Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “schedule contingency”

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 NTRS2016

Experiences with Extra-Vehicular Activities in Response to Critical ISS Contingencies

Initial "Big 14" work was put to the test for the first time in 2010. Deficiencies were found in some of the planning and approaches to that work; Failure Response Assessment Team created in 2010 to address deficiencies -Identify and perform engineering analysis in operations products prior to failure; incorporate results into operations products -Identify actions for protecting ISS against a Next Worse Failure after the first failure occurs -Better document not only EVA products but also planning products, assumptions, and open actions; Pre-failure investments against critical failures best postures ISS for swift response and recovery -A type of insurance policy -Has proven effective in a number of contingency EVA cases since 2010. Planning for MBSU R&R in 2012, Second PM R&R in 2013, EXT MDM R&R in 2014; Current FRAT schedule projects completion of all analysis in 2018

Van Cise, Edward A.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Asteroid Crewed Segment Mission Lean Development

The next generation of human spaceflight missions presents numerous challenges to designers that must be addressed to produce a feasible concept. The specific challenges of designing an exploration mission utilizing the Space Launch System and the Orion spacecraft to carry astronauts beyond earth orbit to explore an asteroid stored in a distant retrograde orbit around the moon will be addressed. Mission designers must carefully balance competing constraints including cost, schedule, risk, and numerous spacecraft performance metrics including launch mass, nominal landed mass, abort landed mass, mission duration, consumable limits and many others. The Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission will be described along with results from the concurrent mission design trades that led to its formulation. While the trades presented are specific to this mission, the integrated process is applicable to any potential future mission. The following trades were critical in the mission formulation and will be described in detail: 1) crew size, 2) mission duration, 3) trajectory design, 4) docking vs grapple, 5) extravehicular activity tasks, 6) launch mass and integrated vehicle performance, 7) contingency performance, 8) crew consumables including food, clothing, oxygen, nitrogen and water, and 9) mission risk. The additional Orion functionality required to perform the Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission and how it is incorporated while minimizing cost, schedule and mass impacts will be identified. Existing investments in the NASA technology portfolio were leveraged to provide the added functionality that will be beneficial to future exploration missions. Mission kits are utilized to augment Orion with the necessary functionality without introducing costly new requirements to the mature Orion spacecraft design effort. The Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission provides an exciting early mission for the Orion and SLS while providing a stepping stone to even more ambitious missions in the future.

Gard, Joe↗
NASA NTRS1990

Automated control of hierarchical systems using value-driven methods

An introduction is given to the Value-driven methodology, which has been successfully applied to solve a variety of difficult decision, control, and optimization problems. Many real-world decision processes (e.g., those encountered in scheduling, allocation, and command and control) involve a hierarchy of complex planning considerations. For such problems it is virtually impossible to define a fixed set of rules that will operate satisfactorily over the full range of probable contingencies. Decision Science Applications' value-driven methodology offers a systematic way of automating the intuitive, common-sense approach used by human planners. The inherent responsiveness of value-driven systems to user-controlled priorities makes them particularly suitable for semi-automated applications in which the user must remain in command of the systems operation. Three examples of the practical application of the approach in the automation of hierarchical decision processes are discussed: the TAC Brawler air-to-air combat simulation is a four-level computerized hierarchy; the autonomous underwater vehicle mission planning system is a three-level control system; and the Space Station Freedom electrical power control and scheduling system is designed as a two-level hierarchy. The methodology is compared with rule-based systems and with other more widely-known optimization techniques.

Pugh, George E.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Scripting Module for the Satellite Orbit Analysis Program (SOAP)

