Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Project Execution Plan”

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 667 records · Page 37
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2014

Cost Analysis In A Multi-Mission Operations Environment

Spacecraft control centers have evolved from dedicated, single-mission or single missiontype support to multi-mission, service-oriented support for operating a variety of mission types. At the same time, available money for projects is shrinking and competition for new missions is increasing. These factors drive the need for an accurate and flexible model to support estimating service costs for new or extended missions; the cost model in turn drives the need for an accurate and efficient approach to service cost analysis. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) provides operations services to a variety of customers around the world. HOSC customers range from launch vehicle test flights; to International Space Station (ISS) payloads; to small, short duration missions; and has included long duration flagship missions. The HOSC recently completed a detailed analysis of service costs as part of the development of a complete service cost model. The cost analysis process required the team to address a number of issues. One of the primary issues involves the difficulty of reverse engineering individual mission costs in a highly efficient multimission environment, along with a related issue of the value of detailed metrics or data to the cost model versus the cost of obtaining accurate data. Another concern is the difficulty of balancing costs between missions of different types and size and extrapolating costs to different mission types. The cost analysis also had to address issues relating to providing shared, cloud-like services in a government environment, and then assigning an uncertainty or risk factor to cost estimates that are based on current technology, but will be executed using future technology. Finally the cost analysis needed to consider how to validate the resulting cost models taking into account the non-homogeneous nature of the available cost data and the decreasing flight rate. This paper presents the issues encountered during the HOSC cost analysis process, and the associated lessons learned. These lessons can be used when planning for a new multi-mission operations center or in the transformation from a dedicated control center to multi-center operations, as an aid in defining processes that support future cost analysis and estimation. The lessons can also be used by mature serviceoriented, multi-mission control centers to streamline or refine their cost analysis process.

Newhouse, M.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Strategic Deconfliction Performance: Results and Analysis from the NASA UTM Technical Capability Level 4 Demonstration

Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) refers to the service-based, cooperative approach to the management of small UAS in the National Airspace System that is safe, scalable, and fair. UTM provides the means to manage the airspace in a complementary manner that does not burden the current air traffic control workforce or infrastructure but allows the Air Navigation Service Provider to maintain its regulatory and operational authority of the airspace. A key feature of UTM is the ability to provide operators the means to strategically deconflict operations from others in the airspace through the digital exchange of information via supporting services. Through this approach, the four-dimensional operation volumes that encompass the intent of operators in a given area are discoverable and can be used for airspace awareness as well as planning conflict free operations that account for and avoid other operations. In certain cases, it is also possible to negotiate volume intersections for shared airspace use without the need to re-plan. In the NASA UTM concept, strategic deconfliction is the first layer of three in the overall conflict management model. The three layers of the conflict management model, which follow the International Civil Aviation Organization’s scheme [ICAO 2005] are: strategic conflict management, separate provision, and collision avoidance. In UTM, the strategic layer mostly occurs prior to departure, but is applicable to en route operations with sufficient planning horizon. The initial requirements for a strategic deconfliction capability within UTM are defined in a NASA publication [Rios 2018]. Within the concept and implementation of service-provided strategic deconfliction is the notion of priority. It is understood that there are instances in which an operation requires a priority designation within the UTM system and special handling accordingly to provide situation awareness and facilitate appropriate responses from other airspace users. Examples of situations requiring priority designation include: when an operator declares an emergency due to problems with the vehicle or its immediate surroundings; operations that are in support of certain organizations (e.g., public safety and first responders); or special missions that also require priority use of airspace (e.g., emergency medical deliveries). UAS Volume Reservations (UVRs) also relate to the topic of priority in the sense that the airspace that the volume encompasses has a different status or classification in which unassociated operations must vacate if inside, or avoid if outside, through strategic deconfliction with the volume. Operations that are specially permitted to access the UVR area are typically assigned priority status given the nature of their mission and their associated credentials. The ability to perform strategic deconfliction, handle certain operations with a priority distinction, and establish UVRs that are communicated throughout the UTM system, is predicated on an architecture that has been established through an evolutionary process in response to close collaboration with stakeholders from government and industry. Another important and influential aspect of these capabilities and architecture is the live, distributed flight tests that have been conducted across the Technical Capability Levels (TCLs) that culminated with a set of complex tests performed as part of TCL4 [Rios 2020]. The TCL4 flight test involved two FAA-designated UAS test sites building teams to collaborate with NASA’s UTM Project on the execution of several detailed, small UAS scenarios in urban environments.

conflict management↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Efforts to Commercialize Communications Services for Mission in Near-Earth Space

