Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Assurance”

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 91 records · Page 5

Fault Management Architectures and the Challenges of Providing Software Assurance

The satellite systems Fault Management (FM) is focused on safety, the preservation of assets, and maintaining the desired functionality of the system. How FM is implemented varies among missions. Common to most is system complexity due to a need to establish a multi-dimensional structure across hardware, software and operations. This structure is necessary to identify and respond to system faults, mitigate technical risks and ensure operational continuity. These architecture, implementation and software assurance efforts increase with mission complexity. Because FM is a systems engineering discipline with a distributed implementation, providing efficient and effective verification and validation (VV) is challenging. A breakout session at the 2012 NASA Independent Verification Validation (IVV) Annual Workshop titled VV of Fault Management: Challenges and Successes exposed these issues in terms of VV for a representative set of architectures. NASA's IVV is funded by NASA's Software Assurance Research Program (SARP) in partnership with NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) to extend the work performed at the Workshop session. NASA IVV will extract FM architectures across the IVV portfolio and evaluate the data set for robustness, assess visibility for validation and test, and define software assurance methods that could be applied to the various architectures and designs. This work focuses efforts on FM architectures from critical and complex projects within NASA. The identification of particular FM architectures, visibility, and associated VVIVV techniques provides a data set that can enable higher assurance that a satellite system will adequately detect and respond to adverse conditions. Ultimately, results from this activity will be incorporated into the NASA Fault Management Handbook providing dissemination across NASA, other agencies and the satellite community. This paper discusses the approach taken to perform the evaluations and preliminary findings from the research including identification of FM architectures, visibility observations, and methods utilized for VVIVV.

Fault Management↗

Software Assurance Challenges for the Commercial Crew Program

This paper will provide a description of some of the challenges NASA is facing in providing software assurance within the new commercial space services paradigm, namely with the Commercial Crew Program (CCP). The CCP will establish safe, reliable, and affordable access to the International Space Station (ISS) by purchasing a ride from commercial companies. The CCP providers have varying experience with software development in safety-critical space systems. NASA's role in providing effective software assurance support to the CCP providers is critical to the success of CCP. These challenges include funding multiple vehicles that execute in parallel and have different rules of engagement, multiple providers with unique proprietary concerns, providing equivalent guidance to all providers, permitting alternates to NASA standards, and a large number of diverse stakeholders. It is expected that these challenges will exist in future programs, especially if the CCP paradigm proves successful. The proposed CCP approach to address these challenges includes a risk-based assessment with varying degrees of engagement and a distributed assurance model. This presentation will describe NASA IV&V Program's software assurance support and responses to these challenges.

Commercial Crew↗

The NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program: Overview and the New Tenets for Cost Conscious Mission Assurance on Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts

The NEPP Program focuses on the reliability aspects of electronic devices (integrated circuits such as a processor in a computer). There are three principal aspects of this reliability: 1) Lifetime, inherent failure and design issues related to the EEE parts technology and packaging; 2) Effects of space radiation and the space environment on these technologies, and; 3) Creation and maintenance of the assurance support infrastructure required for mission success. The NEPP mission is to provide guidance to NASA for the selection and application of microelectronics technologies, to improve understanding of the risks related to the use of these technologies in the space environment, and to ensure that appropriate EEE parts research is performed to meet NASA mission assurance needs. NEPPs FY15 goals are to represent the NASA voice to the greater aerospace EEE parts community including supporting anti-counterfeit and trust, provide relevant guidance to cost-effective missions, aid insertion of advanced (and commercial) technologies, resolve unexpected parts issues, ensure access to appropriate radiation test facilities, and collaborate as widely as possible with external entities. In accordance with the changing mission profiles throughout NASA, the NEPP Program has developed a balanced portfolio of efforts to provide agency-wide assurance for not only traditional spacecraft developments, but also those in-line with the new philosophies emerging worldwide. In this presentation, we shall present an overview of this program and considerations for EEE parts assurance as applied to cost conscious missions.

