SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Team software development”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 595 records · Page 33

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1982

Mission Control Center operations for the Space Transportation System

Orbital flight tests of the Space Shuttle Program involved three types of activities, including classic flight testing of the vehicle hardware and software, operational procedures evaluation and development, and performance of payload mission operations. This combination of activities required a capability of the Mission Control Center (MCC) to provide thorough support to the Orbiter and its crew across a broad spectrum of activities. Attention is given to MCC organization, the general functions performed by the MCC teams, a flight support description, the motivation for a change in MCC operations, support elements, orbit phase functions, and dynamic flight phase functions. It is pointed out that the MCC facilities for the operational mode of support will not be fully implemented until 1984.

Frank, M. P.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Mitigating Motion Base Safety Issues: The NASA LaRC CMF Implementation

The NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC), Cockpit Motion Facility (CMF) motion base design has taken advantage of inherent hydraulic characteristics to implement safety features using hardware solutions only. Motion system safety has always been a concern and its implementation is addressed differently by each organization. Some approaches rely heavily on software safety features. Software which performs safety functions is subject to more scrutiny making its approval, modification, and development time consuming and expensive. The NASA LaRC's CMF motion system is used for research and, as such, requires that the software be updated or modified frequently. The CMF's customers need the ability to update the simulation software frequently without the associated cost incurred with safety critical software. This paper describes the CMF engineering team's approach to achieving motion base safety by designing and implementing all safety features in hardware, resulting in applications software (including motion cueing and actuator dynamic control) being completely independent of the safety devices. This allows the CMF safety systems to remain intact and unaffected by frequent research system modifications.

Bryant, Richard B., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Verifying Architectural Design Rules of the Flight Software Product Line

This paper presents experiences of verifying architectural design rules of the NASA Core Flight Software (CFS) product line implementation. The goal of the verification is to check whether the implementation is consistent with the CFS architectural rules derived from the developer's guide. The results indicate that consistency checking helps a) identifying architecturally significant deviations that were eluded during code reviews, b) clarifying the design rules to the team, and c) assessing the overall implementation quality. Furthermore, it helps connecting business goals to architectural principles, and to the implementation. This paper is the first step in the definition of a method for analyzing and evaluating product line implementations from an architecture-centric perspective.

Ganesan, Dharmalingam↗

NASA NTRS2014

Avionics Architectures for Exploration: Ongoing Efforts in Human Spaceflight

The field of Avionics is advancing far more rapidly in terrestrial applications than in spaceflight applications. Spaceflight Avionics are not keeping pace with expectations set by terrestrial experience, nor are they keeping pace with the need for increasingly complex automation and crew interfaces as we move beyond Low Earth Orbit. NASA must take advantage of the strides being made by both space-related and terrestrial industries to drive our development and sustaining costs down. This paper describes ongoing efforts by the Avionics Architectures for Exploration (AAE) project chartered by NASA's Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Program to evaluate new avionic architectures and technologies, provide objective comparisons of them, and mature selected technologies for flight and for use by other AES projects. The AAE project team includes members from most NASA centers, and from industry. It is our intent to develop a common core avionic system that has standard capabilities and interfaces, and contains the basic elements and functionality needed for any spacecraft. This common core will be scalable and tailored to specific missions. It will incorporate hardware and software from multiple vendors, and be upgradeable in order to infuse incremental capabilities and new technologies. It will maximize the use of reconfigurable open source software (e.g., Goddard Space Flight Center's (GSFC's) Core Flight Software (CFS)). Our long-term focus is on improving functionality, reliability, and autonomy, while reducing size, weight, and power. Where possible, we will leverage terrestrial commercial capabilities to drive down development and sustaining costs. We will select promising technologies for evaluation, compare them in an objective manner, and mature them to be available for future programs. The remainder of this paper describes our approach, technical areas of emphasis, integrated test experience and results as of mid-2014, and future plans. As a part of the AES Program, we are encouraged to set aggressive goals and fall short if necessary, rather than to set our sights too low. We are also asked to emphasize providing our personnel with hands-on experience in development, integration, and testing. That we have embraced both of these philosophies will be evident in the descriptions below.

