Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “task programming”

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 739 records · Page 41
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2009

Commercial Sensor Survey Fiscal Year 2009 master compendium radiation test report

The NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program Sensor Technology Commercial Sensor Survey task is geared toward benefiting future NASA space missions with low-cost, short-duty-cycle, visible-wavelength imaging needs. Such applications could include imaging for educational outreach purposes or short surveys of spacecraft, planetary, or lunar surfaces. Under the task, inexpensive, low-power, commercial grade CMOS sensors were surveyed in fiscal year 2007 (FY07), and three sensors were selected and tested for total ionizing dose (TID) and displacement damage dose (DDD) tolerance in fiscal year 2008 (FY08). The selected sensors had to meet selection criteria chosen to support small, low-mass cameras that produce good resolution color images. The commercial CMOS sensors tested under the task in FY08 showed very promising response to typical outreach and survey camera TID and DDD levels. In fiscal year 2009 (FY09), the survey was broadened to include two additional, similar sensor products. This compendium provides results for all radiation testing performed on the Micron and OmniVision sensors that were selected for radiation tolerance testing in FY08 and FY09.

Thorbourn, Dennis O.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of an Inertial Sensor-based Methodology for Spacesuited Geology Task Assessments during Simulated Lunar Extravehicular Activities

Lunar surface exploration during Artemis missions will require the specific skill set of geology sampling. Apollo astronauts had extensive training and used specialized tools to collect lunar rocks, core samples, pebbles, sand, and dust. The inflexibility of the pressurized Apollo spacesuits forced sampling to be taken at a standstill posture. However, new exploration spacesuits are expected to incorporate advanced materials and joint bearings, allowing for greater mobility and a wider range of functional postures. Thus, science and exploration during Artemis missions will likely involve a variety of standing, squatting, and kneeling postures. In preparation for future lunar exploration missions, NASA provides geologic training to astronauts and other mission personnel. This professional training with a spacesuit in simulated lunar environments will enhance performance and reduce risk of injury to astronauts on the lunar surface. However, anecdotally, untrained or newly trained people wearing prototype planetary spacesuits have been observed to performing motions differently than a trained geologist would when conducting the same geology sampling tasks. Therefore, a tool for evaluating geology postures at extravehicular activity (EVA) training facilities becomes required. In this paper, we introduce a novel inertial measurement unit (IMU)-based method of geology task assessments in spacesuited conditions during simulated lunar EVAs. As a case study, two subjects (one geologist and one non-geologist) participated and donned the Mark III prototype planetary spacesuit during offloading with the spreader bar gimbal in NASA’s Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS). For automated geology task assessments, the spacesuit was instrumented with three wireless IMUs (APDM Opal, OR, USA): one on the chest and one each on the left and right ankle bearings. Then subjects performed geology tasks using various tools (rake, trench, hammer chisel, scoop, and drive tube) for 45 minutes each. The chest IMU measured the torso tilt angle in the sagittal plane. We used an ensemble learning method with the ankle IMUs to discriminate between standing and kneeling activities. IMU data were processed using custom MATLAB (Mathworks, MA, USA) software. In our case study, the developed method was able to discriminate differences in standing and kneeling activity levels between subjects who were all highly experienced with spacesuited testing. Our preliminary data showed one subject maintained the constant and lower range of the upper body tilt angle while both standing and kneeling, while the other subject showed more variation of the upper body tilt angle and preferred bending the upper body rather than changing from standing to kneeling posture and vice versa. While geology experience may be a factor, these results need further investigation as suit sizing and ARGOS offloading configurations have been proven to have a significant influence on suited ARGOS tasks. Also, more subjects will be needed to complete these tasks for validation. IMU-based geology task assessments can provide useful information for geology training programs. Additionally, our IMU-based posture analysis can provide new insights into how to evaluate spacesuited geology task characteristics of astronauts during simulated lunar EVAs.