This add-on module to the SOAP software can perform changes to simulation objects based on the occurrence of specific conditions. This allows the software to encompass simulation response of scheduled or physical events. Users can manipulate objects in the simulation environment under programmatic control. Inputs to the scripting module are Actions, Conditions, and the Script. Actions are arbitrary modifications to constructs such as Platform Objects (i.e. satellites), Sensor Objects (representing instruments or communication links), or Analysis Objects (user-defined logical or numeric variables). Examples of actions include changes to a satellite orbit ( v), changing a sensor-pointing direction, and the manipulation of a numerical expression. Conditions represent the circumstances under which Actions are performed and can be couched in If-Then-Else logic, like performing v at specific times or adding to the spacecraft power only when it is being illuminated by the Sun. The SOAP script represents the entire set of conditions being considered over a specific time interval. The output of the scripting module is a series of events, which are changes to objects at specific times. As the SOAP simulation clock runs forward, the scheduled events are performed. If the user sets the clock back in time, the events within that interval are automatically undone. This script offers an interface for defining scripts where the user does not have to remember the vocabulary of various keywords. Actions can be captured by employing the same user interface that is used to define the objects themselves. Conditions can be set to invoke Actions by selecting them from pull-down lists. Users define the script by selecting from the pool of defined conditions. Many space systems have to react to arbitrary events that can occur from scheduling or from the environment. For example, an instrument may cease to draw power when the area that it is tasked to observe is not in view. The contingency of the planetary body blocking the line of sight is a condition upon which the power being drawn is set to zero. It remains at zero until the observation objective is again in view. Computing the total power drawn by the instrument over a period of days or weeks can now take such factors into consideration. What makes the architecture especially powerful is that the scripting module can look ahead and behind in simulation time, and this temporal versatility can be leveraged in displays such as x-y plots. For example, a plot of a satellite s altitude as a function of time can take changes to the orbit into account.

Carnright, Robert↗
NASA NTRS2008

Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Potable Water System Verification Description

The Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), also known as Orion, will ferry a crew of up to six astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), or a crew of up to four astronauts to the moon. The first launch of CEV is scheduled for approximately 2014. A stored water system on the CEV will supply the crew with potable water for various purposes: drinking and food rehydration, hygiene, medical needs, sublimation, and various contingency situations. The current baseline biocide for the stored water system is ionic silver, similar in composition to the biocide used to maintain quality of the water transferred from the Orbiter to the ISS and stored in Contingency Water Containers (CWCs). In the CEV water system, the ionic silver biocide is expected to be depleted from solution due to ionic silver plating onto the surfaces of the materials within the CEV water system, thus negating its effectiveness as a biocide. Since the biocide depletion is expected to occur within a short amount of time after loading the water into the CEV water tanks at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), an additional microbial

Peterson, Laurie↗
NASA NTRS2009

Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Potable Water System Verification Description

The Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), also known as Orion, will ferry a crew of up to six astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), or a crew of up to four astronauts to the moon. The first launch of CEV is scheduled for approximately 2014. A stored water system on the CEV will supply the crew with potable water for various purposes: drinking and food rehydration, hygiene, medical needs, sublimation, and various contingency situations. The current baseline biocide for the stored water system is ionic silver, similar in composition to the biocide used to maintain quality of the water transferred from the Orbiter to the ISS and stored in Contingency Water Containers (CWCs). In the CEV water system, the ionic silver biocide is expected to be depleted from solution due to ionic silver plating onto the surfaces of the materials within the CEV water system, thus negating its effectiveness as a biocide. Since the biocide depletion is expected to occur within a short amount of time after loading the water into the CEV water tanks at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), an additional microbial control is a 0.1 micron point of use filter that will be used at the outlet of the Potable Water Dispenser (PWD). Because this may be the first time NASA is considering a stored water system for longterm missions that does not maintain a residual biocide, a team of experts in materials compatibility, biofilms and point of use filters, surface treatment and coatings, and biocides has been created to pinpoint concerns and perform testing to help alleviate those concerns related to the CEV water system. Results from the test plans laid out in the paper presented to SAE last year (Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Potable Water System Verification Coordination, 2008012083) will be detailed in this paper. Additionally, recommendations for the CEV verification will be described for risk mitigation in meeting the physicochemical and microbiological requirements on the CEV PWS.

Peterson, Laurie↗
NASA NTRS1974

Planning and management of science programs on Skylab

Discussion of the experience gained in experiment operation planning during the Skylab mission. The Skylab flight planning activity allowed the experimenters to interact with the system and provided the flexibility to respond to contingencies both major and minor. Both these aspects contributed to make efficient use of crew time thus helping to increase the science return from the mission. Examples of the need for real time scheduling response and of the tradeoffs considered between conflicting experiment requirements are presented. General management principles derived from this experience are developed. The Skylab mission experiences, together with previous Apollo mission experiences, are shown to provide a good background for Shuttle flight planning.