space radiation↗

Workshop on Assurance for Autonomous Systems for Aviation

This report describes the workshop on Assurance for Autonomous Systems for Aviation that was held in January 2016 in conjunction with the SciTech 2016 conference held in San Diego, CA. The workshop explored issues related to assurance for autonomous systems and also the idea of trust in these systems. Specifically, we focused on discussing current practices for assurance of autonomy, identifying barriers specific to autonomy as related to assurance as well as operational scenarios demonstrating the need to address the barriers. Furthermore, attention was given to identifying verification techniques that may be applicable to autonomy, as well as discussing new research directions needed to address barriers, thereby involving potential shifts in current practices.

assurance↗

Model Based Mission Assurance in a Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Framework: State-of-the-Art Assessment

This report explores the current state of the art of Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) in projects that have shifted towards Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE). Its goal is to provide insight into how NASA’s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) should respond to this shift. In MBSE, systems engineering information is organized and represented in models: rigorous computer-based representations, which collectively make many activities easier to perform, less error prone, and scalable. S&MA practices must shift accordingly. The “Objective Structure Hierarchies” recently developed by OSMA provide the framework for understanding this shift. Although the objectives themselves will remain constant, S&MA practices (activities, processes, tools) to achieve them are subject to change. This report presents insights derived from literature studies and interviews. The literature studies gleaned assurance implications from reports of space-related applications of MBSE. The interviews with knowledgeable S&MA and MBSE personnel discovered concerns and ideas for how assurance may adapt. Preliminary findings and observations are presented on the state of practice of S&MA with respect to MBSE, how it is already changing, and how it is likely to change further. Finally, recommendations are provided on how to foster the evolution of S&MA to best fit with MBSE.

Aerospace engineering↗

Run Time Assurance for Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing Aircraft

NASA is conducting research to demonstrate and evaluate the application of Run Time Assurance (RTA) as a means to assure safety in Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft with highly automated or autonomous flight capability supervised by a single onboard pilot. The work described in this report demonstrates an application of RTA and examines the implications for design and analysis of aircraft functions and systems; aircraft safety hazards; safety assurance; development assurance; and pilot tasks and performance. This research effort also seeks to assess the efficacy of the combined application of traditional Functional Hazard Analysis (FHA) and the more modern System Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) techniques to perform hazard analyses on aircraft with complex automated and autonomous systems and an onboard pilot. During the research effort we developed architectural designs of two alternate eVTOL aircraft, generally following the process characterized in the SAE standards ARP4754 and ARP4761. The design has focused on the control architectures of these aircraft, which are identical except that one incorporates RTA techniques to reduce the criticality of some key software components. Artifacts of this process include a taxonomy of aircraft-level functions, aircraft-level architecture diagrams, aircraft-level functional hazard assessments (AFHA), function allocations onto aircraft systems and subsystems, functional block diagrams for a select set of control-related functions, and system-level functional hazard assessments (SFHA) for those functions. This project has highlighted the notion that DAL D is something of a sweet spot for low-confidence controllers in an RTA-based design. Among the many activities described in DO-178C, the activities related to requirement verifiability, algorithmic accuracy, and test coverage can be the most challenging for the kinds of advanced control techniques that may be desirable in novel UAM designs, such as adaptive control, machine-learning, artificial intelligence, numerical search, and Monte Carlo based algorithms. Moreover, the standard requires that development teams demonstrate that errors leading to unacceptable failure conditions have been removed from the software. The RTA architecture, which cordons off the low-confidence function, makes it much easier to show this for these kinds of algorithms. With regard to the use of STPA and FHA as complementary hazard analysis techniques, our research effort led us to the conclusion that STPA should be used to derive requirements for hardware and software systems and/or components. Also, STPA is a natural complement to other processes in ARP4754A involving design studies and iteration.