Kyoung Jae Kim↗
NASA NTRS2006

Cassini-Huygens maneuver automation for navigation

Many times during the Cassini-Huygens mission to Saturn, propulsive maneuvers must be spaced so closely together that there isn't enough time or workforce to execute the maneuver-related software manually, one subsystem at a time. Automation is required. Automating the maneuver design process has involved close cooperation between teams. We present the contribution from the Navigation system. In scope, this includes trajectory propagation and search, generation of ephemerides, general tasks such as email notification and file transfer, and presentation materials. The software has been used to help understand maneuver optimization results, Huygens probe delivery statistics, and Saturn ring-plane crossing geometry. The Maneuver Automation Software (MAS), developed for the Cassini-Huygens program enables frequent maneuvers by handling mundane tasks such as creation of deliverable files, file delivery, generation and transmission of email announcements, generation of presentation material and other supporting documentation. By hand, these tasks took up hours, if not days, of work for each maneuver. Automated, these tasks may be completed in under an hour. During the cruise trajectory the spacing of maneuvers was such that development of a maneuver design could span about a month, involving several other processes in addition to that described, above. Often, about the last five days of this process covered the generation of a final design using an updated orbit-determination estimate. To support the tour trajectory, the orbit determination data cut-off of five days before the maneuver needed to be reduced to approximately one day and the whole maneuver development process needed to be reduced to less than a week..

propulsion maneuvers↗
NASA NTRS2009

Human Research Program Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) Standing Review Panel (SRP)

The Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) Standing Review Panel (SRP) evaluated 22 gaps and 39 tasks in the three risk areas assigned to the SHFE Project. The area where tasks were best designed to close the gaps and the fewest gaps were left out was the Risk of Reduced Safety and Efficiency dire to Inadequate Design of Vehicle, Environment, Tools or Equipment. The areas where there were more issues with gaps and tasks, including poor or inadequate fit of tasks to gaps and missing gaps, were Risk of Errors due to Poor Task Design and Risk of Error due to Inadequate Information. One risk, the Risk of Errors due to Inappropriate Levels of Trust in Automation, should be added. If astronauts trust automation too much in areas where it should not be trusted, but rather tempered with human judgment and decision making, they will incur errors. Conversely, if they do not trust automation when it should be trusted, as in cases where it can sense aspects of the environment such as radiation levels or distances in space, they will also incur errors. This will be a larger risk when astronauts are less able to rely on human mission control experts and are out of touch, far away, and on their own. The SRP also identified 11 new gaps and five new tasks. Although the SRP had an extremely large quantity of reading material prior to and during the meeting, we still did not feel we had an overview of the activities and tasks the astronauts would be performing in exploration missions. Without a detailed task analysis and taxonomy of activities the humans would be engaged in, we felt it was impossible to know whether the gaps and tasks were really sufficient to insure human safety, performance, and comfort in the exploration missions. The SRP had difficulty evaluating many of the gaps and tasks that were not as quantitative as those related to concrete physical danger such as excessive noise and vibration. Often the research tasks for cognitive risks that accompany poor task or information design addressed only part, but not all, of the gaps they were programmed to fill. In fact the tasks outlined will not close the gap but only scratch the surface in many cases. In other cases, the gap was written too broadly, and really should be restated in a more constrained way that can be addressed by a well-organized and complementary set of tasks. In many cases, the research results should be turned into guidelines for design. However, it was not clear whether the researchers or another group would construct and deliver these guidelines.

Wichansky, Anna↗
NASA NTRS1989

Initial flight test of a ground deployed system for flying qualities assessment

In order to provide a safe, repeatable, precise, high-gain flying qualities task a ground deployed system was developed and tested at the NASA Ames Research Center's Dryden Flight Research Facility. This system, the adaptable target lighting array system (ATLAS), is based on the German Aerospace Research Establishment's ground attack test equipment (GRATE). These systems provide a flying-qualities task, emulating the ground-attack task with ground deployed lighted targets. These targets light in an unpredictable sequence and the pilot has to aim the aircraft at whichever target is lighted. Two flight-test programs were used to assess the suitability of ATLAS. The first program used the United States Air Force (USAF) NT-33A variability stability aircraft to establish that ATLAS provided a task suitable for use in flying qualities research. A head-up display (HUD) tracking task was used for comparison. The second program used the X-29A forward-swept wing aircraft to demonstrate that the ATLAS task was suitable for assessing the flying qualities of a specific experimental aircraft. In this program, the ground-attack task was used for comparison. All pilots who used ATLAS found it be highly satisfactory and thought it to be superior to the other tasks used in flying qualities evaluations. It was recommended that ATLAS become a standard for flying qualities evaluations.

