Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “procurement”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1993

CFM technologies for space transportation: Multipurpose hydrogen testbed system definition and tank procurement

The development of a test bed tank and system for evaluating cryogenic fluid management technologies in a simulated upper stage liquid hydrogen tank is covered. The tank is 10 ft long and is 10 ft in diameter, and is an ASME certified tank constructed of 5083 aluminum. The tank is insulated with a combination of sprayed on foam insulation, covered by 45 layers of double aluminized mylar separated by dacron net. The mylar is applied by a continuous wrap system adapted from commercial applications, and incorporates variable spacing between the mylar to provide more space between those layers having a high delta temperature, which minimizes heat leak. It also incorporates a unique venting system which uses fewer large holes in the mylar rather than the multitude of small holes used conventionally. This significantly reduces radiation heat transfer. The test bed consists of an existing vacuum chamber at MSFC, the test bed tank and its thermal control system, and a thermal shroud (which may be heated) surrounding the tank. Provisions are made in the tank and chamber for inclusion of a variety of cryogenic fluid management experiments.

Fox, E. C.↗
NASA NTRS2010

NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Program: Recommendations for Technical Requirements for Inclusion in Aerospace Battery Procurements

This NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Systems Working Group was chartered within the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC). The Battery Working Group was tasked to complete tasks and to propose proactive work to address battery related, agency-wide issues on an annual basis. In its first year of operation, this proactive program addressed various aspects of the validation and verification of aerospace battery systems for NASA missions. Studies were performed, issues were discussed and in many cases, test programs were executed to generate recommendations and guidelines to reduce risk associated with various aspects of implementing battery technology in the aerospace industry. This document contains Part 2 - Volume II Appendix A to Part 2 - Volume I.

Jung, David S.↗
NASA NTRS2002

SMEX-Lite Modular Solar Array Architecture

For the most part, Goddard solar arrays have been custom designs that are unique to each mission. The solar panel design has been frozen prior to issuing an RFP for their procurement. There has typically been 6-9 months between RFP release and contract award, followed by an additional 24 months for performance of the contract. For Small Explorer (SMEX) missions, with three years between mission definition and launch, this has been a significant problem. The SMEX solar panels have been sufficiently small that the contract performance period has been reduced to 12-15 months. The bulk of this time is used up in the final design definition and fabrication of flight solar cell assemblies. Even so, it has been virtually impossible to have the spacecraft design at a level of maturity sufficient to freeze the solar panel geometry and release the RFP in time to avoid schedule problems with integrating the solar panels to the spacecraft. With that in mind, the SMEX-Lite project team developed a modular architecture for the assembly of solar arrays to greatly reduce the cost and schedule associated with the development of a mission- specific solar array. In the modular architecture, solar cells are fabricated onto small substrate panels. This modular panel (approximately 8.5" x 17" in this case) becomes the building block for constructing solar arrays for multiple missions with varying power requirements and geometrical arrangements. The mechanical framework that holds these modules together as a solar array is the only mission-unique design, changing in size and shape as required for each mission. There are several advantages to this approach. First, the typical solar array development cycle requires a mission unique design, procurement, and qualification including a custom qualification panel. With the modular architecture, a single qualification of the SMEX-Lite modules and the associated mechanical framework in a typical configuration provided a qualification by similarity to multiple missions. It then becomes possible to procure solar array modules in advance of mission definition and respond quickly and inexpensively to a selected mission's unique requirements. The solar array modular architecture allows the procurement of solar array modules before the array geometry has been frozen. This reduces the effect of procurement lead-time on the mission integration and test flow by as much as 50%. Second, by spreading the non-recurring costs over multiple missions, the cost per unit area is also reduced. In the case of the SMEX-Lite procurement, this reduction was by about one third of the cost per unit area compared to previous SMEX mission-unique procurements. Third, the modular architecture greatly facilitates the infusion of new solar cell technologies into flight programs as these technologies become available. New solar cell technologies need only be fabricated onto a standard-sized module to be incorporated into the next available mission. The modular solar array can be flown in a mixed configuration with some new and some standard cell technologies. Since each module has its own wiring terminals, the array can be arranged as desired electrically with little impact to cost and schedule. The solar array modular architecture does impose some additional constraints on systems and subsystem engineers. First, they must work with discrete solar array modules rather than size the array to fit exactly within an available envelope. The array area is constrained to an integer multiple of the module area. Second, the modular design is optimized for space radiation and thermal environments not greatly different from a typical SMEX LEO environment. For example, a mission with a highly elliptical orbit (e.g., Polar, SMEX/FAST) would require thicker coverglasses to protect the solar cells from the more intense radiation environment.