Goforth, Montgomery B.↗

NASA NTRS2017

The Evolution of Exercise Hardware on ISS: Past, Present, and Future

During 16 years in low-Earth orbit, the suite of exercise hardware aboard the International Space Station (ISS) has matured significantly. Today, the countermeasure system supports an array of physical-training protocols and serves as an extensive research platform. Future hardware designs are required to have smaller operational envelopes and must also mitigate known physiologic issues observed in long-duration spaceflight. Taking lessons learned from the long history of space exercise will be important to successful development and implementation of future, compact exercise hardware. The evolution of exercise hardware as deployed on the ISS has implications for future exercise hardware and operations. Key lessons learned from the early days of ISS have helped to: 1. Enhance hardware performance (increased speed and loads). 2. Mature software interfaces. 3. Compare inflight exercise workloads to pre-, in-, and post-flight musculoskeletal and aerobic conditions. 4. Improve exercise comfort. 5. Develop complimentary hardware for research and operations. Current ISS exercise hardware includes both custom and commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) hardware. Benefits and challenges to this approach have prepared engineering teams to take a hybrid approach when designing and implementing future exercise hardware. Significant effort has gone into consideration of hardware instrumentation and wearable devices that provide important data to monitor crew health and performance.

Buxton, R. E.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Design and Development of Responder: a Notification-Acknowledgment Android OS Phone Application

This paper discusses the design and development of the Android phone application Responder and how it assists Flight Operation Team (FOT) members in handling alerts from a Short Message Service (SMS) text message and email based notification system. The FOT needed a simplified and more powerful tool for receiving, storing, and acknowledging notifications sent from the ground systems automated notification software called Attention! (Registered Trademark). The previous system was to rely on a text message application that comes on a phone. This way was slow, inefficient, and did a poor job of keeping FOT members informed on the state of a situation when multiple notifications are being sent out by Attention! (Registered Trademark). Responder is designed to provide easier viewing and acknowledging of multiple messages. It gives the user a quick look at all recently received messages in an organized and clean manner that prevents notifications from being lost during a large burst of messages. It makes it easier to find and review old messages received and Responder was designed to give the user more flexibility in setting up how and what alerts will notify them when they are received by the phone. Since the implementation of Responder the FOT members are more informed and are able to focus more on problem solving the reason a notification was received then trying to keep up with sending cumbersome acknowledgements over text message or email. Responder is only able to receive and send SMS text messages but by using email to text services provided by the cellular carrier it is able to send and receive emails.

notification↗

NASA NTRS2022

Science Autonomy for Ocean Worlds Astrobiology: A Perspective

Astrobiology missions to ocean worlds in our solar system must overcome both scientific and technological challenges due to extreme temperature and radiation conditions, long communication times, and limited bandwidth. While such tools could not replace ground-based analysis by science and engineering teams, machine learning algorithms could enhance the science return of these missions through development of autonomous science capabilities. Examples of science autonomy include onboard data analysis and subsequent instrument optimization, data prioritization (for transmission), and real-time decision-making based on data analysis. Similar advances could be made to develop streamlined data processing software for rapid ground-based analyses. Here we discuss several ways machine learning and autonomy could be used for astrobiology missions, including landing site selection, prioritization and targeting of samples, classification of “features” (e.g., proposed biosignatures) and novelties (uncharacterized, “new” features, which may be of most interest to agnostic astrobiological investigations), and data transmission.

ocean worlds↗

NASA NTRS2018

Development of a Ground Test and Analysis Protocol for NASA's NextSTEP Phase 2 Habitation Concepts