Run-time assurance↗

Data Centers and Digital Assurance Introduction to Supply Chain and Cybersecurity for Data Centers, Session 1

The first session of the TADA (Technical Assistance for Digital Assurance) Data Centers Cohort Workshop, held on October 30, 2025, introduced foundational concepts of Digital Assurance in the context of data center and grid integration. Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, the workshop brought together utilities, data center operators, developers, and vendors to address cybersecurity and supply chain vulnerabilities. The session emphasized the growing criticality of data centers within the electric grid and the need for secure, real-time, bidirectional communication. Participants explored the principles of Digital Assurance, including cybersecurity, cyber-informed engineering (CIE), and lifecycle security, and applied a threat-vulnerability-consequence framework to identify and mitigate risks at the data center–grid interface. Discussions covered a range of threats such as spoofed dispatch signals and insider threats, architectural vulnerabilities like SCADA interfaces and insecure protocols, and potential consequences including cascading grid failures. The session also raised strategic questions about business value, vendor assurance, and defining cyber boundaries and responsibilities. This foundational workshop set the stage for deeper technical analysis and the development of actionable frameworks in subsequent sessions. Session 1 of 3.

24 - POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Software Quality Assurance for EBR-II Fuels Irradiation and Physics Database (FIPD)

The Fuels Irradiation and Physics Database (FIPD) is an ongoing DOE project on archival of the EBR-II metal-alloy fuel irradiation experiments. As part of its use in support of license applications, the Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) was drafted and endorsed by NRC in an effort to demonstrate its compliance with regulatory expectations. Software Quality Assurance (SQA) for the physics portion of FIPD is intended to qualify the calculated quantities such as fuel and cladding temperatures, neutron fluence and axially varying burnup estimates for irradiated fuel elements. This report covers the initial evaluation of SQA status of three neutron physics and thermo-fluid codes (REBUS, RCT and SE2RCT) that form the basis of calculated quantities for as-irradiated characteristics of the tested metallic fuel elements. The report also introduces an SQA plan to address the identified deficiencies. The REBUS, RCT, and SE2RCT codes are all part of the Argonne Reactor Code (ARC) code system. There is considerable knowledge and experience on REBUS and RCT but relatively less on SE2RCT. During FY2021, efforts focused on an assessment of how the data in the EBR-II Physics and Analysis DataBase (PADB) is generated with SE2RCT and used in FIPD. Additional tasks included considerations of uncertainties for power estimates in REBUS and RCT calculations and their impact on the combined RCT methodology. The RCT software usage in FIPD was assessed this year and the input/output details studied. A “requirements” document was created that identifies the key features of the RCT software being used in FIPD that need to have SQA documentation. A brief discussion on the history of RCT and its input is included in this report along with the basic SQA roadmap laid out in the requirements document. The SE2RCT software usage in FIPD is still being studied noting that there is no current manual. As part of the work done this year, two bugs were identified in the SE2RCT software which have a minor impact on the accuracy of the results it produces. No requirements document has been created, but one identified feature of SE2RCT being used that needs verification was its fuel pin temperature calculation. The work completed this year confirms that the approximations which will be included in the software verification report for SE2RCT are accurate. In addition to software quality assurance work for RCT and SE2RCT, an automated verification framework is proposed to simplify the software quality assurance process. The purpose of this framework is to streamline code verification and documentation while minimizing repetitive tasks for code developers and reviewers. The reduction of repeated input (between reference solution, software, and documentation input) throughout the SQA process reduces potential for human errors during the preparation of the supporting software quality records. The automation of the verification and documentation process proposed for this project leverages the existing verification structure already in place for the SAS4A/SASSYS-1 code.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

The quality assurance role in the Deep Space Network

The quality assurance section provides skilled personnel who perform the following functions: quality hardware engineering, quality software engineering, inspection and testing, and an independent assessment to quality, engineering and project requirements. The quality assurance section provides specifications, workmanship standards, process specifications and quality assurance procedures in support of DSN equipment. In addition, the quality assurance section reviews DSN engineering documents to ensure that appropriate and adequate quality provisions are included.

