Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Task Force”

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 NTRS1989

Comparison of joint space versus task force load distribution optimization for a multiarm manipulator system

It is often proposed that the redundancy in choosing a force distribution for multiple arms grasping a single object should be handled by minimizing a quadratic performance index. The performance index may be formulated in terms of joint torques or in terms of the Cartesian space force/torque applied to the body by the grippers. The former seeks to minimize power consumption while the latter minimizes body stresses. Because the cost functions are related to each other by a joint angle dependent transformation on the weight matrix, it might be argued that either method tends to reduce power consumption, but clearly the joint space minimization is optimal. A comparison of these two options is presented with consideration given to computational cost and power consumption. Simulation results using a two arm robot system are presented to show the savings realized by employing the joint space optimization. These savings are offset by additional complexity, computation time and in some cases processor power consumption.

Soloway, Donald I.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on National Aero-Space Plane (NASP) Program

Six years ago, the Defense Science Board (DSB) initiated a review of the concept, technical basis, program content, and missions of the National Aerospace Plane (NASP) program. The report was completed in Sep. 1988, and the recommendations contributed to strengthening the technical efforts in the NASP program. Since then, substantial technological progress has been made in the technology development phase (Phase 2) of the program. Phase 2 of the program is currently scheduled to end in late Fiscal Year 1993, with a decision whether to proceed to the experimental flight vehicle phase (Phase 3) to be made at that time. This decision will be a very significant one for the Department of Defense (DoD) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). In February of this year, the DSB was chartered to revisit the NASP program to assess the degree to which the many technical challenges of the program have been resolved, or are likely to be resolved by the end of Phase 2.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1996

The First Joint Report of the General Thomas P. Stafford Task Force and the Academician Vladimir F. Utkin Advisory Expert Council on the Shuttle-Mir Rendezvous and Docking Missions

In October 1992, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Russian Space Agency (RSA) formally agreed to conduct a fundamentally new program of human cooperation in space. The 'Shuttle-Mir Program' encompassed combined astronaut-cosmonaut activities on the Shuttle, Soyuz Test Module(TM), and Mir station spacecraft. At that time, NASA and RSA limited the project to: the STS-60 mission carrying the first Russian cosmonaut to fly on the U.S. Space Shuttle; the launch of the first U.S. astronaut on the Soyuz vehicle for a multi-month mission as a member of a Mir crew; and the change-out of the U.S.-Russian Mir crews with a Russian crew during a Shuttle rendezvous and docking mission with the Mir Station. The objectives of the Phase 1 Program are to provide the basis for the resolution of engineering and technical problems related to the implementation of the ISS and future U.S.-Russian cooperation in space. This, combined with test data generated during the course of the Shuttle flights to the Mir station and extended joint activities between U.S. astronauts and Russian cosmonauts aboard Mir, is expected to reduce the technical risks associated with the construction and operation of the ISS. Phase 1 will further enhance the ISS by combining space operations and joint space technology demonstrations. Phase 1 also provides early opportunities for extended U.S. scientific and research activities, prior to utilization of the ISS.

Source record↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Trilateral Task Force – Reliability Analysis Supporting Mission Extension/Post Mission Disposal

At the intersection of mission, technology, and place is NASA’s need to modernize for a digital-forward future. Digitalization, the process of moving toward digital business, is occurring everywhere and remains an ongoing process across the federal government.”[1] Whereas, Digital Transformation is “employing digitization/digital technologies (e.g., Artificial Intelligence (AI), mobile, cloud, data) to change a process, product, or capability so dramatically (e.g., real-time, intelligent, personalized, anywhere, anytime) that it is unrecognizable compared to its traditional form.” [2] In order to facilitate a digital transformation it is essential for NASA to understand and identify where data exists today and which data are value-needed in the future, understand where there are unfulfilled data needs that limit the advancement of NASA work, and ensure NASA efficiency through Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) digital assets in the future. Therefore, NASA’s Reliability & Maintainability (R&M) Enterprise Data Sharing team is working to leverage both Digitization and Digital Transformation to achieve their vision of developing an R&M data discovery framework that enables our community, our partners, and our stakeholders with the ability to efficiently, robustly, and seamlessly access information that enables real-time knowledge and model-based, analytics driven, decision-making impacting R&M. As a result the R&M Enterprise Data Sharing team has conducted a survey of its Reliability, Maintainability, and Availability (RMA) community members to identify data existence (created or used) and where there are corresponding barriers to data acquisition and/or R&M or other issues as shown within this presentation.