Lyons, John↗
NASA NTRS1987

Acquisition-Management Program

NASA Acquisition Management Subsystem (AMS) program integrated NASA-wide standard automated-procurement-system program developed in 1985. Designed to provide each NASA installation with procurement data-base concept with on-line terminals for managing, tracking, reporting, and controlling contractual actions and associated procurement data. Subsystem provides control, status, and reporting for various procurement areas. Purpose of standardization is to decrease costs of procurement and operation of automatic data processing; increases procurement productivity; furnishes accurate, on-line management information and improves customer support. Written in the ADABAS NATURAL.

Avery, Don E.↗
NASA NTRS2001

NASA Alternate Access to Station Service Concept

The evolving nature of the NASA space enterprise compels the agency to develop new and innovative space systems concepts. NASA, working with increasingly strained budgets and a declining manpower base, is attempting to transform from operational activities to procurement of commercial services. NASA's current generation reusable launch vehicle, the Shuttle, is in transition from a government owned and operated entity to a commercial venture to reduce the civil servant necessities for that program. NASA foresees its second generation launch vehicles being designed and operated by industry for commercial and government services. The "service" concept is a pioneering effort by NASA. The purpose the "service" is not only to reduce the civil servant overhead but will free up government resources for further research - and enable industry to develop a space business case so that industry can sustain itself beyond government programs. In addition, NASA desires a decreased responsibility thereby decreasing liability. The Second Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) program is implementing NASA's Space Launch Initiative (SLI) to enable industry to develop the launch vehicles of the future. The Alternate Access to Station (AAS) project office within this program is chartered with enabling industry to demonstrate an alternate access capability for the International Space Station (ISS). The project will not accomplish this by traditional government procurement methods, not by integrating the space system within the project office, or by providing the only source of business for the new capability. The project funds will ultimately be used to purchase a service to take re-supply cargo to the ISS, much the same as any business might purchase a service from FedEx to deliver a package to its customer. In the near term, the project will fund risk mitigation efforts for enabling technologies. AAS is in some ways a precursor to the 2nd Generation RLV. By accomplishing ISS resupply with existing technologies, not only will a new category of autonomous vehicles deliver cargo, but a commercial business base will be incubated that will improve the likelihood of commercial convergence with the next generation of RLVs. Traditional paradigms in government management and acquisition philosophy are being challenged in order to bring about the objective of the AAS project. The phased procurement approach is proving to be the most questionable aspect to date. This work addresses the fresh approach AAS is adopting in management and procurement through a study of the AAS history, current solutions, key technologies, procurement complications, and an incremental forward plan leading to the purchase of a service to deliver goods to ISS. Included in this work is a discussion of the Commercial Space Act of 1998 and how it affects government purchase of space launch and space vehicle services. Industry should find these topics pertinent to their current state of business.

Bailey, Michelle D.↗
NASA NTRS1978

Toxic substances alert program

A toxicity profile is provided, of 187 toxic substances procured by NASA Lewis Research Center during a 3 1/2 year period, including 27 known or suspected carcinogens. The goal of the program is to assure that the center's health and safety personnel are aware of the procurement and use of toxic substances and to alert and inform the users of these materials as to the toxic characteristics and the control measures needed to ensure their safe use. The program also provides a continuing record of the toxic substances procured, who procured them, what other toxic substances the user has obtained in the past, and where similar materials have been used elsewhere at the center.

Junod, T. L.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Industrial application experiment series

Two procurements within the Industrial Application Experiment Series of the Thermal Power Systems Project are discussed. The first procurement, initiated in April 1980, resulted in an award to the Applied Concepts Corporation for the Capital Concrete Experiment: two Fresnel concentrating collectors will be evaluated in single-unit installations at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory Parabolic Dish Test Site and at Capitol Concrete Products, Topeka, Kansas. The second procurement, initiated in March 1981, is titled, "Thermal System Engineering Experiment B." The objective of the procurement is the rapid deployment of developed parabolic dish collectors.