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN)Program enables high speed, robust, secure and cost-effective space communications and navigation services to current and future science and exploration missions. Consistent with National Space Policy, NASA is pursuing the use of demonstrated commercial services for all its future near-Earth requirements through a flexible, multi-provider approach that minimizes risks to the user missions and ensures costs to user missions are reasonable. Progress toward this goal is advancing in multiple key areas including direct to Earth (DTE), space-based relay, technology investments, required spectrum regulatory changes and mission engagement and infusion. The transition to commercial DTE services is already underway, with a target for transition by 2024. The primary functions to execute SCaN’s DTE strategy include increasing commercial service allocations by leveraging current commercial network providers and enabling seamless onboarding of additional providers into the network. Furthermore, moving away from government DTE services will allow operational costs to be optimized. A more gradual approach is planned for the transition to commercial space-based relay services to allow for demonstration and operationalization of commercial services for future users by 2030. In June of 2022, six American SATCOM vendors were awarded a combined $278.5 million through Funded Space Act Agreements (FSAAs) for the first cycle of demonstration and validation activities. The end-to-end service capabilities being targeted are based on existing NASA mission operational needs. Accordingly, each company has proposed a technical approach to lower costs, increase flexibility, and improve performance for a broad range of missions. Successful user mission transition to commercial services, both DTE and space-based relay, are dependent on the technologies and capabilities that address gaps in commercial capability. NASA is investing in technology development and pursuing a new strategic approach to the creation or adoption of space communications standards to move the agency toward a commercial paradigm. Wideband and multi-lingual user terminals are being developed to bridge differences in industry services. Building on ground demonstrations completed in 2021, the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab (APL) will be flight testing a multi-lingual wideband terminal (payload) and demonstrating connectivity to both government and commercial relay services. NASA holds a leadership role in multiple civil space standards bodies and international coordination groups to ensure that standards supporting interoperability are developed with defined functions, interfaces, and performance. However, to successfully meet commercialization objectives, NASA seeks to collaborate with industry, and as applicable adopt or adapt to commercially defined standards. As such, NASA joined the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) as an official member in 2021 to advocate for the inclusion of space missions as a unique user segment in future 5G non-terrestrial networks, and to better understand the scope of 3GPP releases and implications for space users. Further, engagement in Spectrum regulatory bodies is being undertaken to augment existing space-Earth and inter-satellite frequency allocations available for both government and commercial space systems. This paper addresses the recent progress toward NASA’s commercial space communications transition objectives and how key challenges are being navigated.

Gregory W Heckler↗
NASA NTRS2014

Cost Analysis in a Multi-Mission Operations Environment

Spacecraft control centers have evolved from dedicated, single-mission or single mission-type support to multi-mission, service-oriented support for operating a variety of mission types. At the same time, available money for projects is shrinking and competition for new missions is increasing. These factors drive the need for an accurate and flexible model to support estimating service costs for new or extended missions; the cost model in turn drives the need for an accurate and efficient approach to service cost analysis. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) provides operations services to a variety of customers around the world. HOSC customers range from launch vehicle test flights; to International Space Station (ISS) payloads; to small, short duration missions; and has included long duration flagship missions. The HOSC recently completed a detailed analysis of service costs as part of the development of a complete service cost model. The cost analysis process required the team to address a number of issues. One of the primary issues involves the difficulty of reverse engineering individual mission costs in a highly efficient multi-mission environment, along with a related issue of the value of detailed metrics or data to the cost model versus the cost of obtaining accurate data. Another concern is the difficulty of balancing costs between missions of different types and size and extrapolating costs to different mission types. The cost analysis also had to address issues relating to providing shared, cloud-like services in a government environment, and then assigning an uncertainty or risk factor to cost estimates that are based on current technology, but will be executed using future technology. Finally the cost analysis needed to consider how to validate the resulting cost models taking into account the non-homogeneous nature of the available cost data and the decreasing flight rate. This paper presents the issues encountered during the HOSC cost analysis process, and the associated lessons learned. These lessons can be used when planning for a new multi-mission operations center or in the transformation from a dedicated control center to multi-center operations, as an aid in defining processes that support future cost analysis and estimation. The lessons can also be used by mature service-oriented, multi-mission control centers to streamline or refine their cost analysis process.

Felton, Larry↗
NASA NTRS2014

A Flight Research Overview of WSPR, a Pilot Project for Sonic Boom Community Response

In support of NASAs ongoing effort to bring supersonic commercial travel to the public, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center and NASA Langley Research Center, in cooperation with other industry organizations, conducted a flight research experiment to identify the methods, tools, and best practices for a large-scale quiet (or low) sonic boom community human response test. The name of the effort was Waveforms and Sonic boom Perception and Response. Such tests will go towards building a dataset that governing agencies like the Federal Aviation Administration and International Civil Aviation Organization will use to establish regulations for acceptable sound levels of overland sonic booms. Until WSPR, there had never been an effort that studied the response of people in their own homes and performing daily activities to non-traditional, low sonic booms.WSPR was a NASA collaborative effort with several industry partners, in response to a NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate Research Opportunities in Aeronautics. The primary contractor was Wyle. Other partners included Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, Pennsylvania State University, Tetra Tech, and Fidell Associates, Inc.A major objective of the effort included exposing a community with the sonic boom magnitudes and occurrences expected in high-air traffic regions with a network of supersonic commercial aircraft in place. Low-level sonic booms designed to simulate those produced by the next generation of commercial supersonic aircraft were generated over a small residential community. The sonic boom footprint was recorded with an autonomous wireless microphone array that spanned the entire community. Human response data was collected using multiple survey methods. The research focused on essential elements of community response testing including subject recruitment, survey methods, instrumentation systems, flight planning and operations, and data analysis methods.This paper focuses on NASAs role in the efforts logistics and operations including human response subject recruitment, the operational processes involved in implementing the surveys throughout the community, instrumentation systems, logistics, flight planning, and flight operations. Findings discussed in this paper include critical lessons learned in all of those areas. The paper also discusses flight operations results. Analysis of the accuracy and repeatability of planning and executing the unique aircraft maneuver used to generate low sonic booms concluded that the sonic booms had overpressures within 0.15 pounds-per-square-feet of the planned values for 76 of t he attempts. Similarly, 90 of the attempts to generate low sonic booms within the community were successful.

sonic booms↗
NASA NTRS2025

Provider of Services for Urban Air Mobility (PSU) Prototype Simulation (X5) Final Report

