Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “technical standards”

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

NASA’s Revised Planetary Protection Policy and Implementation

NASA has updated its planetary protection policy and implementation approach in response to advances in scientific understanding of solar system targets, upcoming mission opportuni-ties for exploration and sample return, and the private sector’s emerging capability to plan missions to Earth’s Moon and Mars. In September 2021, the NASA Procedural Requirements NPR 8715.24, entitled “Planetary Protection Provisions for Robotic Extraterrestrial Missions” was released which repositions planetary protection in existing NASA mission and program management structures, introduces risk-informed decision making, expands on key roles and responsibilities for both programmatic and the Oÿce of Safety and Mission Assurance, updates the categorization process and streamlines the planetary protection documentation approval and schedule. NASA is working on a more detailed technical standard to accompany NPR 8715.24 which will include the detailed technical requirements to address organic contamina-tion, inadvertent impact avoidance, biological control and management, end of mission disposal and restricted Earth-Return sample safety and assurance. This report to the COSPAR com-munity will describe the current NASA planetary protection policy and its alignment with the revised COSPAR planetary protection policy. NASA’s plans for updating the supporting “Handbook for Implementing Planetary Protection Technical Requirements” and future policies for addressing planetary protection of crewed missions will also be presented.

Elaine Seasly↗

NASA’s Revised Planetary Protection Policy and Implementation

NASA has updated its planetary protection policy and implementation approach in response to advances in scientific understanding of solar system targets, upcoming mission opportunities for exploration and sample return, and the private sector’s emerging capability to plan missions to Earth’s Moon and Mars. In September 2021, the NASA Procedural Requirements NPR 8715.24, entitled “Planetary Protection Provisions for Robotic Extraterrestrial Missions” was released which repositions planetary protection in existing NASA mission and program management structures, introduces risk-informed decision making, expands on key roles and responsibilities for both programmatic and the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, updates the categorization process and streamlines the planetary protection documentation approval and schedule. NASA is working on a more detailed technical standard to accompany NPR 8715.24 which will include the detailed technical requirements to address organic contamination, inadvertent impact avoidance, biological control and management, end of mission disposal and restricted Earth-Return sample safety and assurance. This report to the COSPAR community will describe the current NASA planetary protection policy and its alignment with the revised COSPAR planetary protection policy. NASA’s plans for updating the supporting “Handbook for Implementing Planetary Protection Technical Requirements” and future policies for addressing planetary protection of crewed missions will also be presented.

Planetary Protection↗

NASA’s Revised Planetary Protection Policy and Implementation

NASA has updated its planetary protection policy and implementation approach in response to advances in scientific understanding of solar system targets, upcoming mission opportunities for exploration and sample return, and the private sector’s emerging capability to plan missions to Earth’s Moon and Mars. In September 2021, the NASA Procedural Requirements NPR 8715.24, entitled “Planetary Protection Provisions for Robotic Extraterrestrial Missions” was released which repositions planetary protection in existing NASA mission and program management structures, introduces risk-informed decision making, expands on key roles and responsibilities for both programmatic and the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, updates the categorization process and streamlines the planetary protection documentation approval and schedule. NASA is working on a more detailed technical standard to accompany NPR 8715.24 which will include the detailed technical requirements to address organic contamination, inadvertent impact avoidance, biological control and management, end of mission disposal and restricted Earth-Return sample safety and assurance. This report to the COSPAR community will describe the current NASA planetary protection policy and its alignment with the revised COSPAR planetary protection policy. NASA’s plans for updating the supporting “Handbook for Implementing Planetary Protection Technical Requirements” and future policies for addressing planetary protection of crewed missions will also be presented.

