SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “INFORMATION 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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2010

Improving Separation Assurance Stability Through Trajectory Flexibility Preservation

New information and automation technologies are enabling the distribution of tasks and decisions from the service providers to the users of the air traffic system, with potential capacity and cost benefits. This distribution of tasks and decisions raises the concern that independent user actions will decrease the predictability and increase the complexity of the traffic system, hence inhibiting and possibly reversing any potential benefits. One such concern is the adverse impact of uncoordinated actions by individual aircraft on the stability of separation assurance. For example, individual aircraft performing self-separation may resolve predicted losses of separation or conflicts with some traffic, only to result in secondary conflicts with other traffic or with the same traffic later in time. In answer to this concern, this paper proposes metrics for preserving user trajectory flexibility to be used in self-separation along with other objectives. The hypothesis is that preserving trajectory flexibility will naturally reduce the creation of secondary conflicts by bringing about implicit coordination between aircraft. The impact of using these metrics on improving self-separation stability is investigated by measuring the impact on secondary conflicts. The scenarios analyzed include aircraft in en route airspace with each aircraft meeting a required time of arrival in a twenty minute time horizon while maintaining separation from the surrounding traffic and using trajectory flexibility metrics to mitigate the risk of secondary conflicts. Preliminary experiments showed promising results in that the trajectory flexibility preservation reduced the potential for secondary conflicts.

Idris, Husni↗

NASA NTRS1990

Spaceport aurora: An orbiting transportation node

With recent announcements of the development of permanently staffed facilities on the Moon and Mars, the national space plan is in need of an infrastructure system for transportation and maintenance. A project team at the University of Houston College of Architecture and the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture, recently examined components for a low Earth orbit (LEO) transportation node that supports a lunar build-up scenario. Areas of investigation included identifying transportation node functions, identifying existing space systems and subsystems, analyzing variable orbits, determining logistics strategies for maintenance, and investigating assured crew return systems. The information resulted in a requirements definition document, from which the team then addressed conceptual designs for a LEO transportation node. The primary design drivers included: orbital stability, maximizing human performance and safety, vehicle maintainability, and modularity within existing space infrastructure. For orbital stability, the power tower configuration provides a gravity gradient stabilized facility and serves as the backbone for the various facility components. To maximize human performance, human comfort is stressed through zoning of living and working activities, maintaining a consistent local vertical orientation, providing crew interaction and viewing areas and providing crew return vehicles. Vehicle maintainability is accomplished through dual hangars, dual work cupolas, work modules, telerobotics and a fuel depot. Modularity is incorporated using Space Station Freedom module diameter, Space Station Freedom standard racks, and interchangeable interior partitions. It is intended that the final design be flexible and adaptable to provide a facility prototype that can service multiple mission profiles using modular space systems.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1991

FY 1991 safety program status report

In FY 1991, the NASA Safety Division continued efforts to enhance the quality and productivity of its safety oversight function. Recent initiatives set forth in areas such as training, risk management, safety assurance, operational safety, and safety information systems have matured into viable programs contributing to the safety and success of activities throughout the Agency. Efforts continued to develop a centralized intra-agency safety training program with establishment of the NASA Safety Training Center at the Johnson Space Center (JSC). The objective is to provide quality training for NASA employees and contractors on a broad range of safety-related topics. Courses developed by the Training Center will be presented at various NASA locations to minimize travel and reach the greatest number of people at the least cost. In FY 1991, as part of the ongoing efforts to enhance the total quality of NASA's safety work force, the Safety Training Center initiated development of a Certified Safety Professional review course. This course provides a comprehensive review of the skills and knowledge that well-rounded safety professionals must possess to qualify for professional certification. FY 1992 will see the course presented to NASA and contractor employees at all installations via the NASA Video Teleconference System.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1997

