Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Lessons”

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 685 records · Page 38
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2012

CloudSat Anomaly Recovery and Operational Lessons Learned

Nov 2011: NASA/JPL declared CloudSat fully operational in DO ]OP Mode . CloudSat collects science data during sunlit portion of orbit, stable spin hibernation in eclipse . New CONOPS requires constant monitoring of thermal and power profiles, while allowing collection of 54 mins of science data per sunlit orbit

spacecraft systems↗
NASA NTRS2014

Design and Lessons Learned on the Development of a Cryogenic Pupil Select Mechanism Used in the Testing and Calibration of the Integrated Science Instrument Module (ISIM) on the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST)

Calibration and testing of the instruments on the Integrated Science Instrument Module (ISIM) of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is being performed by the use of a cryogenic, full-field, optical simulator that was constructed for this purpose. The Pupil Select Mechanism (PSM) assembly is one of several mechanisms and optical elements that compose the Optical Telescope Element SIMulator, or OSIM. The PSM allows for several optical elements to be inserted into the optical plane of OSIM, introducing a variety of aberrations, distortions, obscurations, and other calibration states into the pupil plane. The following discussion focuses on the details of the design evolution, analysis, build, and test of this mechanism along with the challenges associated with creating a sub arc-minute positioning mechanism operating in an extreme cryogenic environment. In addition, difficult challenges in the control system design will be discussed including the incorporation of closed-loop feedback control into a system that was designed to operate in an open-loop fashion.

Testing↗
NASA NTRS2008

NASA Crew Exploration Vehicle, Thermal Protection System, Lessons Learned

The Orion (CEV) thermal protection system (TPS) advanced development project (ADP) was initiated in late 2006 to reduce developmental risk by significant investment in multiple heat shield architectural solutions that can meet the needs both the Low Earth orbit (LEO) and Lunar return missions. At the same time, the CEV TPS ADP was also charged with developing a preliminary design for the heat shield to meet the PDR requirement and at the time of the PDR, transfer the design to Lockheed- Martin, the prime contractor. We reported on the developmental activities of the first 18 months at the IPPW5 in Bordeaux, France, last summer. In June 08, at the time of the IPPW6, the CEV TPS ADP would have nearly completed the preparation for the Orion PDR and would be close to the original three-year mark. We plan to report on the progress at the Atlanta workshop. In the past year, Orion TPS ADP investment in TPS Technology, especially in PICA ablative Heat-shield design, development, testing and engineering (DDTE) has paid off in enabling MSL mission to switch from SLA 561 V heat shield to PICA heat shield. CEV TPS ADP considered SLA 561 V as a candidate for LEO missions and our testing identified failure modes in SLA and as a result, we dropped SLA for further evaluation. This close synergy between two projects is a highly visible example of how investment in technology areas can and does benefit multiple missions. In addition, CEV TPS ADP has been able to revive the Apollo ablative system namely AVCOAT honeycomb architecture as an alternate to the baseline PICA architecture and we plan to report the progress we have made in AVCOAT. CEV TPS ADP has invested considerable resources in developing analytical models for PICA and AVCOAT, material property measurements that is essential to the design of the heat-shield, in arcjet testing, in understanding the differences between different arc jet facilities, namely NASA Ames, NASA JSC and Air Force's AEDC, and in Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE), and in integration of and manufacturing heat shield as a system. The capabilities of the two heat shield systems including failure modes via testing and analysis, once established, can serve the Probe Community and future mission designers to inner and outer planetary exploration very well. For example, missions to Venus, Mars and Titan can use either one of the system by selecting the mission design parameters that utilizes the full characteristics of these system to make use of system efficiency that will result in reduced heat shield mass, system robustness that will enhance mission success and cost. We plan to present significant progresses of the past three years and highlight the significant contributions CEV TPS ADP Project has made to advance the state of the art in Thermal Protection System technology that has and will continue to benefit future entry probe missions.

NASA Crew Exploration Vehicle↗
NASA NTRS2019

Lessons from Modeling Flexible Aircraft for Active Flutter Suppression

These slides describe a method and technology of modeling flexible aircraft for active control of structural dynamics. Objective: Generate models useful for the design and evaluation of control laws for active structural control and flutter suppression that are able to accurately predict body freedom flutter.

Lessons Learned↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Morpheus and Ascent Abort-2 Lessons Learned in Lean SE&I

The purpose of this presentation is to describe key features of the streamlined systems engineering approach for two in-house NASA projects, the Morpheus lander (2010-2014) and Orion’s Ascent Abort 2 (AA-2) Crew Module and Separation Ring (CSR) project.

Lean development↗
NASA NTRS2021

Guidance and Lessons Learned from COVID-19 for Human-Subjects Research

The goal of this effort was to identify innovative strategies, approaches, and methods that have enabled researchers to continue doing meaningful human subjects research during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many organizations and recent literature primarily focus on efforts for future research in a post-COVID environment. Additionally, there have been no systematic efforts across the agency or broader human factors community to coordinate or share strategies. Therefore, the focus was on acquiring knowledge gained by researchers from experiences during COVID that could be valuable to continue human-subjects research under existing restrictions.

Coronavirus Disease 2019↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lessons Learned in Systems Engineering Availability and Recommendations for Mission Technical Leaders

In spaceflight missions at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), the Mission System Engineer (MSE) is the technical leader of the overall engineering team and also is the Independent Engineering Technical Authority. The responsibility of this role includes the definition of the mission design architecture, concept of operations, and mission requirements, management of risk throughout the development, and verification and validation of the final system performance and function amongst other duties. This responsibility inherently requires time management, enabling focus on a balanced development with appropriate risk. Time is the most valuable resource of the MSE. The system engineer’s availability to interact with the development team (often product or component design leads and technicians, often in different worksites) to discover and mitigate mission risks during development is key to mission success. This paper presents examples from Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, Landsat 9, and Neutron star Interior Composition ExploreR (NICER) which represent in-house and out-of-house hardware builds. These examples demonstrate how interactions between the Mission Systems Engineers and other project and partner engineers result in discovery of critical risks, leading to early mitigation with significant cost and performance savings. These three missions would have suffered test failures or on-orbit failures had their MSEs not set aside time to visit engineers and technicians that were working on key pieces of space flight hardware. Availability is more than just time; it is openness to listen to concerns and questions. It begins by building a level of trust in the team that it is safe to ask questions or share concerns without the fear of blame or additional workload. It also requires enabling informal conversations (over lunch, coffee, in the clean room, or at the team members desk, etc.) where key information can be exchanged, and team members may even provide an easy-to-implement mitigation idea for another subsystem. Availability is a highly valuable commodity and completely non-obvious to protect and optimize. The natural tendency of engineers is to keep themselves busy with solving problems that they know about. This paper is encouraging MSEs to resist this tendency to try and solve all the complex problems themselves and actively devote daily time to learning and solving problems that are found with informal communications with other team members.

Lessons Learned↗