Elaine Seasly↗

Standards Advisor-Advanced Information Technology for Advanced Information Delivery

Developers of space systems must deal with an increasing amount of information in responding to extensive requirements and standards from numerous sources. Accessing these requirements and standards, understanding them, comparing them, negotiating them and responding to them is often an overwhelming task. There are resources to aid the space systems developer, such as lessons learned and best practices. Again, though, accessing, understanding, and using this information is often more difficult than helpful. This results in space systems that: 1. Do not meet all their requirements. 2. Do not incorporate prior engineering experience. 3. Cost more to develop. 4. Take longer to develop. The NASA Technical Standards Program (NTSP) web site at http://standards.nasa.gov has made significant improvements in making standards, lessons learned, and related material available to space systems developers agency-wide. The Standards Advisor was conceived to take the next steps beyond the current product, continuing to apply evolving information technology that continues to improve information delivery to space systems developers. This report describes the features of the Standards Advisor and suggests a technical approach to its development.

Hawker, J. Scott↗

Defining Medical Levels of Care for Exploration Missions

NASA medical care standards establish requirements for providing health and medical programs for crewmembers during all phases of a mission. These requirements are intended to prevent or mitigate negative health consequences of long-duration spaceflight, thereby optimizing crew health and performance over the course of the mission. Current standards are documented in the two volumes of the NASA-STD-3001 Space Flight Human-System Standard document, established by the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer. Its purpose is to provide uniform technical standards for the design, selection, and application of medical hardware, software, processes, procedures, practices, and methods for human-rated systems. NASA-STD-3001 Vol. 1 identifies five levels of care for human spaceflight. These levels of care are accompanied by several components that illustrate the type of medical care expected for each. The Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) of the Human Research Program has expanded the context of these provided levels of care and components. This supplemental information includes definitions for each component of care and example actions that describe the type of capabilities that coincide with the definition. This interpretation is necessary in order to fully and systematically define the capabilities required for each level of care in order to define the medical requirements and plan for infrastructure needed for medical systems of future exploration missions, such as one to Mars.

Hailey, M.↗

Atmospheric/Space Environment Support Lessons Learned Regarding Aerospace Vehicle Design and Operations

In modern government and aerospace industry institutions the necessity of controlling current year costs often leads to high mobility in the technical workforce, "one-deep" technical capabilities, and minimal mentoring for young engineers. Thus, formal recording, use, and teaching of lessons learned are especially important in the maintenance and improvement of current knowledge and development of new technologies, regardless of the discipline area. Within the NASA Technical Standards Program Website http://standards.nasa.gov there is a menu item entitled "Lessons Learned/Best Practices". It contains links to a large number of engineering and technical disciplines related data sets that contain a wealth of lessons learned information based on past experiences. This paper has provided a small sample of lessons learned relative to the atmospheric and space environment. There are many more whose subsequent applications have improved our knowledge of the atmosphere and space environment, and the application of this knowledge to the engineering and operations for a variety of aerospace programs.

Vaughan, William W.↗

Revision of ISO 15859 Aerospace Fluid Standards

A detailed review of ISO 15859 "Space Systems - Fluid Characteristics, Sampling and Test Methods" was performed An approach to revising Parts 1-9 and 11-13 was developed and concurred by the NASA Technical Standards Program Office. The approach was to align them with the highest level source documents, and not to program-specific requirements. The updated documents were prepared and presented.

Greene, Benjamin↗

Terrestrial Environment (Climatic) Criteria Handbook For Use in Aerospace Vehicle Development

An update of the NASA 'Terrestrial Environment (Climatic) Criteria Handbook for Use in Aerospace Vehicle Development' (NASA-HDBK-1001) is currently in the final process of completion for release in late-2004 or early 2005. The current version of the Handbook was approved by the NASA Chief Engineer in 2000 as a NASA Preferred Technical Standard. However, it was based on natural environment criteria developed mostly in the early 1990's. Therefore, a task was approved to completely update the Handbook in order to reflect the current state-of-the-art in the various terrestrial environmental climatic criteria areas. The technical areas include: Winds, atmospheric constituents, thermodynamic parameters/models/extremes, humidity, electricity, precipitation/fog/icing, cloud phenomena/cover, diffusion/toxic release, severe weather/tornado/hurricane, solar/thermal radiation, geologic hazards, and sea state. A summary of this extensive update will be presented along with some key examples of the new contents. Earlier versions of this publication have been extensively used by the aerospace community, especially program managers and design engineers for required natural terrestrial environment inputs to use in mission planning, development studies and trades, plus by those concerned with terrestrial environment descriptions for the major test ranges within the United States.