Cultural Variability in Crew Communication

In this study we examined what linguistic strategies pilots use when they have to challenge the actions of a colleague, and how their communications balance the need for informativeness with the need for assuring the other's cooperation. Two strategies emerged for captains. They either gave commands or they made suggestions that referred to actions of the crew. Both strategies explicitly state what action should be taken but they differ in their social implications. Commands are direct insofar as they entail a strong obligation for the listener to comply with the speaker' s request. Suggestions are less direct in this respect. However, by using the collegial "Let's do," speakers appeal to the solidarity between themselves and their listeners and seek compliance in this way. Commands, in contrast, are inherently authoritative and imply an asymmetry in status. Speakers by giving a command, express their belief that they are socially more powerful than their listeners and that they are thus licensed to command. That is, speakers seek listener compliance by appeal to their status. Status-based commands were more frequent among male captains than among female captains. Female captains instead were likely to shift the motivation for their commands away from their status to some objective necessity by referring to some problem or goal It remains to be seen, however, how captains' strategies were affected by the severity of a problem situation. Results in a preliminary study involving only male participants, suggests that pilots increased the directness of their utterances in situations that they perceived to be risky. Thus the observation that male captains used complex communications half of the time while female captains did so 75% of the time, could indicate that male captains were more likely than female captains to change their strategies with the severity of situations. Both male and female first officers in this study were less direct than captains. The most common strategy of first officers was to point to some problem or to remind the captain of a given goal. What corrective action should be taken and by whom was not explicitly stated but implied and left to the captain. In their other strategies, permission seeking and confirmation-seeking questions, first officers were more explicit about a corrective action. In the first case, they volunteered to do some course of action but left the final decision to the captain. In the latter case, they inquired or confirmed whether the captain wanted some action. Although all three strategies seek the compliance of the listener by appeal to his authority, there are important differences: By asking permission seeking and confirmation-seeking questions, first officers specify the action for which they want the captain's compliance. Compliance, however, is not demanded but requested. By alerting to a problem or to a goal, in contrast, first of officers seek the captain's compliance only with their assessment of the situation but not with a particular course of action. That is, they place the captain under no explicit obligation to initiate a corrective action but do so only indirectly by assuming that a course of action is self-evident once the problem has been acknowledged.

Fischer, Ute↗

NASA NTRS2011

Effects of Data Quality on the Characterization of Aerosol Properties from Multiple Sensors

Cross-comparison of aerosol properties between ground-based and spaceborne measurements is an important validation technique that helps to investigate the uncertainties of aerosol products acquired using spaceborne sensors. However, it has been shown that even minor differences in the cross-characterization procedure may significantly impact the results of such validation. Of particular consideration is the quality assurance I quality control (QA/QC) information - an auxiliary data indicating a "confidence" level (e.g., Bad, Fair, Good, Excellent, etc.) conferred by the retrieval algorithms on the produced data. Depending on the treatment of available QA/QC information, a cross-characterization procedure has the potential of filtering out invalid data points, such as uncertain or erroneous retrievals, which tend to reduce the credibility of such comparisons. However, under certain circumstances, even high QA/QC values may not fully guarantee the quality of the data. For example, retrievals in proximity of a cloud might be particularly perplexing for an aerosol retrieval algorithm, resulting in an invalid data that, nonetheless, could be assigned a high QA/QC confidence. In this presentation, we will study the effects of several QA/QC parameters on cross-characterization of aerosol properties between the data acquired by multiple spaceborne sensors. We will utilize the Multi-sensor Aerosol Products Sampling System (MAPSS) that provides a consistent platform for multi-sensor comparison, including collocation with measurements acquired by the ground-based Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET), The multi-sensor spaceborne data analyzed include those acquired by the Terra-MODIS, Aqua-MODIS, Terra-MISR, Aura-OMI, Parasol-POLDER, and CalipsoCALIOP satellite instruments.

Petrenko, Maksym↗

NASA NTRS2018

Mission Configuration Tree for the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST)