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) is a new air transportation service concept to carry passengers or cargo in metropolitan areas, leveraged by innovative aircraft and air traffic automation technologies. NASA has conducted a series of simulations, called the X-series simulation, to evaluate the UAM concept of operations and support the development of airspace procedures and services for UAM operations. The simulation called “X5” was conducted in 2023 to test a Provider of Services for UAM (PSU) prototype developed by NASA for UAM flight planning, strategic conflict management support, and data exchange between UAM operators. In this simulation, two strategic conflict management capabilities, Demand-Capacity Balancing and Sequencing and Scheduling, were further investigated. This document describes the UAM system architecture modeled, the X5 simulation environment to be executed (e.g., traffic scenario and UAM airspace construct), and the strategic conflict management processes developed and evaluated in this study. Then, the simulation results are provided using several system performance metrics, such as the number of operations planned and activated, demand-capacity imbalances detected and resolved, and pre-departure delays. Based on these metrics, the test findings and lessons learned from this simulation are discussed. NASA developed a PSU prototype as part of a reference implementation of UAM system architecture and evolved strategic conflict management capabilities for UAM operations from the previous collaborative simulations with industry partners. Below is the summary of the achievements: - Aligned NASA’s UAM reference architecture with the FAA’s UAM ConOps notional architecture - Extended UAM airspace management capabilities to include 1) Demand-Capacity Balancing (DCB) to ensure operators coordinate planned usage of shared vertiports, and 2) Sequencing and Scheduling (S&S) at UAM corridor entry and exit points to help facilitate an orderly flow of traffic - Defined the PSU information exchange APIs and requirements towards informing industry standards - Developed and tested a NASA PSU prototype as reference implementation to validate the requirements and APIs - Developed a prototype service connecting NASA’s PSU and the FAA system for testing future PSU-ATM interface requirements - Tested NASA-developed assumptions for UAM operations such as airspace design, procedures, vehicle performance, and strategic conflict management methods to inform future Cooperative Operating Practices (COPs) development with industry - Evaluated system performance metrics such as number of simultaneous operations and ground delays that can help define system-level requirements. The simulation results showed that the UAM traffic demand could be managed to minimize the needs of tactical separation provision with ground delays assigned by DCB and S&S. These accomplishments and the lessons learned from the PSU Prototype X5 simulation activities will be valuable inputs for the Air Mobility Pathfinders (AMP) project, which is NASA’s new project to create and evaluate a reference architecture for safe, secure, and scalable UAM operations.

Simulation↗
NASA NTRS2000

Situation Awareness and Levels of Automation: Empirical Assessment of Levels of Automation in the Commercial Cockpit

This report has been prepared to closeout a NASA grant to Mississippi State University (MSU) for research into situation awareness (SA) and automation in the advanced commercial aircraft cockpit. The grant was divided into two obligations including $60,000 for the period from May 11, 2000 to December 25, 2000. The information presented in this report summarizes work completed through this obligation. It also details work to be completed with the balance of the current obligation and unobligated funds amounting to $50,043, which are to be granted to North Carolina State University for completion of the research project from July 31, 2000 to May 10, 2001. This research was to involve investigation of a broad spectrum of degrees of automation of complex systems on human-machine performance and SA. The work was to empirically assess the effect of theoretical levels of automation (LOAs) described in a taxonomy developed by Endsley & Kaber (1999) on naive and experienced subject performance and SA in simulated flight tasks. The study was to be conducted in the context of a realistic simulation of aircraft flight control. The objective of this work was to identify LOAs that effectively integrate humans and machines under normal operating conditions and failure modes. In general, the work was to provide insight into the design of automation in the commercial aircraft cockpit. Both laboratory and field investigations were to be conducted. At this point in time, a high-fidelity flight simulator of the McDonald Douglas (MD) 11 aircraft has been completed. The simulator integrates a reconfigurable flight simulator developed by the Georgia Institute of Technology and stand-alone simulations of MD-11 autoflight systems developed at MSU. Use of the simulator has been integrated into a study plan for the laboratory research and it is expected that the simulator will also be used in the field study with actual commercial pilots. In addition to the flight simulator, an electronic version of the Situation Awareness Global Assessment Technique (SAGAT) has been completed for measuring commercial pilot SA in flight tasks. The SAGAT is to be used in both the lab and field studies. Finally, the lab study has been designed and subjects have been recruited for participation in experiments. This study will investigate the effects of five levels of automation, described in Endsley & Kaber's (1999) taxonomy and applied to the MD-11 autoflight system, on private pilot performance and SA in basic flight tasks by using the MD-11 simulator. The field study remains to be planned and executed.

Kaber, David B.↗
NASA NTRS2016

NASA Operational Simulator for Small Satellites: Tools for Software Based Validation and Verification of Small Satellites

The NASA Operational Simulator for Small Satellites (NOS3) is a suite of tools to aid in areas such as software development, integration test (IT), mission operations training, verification and validation (VV), and software systems check-out. NOS3 provides a software development environment, a multi-target build system, an operator interface-ground station, dynamics and environment simulations, and software-based hardware models. NOS3 enables the development of flight software (FSW) early in the project life cycle, when access to hardware is typically not available. For small satellites there are extensive lead times on many of the commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components as well as limited funding for engineering test units (ETU). Considering the difficulty of providing a hardware test-bed to each developer tester, hardware models are modeled based upon characteristic data or manufacturers data sheets for each individual component. The fidelity of each hardware models is such that FSW executes unaware that physical hardware is not present. This allows binaries to be compiled for both the simulation environment, and the flight computer, without changing the FSW source code. For hardware models that provide data dependent on the environment, such as a GPS receiver or magnetometer, an open-source tool from NASA GSFC (42 Spacecraft Simulation) is used to provide the necessary data. The underlying infrastructure used to transfer messages between FSW and the hardware models can also be used to monitor, intercept, and inject messages, which has proven to be beneficial for VV of larger missions such as James Webb Space Telescope (JWST). As hardware is procured, drivers can be added to the environment to enable hardware-in-the-loop (HWIL) testing. When strict time synchronization is not vital, any number of combinations of hardware components and software-based models can be tested. The open-source operator interface used in NOS3 is COSMOS from Ball Aerospace. For testing, plug-ins are implemented in COSMOS to control the NOS3 simulations, while the command and telemetry tools available in COSMOS are used to communicate with FSW. NOS3 is actively being used for FSW development and component testing of the Simulation-to-Flight 1 (STF-1) CubeSat. As NOS3 matures, hardware models have been added for common CubeSat components such as Novatel GPS receivers, ClydeSpace electrical power systems and batteries, ISISpace antenna systems, etc. In the future, NASA IVV plans to distribute NOS3 to other CubeSat developers and release the suite to the open-source community.