Digital Transformation, Reliability Engineering↗
NASA NTRS2024

Combining Large Datasets - Cancer Moonshot Task Group Final Summary

In February 2022, President Biden re-ignited the Cancer Moonshot with bold new goals: to reduce the cancer death rate by half within 25 years and improve the lives of people with cancer and cancer survivors. To achieve these ambitious goals, the White House convened the first-ever Cancer Cabinet, bringing together departments and agencies from across the federal government to end cancer as we know it.The Cancer Cabinet convened three task forces and supporting task groups, including the Data and Innovation Task Force, which supported the Cancer Moonshot priority to “Deliver innovation to patients and communities.” In early 2023, the “Combining Large Datasets” (CoLD) Task Group was created within the Data and Innovation Task Force. The scope of the CoLD Task Group was how federal agencies combine large datasets for broad applications across cancer prevention and control, including nutrition, epidemiology, and military/Veteran health. Within this scope, the group sought to better leverage the immense potential of data and power of data tools to increase our understanding of cancer incidence, causes, mortality, treatments, prevention, outcomes, costs, and all other aspects of the burden of cancer.

data integration↗
NASA NTRS1999

Metallurgical Evaluations of Depainting Processes on Aluminum Substrate

In December 1993, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Emission Standards Division and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) signed an Interagency Agreement (IA) initiating a task force for the technical assessment of alternative technologies for aerospace depainting operations. The United States Air Force (USAF) joined the task force in 1994. The mandates of the task force were: (1) To identify available alternative depainting systems that do not rely on methylene chloride or other ozone-depleting, chlorinated, and volatile organic carbon solvents. (2) To determine the viability, applicability, and pollution prevention potential of each identified alternative. (3) To address issues of safety, environmental impact, reliability, and maintainability. Through a Technical Implementation Committee (TIC), the task force selected and evaluated eight alternative paint stripping technologies: chemical stripping, carbon dioxide (CO2) blasting, xenon flashlamp and CO2 coatings removal (FLASHJET(R)), CO2 laser stripping, plastic media blasting (PMB), sodium bicarbonate wet stripping, high-pressure water blasting (WaterJet), and wheat starch abrasive blasting (Enviro-Strip(R)). (The CO2 blasting study was discontinued after the first depainting sequence.) This final report presents the results of the Joint EPA/NASA/USAF Interagency Depainting Study. Significant topics include: (1) Final depainting sequence data for the chemical stripping, PMB, sodium bicarbonate wet stripping, and WaterJet processes. (2) Strip rates for all eight technologies. (3) Sequential comparisons of surface roughness measurements for the seven viable depainting technologies. (4) Chronological reviews of and lessons learned in the conduct of all eight technologies. (5) An analysis of the surface roughness trends for each of the seven technologies. (6) Metallurgic evaluations of panels Summaries of corrosion and hydrogen embrittlement evaluations of chemical stripping panels, detailed descriptions of which appear in previous reports. Because the requirements for alternative systems are diverse, as are initial setup, training, and on-going operational considerations, this study does not recommend a particular product or process. Users of this study will draw their own conclusions from the data presented herein.

McGill, Preston↗
NASA NTRS2010

VLBI Data Interchange Format (VDIF)

One important outcome of the 7th International e-VLBI Workshop in Shanghai in June 2008 was the creation of a task force to study and recommend a universal VLBI data format that is suitable for both on-the-wire e-VLBI data transfer, as well as direct disk storage. This task force, called the VLBI Data Interchange Format (VDIF) Task Force, is the first part of a two-part effort, the second of which will address standardization of e-VLBI data-transmission-protocols. The formation of the VDIF Task Force was prompted particularly by increased e-VLBI activity and the difficulties encountered when data arrive at a correlator in different formats from various instruments in various parts of the world. The task force created a streaming packetized data format that may be used for real-time and non-realtime e-VLBI, as well as direct disk storage. The data may contain multiple channels of time-sampled data with an arbitrary number of channels, arbitrary #bits/sample up to 32, and real or complex data; data rates in excess of 100 Gbps are supported. Each data packet is completely self-identifying via a short header, and data may be decoded without reference to any external information. The VDIF task force has completed its work, and the VDIF standard was ratified at the 2009 e-VLBI workshop in Madrid.