Johnson, Dale↗

Guidebook for the Design and Analysis of a NASA Standard Nondestructive Evaluation (NDE) Probability of Detection (POD) Study

Purpose: This document provides guidance on the design and analysis of a NASA Standard nondestructive evaluation (NDE) probability of detection (POD) study. A Standard NDE flaw size is considered to be conservative such that most inspectors, trained and certified in the specific NDE method, are expected to provide at least 90/95 POD for that flaw size to inspect fracture-critical hardware. Scope: This document is specifically applicable to NASA Technical Standards that establish the NDE requirements for any NASA system or component, flight or ground, where fracture control and a quantitative demonstration of POD is a requirement, including NASA-STD-5009B, Nondestructive Evaluation Requirements for Fracture-Critical Metallic Components, and NASA-STD-5019A,Fracture Control Requirements for Spaceflight Hardware.

Probability of Detection↗

Adopting an Objectives-Driven Assurance Case Approach for Achieving Space Flight Mission Planetary Protection Objectives

Traditionally, NASA has utilized prescriptive technical and process requirements to ensure safety and mission assurance performance objectives for space flight missions are achieved. While prescriptive re-quirements may be easier to communicate and manage throughout the systems engineering process, the highly-constrained nature of prescriptive requirements can limit the ability to take advantage of cost-saving opportunities and offer limited ability to explore other options or alternative designs, processes, and methods. It can also be difficult to develop prescriptive requirements for objectives that are prob-abilistic in nature or that cannot be satisfied by direct verification. In contrast, the development of an assurance case allows for a compelling, comprehensible, and valid argument to be developed with support-ing evidence that shows safety and mission assurance objectives have been satisfied. Analogous to how patent applications are constructed for inventions, an assurance case has a high-level claim of meeting a safety and mission assurance objective, followed by a more specific set of sub-claims and technical evidence which supports the claims. The objectives-driven assurance case approach allows for a better understand-ing and exploration of the trade space, more flexibility to balance trades, and the ability to realize and implement technical and process innovations for resource, time, and cost savings. The assurance case is a living case that evolves over the entire program life cycle. Recently, NASA’s Office of Planetary Pro-tection (OPP) has adopted the assurance case approach as an acceptable methodology for demonstrating avoidance of contamination of target solar system bodies explored by NASA space flight missions. This methodology has been incorporated into NASA’s new technical standard for planetary protection and is currently being utilized by the Mars Sample Return campaign for safe sample containment during sample return. This presentation will explore the development and implementation of an assurance case approach in the context of planetary protection, the shift from prescriptive requirements and the ongoing culture change in the technical community, and the support and guidance from NASA’s OPP in adopting the assurance case approach for achieving planetary protection objectives on NASA’s space flight missions.

Elaine Seasly↗

NASA Planetary Protection Program Overview and Update

NASA has an integrated planetary protection strategy that leverages COSPAR Policy guide-lines, workshops, scientific consensus, partnerships and international working groups to develop policy and implementation guidelines. The Oÿce of Safety and Mission Assurance, which in-cludes NASA’s Oÿce of Planetary Protection, depends on these activities to support NASA’s missions in the assurance of crew safety and mission success while protecting the public and planetary environment from harmful contamination. This report will detail the overall planetary protection policy development perspective to sup-port NASA’s upcoming mission opportunities for exploration to include crewed Mars and sam-ple return missions. NASA continues to evolve its strategies, policies, and standards. NASA’s support in the COSPAR workshop series on Refining Planetary Protection Requirements for Crewed Missions to Mars have resulted in a NASA interim directive and paved the way for the development of NASA planetary protection roadmaps. These Agency level roadmaps address technology development and testing required to fill knowledge gaps for developing responsive policy guidelines and quantitative technical standards. In addition to workshops and tech-nology management strategies, NASA is also leveraging the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine’s Committee of Planetary Protection to serve as a source of advice on planetary protection measures. Finally, the report will include how the Oÿce of Safety and Mission Assurance is incorporating planetary protection into existing and new multi-agency partnerships.