Parker, R. A. R.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Risk analysis of computer system designs

Adverse events during implementation can affect final capabilities, schedule and cost of a computer system even though the system was accurately designed and evaluated. Risk analysis enables the manager to forecast the impact of those events and to timely ask for design revisions or contingency plans before making any decision. This paper presents a structured procedure for an effective risk analysis. The procedure identifies the required activities, separates subjective assessments from objective evaluations, and defines a risk measure to determine the analysis results. The procedure is consistent with the system design evaluation and enables a meaningful comparison among alternative designs.

Vallone, A.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Servicing operations for the SIRTF Observatory at the Space Station

This paper describes the servicing requirements, plans, and proposed Space Station-based servicing operations for the Space Infrared Telescope Facility (SIRTF) Observatory. SIRTF is a cryogenically-cooled, long-life, one meter class space telescope which will be operated by NASA as a free-flying observatory for infrared astronomy, in the mid-1990's. To achieve its 5-year lifetime requirement (10 year goal), SIRTF must be replenished periodically with cryogenic helium and have its life-limited modular subsystems replaced; capability for contingency repair of warm components will also be provided in the Observatory design. A general description of the SIRTF Observatory is given, including options for the support systems (spacecraft). The overall servicing philosophy and plans are addressed with scheduling and needed support elements described. A proposed Space Station-based servicing scenario is described, including orbital transfer, servicing and checkout operations. A detailed description and timeline for liquid helium replenishment operations is provided, including a conceptual design and technology development program for the cryogenic helium transfer dewar (tanker). Finally, a preliminary SIRTF spares/logistics philosophy is outlined, including tradeoffs to be considered.

Wiltsee, Christopher B.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

BioSentinel: Mission Summary and Lessons Learned From the First Deep Space Biology CubeSat Mission

Launched on Artemis-1, BioSentinel carries a biology experiment into deep space for the first time in 50 years. A 6U CubeSat form factor was utilized for the spacecraft which included technologies newly developed or adapted for operations beyond Earth orbit. The spacecraft carries onboard budding yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, as an analog to human cells to test the biological response to deep space radiation. This was the maiden deep-space voyage for many of the subsystems, and the first time to evaluate their performance in flight operation. Flying a CubeSat beyond LEO comes with unique challenges with respect to trajectory uncertainty and mission operations planning. The nominal plan was a lunar fly-by, followed by an insertion into Heliocentric orbit. However, some possible scenarios included lunar eclipses that could have severely impacted the power budget during that phase of the mission, while others could have resulted in a “Retrograde” hyperbola at swing-by resulting in the spacecraft traveling inward toward Earth or even towards a collision with the lunar surface. The commissioning phase of the mission was successful and completed a week ahead of schedule. It did not come without its exciting moments and challenges. First contact with the spacecraft uncovered that the vehicle was unexpectedly tumbling after deployment, a situation that needed to be corrected urgently. The mission operations team executed a contingency plan to stabilize the spacecraft, with just moments to spare before the battery ran out of power. The BioSensor payload onboard the spacecraft is a complex instrument that includes microfluidics, fluid systems, sensor control electronics, as well at the living yeast cells. BioSentinel also included a TimePix radiation sensor implemented by JSC’s RadWorks group. Dose and Linear Energy Transfer (LET) data is compared directly to the rate of DSB-and repair events measured by the S. cerevisiae cells. BioSentinel mature nanosatellite technologies included: deep space communications and navigation, autonomous attitude control and momentum management, and micro-propulsion systems, to provide an adaptable nanosatellite platform for deep space uses. This paper discusses the performance of the BioSentinel spacecraft through the mission phase, and includes lessons learned from challenges and anomalies. BioSentinel had many successes and will be a pathfinder for future deep space CubeSats and biology missions.