Bluhm, S. A.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Quality assurance and risk management: Perspectives on Human Factors Certification of Advanced Aviation Systems

This paper is based on the experience of engineering psychologists advising the U.K. Ministry of Defense (MoD) on the procurement of advanced aviation systems that conform to good human engineering (HE) practice. Traditional approaches to HE in systems procurement focus on the physical nature of the human-machine interface. Advanced aviation systems present increasingly complex design requirements for human functional integration, information processing, and cognitive task performance effectiveness. These developing requirements present new challenges for HE quality assurance (QA) and risk management, requiring focus on design processes as well as on design content or product. A new approach to the application of HE, recently adopted by NATO, provides more systematic ordering and control of HE processes and activities to meet the challenges of advanced aircrew systems design. This systematic approach to HE has been applied by MoD to the procurement of mission systems for the Royal Navy Merlin helicopter. In MoD procurement, certification is a judicial function, essentially independent of the service customer and industry contractor. Certification decisions are based on advice from MoD's appointed Acceptance Agency. Test and evaluation (T&E) conducted by the contractor and by the Acceptance Agency provide evidence for certification. Certification identifies limitations of systems upon release to the service. Evidence of compliance with HE standards traditionally forms the main basis of HE certification and significant non-compliance could restrict release. The systems HE approach shows concern for the quality of processes as well as for the content of the product. Human factors certification should be concerned with the quality of HE processes as well as products. Certification should require proof of process as well as proof of content and performance. QA criteria such as completeness, consistency, timeliness, and compatibility provide generic guidelines for progressive acceptance and certification of HE processes. Threats to the validity of certification arise from problems and assumptions in T&E methods. T&E should seek to reduce the risk of specification non-compliance and certification failure.

Taylor, Robert M.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Recommendations on the Use of Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts for NASA Missions - Phase II

This assessment had two Phases. Phase I captured NASA Centers’ current practices for commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts 1 used in spaceflight systems and ground support equipment (available at https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205011579) [ref. 1]. The Phase II report provides guidance for selecting and using COTS parts in NASA missions. The approaches proposed in this report differ from current agency practices. This top-level executive summary touches on these new approaches for using COTS parts but does not provide the detailed information that is critical in understanding the rationale behind these new approaches. Readers will need to read the entire report to gain full understanding and effectively use the recommendations herein. NASA’s historical approach to selecting and applying parts has been to define certain parts, primarily specific classes of military specification (MIL-SPEC) parts, as “standard”, leaving all others, including COTS parts, as nonstandard. Standard parts typically are used without further testing (“use-as-is”). Nonstandard parts are subjected to initial screening and subsequent lot acceptance testing of representative samples from each procured lot per MIL-SPEC or similar requirements. Decades later, top-tier commercial part manufacturers have evolved significant manufacturing, statistical control, and technological improvements that can now provide parts as reliable or more reliable than MIL-SPEC parts, when used within their datasheet limits. Concurrently, the space science and exploration community’s needs demand technological advances unavailable with MIL-SPEC parts. This ongoing change necessitates using COTS parts for space missions. Properly selected COTS parts in appropriate applications can offer performance and supply availability advantages compared to MIL-SPEC parts. Their utility and demonstrated reliability result from large volumes and automated production and testing processes. However, careful review and a thorough understanding of their specifications (i.e., datasheet limitations) is needed, and verifying that manufacturer specifications and reliability meet space hardware application needs are necessary. This report recommends MIL-SPEC screening and non-radiation-related lot acceptance testing be reduced or eliminated in cases where evidence of sufficient quality and reliability exists for COTS parts. The extent of NASA's insight into COTS manufacturers and the amount and nature of the needed evidence will differ by mission and will likely be driven by a mission's resources and associated risk posture. To facilitate this goal, two new terminologies have been defined and described: “Industry Leading Parts Manufacturer (ILPM)” and “Established COTS parts.” An ILPM is a COTS manufacturer that produces high quality and reliable parts. Some parts produced by ILPMs, defined as Established COTS parts, do not need any additional MIL-SPEC or NASA screening and lot acceptance testing to be used in space applications. This report provides guidance for selecting, procuring, and applying COTS parts and for performing part-, board-, and system-level COTS parts verification. The recommendation to select Established COTS parts from ILPMs will assure those COTS parts will have comparable quality to corresponding MIL-SPEC parts. Selecting, applying, and verifying Established COTS parts from ILPMs requires a holistic team approach, engaging parts engineers, circuit designers, quality, reliability, and systems engineers, procurement specialists, radiation specialists, avionics leads, and program/project managers. A mission-specific approach tailored to a project’s Mission, Environment, Applications and Lifetime (MEAL) [ref. 2] requirements should be developed and approved by program/project managers. Any associated risks should be clearly identified, quantified, mitigated, and/or accepted. Different approaches are recommended according to program/project Risk Classes A, B, C, and D [ref. 3] and human-rated missions [ref. 4]: 1. Recommend Classes A and B and human-rated missions consider a “MIL-SPEC parts- based design” approach. ”MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach is one in which most parts are MIL-SPEC parts and Established COTS parts from ILPMs are used only when an equivalent MIL-SPEC part does not meet functional or size, weight, and power (SWaP) or performance requirements, or is not available. 2. Recommend Classes D and Sub-D missions consider a “System of COTS” approach. “System of COTS” approach is one which most parts are Established COTS parts from ILPMs. 3. Recommend Class C missions determine which approach is the best for their projects; that is, use either a “MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach, “System of COTS” approach, or a combined approach utilizing elements of both. This report intends to provide guidance in using COTS parts for NASA missions with risk classifications of A through D and human-rated missions; but it does not address the costs of using COTS parts. Costs of using COTS parts in different NASA mission classes can vary significantly even if the same parts are used in different risk postures, due to differing verification levels needed. The guidance does not distinguish between critical or non-critical systems, and a given project will need to apply the appropriate guidance based on their risk posture. The intended audience of this report are NASA personnel and commercial practitioners who support NASA’s spaceflight missions, including spaceflight program or project managers, parts engineers, parts manufacturers, radiation engineers, avionics engineers, system engineers, circuit design engineers, reliability engineers, safety and mission assurance (SMA) personnel, and parts procurement specialists. The NEPP Program will perform a pathfinder study to explore implementing the guidance in this NESC report. An ILPM verification process is not the same as conventional vendor qualification processes performed according to military standards and specifications. This NESC report intends to provide guidance in utilizing available parts data from ILPM manufacturers for parts assurance assessments needed for NASA missions. The report also captured the current practices from DoD and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in Section 10. Note each DoD and FAA report was provided by the corresponding agencies regarding their practices, which are independent from the NESC recommendations in the report.