Sirpilla, R. L.↗

Assessment of the NASA Flight Assurance Review Program

The NASA flight assurance review program to develop minimum standard guidelines for flight assurance reviews was assessed. Documents from NASA centers and NASA headquarters to determine current design review practices and procedures were evaluated. Six reviews were identified for the recommended minimum. The practices and procedures used at the different centers to incorporate the most effective ones into the minimum standard review guidelines were analyzed and guidelines for procedures, personnel and responsibilies, review items/data checklist, and feedback and closeout were defined. The six recommended reviews and the minimum standards guidelines developed for flight assurance reviews are presented. Observations and conclusions for further improving the NASA review and quality assurance process are outlined.

Holmes, J.↗

NASA guidelines for assuring the adequacy and appropriateness of security safeguards in sensitive applications

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-71, transmittal Memorandum No. 1, requires that each agency establish a management control process to assure that appropriate administrative, physical and technical safeguards are incorporated into all new computer applications. In addition to security specifications, the management control process should assure that the safeguards are adequate for the application. The security activities that should be integral to the system development process are examined. The software quality assurance process to assure that adequate and appropriate controls are incorporated into sensitive applications is also examined. Security for software packages is also discussed.

Tompkins, F. G.↗

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.↗

Management of government quality assurance functions for NASA contracts

This handbook sets forth requirements for NASA direction and management of government quality assurance functions performed for NASA contracts and is applicable to all NASA installations. These requirements will standardize management to provide the minimum oversight and effective use of resources. This handbook implements Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 46, NASA FAR Supplement 18-46, Quality Assurance, and NMI 7410.1. Achievement of established quality and reliability goals at all levels is essential to the success of NASA programs. Active participation by NASA and other agency quality assurance personnel in all phases of contract operations, including precontract activity, will assist in the economic and timely achievement of program results. This involves broad participation in design, development, procurement, inspection, testing, and preventive and corrective actions. Consequently, government, as well as industry, must place strong emphasis on the accomplishment of all functions having a significant bearing on quality and reliability from program initiation through end-use of supplies and services produced. For purposes of implementing NASA and other agency agreements, and to provide for uniformity and consistency, the terminology and definitions prescribed herein and in a future handbook shall be utilized for all NASA quality assurance delegations and subsequent redelegations.

Source record↗

Metrology: Measurement Assurance Program Guidelines

The 5300.4 series of NASA Handbooks for Reliability and Quality Assurance Programs have provisions for the establishment and utilization of a documented metrology system to control measurement processes and to provide objective evidence of quality conformance. The intent of these provisions is to assure consistency and conformance to specifications and tolerances of equipment, systems, materials, and processes procured and/or used by NASA, its international partners, contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers. This Measurement Assurance Program (MAP) guideline has the specific objectives to: (1) ensure the quality of measurements made within NASA programs; (2) establish realistic measurement process uncertainties; (3) maintain continuous control over the measurement processes; and (4) ensure measurement compatibility among NASA facilities. The publication addresses MAP methods as applied within and among NASA installations and serves as a guide to: control measurement processes at the local level (one facility); conduct measurement assurance programs in which a number of field installations are joint participants; and conduct measurement integrity (round robin) experiments in which a number of field installations participate to assess the overall quality of particular measurement processes at a point in time.

Eicke, W. G.↗

Product Assurance for Spaceflight Hardware

This report contains information about the tasks I have completed and the valuable experience I have gained at NASA. The report is divided into two different sections followed by a program summary sheet. The first section describes the two reports I have completed for the Office of Mission Assurance (OMA). I describe the approach and the resources and facilities used to complete each report. The second section describes my experience working in the Receipt Inspection/Quality Assurance Lab (RI/QA). The first report described is a Product Assurance Plan for the Gas Permeable Polymer Materials (GPPM) mission. The purpose of the Product Assurance Plan is to define the various requirements which are to be met through completion of the GPPM mission. The GPPM experiment is a space payload which will be flown in the shuttle's SPACEHAB module. The experiment will use microgravity to enable production of complex polymeric gas permeable materials. The second report described in the first section is a Fracture Analysis for the Mir Environmental Effects Payload (MEEP). The Fracture Analysis report is a summary of the fracture control classifications for all structural elements of the MEEP. The MEEP hardware consists of four experiment carriers, each of which contains an experiment container holding a passive experiment. The MEEP hardware will be attached to the cargo bay of the space shuttle. It will be transferred by Extravehicular Activity and mounted on the Mir space station. The second section of this report describes my experiences in the RVQA lab. I listed the different equipment I used at the lab and their functions. I described the extensive inspection process that must be completed for spaceflight hardware. Included, at the end of this section, are pictures of most of the equipment used in the lab. There is a summary sheet located at the end of this report. It briefly describes the valuable experience I have gained at NASA this summer and what I will be able to take with me as I return to college. I briefly discuss the experiences I mentioned in the previous three paragraphs along with training classes I attended and courses I completed at the Learning Lab.