Verification↗
DOE OSTI2020

GIS-Based Modeling of Contaminated Soil Volumes at Multiple Sites in the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program - 20149

The remediation of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste (HTRW) sites produces cost-related risks associated with the estimation of contaminated soil or debris volumes. Historical risk-management techniques include cost contingencies to cover volume uncertainties that affect project budgeting and decision-making. The Buffalo District teamed with project partners to lessen volume uncertainty and reduce project risks at multiple HTRW sites managed under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). Historical remedial investigations under FUSRAP commonly identified the presence of radiological material in site media, the associated human health risk, and then areas of remediation. To manage remedial execution and reduce risk, pre-design or remediation-phase sampling essentially 'chased' contamination, which was not conducive to efficient predictive budgeting derived from Feasibility Study (FS) cost analyses. The Buffalo District first optimized their approach to better understand volume uncertainty by utilizing the Argonne National Laboratory's Bayesian Approaches for Adaptive Spatial Sampling (BAASS) software [1]. BAASS processed soft data (e.g., gamma walk-over data) and spatial sampling data to estimate the lateral extent of contaminated soil irrespective of depth (i.e., gross contamination extent) and define areas of contaminant uncertainty. The software performed a binary transformation of contaminant concentrations at all sampling points based upon remedial action goals or a sum of ratios approach (i.e., clean, impacted, or range of impacts in soil). The model produced two-dimensional (horizontal) contaminant probability contours and statistical uncertainty in the sampling coverage and resulting contaminant extents. This method was translated vertically by partitioning the sampling data into depth brackets that produced a stacked representation of contaminant extents and uncertainty in the subsurface (i.e., similar to construction lifts). The results commonly led to a better understanding of project uncertainty and the need for sampling strategies that produce high-confidence soil volumes, which control costs. The BAASS-based delineations were eventually replaced by Empirical Bayesian Kriging (EBK) methods available in ArcGIS Spatial or 3D Analysts [2]. The EBK method calculates contaminant probability zones derived from user-controlled semivariograms of the spatial datasets. The resulting probability zones (e.g., 50% or 80% of contaminant probability) represent the two-dimensional surface delineation of the overall horizontal remedial area, similarly to BAASS. However, unlike BAASS, the vertical sampling data within these probability zones became vertical control points to contour a subterranean surface that connects subsurface points to the land-surface delineations of contamination. The resulting representation of horizontal and vertical impacts within an enclosed envelop (volume) of soil included uncertainty distributions that are used to plan uncertainty-reduction sampling. These data-driven and math-based models of three-dimensional sampling results produced well-bounded remedial volumes for project planning and better uncertainty predictions during project budgeting. The EBK method was applied to several FUSRAP sites managed by the Buffalo District and compared to less rigorously modeled sites previously remediated by the District. The comparison of modeled to actual remediated volumes provide a basis for validating the volume-estimation method. This comparison is important to ensure modeled volumes match physical boundaries of site remediation. FUSRAP sites with denser investigative sampling and lesser volume uncertainty proved useful in remedial planning and contracting. The Buffalo District noted that historical sites with sparser sampling arrays had greater disparity between estimated volumes and final remedial volumes. The benefit achieved over the cost of detailed soil sampling appears positive for FUSRAP projects, especially where impacts vary widely and appear unbounded by investigation-phase sampling. The subsequent Empirical Bayesian Kriging of contamination coupled with vertical contouring for soil estimations reduces uncertainty in soil volumes or indicates where sampling is required to reduce uncertainty, which together optimize remedial planning and budgeting. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Renewable Energy Materials Properties Database: Summary

Renewable energy is providing a growing share of electricity generation in the United States, with generation from utility scale wind and solar increasing by 12% and 29%, respectively, in 2020 (EIA 2021). Installation of new renewable energy facilities requires material inputs that range from common construction materials to specialized, high-performance materials that may have limited availability. This report summarizes the Department of Energy (DOE) Wind Energy Technologies Office (WETO) and DOE Solar Energy Technologies Office (SETO) database of materials used in domestic wind and solar installations. The Energy Act of 2020 directs WETO and SETO to deliver a "comprehensive physical property database of materials for use in [wind and solar] energy technologies, which shall identify the type, quantity, country of origin, source, significant uses, projected availability, and physical properties of materials used in [wind and solar] energy technologies" by no later than September 1, 2022. This report is the summary and directions for use of the Renewable Energy Materials Property Database (REMPD), in response to that direction. The related full text of the Energy Act of 2020 is provided in Appendix A. The focus of the REMPD and this accompanying report is on quantifying the raw and processed materials used in renewable energy technologies. The database contains information on the amount of each material that goes into wind and solar power plants, descriptions of the relevant material properties, and the primary countries of origin for each material. Some materials go through several stages of processing and/or are incorporated into subcomponents that make up the completed energy generation facilities. This report does not analyze supply chains for the production of renewable energy plant components. The Department of Energy has carried out related analysis in response to Executive Order 14017, which directed production of "America's Supply Chains" reports for Wind and Solar. The supply chain reports can be found at https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/Wind%20Supply%20Chain%20Report%20-%20Final%202.25.22.pdf (Wind) and https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/Solar%20Energy%20Supply%20Chain%20Report%20-%20Final.pdf (Solar). Additional reports in this series that are relevant to wind, solar and hybrid plants include: Energy Storage at https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/Energy%20Storage%20Supply%20Chain%20Report%20-%20final.pdf and Neodymium Magnets at https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/Neodymium%20Magnets%20Supply%20Chain%20Report%20-%20Final.pdf.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