Commercial-Off-The-Shelf↗
NASA NTRS2025

Assessing Commercialization Strategies for Evolving Network Demand (ASCEND) in the NASA Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) Program

What will NASA’s future communications demand and expenditure look like, in a paradigm where space policy encourages maximum private sector involvement? In this paper we consider this question, as NASA moves towards commercial procurement for Direct-To-Earth and Space Relay communication services. We develop a new quantitative Techno-Economic Assessment (TEA) model capable of evaluating the incremental cost over time to NASA of utilizing commercial communication services, for different mission and market scenarios. We find that current and future NASA demand could be viably procured from commercial services, with the potential to reduce cost using non-exclusive networks and the sharing of fixed costs. However, there is a key trade-off identified between maximizing economies of scale benefits and ensuring sufficient competition between communication providers to avoid collusion and excessive pricing. For example, procuring from 1-2 providers would maximize scale economies, whereas procuring from 5-6 providers would maximize competition. Given this context, it would be prudent to seek to award service contracts for 3-4 providers to optimize economies of scale benefits, while mitigating possible market collusion. These recommendations enable NASA to successfully achieve its scientific mission over the next decade, while managing limited financial and networking resources.

NSN↗
NASA NTRS1973

Development of simulation computer complex specification

The Training Simulation Computer Complex Study was one of three studies contracted in support of preparations for procurement of a shuttle mission simulator for shuttle crew training. The subject study was concerned with definition of the software loads to be imposed on the computer complex to be associated with the shuttle mission simulator and the development of procurement specifications based on the resulting computer requirements. These procurement specifications cover the computer hardware and system software as well as the data conversion equipment required to interface the computer to the simulator hardware. The development of the necessary hardware and software specifications required the execution of a number of related tasks which included, (1) simulation software sizing, (2) computer requirements definition, (3) data conversion equipment requirements definition, (4) system software requirements definition, (5) a simulation management plan, (6) a background survey, and (7) preparation of the specifications.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1976

Quality assurance program guidelines for application to and use by manufacturers of rail/guideway vehicles, buses, automatic train control systems, and their major subsystems

Guidelines are presented for a quality assurance system to be implemented by the manufacturer in support of designing, developing, fabricating, assembling, inspecting, testing, handling, and delivery of equipment being procured for use in public urban mass transit systems. The guidelines apply to this equipment when being procured for: (1) use in revenue service; (2) demonstration of systems that will be revenue producing or used by the public; (3) use as a prototype for follow-on operational/revenue producing equipment procurements; and (4) qualification tests.