Whitney, Alan↗
NASA NTRS1999

Technology Maturity Towards Highly Reusable Space Transportation Goals

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Advanced Space Transportation Program (ASTP) has advanced key propulsion and launch vehicle systems technologies towards enabling the concepts identified by the Highly Reusable Space Transportation (HRST) Study as having significant potential for reducing the cost of access to space. The Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) manages the ASTP for the NASA Aero-Space Technology Enterprise. The HRST Study was conducted from 1995 through 1997 to evaluated launch concepts with the potential to reduce launch cost to $100 to $200 per pound of payload to low Earth orbit in the 2016 to 2022 timeframe. The HRST represents a generation of launch vehicles beyond the Lockheed-Martin VentureStar concept with a goal of another factor of ten reduction in launch cost below the next generation Reusable Launch Vehicle. Several concepts were developed and evaluated during the initial HRST studies. At the completion of the concept development phase in 1997, four task forces were formed to integrate the results of the study. These task forces were System Concept Definition, Operations Assessment. Cost Assessment and Technology Assessment. The Operations Assessment task force published its final report in November 1998. The Operations Assessment task force evaluated both single stage to orbit (SSTO) and two-stage to orbit (TSTO) concepts. SSTO concepts included horizontal takeoff and horizontal landing, vertical takeoff and vertical landing and vertical takeoff and horizontal landing. Horizontally launched concepts including launch assist options. SSTO concepts included airbreathing and all rocket as well as combination propulsion systems. The Operations Assessment considered the significance of performance margin, flight rate capability, reliability, launch assist, design optimization and technology development. These studies serve as a guide for the ASTP to prioritize technology development towards future highly reusable launch systems. Although the ASTP supports the development of technology that is focused at a near term fully reusable launch vehicle, the core of the technology development is looking ahead to future generations of launch vehicles that will enable dramatic growth in civil and commercial space enterprise. The primary focus of the paper is to status the key enabling technologies including rocket based combined cycle (RBCC) propulsion, magnetic launch assist, long life, low weight rocket propulsion, integral hot structures. robust thermal protection systems and integrated vehicle health management. The ASTP technology roadmap is leading rapidly towards system demonstration and eventual future X vehicle flight demonstrations.

Lyles, Garry↗
NASA NTRS1986

The suitability of various spacecraft for future space applications missions

The Space Applications Advisory Committee (SAAC) of NASA's Advisory Council was asked by the Associate Administrator for Space Science and Applications to consider the most suitable future means for accomplishing space application missions. To comply with this request, SAAC formed a Task Force whose report is contained in this document. In their considerations, the Task Force looked into the suitability of likely future spacecraft options for supporting various types of application mission payloads. These options encompass a permanent manned space station, the Space Shuttle operating in a sortie mode, unmanned platforms that integrate a wide variety of instruments or other devices, and smaller free fliers that accommodate at most a few functions. The Task Force also recognized that the various elements could be combined to form a larger space infrastructure. This report summarizes the results obtained by the Task Force. It describes the approach utilized, the findings and their analysis, and the conclusions.

Mathews, C. W.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Project LASER: Learning about science, engineering, and research

The number of American students entering science and engineering careers and their ranking in comparison with other countries is on the decline. This decline has alarmed Congress which, in 1987, established a Task Force on Women, Minorities, and the Handicapped in Science and Technology to define the problem and find solutions. If left unchanged, the task force has warned that the prospects for maintaining an advanced industrial society will diminish. NASA is supportive of the six goals outlined by the task force, which are paraphrase herein, and is carefully assessing its education programs to identify those offering the greatest potential for achieving the task force objectives with a reasonable range of resources. A major initiative is under way on behalf of NASA at its Marshall Space Flight Center, where highly effective features of several NASA education programs along with innovations are being integrated into a comprehensive pilot program. This program, dubbed Project LASER, is discussed.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1979

Study of modeling and evaluation of remote manipulation tasks with force feedback

The use of time and motion study methods to evaluate force feedback in remote manipulation tasks are described. Several systems of time measurement derived for industrial workers were studied and adapted for manipulator use. A task board incorporating a set of basic motions was designed and built. Results obtained from two subjects in three manipulation situations for each are reported: a force-reflective manipulator, a unilateral manipulator, and the unaided human hand. The results indicate that: (1) a time-and-motion study techniques are applicable to manipulation; and that (2) force feedback facilitates some motions (notably fitting), but not others (such as positioning).