James Webb Space Telescope Navigation Optimization Challenges

The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is a NASA flagship mission launched on December 25, 2021. The early orbit phase was highlighted by three midcourse correction burns that were performed to maneuver the vehicle into a libration orbit at the second Sun-Earth-Moon (SEM) libration point (L2). During the coast to L2, the vehicle’s primary observatory and sunshield were deployed. Once the tennis-court-sized sunshield was unfurled and tensioned into place, the large area exposed to solar radiation pressure (SRP) dictated that the SRP force model would need to account for the vehicle’s geometry, reflective properties, and orientation relative to the Sun. Following the insertion of JWST into its L2 libration orbit on January 24, 2022, the commissioning phase for the vehicle’s observatory commenced along with the first cycle of routine station-keeping maneuvers. The NASA Goddard Space Flight Center’s Flight Dynamics Facility (FDF) provides navigation services for the JWST mission. The FDF serves as the prime or backup navigation operations center for more than 30 active missions spanning a wide array of flight regimes performing orbit determination, maneuver planning, trajectory optimization, and tracking data evaluation. Definitive orbit determination for JWST is performed by the FDF using an Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) to estimate the vehicle’s trajectory and reflective properties using Deep Space Network (DSN) TRK-2-34 tracking data and spacecraft attitude telemetry. For the purposes of orbit prediction and station-keeping maneuver targeting, the sensitivity of the SRP force to the vehicle’s orientation requires that predictive attitude information must be incorporated to generate accurate orbit predictions and maneuver plans. Predictive attitude plans are provided to the FDF by the JWST Spacecraft Operations Center (SOC). Short-term (28 day) orbit predictions are propagated using a Short Range Attitude Plan (SRAP) to model the vehicle’s future attitude states for up to a week. SRAP attitude data is highly reliable, as it reflects finalized planned attitude states that the vehicle will be commanded to attain during the ensuing week. A Long Range Attitude Plan (LRAP) can be implemented to model predicted attitude states beyond one week, but these predictions are tentative and subject to revision due to changes in science operations plans. Instead, a conservative approach of applying a Sun-Pointing Neutral (SPN) attitude configuration is utilized for long-term (2 year) orbit predictions where reliable planned attitude data is not available. SPN attitude mode aligns the net SRP force along the JWST-to-Sun vector where it becomes independent of the vehicle’s angle of rotation about this vector, defined as the Sun yaw. Given the dynamic instability of the libration orbit, station-keeping thrust must be applied in either the sunward or anti-sunward direction to balance the resulting orbit. The attitude constraints of the vehicle also impose limits on the available pointing directions for station-keeping thrusters. The thrusters cannot be aligned with the optimal pointing direction for sunward maneuvers, rendering sunward maneuvers to be significantly less fuel efficient than anti-sunward maneuvers. Consequently, station-keeping maneuvers must be targeted to balance the orbit while ensuring that the next maneuver will also be performed in the anti-sunward direction to optimize propellant usage. When targeting a station-keeping maneuver, the attitude and SRP modeling configuration which is applied to the predicted post-maneuver trajectory will dictate the direction of the subsequent station-keeping maneuver, assuming nominal propulsion system performance. If the predicted post-maneuver attitude states result in an SRP model which under-predicts the cumulative SRP impact on the post-maneuver orbit, a targeted anti-sunward maneuver will be larger than necessary and the next maneuver will need to be executed sunward in order to compensate. In contrast, an anti-sunward maneuver which is targeted using an SRP model which over-predicts the cumulative SRP impact will achieve station-keeping while ensuring that the next maneuver will likewise be performed anti-sunward. For this reason, station-keeping maneuvers are targeted while applying the SPN attitude mode, as this mode entails the largest possible SRP area cross-section and therefore a larger modeled cumulative SRP impact. This paper documents the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center’s FDF support for JWST on-orbit operations and the analysis projects undertaken utilizing the experiences and data accumulated throughout the first full year of routine science operations. The results of these analysis efforts have been used to implement improvements to orbit prediction accuracy and maneuver efficiency which have the potential to prolong the lifespan of JWST to continue to conduct ground-breaking infrared astronomy for decades to come.

Flight Dynamics↗
NASA NTRS2008

Assessment and Mission Planning Capability For Quantitative Aerothermodynamic Flight Measurements Using Remote Imaging