The NASA Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) program is a public-private partnership model that seeks commercial development of deep space exploration capabilities to support human spaceflight missions around and beyond cislunar space. NASA first issued the Phase 1 NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcement to U.S. industries in 2014, which called for innovative cislunar habitation concepts that leveraged commercialization plans for low-Earth orbit. These habitats will be part of the Deep Space Gateway (DSG), the cislunar space station planned by NASA for construction in the 2020s. In 2016, Phase 2 of the NextSTEP program selected five commercial partners to develop ground prototypes. A team of NASA research engineers and subject matter experts (SMEs) have been tasked with developing the ground-test protocol that will serve as the primary means by which these Phase 2 prototypes will be evaluated. Since 2008, this core test team has successfully conducted multiple spaceflight analog mission evaluations utilizing a consistent set of operational tools, methods, and metrics to enable the iterative development, testing, analysis, and validation of evolving exploration architectures, operations concepts, and vehicle designs. The purpose of implementing a similar evaluation process for the Phase 2 Habitation Concepts is to consistently evaluate different commercial partner ground prototypes to provide data-driven, actionable recommendations for Phase 3. This paper describes the process by which the ground test protocol was developed and the objectives, methods, and metrics by which the NextSTEP Phase 2 Habitation Concepts will be rigorously and systematically evaluated. The protocol has been developed using both a top-down and bottom-up approach. Top-down development began with the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) exploration objectives and ISS Exploration Capability Study Team (IECST) candidate flight objectives. Strategic questions and associated rationales, derived from these candidate architectural objectives, provide the framework by which the ground-test protocol will address the DSG stack elements and configurations, systems and subsystems, and habitation, science, and EVA functions. From these strategic questions, high-level functional requirements for the DSG were drafted and associated ground-test objectives and analysis protocols were established. Bottom-up development incorporated objectives from NASA SMEs in autonomy, avionics and software, communication, environmental control and life support systems, exercise, extravehicular activity, exploration medical operations, guidance navigation and control, human factors and behavioral performance, human factors and habitability, logistics, Mission Control Center operations, power, radiation, robotics, safety and mission assurance, science, simulation, structures, thermal, trash management, and vehicle health. Top-down and bottom-up objectives were integrated to form overall functional requirements - ground-test objectives and analysis mapping. From this mapping, ground-test objectives were organized into those that will be evaluated through inspection, demonstration, analysis, subsystem standalone testing, and human-in-the-loop (HITL) testing. For the HITL tests, mission-like timelines, procedures, and flight rules have been developed to directly meet ground test objectives and evaluate specific functional requirements. Data collected from these assessments will be analyzed to determine the acceptability of habitation element configurations and the combinations of capabilities that will result in the best habitation platform to be recommended by the test team for Phase 3.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗

NASA NTRS1994

Communication Research in Aviation and Space Operations: Symptoms and Strategies of Crew Coordination

The day-to-day operators of today's aerospace systems work under increasing pressures to accomplish more with less. They work in operational systems which are complex, technology-based, and high-risk; in which incidents and accidents have far-reaching and costly consequences. For these and other reasons, there is concern that the safety net formerly built upon redundant systems and abundant resources may become overburdened. Although we know that human ingenuity can overcome incredible odds, human nature can also fail in unpredictable ways. Over the last 20 years, a large percentage of aviation accidents and incidents have been attributed to human errors rather than hardware or environmental factors alone. A class of errors have been identified which are not due to a lack of individual, technical competencies. Rather, they are due to the failure of teams to utilize readily available resources or information in a timely fashion. These insights began a training revolution in the aviation industry called Cockpit Resource Management, which later became known as Crew Resource Management (CRM) as its concepts and applications extended to teams beyond the flightdeck. Then, as now, communication has been a cornerstone in CRM training since crew coordination and resource management largely resides within information transfer processes--both within flightcrews, and between flightcrews and the ground operations teams that support them. The research I will describe takes its roots in CRM history as we began to study communication processes in order to discover symptoms of crew coordination problems, as well as strategies of effective crew management. On the one hand, communication is often the means or the tool by which team members manage their resources, solve problems, maintain situational awareness and procedural discipline. Conversely, it is the lack of planning and resource management, loss of vigilance and situational awareness, and non-standard communications that are implicated in accidents and incidents. NASA/Ames Crew Factors researchers have been developing a model of effective crew coordination in order to understand the sources of performance breakdowns, and to develop effective solutions and interventions. Because communication is a primary mechanism by which information is received and transmitted, and because it is observable behavior, we focus on these group processes in order to identify patterns of communication that distinguish effective from less effective crew performance. Since a prime objective is to develop training recommendations for enhancing communication skills, we interpret our findings in the context of relevant task and environmental conditions, role and procedural constraints, and the normal real-time parameters of flight operations. Another research objective is to consider how communication and coordination can be enhanced through design. For example, flight deck and hardware design as well as procedural and software design may greatly influence the efficiency with which crews communicate and coordinate their work. In addition, teams and tasks may be designed, organized, and trained so that team interactions with each other are based upon appropriately shared knowledge, procedures and situation awareness. In short, we are interested in enhancing communication practices through (1) the training of specific communication skills, and (2) the design of equipment, tasks, procedures, and teams that optimize smooth, unambiguous communication processes. Two examples of communication research will be described; one in aviation and one in space operations. The first example is a high-fidelity full mission simulation study which investigates the affect of flightdeck automation on crew coordination and communication (contrasting crew performance in the DC-9 vs. MD88). Additional information is contained in the original extended abstract.