Shafer, Mary F.↗
NASA NTRS1994

National facilities study. Volume 5: Space research and development facilities task group

With the beginnings of the U.S. space program, there was a pressing need to develop facilities that could support the technology research and development, testing, and operations of evolving space systems. Redundancy in facilities that was once and advantage in providing flexibility and schedule accommodation is instead fast becoming a burden on scarce resources. As a result, there is a clear perception in many sectors that the U.S. has many space R&D facilities that are under-utilized and which are no longer cost-effective to maintain. At the same time, it is clear that the U.S. continues to possess many space R&D facilities which are the best -- or among the best -- in the world. In order to remain world class in key areas, careful assessment of current capabilities and planning for new facilities is needed. The National Facility Study (NFS) was initiated in 1992 to develop a comprehensive and integrated long-term plan for future aerospace facilities that meets current and projected government and commercial needs. In order to assess the nation's capability to support space research and development (R&D), a Space R&D Task Group was formed. The Task Group was co-chaired by NASA and DOD. The Task Group formed four major, technologically- and functionally- oriented working groups: Human and Machine Operations; Information and Communications; Propulsion and Power; and Materials, Structures, and Flight Dynamics. In addition to these groups, three supporting working groups were formed: Systems Engineering and Requirements; Strategy and Policy; and Costing Analysis. The Space R&D Task Group examined several hundred facilities against the template of a baseline mission and requirements model (developed in common with the Space Operations Task Group) and a set of excursions from the baseline. The model and excursions are described in Volume 3 of the NFS final report. In addition, as a part of the effort, the group examined key strategic issues associated with space R&D facilities planning for the U.S., and these are discussed in Section 4 of this volume.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2016

NEPP Roadmaps, COTS, and Small Missions

This presentation provides an overview of the NEPP Program as well as the current roadmap for NEPP tasks.

NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program↗
NASA NTRS1998

This New Ocean: A History of Project Mercury

When Congress created the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in 1958, it charged NASA with the responsibility "to contribute materially to . . . the expansion of human knowledge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space" and "provide for the widest practicable and appropriate dissemination of information concerning its activities and the results thereof." NASA wisely interpreted this mandate to include responsibility for documenting the epochal progress of which it is the focus. The result has been the development of a historical program by NASA as unprecedented as the task of extending man's mobility beyond his planet. This volume is not only NASA's accounting of its obligation to disseminate information to our current generation of Americans. It also fulfills, as do all of NASA's future-oriented scientific-technological activities, the further obligation to document the present as the heritage of the future. The wide-ranging NASA history program includes chronicles of day-to-day space activities; specialized studies of particular fields within space science and technology; accounts of NASA's efforts in organization and management, where its innovations, while less known to the public than its more spectacular space shots, have also been of great significance; narratives of the growth and expansion of the space centers throughout the country, which represent in microcosm many aspects of NASA's total effort; program histories, tracing the successes- and failures- of the various projects that mark man's progress into the Space Age; and a history of NASA itself, incorporating in general terms the major problems and challenges, and the responses thereto, of our entire civilian space effort. The volume presented here is a program history, the first in a series telling of NASA's pioneering steps into the Space Age. It deals with the first American manned-spaceflight program: Project Mercury. Although some academicians might protest that this is "official" history, it is official only in the fact that it has been prepared and published with the support and cooperation of NASA. It is not "official" history in the sense of presenting a point of view supposedly that of NASA officialdom-if anyone could determine what the "point of view" of such a complex organism might be. Certainly, the authors were allowed to pursue their task with the fullest freedom and in accordance with the highest scholarly standards of the history profession.

Swenson, Loyd S., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Mars Technology Program Planetary Protection Technology Development

The objectives of the NASA Planetary Protection program are to preserve biological and organic conditions of solar-system bodies for future scientific exploration and to protect the Earth from potential hazardous extraterrestrial contamination. As the exploration of solar system continues, NASA remains committed to the implementation of planetary protection policy and regulations. To fulfill this commitment, the Mars Technology Program (MTP) has invested in a portfolio of tasks for developing necessary technologies to meet planetary protection requirements for the next decade missions.