Frank Groen↗

Engineering Lessons Learned and Systems Engineering Applications

Systems Engineering is fundamental to good engineering, which in turn depends on the integration and application of engineering lessons learned and technical standards. Thus, good Systems Engineering also depends on systems engineering lessons learned from within the aerospace industry being documented and applied. About ten percent of the engineering lessons learned documented in the NASA Lessons Learned Information System are directly related to Systems Engineering. A key issue associated with lessons learned datasets is the communication and incorporation of this information into engineering processes. Systems Engineering has been defined (EINIS-632) as "an interdisciplinary approach encompassing the entire technical effort to evolve and verify an integrated and life-cycle balanced set of system people, product, and process solutions that satisfy customer needs". Designing reliable space-based systems has always been a goal for NASA, and many painful lessons have been learned along the way. One of the continuing functions of a system engineer is to compile development and operations "lessons learned" documents and ensure their integration into future systems development activities. They can produce insights and information for risk identification identification and characterization. on a new project. Lessons learned files from previous projects are especially valuable in risk

Gill, Paul S.↗

UID.. .Now That's Gonna Leave A Mark

Since 1975 bar codes on products at the retail counter have been accepted as the standard for entering product identity for price determination. Since the beginning of the 21st century, the Data Matrix symbol has become accepted as the bar code format that is marked directly on a part, assembly or product that is durable enough to identify that item for its lifetime. NASA began the studies for direct part marking Data Matrix symbols on parts during the Return to Flight activities after the Challenger Accident. Over the 20 year period that has elapsed since Challenger, a mountain of studies, analyses and focused problem solutions developed by and for NASA have brought about world changing results. NASA Technical Standard 6002 and NASA Handbook 6003 for Direct Part Marking Data Matrix Symbols on Aerospace Parts have formed the basis for most other standards on part marking internationally. NASA and its commercial partners have developed numerous products and methods that addressed the difficulties of collecting part identification in aerospace operations. These products enabled the marking of Data Matrix symbols in virtually every situation and the reading of symbols at great distances, severe angles, under paint and in the dark without a light. Even unmarkable delicate parts now have a process to apply a chemical mixture, recently trademarked as Nanocodes, that can be converted to Data Matrix information through software. The accompanying intellectual property is protected by ten patents, several of which are licensed. Direct marking Data Matrix on NASA parts dramatically decreases data entry errors and the number of parts that go through their life cycle marked, two major threats to sound configuration management and flight safety. NASA is said to only have people and stuff with information connecting them. Data Matrix is one of the most significant improvements since Challenger to the safety and reliability of that connection.