High resolution calibrated infrared imagery of vehicles during hypervelocity atmospheric entry or sustained hypersonic cruise has the potential to provide flight data on the distribution of surface temperature and the state of the airflow over the vehicle. In the early 1980 s NASA sought to obtain high spatial resolution infrared imagery of the Shuttle during entry. Despite mission execution with a technically rigorous pre-planning capability, the single airborne optical system for this attempt was considered developmental and the scientific return was marginal. In 2005 the Space Shuttle Program again sponsored an effort to obtain imagery of the Orbiter. Imaging requirements were targeted towards Shuttle ascent; companion requirements for entry did not exist. The engineering community was allowed to define observation goals and incrementally demonstrate key elements of a quantitative spatially resolved measurement capability over a series of flights. These imaging opportunities were extremely beneficial and clearly demonstrated capability to capture infrared imagery with mature and operational assets of the US Navy and the Missile Defense Agency. While successful, the usefulness of the imagery was, from an engineering perspective, limited. These limitations were mainly associated with uncertainties regarding operational aspects of data acquisition. These uncertainties, in turn, came about because of limited pre-flight mission planning capability, a poor understanding of several factors including the infrared signature of the Shuttle, optical hardware limitations, atmospheric effects and detector response characteristics. Operational details of sensor configuration such as detector integration time and tracking system algorithms were carried out ad hoc (best practices) which led to low probability of target acquisition and detector saturation. Leveraging from the qualified success during Return-to-Flight, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center sponsored an assessment study focused on increasing the probability of returning spatially resolved scientific/engineering thermal imagery. This paper provides an overview of the assessment task and the systematic approach designed to establish confidence in the ability of existing assets to reliably acquire, track and return global quantitative surface temperatures of the Shuttle during entry. A discussion of capability demonstration in support of a potential Shuttle boundary layer transition flight test is presented. Successful demonstration of a quantitative, spatially resolved, global temperature measurement on the proposed Shuttle boundary layer transition flight test could lead to potential future applications with hypersonic flight test programs within the USAF and DARPA along with flight test opportunities supporting NASA s project Constellation.

Horvath, Thomas↗
NASA NTRS2014

A Flight Research Overview of WSPR, a Pilot Project for Sonic Boom Community Response

In support of the ongoing effort by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to bring supersonic commercial travel to the public, the NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center and the NASA Langley Research Center, in cooperation with other industry organizations, conducted a flight research experiment to identify the methods, tools, and best practices for a large-scale quiet (or low) sonic boom community human response test. The name of the effort was Waveforms and Sonic boom Perception and Response (WSPR). Such tests will be applied to building a dataset that governing agencies such as the Federal Aviation Administration and the International Civil Aviation Organization will use to establish regulations for acceptable sound levels of overland sonic booms. The WSPR test was the first such effort that studied responses to non-traditional low sonic booms while the subject persons were in their own homes and performing daily activities.The WSPR test was a NASA collaborative effort with several industry partners, in response to a NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate Research Opportunities in Aeronautics. The primary contractor was Wyle (El Segundo, California). Other partners included Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation (Savannah, Georgia); Pennsylvania State University (University Park, Pennsylvania); Tetra Tech, Inc. (Pasadena, California); and Fidell Associates, Inc. (Woodland Hills, California).A major objective of the effort included exposing a community to the sonic boom magnitudes and occurrences that would be expected to occur in high-air traffic regions having a network of supersonic commercial aircraft in place. Low-level sonic booms designed to simulate those produced by the next generation of commercial supersonic aircraft were generated over a small residential community. The sonic boom footprint was recorded with an autonomous wireless microphone array that spanned the entire community. Human response data were collected using multiple survey methods. The research focused on essential elements of community response testing including subject recruitment, survey methods, instrumentation systems, flight planning and operations, and data analysis methods.This paper focuses on the NASA role in the logistics and operations of the effort, including human response subject recruitment, the operational processes involved in implementing the surveys throughout the community, instrumentation systems, logistics, flight planning, and flight operations. Findings discussed in this paper include critical lessons learned in all of the above-mentioned areas, as well as flight operations results. Analysis of the accuracy and repeatability of planning and executing the unique aircraft maneuver used to generate low sonic booms concluded that the sonic booms had overpressures within 0.15 lbft2 of the planned values for 76 percent of the attempts. Similarly, 90 percent of the attempts to generate low sonic booms within the community were successful.

community response↗
DOE OSTI2020

Life-Cycle Baseline Customization for the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program - 20304

One of the responsibilities of the federal government is to estimate sound and defensible life-cycle baseline costs for use in federal budget estimates and to meet federal financial reporting requirements. To accomplish this, the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management (LM) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) have partnered together to ensure that the liabilities documented in each Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) site's life-cycle baseline are specifically tailored. FUSRAP was created in the mid-1970's to clean up radiological contamination resulting from the early development of nuclear weapons. DOE was responsible for FUSRAP until October 1997, when Congress transferred the administration and execution of FUSRAP site cleanups to USACE. By 1997, DOE had completed the cleanup of 25 of the 46 sites that were active within the program and had begun cleanup at 13 additional sites. USACE was assigned responsibility for the cleanup of the 21 remaining FUSRAP sites, and at 8 additional sites that had since been referred for cleanup. The LM mission for the FUSRAP sites is to perform long-term surveillance and maintenance (LTS and M). Currently, LM provides long-term stewardship for 34 completed FUSRAP sites. Another 20 sites are under active remediation by USACE. Within the last 5 years, USACE has completed the cleanup at five FUSRAP sites and the LTS and M responsibility has been transferred to LM. By 2029, USACE will compete remediation at eight additional sites and LTS and M for those sites will transfer to LM. Because responsibilities for the FUSRAP sites transfer between USACE and LM upon completion of remedial actions, both agencies maintain life-cycle baselines for different stages of the project and both must have a strong understanding of the needs and requirements for each site. This understanding ensures that the life-cycle baselines form a complete and accurate picture of what is required for the site and for the FUSRAP program. LM focuses on several things when customizing the life-cycle baseline estimates for the FUSRAP sites, including (1) Understanding the unique requirements for each site. By reviewing site-specific documents prepared by USACE, such as Feasibility Studies and Records of Decision, and partnering with USACE to gain additional insight about site conditions and requirements for stewardship, as well as potential risks, LM can better develop the life-cycle baselines. (2) Developing site-specific labor breakdowns. This ensures the required labor mix is baselined for specific activities by comparing the labor mix required to perform activities at (a) other LM-managed FUSRAP sites and (b) non-FUSRAP LM sites and (c) by USACE at active FUSRAP sites. (3) Taking a tiered approach to life-cycle baseline planning. Estimates for sites transferring to LM in the near term (5 years) are more definitive than for sites transferring in the out-year period. Remedial actions at the near-term sites are at or near completion, providing LM a strong understanding of the LTS and M requirements and remaining liabilities. This in turn allows for site-specific customization of the baseline. (4) Using a robust risk management approach to ensure that liabilities specific to each site are identified, evaluated by probability and severity, and documented in relation to the impact to cost or schedule. To ensure the most accuracy within all the baselines, the FUSRAP life-cycle baselines are updated as needed to support program, project, and contract management needs. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS1997