Mars technology program↗
NASA NTRS2006

New Directions for NASA's Advanced Life Support Program

Advanced Life Support (ALS), an element of Human Systems Research and Technology s (HSRT) Life Support and Habitation Program (LSH), has been NASA s primary sponsor of life support research and technology development for the agency. Over its history, ALS sponsored tasks across a diverse set of institutions, including field centers, colleges and universities, industry, and governmental laboratories, resulting in numerous publications and scientific articles, patents and new technologies, as well as education and training for primary, secondary and graduate students, including minority serving institutions. Prior to the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE) announced on January 14th, 2004 by the President, ALS had been focused on research and technology development for long duration exploration missions, emphasizing closed-loop regenerative systems, including both biological and physicochemical. Taking a robust and flexible approach, ALS focused on capabilities to enable visits to multiple potential destinations beyond low Earth orbit. ALS developed requirements, reference missions, and assumptions upon which to structure and focus its development program. The VSE gave NASA a plan for steady human and robotic space exploration based on specific, achievable goals. Recently, the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS) was chartered by NASA s Administrator to determine the best exploration architecture and strategy to implement the Vision. The study identified key technologies required to enable and significantly enhance the reference exploration missions and to prioritize near-term and far-term technology investments. This technology assessment resulted in a revised Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) technology investment plan. A set of new technology development projects were initiated as part of the plan s implementation, replacing tasks previously initiated under HSRT and its sister program, Exploration Systems Research and Technology (ESRT). The Exploration Life Support (ELS) Project, under the Exploration Technology Development Program, has recently been initiated to perform directed life support technology development in support of Constellation and the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV). ELS) has replaced ALS, with several major differences. Thermal Control Systems have been separated into a new stand alone project (Thermal Systems for Exploration Missions). Tasks in Advanced Food Technology have been relocated to the Human Research Program. Tasks in a new discipline area, Habitation Engineering, have been added. Research and technology development for capabilities required for longer duration stays on the Moon and Mars, including bioregenerative system, have been deferred.

Barta, Daniel J.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Process development for automated solar cell and module production. Task 4: Automated array assembly

The Unimate robot was programmed for the final 35 cell pattern to be used in the fabrication of the deliverable modules. Mechanical construction of the Automated Lamination Station and Final Assembly Station were completed on schedule. All final wiring and interconnect cables were also completed and the first operational testing began. The final controlling program was written. A local fabricator was contracted to produce the glass reinforced concrete panels to be used for testing and deliverables. A video tape showing all three stations in operation was produced.

Hagerty, J. J.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Design for a complete SOHO mission under the ISTP

The Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) occupies a crucial slot in the International Solar Terrestrial Physics (ISTP) program, which investigates the energy and material flows in key regions of the geospace. Prior space missions which have brought understanding of the corona to what it is today are reviewed. Similarly, space science programs on the horizon will build on SOHO discoveries and insights. SOHO program structure and cost control methods are sketched; tasks have been transferred off the spacecraft where possible, and capabilities will be delivered just before needed. The team analyses of data will be augmented by a SOHO guest investigator program after launch. Theorists on teams would similarly be joined by participants in a proposed SOHO theory program. The ISTP program is built on a foundation of collaborative science, implying the need for observational campaigns directed from a user friendly operations center.

Wagner, W. J.↗
NASA NTRS1988

KALI - An environment for the programming and control of cooperative manipulators

A design description is given of a controller for cooperative robots. The background and motivation for multiple arm control are discussed. A set of programming primitives which permit a programmer to specify cooperative tasks are described. Motion primitives specify asynchronous motions, master/slave motions, and cooperative motions. In the context of cooperative robots, trajectory generation issues are discussed and the authors' implementation briefly described. The relations between programming and control in the case of multiple robots are examined. The allocation of various tasks among a multiprocessor computer is described.

Hayward, Vincent↗
NASA NTRS1985

Analysis of Spiral Bevel Gearing

Program generalized for automated finite-element-method model generation. Tedious task of finite-element-method (FEM) model preparation greatly reduced by development of preprocessing program for automated model generation. Utility of program, including ability to rapidly evaluate parametric changes, demonstrated for spiral, helical, and spiral bevel gearing. Postprocessing program also developed, aids in review and interpretation of calculated FEM stresses.

Drago, R. J.↗
NASA NTRS1995

Using an architectural approach to integrate heterogeneous, distributed software components

Many computer programs cannot be easily integrated because their components are distributed and heterogeneous, i.e., they are implemented in diverse programming languages, use different data representation formats, or their runtime environments are incompatible. In many cases, programs are integrated by modifying their components or interposing mechanisms that handle communication and conversion tasks. For example, remote procedure call (RPC) helps integrate heterogeneous, distributed programs. When configuring such programs, however, mechanisms like RPC must be used explicitly by software developers in order to integrate collections of diverse components. Each collection may require a unique integration solution. This paper describes improvements to the concepts of software packaging and some of our experiences in constructing complex software systems from a wide variety of components in different execution environments. Software packaging is a process that automatically determines how to integrate a diverse collection of computer programs based on the types of components involved and the capabilities of available translators and adapters in an environment. Software packaging provides a context that relates such mechanisms to software integration processes and reduces the cost of configuring applications whose components are distributed or implemented in different programming languages. Our software packaging tool subsumes traditional integration tools like UNIX make by providing a rule-based approach to software integration that is independent of execution environments.

Callahan, John R.↗