Kanki, Barbara G.↗

NASA NTRS1994

SCOSII: ESA's new generation of mission control systems: The user's perspective

In 1974 ESOC decided to develop a reusable Mission Control System infrastructure for ESA's missions operated under its responsibility. This triggered a long and successful product development line, which started with the Multi Mission Support System (MSSS) which entered in service in 1977 and is still being used today by the MARECS and ECS missions; it was followed in 1989 by a second generation of systems known as SCOS-I, which was/is used by the Hipparcos, ERS-1 and EURECA missions and will continue to support all future ESCO controlled missions until approximately 1995. In the meantime the increasing complexity of future missions together with the emergence of new hardware and software technologies have led ESOC to go for the development of a third generation of control systems, SCOSII, which will support their future missions up to at least the middle of the next decade. The objective of the paper is to present the characteristics of the SCOSII system from the perspective of the mission control team; i.e. it will concentrate on the improvements and advances in the performance, functionality and work efficiency of the system.

Kaufeler, P.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Multidisciplinary Optimization Branch Experience Using iSIGHT Software

The Multidisciplinary Optimization (MDO) Branch at NASA Langley is investigating frameworks for supporting multidisciplinary analysis and optimization research. A framework provides software and system services to integrate computational tasks and allows the researcher to concentrate more on the application and less on the programming details. A framework also provides a common working environment and a full range of optimization tools, and so increases the productivity of multidisciplinary research teams. Finally, a framework enables staff members to develop applications for use by disciplinary experts in other organizations. This year, the MDO Branch has gained experience with the iSIGHT framework. This paper describes experiences with four aerospace applications, including: (1) reusable launch vehicle sizing, (2) aerospike nozzle design, (3) low-noise rotorcraft trajectories, and (4) acoustic liner design. Brief overviews of each problem are provided, including the number and type of disciplinary codes and computation time estimates. In addition, the optimization methods, objective functions, design variables, and constraints are described for each problem. For each case, discussions on the advantages and disadvantages of using the iSIGHT framework are provided as well as notes on the ease of use of various advanced features and suggestions for areas of improvement.

Padula, S. L.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Automated Commanding of the SMAP Spacecraft Enables Efficient, Reliable, and Responsive Operations

The Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) mission developed and deployed a system to autonomously handle most routine commanding of the observatory. This system of ground software is able to build commands, validate them, and radiate the commands to the spacecraft, all without human interaction. In the case of an off -nominal scenario, the system will abort gracefully and notify the mission operations team of the problem. The system was phased into operations during the first three months of the SMAP mission and handles over 90% of the weekly commanding of the vehicle. The gradual introduction of the automation in flight, along with an extensive test campaign, was instrumental in the success of the software. The automation has enabled substantial efficiencies in operations team staffing and has improved reliability by removing the potential for human error. The system also allows the SMAP project to be more responsive which has shown significant benefits in areas of data latency and science accuracy.