Schramm, Fred↗

NASA Technologies for Product Identification

Since 1975 bar codes on products at the retail counter have been accepted as the standard for entering product identity for price determination. Since the beginning of the 21st century, the Data Matrix symbol has become accepted as the bar code format that is marked directly on a part, assembly or product that is durable enough to identify that item for its lifetime. NASA began the studies for direct part marking Data Matrix symbols on parts during the Return to Flight activities after the Challenger Accident. Over the 20 year period that has elapsed since Challenger, a mountain of studies, analyses and focused problem solutions developed by and for NASA have brought about world changing results. NASA Technical Standard 6002 and NASA Handbook 6003 for Direct Part Marking Data Matrix Symbols on Aerospace Parts have formed the basis for most other standards on part marking internationally. NASA and its commercial partners have developed numerous products and methods that addressed the difficulties of collecting part identification in aerospace operations. These products enabled the marking of Data Matrix symbols in virtually every situation and the reading of symbols at great distances, severe angles, under paint and in the dark without a light. Even unmarkable delicate parts now have a process to apply a chemical mixture called NanocodesTM that can be converted to a Data Matrix. The accompanying intellectual property is protected by 10 patents, several of which are licensed. Direct marking Data Matrix on NASA parts virtually eliminates data entry errors and the number of parts that go through their life cycle unmarked, two major threats to sound configuration management and flight safety. NASA is said to only have people and stuff with information connecting them. Data Matrix is one of the most significant improvements since Challenger to the safety and reliability of that connection. This presentation highlights the accomplishments of NASA in its efforts to develop technologies for automatic identification, its efforts to implement them and its vision on their role in space.

Schramm, Fred, Jr.↗

UID...Now That's Gonna Leave A Mark

Since 1975 bar codes on products at the retail counter have been accepted as the standard for entering product identity for price determination. Since the beginning of the 21st century, the Data Matrix symbol has become accepted as the bar code format that is marked directly on a part, assembly or product that is durable enough to identify that item for its lifetime. NASA began the studies for direct part marking Data Matrix symbols on parts during the Return to Flight activities after the Challenger Accident. Over the 20 year period that has elapsed since Challenger, a mountain of studies, analyses and focused problem solutions developed by and for NASA have brought about world changing results. NASA Technical Standard 6002 and NASA Handbook 6003 for Direct Part Marking Data Matrix Symbols on Aerospace Parts have formed the basis for most other standards on part marking internationally. NASA and its commercial partners have developed numerous products and methods that addressed the difficulties of collecting part identification in aerospace operations. These products enabled the marking of Data Matrix symbols in virtually every situation and the reading of symbols at great distances, severe angles, under paint and in the dark without a light. Even unmarkable delicate parts now have a process to apply a chemical mixture, recently trademarked as Nanocodes, that can be converted to Data Matrix information through software. The accompanying intellectual property is protected by ten patents, several of which are licensed. Direct marking Data Matrix on NASA parts dramatically decreases data entry errors and the number ofparts that go through their life cycle unmarked, two major threats to sound configuration management and flight safety. NASA is said to only have people and stuff with information connecting them. Data Matrix is one of the most significant improvements since Challenger to the safety and reliability of that connection.

Schramm, Harry F., Jr.↗

UID...Now That's Gonna Leave a Mark

Since 1975 bar codes on products at the retail counter have been accepted as the standard for entering product identity for price determination. Since the beginning of the 21st century, the Data Matrix symbol has become accepted as the bar code format that is marked directly on a part, assembly or product that is durable enough to identify that item for its lifetime. NASA began the studies for direct part marking Data Matrix symbols on parts during the Return to Flight activities after the Challenger Accident. Over the 20 year period that has elapsed since Challenger, a mountain of studies, analyses and focused problem solutions developed by and for NASA have brought about world changing results. NASA Technical Standard 6002 and NASA Handbook 6003 for Direct Part Marking Data Matrix Symbols on Aerospace Parts have formed the basis for most other standards on part marking internationally. NASA and its commercial partners have developed numerous products and methods that addressed the difficulties of collecting part identification in aerospace operations. These products enabled the marking of Data Matrix symbols in virtually every situation and the reading of symbols at great distances, severe angles, under paint and in the dark without a light. Even unmarkable delicate parts now have a process to apply a chemical mixture, recently trademarked as Nanocodes, that can be converted to Data Matrix information through software. The accompanying intellectual property is protected by ten patents, several of which are licensed. Direct marking Data Matrix on NASA parts dramatically decreases data entry errors and the number of parts that go through their life cycle unmarked, two major threats to sound configuration management and flight safety. NASA is said to only have people and stuff with information connecting them. Data Matrix is one of the most significant improvements since Challenger to the safety and reliability of that connection.

Schramm, Harry F.↗