Monroe, Mike↗

Radiation Hardness Assurance for Space Systems

The space radiation environment can lead to extremely harsh operating conditions for on-board electronic box and systems. The characteristics of the radiation environment are highly dependent on the type of mission (date, duration and orbit). Radiation accelerates the aging of the electronic parts and material and can lead to a degradation of electrical performance; it can also create transient phenomena on parts. Such damage at the part level can induce damage or functional failure at electronic box, subsystem, and system levels. A rigorous methodology is needed to ensure that the radiation environment does not compromise the functionality and performance of the electronics during the system life. This methodology is called hardness assurance. It consists of those activities undertaken to ensure that the electronic piece parts placed in the space system perform to their design specifications after exposure to the space environment. It deals with system requirements, environmental definitions, part selection, part testing, shielding and radiation tolerant design. All these elements should play together in order to produce a system tolerant to.the radiation environment. An overview of the different steps of a space system hardness assurance program is given in section 2. In order to define the mission radiation specifications and compare these requirements to radiation test data, a detailed knowledge of the space environment and the corresponding electronic device failure mechanisms is required. The presentation by J. Mazur deals with the Earth space radiation environment as well as the internal environment of a spacecraft. The presentation by J. Schwank deals with ionization effects, and the presentation by T. Weatherford deals with Single particle Event Phenomena (SEP) in semiconductor devices and microcircuits. These three presentations provide more detailed background to complement the sections 3 and 4. Part selection and categorization are discussed in section 5. Section 6 presents the organization of the hardness assurance within a project. Section 7 discusses emerging radiation hardness assurance issues.

Poivey, Christian↗

Technical Excellence and Communication: The Cornerstones for Successful Safety and Mission Assurance Programs

The paper describes the role of technical excellence and communication in the development and maintenance of safety and mission assurance programs. The Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) organization is used to illustrate philosophies and techniques that strengthen safety and mission assurance efforts and that contribute to healthy and effective organizational cultures. The events and conditions leading to the development of the MSFC S&MA organization are reviewed. Historic issues and concerns are identified. The adverse effects of resource limitations and risk assessment roles are discussed. The structure and functions of the core safety, reliability, and quality assurance functions are presented. The current organization s mission and vision commitments serve as the starting points for the description of the current organization. The goals and objectives are presented that address the criticisms of the predecessor organizations. Additional improvements are presented that address the development of technical excellence and the steps taken to improve communication within the Center, with program customers, and with other Agency S&MA organizations.

Malone, Roy W.↗

Concept of Operation for Tactical Separation Assurance in Super-Density Operations

The Airspace Systems Program is committed to supporting the Next Generation Air Transportation System through research and development in select areas. One such area, referred to as Super Density Operations, is conducting research to develop technologies that will safely increase the throughput in busy terminal area environments. The purpose of this document is to develop a Concept of Operations for the Tactical Separation Assurance function, one of the functions included in Super Density Operations. A functional description of the technologies required for Super Density Operations is presented followed by a more detail description of the Tactical Separation Assurance function. Two story boards are presented to illustrate the operational use of the Tactical Separation Assurance function under different situations. The last section proposes a pathway to implementing the Tactical Separation Assurance function.

Denery, Dallas G.↗