reduced by a 5◦ buffer away from the edge of the range of conflict-resulting heading in pilots’ selection of maneuver.

UAS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Creating Portfolio Management Concepts for Highly Agile and Innovative Government Research Programs Using Design Thinking and Lean Startup Methodologies

Managing a research and development (R&D) portfolio presents numerous challenges, such as prioritizing research areas, remaining agile, strategic workforce planning, and measuring return on investment, impact, and innovation. One government R&D program is charged with producing a high degree of innovative, transformational breakthroughs in aviation technology. A practical, structured methodology for strategically prioritizing emerging aviation R&D in such an environment is lacking. The existing multi-criteria decision aid tools are primarily utilized at an enterprise level, take months to set up and collect data, require large teams of experts, are used on an infrequent basis, and are not conducive to a highly innovative, high-risk portfolio. Prior to audaciously creating a new portfolio prioritization process, the exact challenges with portfolio management for R&D projects were identified using the design thinking and lean start-up methods. A key part of this discovery process was interviewing stakeholders, as well as other managers of organizations charged with producing innovative portfolios. These interviews, as well as additional techniques, were used to develop a deeper understanding of the challenges and, subsequently, lay the foundation for development of an effective portfolio prioritization process. Four potential concepts that represent key findings emerged: carefully selected criteria for portfolio assessment and selection, targeted portfolio turnover rate, dynamic portfolio prioritization framework, and streamlined transition or commercialization of R&D. Acting on any one of the resulting portfolio management concepts will increase the transparency and confidence in portfolio decisions and, ideally, result in a greater degree of transformational breakthroughs in aviation technology.

project portfolio management↗