Witkin, S. A.↗
NASA NTRS1977

An interactive computer approach to performing resource analysis for a multi-resource/multi-project problem

New planning techniques and supporting computer tools are needed for the optimization of resources and costs for space transportation and payload systems. Heavy emphasis on cost effective utilization of resources has caused NASA program planners to look at the impact of various independent variables that affect procurement buying. A description is presented of a category of resource planning which deals with Spacelab inventory procurement analysis. Spacelab is a joint payload project between NASA and the European Space Agency and will be flown aboard the Space Shuttle starting in 1980. In order to respond rapidly to the various procurement planning exercises, a system was built that could perform resource analysis in a quick and efficient manner. This system is known as the Interactive Resource Utilization Program (IRUP). Attention is given to aspects of problem definition, an IRUP system description, questions of data base entry, the approach used for project scheduling, and problems of resource allocation.

Schlagheck, R. A.↗
NASA NTRS1966

New developments in NASA quality assurance

The purpose of this talk is to examine and discuss NASA's basic quality concept, the policy and procedures which define and implement this concept and subsequently explore the NASA-Industry quality relationships which are essential to the success of NASA's quality assurance concept. It is important to emphasize that NASA's Quality Assurance program is predicated on the concept of an individually tailored quality program for each significant NASA procurement - particularly, large space systems. As a result, NASA's Quality Assurance program - to be effective - must be responsive to various technologies, hardware systems, and space missions. In addition, the program must be responsive to changing policies and practices in research, engineering and procurement. Key issues in the NASA-Contractor quality relationships in the framework of an over all NASA-Industry partnership include: (1) the necessity for NASA to effectively discharge its responsibility for providing clear and complete definition of quality requirements at all phases of the procurement cycle; (2) the right of the contractor to expect an explicit definition of NASA quality requirements in each RFP and contract and to request same if it is not provided; (3) the necessity for the contractor to have a dynamic and responsive quality program which is directed towards assuring that the hardware meets all technical requirements and to accomplish this in an effective and efficient manner; and (4) the critical need for investigation and study of the economic aspects of quality and an evaluation of our policies and practices based upon the results of such a study.

Condon, John E.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Investigate zero-stress replicated optics

The contracted activities for the procurement of 'Investigate Zero-Stress Replicated Optics' to support the AXAF-S x-ray spectrometer mirrors has been completed. To date four large Wolter I grazing incidence x-ray optical shells have been electroformed from nickel. The mirrors were fabricated utilizing each of two nickel alloy plated aluminum substrates twice. A wide variety of testing has been completed by NASA MSFC and UAH. This testing includes heat treatment control tests, subscale plating and fixture testing, alloy control of the electroless nickel, adhesion and release testing of the gold to electroless nickel, electroforming instrumentation and software and fabrication of subscale models. The full scale shells are one millimeter thick nickel electrodeposited over a thin gold layer which in turn has the optical surface on the inside. The optical surface is the replicate of the surface prepared on the substrate. Appendix I briefly outlines the fabrication process. Major objectives which were shared by UAH and MSFC include the design of facilities, equipment and tooling and procurement of materials and equipment. Process development followed with the fabrication of small scale pilot units. Procurement commenced immediately and equipment and materials were ordered to implement the fabrication of first surface full scale substrates (mandrels) and the second surface electroformed optical components. All principal objectives have been achieved. Inspection of the mirrors in visible and x-ray modes validates that the required performance and the quality can be achieved by an electroforming replication process. A very distinct progressive improvement has been achieved with each of the four mirrors produced. The final mirror exceeded the original goals and set an improved standard for flight hardware. The future goal of a 30 arc second resolution at 8 KEV x-ray appears to be achievable by this process when proper cleanliness and process control is utilized.

Engelhaupt, Darell↗