BioSentinel↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Biosentinel: Mission Summary and Lessons Learned From the First Deep Space Biology CubeSat Mission

Launched on Artemis-1, BioSentinel carries a biology experiment into deep space for the first time in 50 years. A 6U CubeSat form factor was utilized for the spacecraft which included technologies newly developed or adapted for operations beyond Earth orbit. The spacecraft carries onboard budding yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, as an analog to human cells to test the biological response to deep space radiation. This was the maiden deep-space voyage for many of the subsystems, and the first time to evaluate their performance in flight operation. Flying a CubeSat beyond LEO comes with unique challenges with respect to trajectory uncertainty and mission operations planning. The nominal plan was a lunar fly-by, followed by an insertion into Heliocentric orbit. However, some possible scenarios included lunar eclipses that could have severely impacted the power budget during that phase of the mission, while others could have resulted in a “Retrograde” hyperbola at swing-by resulting in the spacecraft traveling inward toward Earth or even towards a collision with the lunar surface. The commissioning phase of the mission was successful and completed a week ahead of schedule. It did not come without its exciting moments and challenges. First contact with the spacecraft uncovered that the vehicle was unexpectedly tumbling after deployment, a situation that needed to be corrected urgently. The mission operations team executed a contingency plan to stabilize the spacecraft, with just moments to spare before the battery ran out of power. The BioSensor payload onboard the spacecraft is a complex instrument that includes microfluidics, fluid systems, sensor control electronics, as well at the living yeast cells. BioSentinel also included a TimePix radiation sensor implemented by JSC’s RadWorks group. Dose and Linear Energy Transfer (LET) data is compared directly to the rate of DSB-and repair events measured by the S. cerevisiae cells. BioSentinel mature nanosatellite technologies included: deep space communications and navigation, autonomous attitude control and momentum management, and micro-propulsion systems, to provide an adaptable nanosatellite platform for deep space uses. This paper discusses the performance of the BioSentinel spacecraft through the mission phase, and includes lessons learned from challenges and anomalies. BioSentinel had many successes and will be a pathfinder for future deep space CubeSats and biology missions.

BioSentinel↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Biosentinel: The First Deep Space Biology CubeSat Mission- Mission Summary and Lessons Learned

Launched on Artemis-1, BioSentinel carries a biology experiment into deep space for the first time in 50 years. A 6U CubeSat form factor was utilized for the spacecraft which included technologies newly developed or adapted for operations beyond Earth orbit. The spacecraft carries onboard budding yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, as an analog to human cells to test the biological response to deep space radiation. This was the maiden deep-space voyage for many of the subsystems, and the first time to evaluate their performance in flight operation. Flying a CubeSat beyond LEO comes with unique challenges with respect to trajectory uncertainty and mission operations planning. The nominal plan was a lunar fly-by, followed by an insertion into Heliocentric orbit. However, some possible scenarios included lunar eclipses that could have severely impacted the power budget during that phase of the mission, while others could have resulted in a “Retrograde” hyperbola at swing-by resulting in the spacecraft traveling inward toward Earth or even towards a collision with the lunar surface. The commissioning phase of the mission was successful and completed a week ahead of schedule. It did not come without its exciting moments and challenges. First contact with the spacecraft uncovered that the vehicle was unexpectedly tumbling after deployment, a situation that needed to be corrected urgently. The mission operations team executed a contingency plan to stabilize the spacecraft, with just moments to spare before the battery ran out of power. The BioSensor payload onboard the spacecraft is a complex instrument that includes microfluidics, fluid systems, sensor control electronics, as well at the living yeast cells. BioSentinel also included a TimePix radiation sensor implemented by JSC’s RadWorks group. Dose and Linear Energy Transfer (LET) data is compared directly to the rate of DSB-and repair events measured by the S. cerevisiae cells. BioSentinel mature nanosatellite technologies included: deep space communications and navigation, autonomous attitude control and momentum management, and micro-propulsion systems, to provide an adaptable nanosatellite platform for deep space uses. This paper discusses the performance of the BioSentinel spacecraft through the mission phase, and includes lessons learned from challenges and anomalies. BioSentinel had many successes and will be a pathfinder for future deep space CubeSats and biology missions.