Hill, J. W.↗
NASA NTRS2020

History and Logic Model NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Instrument and Payload Systems Engineering Technical Performance Study

Historically, some NASA missions have exceeded schedule and cost commitments. Studies suggest technical performance is a contributor. The 1980 NASA Project Management Study concluded, "one of the most significant contributors to cost and schedule growth is inadequate definition of technical and management aspects of a program..." (as cited in GAO/NSIAD-93-97, p. 11). The 1991 NASA Roles and Missions Report identified a "need for increased emphasis on technological readiness and requirements on the front end of a program" (as cited in GAO/NSIAD-93-97, p. 11). The 1992 NASA Program Costs Report stated that NASA officials identified, among other things, "insufficient definition studies... [and] program redesigns and technical complexities" as reasons for cost and schedule overruns (GAO/NSAID-93-97, p. 11). The 2002 Task Force on Acquisition of National Security Space Programs found "requirements definition and control issues, unhealthy cost bias in proposal evaluation, widespread lack of budget reserves required to implement high risk programs on schedule, and an overall underappreciation of the importance of appropriately staffed and trained system engineering staff to manage the technologically demanding and unique aspects of space programs" (DoD, 2003, p.i.) In 2007, The NASA Office of the Chief Engineer chartered the NASA Instrument Capability Study (NICS) “to determine whether NASA instrument developers are facing challenges that impact the capability to design and build quality instruments or whether there are flaws in the acquisition strategy evidenced by schedule delays, cost overruns, and increased technical risk via design deficiencies. The... team was also chartered to determine if occurrences [are]... isolated cases or if there are generic issues... If the issues [are] found to be generic, the team [is] to offer solutions to recover such capability" (NICS Report, 2008, p. vi). The 2008 NICS Report, led by Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), identified challenges to instrument technical performance consistent with findings from previous reports. In 2017, the Instrument Project Division (IPD) Implementation Study was initiated to determine if there was a change in meeting schedule and cost commitments after implementing certain NICS recommendations. In 2018, the Instrument Technical Performance Study was initiated to determine the current state of Instrument Technical Performance in the GSFC Payload & Instrument Systems Engineering Branch. The purpose of the combined studies is to answer the question, "Is there a relationship between meeting NASA scientific instrument technical success and meeting schedule and cost commitments? If yes, what is the relationship?" References Department of Defense Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics. (2003). The report of the defense science board/ air force scientific advisory board joint task force on acquisition of national security space programs. Washington DC. Government Accounting Office. (1992). NASA program costs: Space missions require substantially more funding than initially estimated. GAO/NSIAD-93-97. Washington DC. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency, Department of Defense. (2008). The NASA instrument capability study final report. NP-2008-11-058-GSFC. Washington DC.

Robbins, Geraldine↗
NASA NTRS2017

Global and Regional Sea Level Rise Scenarios for the United States

The Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flood Hazard Scenarios and Tools Interagency Task Force, jointly convened by the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) and the National Ocean Council (NOC), began its work in August 2015. The Task Force has focused its efforts on three primary tasks: 1) updating scenarios of global mean sea level (GMSL) rise, 2) integrating the global scenarios with regional factors contributing to sea level change for the entire U.S. coastline, and 3) incorporating these regionally appropriate scenarios within coastal risk management tools and capabilities deployed by individual agencies in support of the needs of specific stakeholder groups and user communities. This technical report focuses on the first two of these tasks and reports on the production of gridded relative sea level (RSL, which includes both ocean-level change and vertical land motion) projections for the United States associated with an updated set of GMSL scenarios. In addition to supporting the longer-term Task Force effort, this new product will be an important input into the USGCRP Sustained Assessment process and upcoming Fourth National Climate Assessment (NCA4) due in 2018. This report also serves as a key technical input into the in-progress USGCRP Climate Science Special Report (CSSR).

Sweet, William V.↗