automation↗

NASA NTRS2017

CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture Design Criteria

BACKGROUND: In preparation for human exploration to Mars, there is a need to define the development and test program that will validate deep space operations and systems. In that context, a Proving Grounds CisLunar habitat spacecraft is being defined as the next step towards this goal. This spacecraft will operate differently from the ISS or other spacecraft in human history. The performance envelope of this spacecraft (mass, volume, power, specifications, etc.) is being defined by the Future Capabilities Study Team. This team has recognized the need for a human-centered approach for the internal architecture of this spacecraft and has commissioned a CisLunar Phase-1 Habitat Internal Architecture Study Team to develop a NASA reference configuration, providing the Agency with a "smart buyer" approach for future acquisition. THE CISLUNAR HABITAT INTERNAL ARCHITECTURE STUDY: Overall, the CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture study will address the most significant questions and risks in the current CisLunar architecture, habitation, and operations concept development. This effort is achieved through definition of design criteria, evaluation criteria and process, design of the CisLunar Habitat Phase-1 internal architecture, and the development and fabrication of internal architecture concepts combined with rigorous and methodical Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) evaluations and testing of the conceptual innovations in a controlled test environment. The vision of the CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture Study is to design, build, and test a CisLunar Phase-1 Habitat Internal Architecture that will be used for habitation (e.g. habitability and human factors) evaluations. The evaluations will mature CisLunar habitat evaluation tools, guidelines, and standards, and will interface with other projects such as the Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Program integrated Power, Avionics, Software (iPAS), and Logistics for integrated human-in-the-loop testing. The mission of the CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture Study is to become a forcing function to establish a common understanding of CisLunar Phase-1 Habitation Internal Architecture design criteria, processes, and tools. The scope of the CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture study is to design, develop, demonstrate, and evaluate a Phase-1 CisLunar Habitat common module internal architecture based on design criteria agreed to by NASA, the International Partners, and Commercial Exploration teams. This task is to define the CisLunar Phase-1 Internal Architecture Government Reference Design, assist NASA in becoming a "smart buyer" for Phase-1 Habitat Concepts, and ultimately to derive standards and requirements from the Internal Architecture Design Process. The first step was to define a Habitat Internal Architecture Design Criteria and create a structured philosophy to be used by design teams as a filter by which critical aspects of consideration would be identified for the purpose of organizing and utilizing interior spaces. With design criteria in place, the team will develop a series of iterative internal architecture concept designs which will be assessed by means of an evaluation criteria and process. These assessments will successively drive and refine the design, leading to the combination and down-selection of design concepts. A single refined reference design configuration will be developed into in a medium-to-high fidelity mockup. A multi-day human-in-the-loop mission test will fully evaluate the reference design and validate its configuration. Lessons learned from the design and evaluation will enable the team to identify appropriate standards for Phase-1 CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture and will enable NASA to develop derived requirements in support of maturing CisLunar Habitation capabilities. This paper will describe the criteria definition process, workshop event, and resulting CisLunar Phase-1 Habitat Internal Architecture Design Criteria.

Jones, R.↗

NASA NTRS1989

Computer aided system engineering for space construction

This viewgraph presentation covers the following topics. Construction activities envisioned for the assembly of large platforms in space (as well as interplanetary spacecraft and bases on extraterrestrial surfaces) require computational tools that exceed the capability of conventional construction management programs. The Center for Space Construction is investigating the requirements for new computational tools and, at the same time, suggesting the expansion of graduate and undergraduate curricula to include proficiency in Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) though design courses and individual or team projects in advanced space systems design. In the center's research, special emphasis is placed on problems of constructability and of the interruptability of planned activity sequences to be carried out by crews operating under hostile environmental conditions. The departure point for the planned work is the acquisition of the MCAE I-DEAS software, developed by the Structural Dynamics Research Corporation (SDRC), and its expansion to the level of capability denoted by the acronym IDEAS**2 currently used for configuration maintenance on Space Station Freedom. In addition to improving proficiency in the use of I-DEAS and IDEAS**2, it is contemplated that new software modules will be developed to expand the architecture of IDEAS**2. Such modules will deal with those analyses that require the integration of a space platform's configuration with a breakdown of planned construction activities and with a failure modes analysis to support computer aided system engineering (CASE) applied to space construction.

Racheli, Ugo↗

NASA NTRS2010

A Flight-Calibrated Methodology for Determination of Cassini Thruster On-Times for Reaction Wheel Biases

This paper describes a methodology for accurate and flight-calibrated determination of the on-times of the Cassini spacecraft Reaction Control System (RCS) thrusters, without any form of dynamic simulation, for the reaction wheel biases. The hydrazine usage and the delta V vector in body frame are also computed from the respective thruster on-times. The Cassini spacecraft, the largest and most complex interplanetary spacecraft ever built, continues to undertake ambitious and unique scientific observations of planet Saturn, Titan, Enceladus, and other moons of Saturn. In order to maintain a stable attitude during the course of its mission, this three-axis stabilized spacecraft uses two different control systems: the RCS and the reaction wheel assembly control system. The RCS is used to execute a commanded spacecraft slew, to maintain three-axis attitude control, control spacecraft's attitude while performing science observations with coarse pointing requirements, e.g. during targeted low-altitude Titan and Enceladus flybys, bias the momentum of reaction wheels, and to perform RCS-based orbit trim maneuvers. The use of RCS often imparts undesired delta V on the spacecraft. The Cassini navigation team requires accurate predictions of the delta V in spacecraft coordinates and inertial frame resulting from slews using RCS thrusters and more importantly from reaction wheel bias events. It is crucial for the Cassini spacecraft attitude control and navigation teams to be able to, quickly but accurately, predict the hydrazine usage and delta V for various reaction wheel bias events without actually having to spend time and resources simulating the event in flight software-based dynamic simulation or hardware-in-the-loop simulation environments. The methodology described in this paper, and the ground software developed thereof, are designed to provide just that. This methodology assumes a priori knowledge of thrust magnitudes and thruster pulse rise and tail-off time constants for eight individual attitude control thrusters, the spacecraft's wet mass and its center of mass location, and a few other key parameters.