BioSentinel↗
NASA NTRS2005

Risk Management for Human Support Technology Development

NASA requires continuous risk management for all programs and projects. The risk management process identifies risks, analyzes their impact, prioritizes them, develops and carries out plans to mitigate or accept them, tracks risks and mitigation plans, and communicates and documents risk information. Project risk management is driven by the project goal and is performed by the entire team. Risk management begins early in the formulation phase with initial risk identification and development of a risk management plan and continues throughout the project life cycle. This paper describes the risk management approach that is suggested for use in NASA's Human Support Technology Development. The first step in risk management is to identify the detailed technical and programmatic risks specific to a project. Each individual risk should be described in detail. The identified risks are summarized in a complete risk list. Risk analysis provides estimates of the likelihood and the qualitative impact of a risk. The likelihood and impact of the risk are used to define its priority location in the risk matrix. The approaches for responding to risk are either to mitigate it by eliminating or reducing the effect or likelihood of a risk, to accept it with a documented rationale and contingency plan, or to research or monitor the risk, The Human Support Technology Development program includes many projects with independently achievable goals. Each project must do independent risk management, considering all its risks together and trading them against performance, budget, and schedule. Since the program can succeed even if some projects fail, the program risk has a complex dependence on the individual project risks.

jones, Harry↗
NASA NTRS1991

Space Station Freedom contingency reboost and resupply strategies

The objective of this study was to determine the requirements necessary to ensure a viable Space Station Freedom (SSF) in the event of a delay in the date of the first element launch, and/or in the event that the nominal assembly sequence is interrupted, perhaps due to a delay in the Space Shuttle Launch Schedule. Orbit lifetimes, reboost fuel requirements, and controllability requirements were calculated for each stage of the SSF assuming anywhere from a 6 to 24 month delay/interruption in the baseline SSF assembly sequence. These results were assessed in order to formulate strategies to assure SSF viability in the presence of assembly sequence delays and interruptions.

Troutman, Patrick A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Automated Management of Small Unmanned Aircraft System Communications and Navigation Contingency

The number of small Unmanned Aircraft System (sUAS) operating in the low-altitude of the National Airspace System (NAS) has been rapidly increasing in the past few years and this number is expected to grow in the future. However, aside from a few special cases, all sUAS must fly within visual line-of-sight (VLOS) of their operators and this limitation is blocking highly anticipated beyond visual line-of-sight (BVLOS) sUAS applications such as package delivery from practice. To enable routine low-altitude BVLOS operations, there needs to be a traffic management ecosystem that complements the FAA’s Air Traffic Management (ATM) system, which does not provide air traffic services under 400 feet above ground level (AGL). NASA has been pioneering research and development of this ecosystem under UAS Traffic Management (UTM) project since 2015 in a series of Technical Capability Levels (TCL) activities that are increasingly complex. In TCL1, completed in 2015, visual line-of-sight operations such as agriculture, firefighting, and infrastructure monitoring were addressed with a focus on geofencing and operations scheduling. Technologies and requirements needed for BVLOS operations in sparsely populated areas were examined in TCL2 in 2016, and those for operations over moderately populated areas in TCL3 in 2017 and 2018. TCL4 is building on the earlier TCLs and focuses on technologies and requirements for operations in higher-density urban areas for tasks such as newsgathering and package delivery and for managing large-scale contingencies. To coordinate and facilitate the incremental implementation of the UTM ecosystem in the NAS, a Research Transition Team (RTT) has been formed between the FAA, NASA, and industry. The RTT is divided into four subgroups, concept and use case development, data exchange and information architecture, sense and avoid, and communications and navigation (C&N). This paper focuses on C&N subgroup activities, in particular about the development of automated sUAS communications and navigation contingency management. The goal of this development is to prepare sUAS to display predictable behavior while handling C&N off-nominal events. It is expected that the adoption of the presented automated contingency management by the sUAS community will accommodate and inform rulemaking towards governing low-altitude BVLOS operations.