The NASA Integrated Information Technology Architecture

This document defines an Information Technology Architecture for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), where Information Technology (IT) refers to the hardware, software, standards, protocols and processes that enable the creation, manipulation, storage, organization and sharing of information. An architecture provides an itemization and definition of these IT structures, a view of the relationship of the structures to each other and, most importantly, an accessible view of the whole. It is a fundamental assumption of this document that a useful, interoperable and affordable IT environment is key to the execution of the core NASA scientific and project competencies and business practices. This Architecture represents the highest level system design and guideline for NASA IT related activities and has been created on the authority of the NASA Chief Information Officer (CIO) and will be maintained under the auspices of that office. It addresses all aspects of general purpose, research, administrative and scientific computing and networking throughout the NASA Agency and is applicable to all NASA administrative offices, projects, field centers and remote sites. Through the establishment of five Objectives and six Principles this Architecture provides a blueprint for all NASA IT service providers: civil service, contractor and outsourcer. The most significant of the Objectives and Principles are the commitment to customer-driven IT implementations and the commitment to a simpler, cost-efficient, standards-based, modular IT infrastructure. In order to ensure that the Architecture is presented and defined in the context of the mission, project and business goals of NASA, this Architecture consists of four layers in which each subsequent layer builds on the previous layer. They are: 1) the Business Architecture: the operational functions of the business, or Enterprise, 2) the Systems Architecture: the specific Enterprise activities within the context of IT systems, 3) the Technical Architecture: a common, vendor-independent framework for design, integration and implementation of IT systems and 4) the Product Architecture: vendor=specific IT solutions. The Systems Architecture is effectively a description of the end-user "requirements". Generalized end-user requirements are discussed and subsequently organized into specific mission and project functions. The Technical Architecture depicts the framework, and relationship, of the specific IT components that enable the end-user functionality as described in the Systems Architecture. The primary components as described in the Technical Architecture are: 1) Applications: Basic Client Component, Object Creation Applications, Collaborative Applications, Object Analysis Applications, 2) Services: Messaging, Information Broker, Collaboration, Distributed Processing, and 3) Infrastructure: Network, Security, Directory, Certificate Management, Enterprise Management and File System. This Architecture also provides specific Implementation Recommendations, the most significant of which is the recognition of IT as core to NASA activities and defines a plan, which is aligned with the NASA strategic planning processes, for keeping the Architecture alive and useful.

Baldridge, Tim↗
DOE OSTI2018

Testing Results from the Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System (LAWPS) Full-Scale Ion Exchange Column Test and Engineering Scale Integrated System Test - 18634

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of River Protection's (ORP) primary mission is to retrieve and treat Hanford's tank waste and close the Tank Farms to protect the Columbia River. Mixed radioactive waste is stored in 177 underground tanks at the Hanford Site as reported in DOE/ORP 2003- 02, Environmental Impact Statement for Retrieval, Treatment, and Disposal of Tank Waste and Closure of the Single Shell Tanks at the Hanford Site, Richland WA, Inventory and Source Term Data Package. The 177 underground tanks are estimated to contain about 56 million gallons of waste. The Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System (LAWPS) Project provides for the early production of immobilized low activity waste (ILAW) by feeding LAW directly from Tank Farms to the Hanford Waste Treatment Plant's (WTP's) LAW Facility, bypassing the Pretreatment Facility. Prior to the transfer of feed to the WTP LAW Vitrification Facility, tank supernatant waste will be pretreated in the LAWPS to meet the WTP LAW waste acceptance criteria. The LAWPS will also facilitate the return of secondary liquid wastes from the WTP LAW Vitrification Facility to the Tank Farms. In November of 2015 DOE's Tank Operations Contractor, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS), awarded a contract to the AECOM team to design, fabricate and operate two test platforms to generate performance data at two different scales and demonstrate technology maturation. The first platform models the ion exchange (IX) columns at full scale, and the second platform models the integrated flowsheet (cross flow filter (CFF) and IX) at 1/9. scale. Overarching technical objectives of performing the full-scale ion exchange test and the engineering-scale integrated test are to: 1. Test interactions between unit process operations; 2. Test removal of non-radioactive cesium from process stream; 3. Test removal of undissolved solids from process stream; 4. Confirm operational flow rate range and stability; 5. Confirm volumetric throughput of waste stream over flow operating range; 6. Confirm range of process temperatures over planned operating range; 7. Establish system hydraulics and process criteria; 8. Coordinate key control and monitoring components; 9. Establish treated product chemistry meets requirements (cesium, solids, and pH); and 10. Test the hazard control strategy for a no flow condition through the IX column. Data collected during testing will be used by WRPS to validate the preliminary design, inform the final design of the permanent plant equipment, and demonstrate that the critical technology elements have advanced to a technology readiness level of 6 (prototypical system validation in a relevant environment). Testing on both platforms started in fall of 2016 generating NQA-1 data. This paper covers test results from the first five phases of testing on the 1/9. scale integrated test platform. A further three phases of testing are currently being executed, these including a 5.6 M sodium simulant containing foulant, a high viscosity simulant and finally a run performed with a lower Cs concentration (all earlier tests were spiked to 4 x Cs to reduce volume and cost). Results from these tests were not available at the time of writing available. Results are also presented from the full scale IX testing. Eight test were performed covering column loading, elution and regeneration; column loading, elution and regeneration with upflow displacement; IX column loading and gas migration; resin removal; solids accumulation; and IX column emergency recirculation and vent. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS2016