Earth Mean Equatorial↗

NASA NTRS2002

Virtual Engineering and Science Team - Reusable Autonomy for Spacecraft Subsystems

In this paper we address the design, development, and evaluation of the Virtual Engineering and Science Team (VEST) tool - a revolutionary way to achieve onboard subsystem/instrument autonomy. VEST directly addresses the technology needed for advanced autonomy enablers for spacecraft subsystems. It will significantly support the efficient and cost effective realization of on-board autonomy and contribute directly to realizing the concept of an intelligent autonomous spacecraft. VEST will support the evolution of a subsystem/instrument model that is probably correct and from that model the automatic generation of the code needed to support the autonomous operation of what was modeled. VEST will directly support the integration of the efforts of engineers, scientists, and software technologists. This integration of efforts will be a significant advancement over the way things are currently accomplished. The model, developed through the use of VEST, will be the basis for the physical construction of the subsystem/instrument and the generated code will support its autonomous operation once in space. The close coupling between the model and the code, in the same tool environment, will help ensure that correct and reliable operational control of the subsystem/instrument is achieved.VEST will provide a thoroughly modern interface that will allow users to easily and intuitively input subsystem/instrument requirements and visually get back the system's reaction to the correctness and compatibility of the inputs as the model evolves. User interface/interaction, logic, theorem proving, rule-based and model-based reasoning, and automatic code generation are some of the basic technologies that will be brought into play in realizing VEST.

Bailin, Sidney C.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Building Capacity for Policy-makers in a Virtual Setting: Providing Tools to Analyze Wildfire Smoke Plumes and Their Impacts

The NASA DEVELOP Program conducted 10-week long feasibility projects in a remote work setting, including partnering with The Nature Conservancy’s Washington Chapter and the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency to investigate wildfire smoke from 2000 - 2020 in the Pacific Northwest using satellite-derived data. The team engaged with platforms for collaboration both internally with NASA affiliates and externally with community organizations. Working from multiple states, the team members used a variety of software including Google Meet, Microsoft Teams, and Google Earth Engine to foster communication and work with data in a shared virtual environment. Throughout the project, the team learned that executing the project in a distanced work setting made it easier to reach out to scientists across the country for expertise and guidance. To study changes in air quality resulting from wildfire smoke, the team utilized data from NASA’s Fire Information from Resource Management System (FIRMS) and the ESA’s Sentinel-5 TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI). The team created a Google Earth Engine web-based tool, “Plume Hazards and Observations of Emissions by Navigating an Interactive eXplorer” (PHOENIX), to visualize changes in pollutants and aerosol optical depth after fire events. The potential relationship between plume height and fire radiative power was evaluated by using NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) aboard Aqua and Terra satellites and NASA’s Multi-angle Imaging SpectroRadiometer (MISR) aboard Terra with the MISR INteractive eXplorer (MINX). The PHOENIX smoke assessment tool and science communication infographics will be shared electronically with the partner organizations. Furthermore, the team introduced the partners to MINX and will provide a tailored tutorial that included a recorded video and a written component with a live virtual workshop. These resources build capacity for further research and education on wildfire smoke and air quality within communities.

NASA DEVELOP↗

NASA NTRS1990

Next generation VLSI tools

This paper focuses on what features would be useful in VLSI Computer Aided Design Tools and Systems to be used in the next five to ten years. Examples of current design tasks will be used to emphasize the areas where new or expanded VLSI CAD tools are needed. To provide a basis for projecting the future of VLSI tools, a brief history of the evolution of VLSI design software and hardware platforms is presented. The role of design methodology is considered with respect to the anticipated scale of future VLSI design projects. Future requirements of design verification and manufacturing testing are projected based on the challenge of surviving in a competitive market. Examples of VLSI tools reflect the author's involvement on VLSI design teams developing integrated circuits for disk memory and other computer peripherals for the last eight years.

Gibson, J.↗