Unmanned Aviation System (UAS) Traffic Management↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Automated Management of Small Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Communications and Navigation Contingency

The number of small Unmanned Aircraft System (sUAS) operating in the low-altitude of the National Airspace System (NAS) has been rapidly increasing in the past few years and this number is expected to grow in the future. However, aside from a few special cases, all sUAS must fly within visual line-of-sight (VLOS) of their operators and this limitation is blocking highly anticipated beyond visual line-of-sight (BVLOS) sUAS applications such as package delivery from practice. To enable routine low-altitude BVLOS operations, there needs to be a traffic management ecosystem that complements the FAA’s Air Traffic Management (ATM) system, which does not provide air traffic services under 400 feet above ground level (AGL). NASA has been pioneering research and development of this ecosystem under UAS Traffic Management (UTM) project since 2015 in a series of Technical Capability Levels (TCL) activities that are increasingly complex. In TCL1, completed in 2015, visual line-of-sight operations such as agriculture, firefighting, and infrastructure monitoring were addressed with a focus on geofencing and operations scheduling. Technologies and requirements needed for BVLOS operations in sparsely populated areas were examined in TCL2 in 2016, and those for operations over moderately populated areas in TCL3 in 2017 and 2018. TCL4 is building on the earlier TCLs and focuses on technologies and requirements for operations in higher-density urban areas for tasks such as newsgathering and package delivery and for managing large-scale contingencies. To coordinate and facilitate the incremental implementation of the UTM ecosystem in the NAS, a Research Transition Team (RTT) has been formed between the FAA, NASA, and industry. The RTT is divided into four subgroups, concept and use case development, data exchange and information architecture, sense and avoid, and communications and navigation (C&N). This paper focuses on C&N subgroup activities, in particular about the development of automated sUAS communications and navigation contingency management. The goal of this development is to prepare sUAS to display predictable behavior while handling C&N off-nominal events. It is expected that the adoption of the presented automated contingency management by the sUAS community will accommodate and inform rulemaking towards governing low-altitude BVLOS operations.

Unmanned Aviation Systems (UAS) Traffic Management↗
NASA NTRS1997

Coping with Irregular Operations: Implications for a Free Flight Environment

Irregular operations involve disruption of scheduled airline operations. They ate of concern to the carriers because they cost money, require personnel effort, and may harm customer good will. Irregular operations may result from aircraft system malfunctions that take planes out of service or result in cancellations, Might system problems or passenger medical emergencies that require diversions, local airport problems that may close down a runway, or weather systems that restrict flow into airports or regions. At the heart of responding to irregular operations is distributed decision making by members of airline operations centers, pilots, and the air traffic control system. Six U.S. carriers participated in a study in which we observed strategies used by operations center personnel to handle various classes of irregular operations. We focused on situations that are most disruptive to regular operations and are most difficult to cope with. We also sought to identify classes of events that would be most affected by changes in the air traffic management system. How a carrier deals with disruptions to its schedule reflects its philosophy and primary goals, as well as its resources. Size and type of operations (short or long-haul) determine which problems have priority. Each airline has different technological support tools to aid in flight planning and replanning, and some carriers have established contingency procedures for coping with various situations. We also examined differences in extent and type of interaction between ABC personnel and various elements of the air traffic system as they managed various problems: who interacts with AM what situations prompt interaction, how often these occur, and the outcomes and Perceived benefits. Use of the expanded NRP program was also studied, along with its advantages to the individual companies. We also examined the implications of the proposed change to a free flight environment on airline strategies for coping with irregular operations.

Orasanu, Judith↗
NASA NTRS2008

A Comparison of Probabilistic and Deterministic Campaign Analysis for Human Space Exploration

Human space exploration is by its very nature an uncertain endeavor. Vehicle reliability, technology development risk, budgetary uncertainty, and launch uncertainty all contribute to stochasticity in an exploration scenario. However, traditional strategic analysis has been done in a deterministic manner, analyzing and optimizing the performance of a series of planned missions. History has shown that exploration scenarios rarely follow such a planned schedule. This paper describes a methodology to integrate deterministic and probabilistic analysis of scenarios in support of human space exploration. Probabilistic strategic analysis is used to simulate "possible" scenario outcomes, based upon the likelihood of occurrence of certain events and a set of pre-determined contingency rules. The results of the probabilistic analysis are compared to the nominal results from the deterministic analysis to evaluate the robustness of the scenario to adverse events and to test and optimize contingency planning.

Merrill, R. Gabe↗