SC-228 Inclusion of DAA Warning Alert for TCAS Interoperability

This white paper summarizes NASA research results that have informed Special Committee 228 (SC-228) discussions and decisions regarding the inclusion of a warning-level alert within the detect and avoid (DAA) alerting structure for unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). For UAS, the removal of the pilot from onboard the aircraft has eliminated the ability of the ground-based pilot in command (PIC) to use out-the-window visual information to make judgments about a potential threat of a loss of well clear with another aircraft. As a result, the DAA traffic display will be the primary source of information that the PIC can use to execute the three primary well clear functions: 1) detect a potential loss of well clear, 2) determine a resolution maneuver, and 3) upload that maneuver to the aircraft via the ground control station (GCS). In addition, pilots are required to coordinate with air traffic control (ATC) prior to maneuvering off of their approved flight plan. In determining an appropriate resolution maneuver to avoid a loss of well clear, the PIC must decide both when and how to maneuver, and both the timeliness and the accuracy (i.e., correctness) of the maneuver are critical to reducing the likelihood and/or severity of a loss of well clear. Alerting information is one of three critical components of the DAA display, along with traffic information elements (e.g., relative heading, speed and altitude) and maneuver guidance. Alerting information and maneuver guidance, in particular, have been found to have a significant impact, both statistically and practically, on pilots' ability to avoid and minimize the severity of losses of well clear While all three display components are key to pilots performing the traffic avoidance task of remaining well clear, in general, alerting information provides crucial information about when a resolution maneuver is required while maneuver guidance assists the pilot in determining how best to maneuver. A fundamental task of the DAA alerting system is to provide critical timing information to the pilot about the potential for a loss of well clear with another aircraft. This is done by employing both temporal and spatial thresholds that indicate to the pilot the likelihood and imminence of a loss of well clear. The design of the DAA alerting thresholds is a balancing act between eliciting the desired pilot response in real loss of well clear threat events and reducing excessive, unnecessary, and/or uncoordinated UAS maneuvering within the air traffic environment; larger thresholds, both spatially and temporally, may increase the likelihood of a pilot avoiding a loss of well clear, but it can also increase the frequency of maneuvering - especially in cases where a maneuver is not actually needed to maintain well clear. A series of human in the loop (HITL) simulations have been conducted as part of NASA's Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Integration in the National Airspace System (NAS) project. The purpose of these HITLs has been to provide empirical results in order to inform development of the minimum human-machine interface requirements for the DAA system. This white paper will present those results which provide evidence of a human performance benefit (in terms of response times and ability to remain well clear of other aircraft) of the DAA warning alert both with and without a collision avoidance system on board the aircraft.

TCAS interoperability↗
NASA NTRS2004

The Wallops Flight Facility Rapid Response Range Operations Initiative

While the dominant focus on short response missions has appropriately centered on the launch vehicle and spacecraft, often overlooked or afterthought phases of these missions have been launch site operations and the activities of launch range organizations. Throughout the history of organized spaceflight, launch ranges have been the bane of flight programs as the source of expense, schedule delays, and seemingly endless requirements. Launch Ranges provide three basic functions: (1) provide an appropriate geographical location to meet orbital other mission trajectory requirements, (2) provide project services such as processing facilities, launch complexes, tracking and data services, and expendable products, and (3) assure safety and property protection to participating personnel and third-parties. The challenge with which launch site authorities continuously struggle, is the inherent conflict arising from projects whose singular concern is execution of their mission, and the range s need to support numerous simultaneous customers. So, while tasks carried out by a launch range committed to a single mission pale in comparison to efforts of a launch vehicle or spacecraft provider and could normally be carried out in a matter of weeks, major launch sites have dozens of active projects separate sponsoring organizations. Accommodating the numerous tasks associated with each mission, when hardware failures, weather, maintenance requirements, and other factors constantly conspire against the range resource schedulers, make the launch range as significant an impediment to responsive missions as launch vehicles and their cargo. The obvious solution to the launch site challenge was implemented years ago when the Department of Defense simply established dedicated infrastructure and personnel to dedicated missions, namely an Inter Continental Ballistic Missile. This however proves to be prohibitively expensive for all but the most urgent of applications. So the challenge becomes how can a launch site provide acceptably responsive mission services to a particular customer without dedicating extensive resources and while continuing to serve other projects? NASA's Wallops Flight Facility (WFF) is pursuing solutions to exactly this challenge. NASA, in partnership with the Virginia Commercial Space Flight Authority, has initiated the Rapid Response Range Operations Initiative (R3Ops). R3Ops is a multi-phased effort to incrementally establish and demonstrate increasingly responsive launch operations, with an ultimate goal of providing ELV-class services in a maximum of 7-10 days from initial notification routinely, and shorter schedules possible with committed resources. This target will be pursued within the reality of simultaneous concurrent programs, and ideally, largely independent of specialized flight system configurations. WFF has recently completed Phase 1 of R3Ops, an in-depth collection (through extensive expert interviews) and software modeling of individual steps by various range disciplines. This modeling is now being used to identify existing inefficiencies in current procedures, to identify bottlenecks, and show interdependencies. Existing practices are being tracked to provide a baseline to benchmark against as new procedures are implemented. This paper will describe in detail the philosophies behind WFF's R3Ops, the data collected and modeled in Phase 1, and strategies for meeting responsive launch requirements in a multi-user range environment planned for subsequent phases of this initiative.

Underwood, Bruce E.↗