The GSFC Mission Configuration web-based application is a means of documenting the structure of the many elements used in building each mission that NASA launches, as well as archiving the documents associated with each of these elements and keeping track of suppliers. This includes all available drawings, engineering orders, parts lists, block diagrams, and photos of each system, subsystem, and component. While the information for several of NASA's missions is being input into Mission Configuration, the ten weeks of this project focused on collecting information for the instrument systems of the James Webb Space Telescope. Documents were collected from a database called the Next Generation Integrated Network (NGIN) so that they can eventually be uploaded into the application. From these documents, including drawings and parts lists, a configuration tree was created in Microsoft Visio which showed the relationships between each system, subsystem, and component. When both these documents and the configuration tree are input into Mission Configuration, they will be place into a drill down tree structure, from which drawings and documents can be accessed directly. Mission Configuration also includes search functions that make all parts searchable by keywords such as vendor, part number, taxonomy, and alternate nomenclature. This application is an important resource for providing access to documents related to the components used on each mission. It has created a central repository for information which can be used to benefit Safety & Mission Assurance, but may also be useful across codes. The process of collecting the information and documents to put into Mission Configuration is also allowing for a concise breakdown of information from diverse formats, creating standardization which makes information more readily accessible, while retaining project-specific information that makes it more easily searchable.

Cain, Mary C.↗

NASA NTRS1995

Software Configuration Management Guidebook

The growth in cost and importance of software to NASA has caused NASA to address the improvement of software development across the agency. One of the products of this program is a series of guidebooks that define a NASA concept of the assurance processes which are used in software development. The Software Assurance Guidebook, SMAP-GB-A201, issued in September, 1989, provides an overall picture of the concepts and practices of NASA in software assurance. Lower level guidebooks focus on specific activities that fall within the software assurance discipline, and provide more detailed information for the manager and/or practitioner. This is the Software Configuration Management Guidebook which describes software configuration management in a way that is compatible with practices in industry and at NASA Centers. Software configuration management is a key software development process, and is essential for doing software assurance.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2005

Automatic Certification of Kalman Filters for Reliable Code Generation

AUTOFILTER is a tool for automatically deriving Kalman filter code from high-level declarative specifications of state estimation problems. It can generate code with a range of algorithmic characteristics and for several target platforms. The tool has been designed with reliability of the generated code in mind and is able to automatically certify that the code it generates is free from various error classes. Since documentation is an important part of software assurance, AUTOFILTER can also automatically generate various human-readable documents, containing both design and safety related information. We discuss how these features address software assurance standards such as DO-178B.

Denney, Ewen↗

NASA NTRS2017

Technology and Tool Development to Support Safety and Mission Assurance

The Assurance Case approach is being adopted in a number of safety-mission-critical application domains in the U.S., e.g., medical devices, defense aviation, automotive systems, and, lately, civil aviation. This paradigm refocuses traditional, process-based approaches to assurance on demonstrating explicitly stated assurance goals, emphasizing the use of structured rationale, and concrete product-based evidence as the means for providing justified confidence that systems and software are fit for purpose in safely achieving mission objectives. NASA has also been embracing assurance cases through the concepts of Risk Informed Safety Cases (RISCs), as documented in the NASA System Safety Handbook, and Objective Hierarchies (OHs) as put forth by the Agency's Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA). This talk will give an overview of the work being performed by the SGT team located at NASA Ames Research Center, in developing technologies and tools to engineer and apply assurance cases in customer projects pertaining to aviation safety. We elaborate how our Assurance Case Automation Toolset (AdvoCATE) has not only extended the state-of-the-art in assurance case research, but also demonstrated its practical utility. We have successfully developed safety assurance cases for a number of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) operations, which underwent, and passed, scrutiny both by the aviation regulator, i.e., the FAA, as well as the applicable NASA boards for airworthiness and flight safety, flight readiness, and mission readiness. We discuss our efforts in expanding AdvoCATE capabilities to support RISCs and OHs under a project recently funded by OSMA under its Software Assurance Research Program. Finally, we speculate on the applicability of our innovations beyond aviation safety to such endeavors as robotic, and human spaceflight.

Mission Assuranc↗

NASA NTRS2013

NASA Software Engineering Benchmarking Study

To identify best practices for the improvement of software engineering on projects, NASA's Offices of Chief Engineer (OCE) and Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) formed a team led by Heather Rarick and Sally Godfrey to conduct this benchmarking study. The primary goals of the study are to identify best practices that: Improve the management and technical development of software intensive systems; Have a track record of successful deployment by aerospace industries, universities [including research and development (R&D) laboratories], and defense services, as well as NASA's own component Centers; and Identify candidate solutions for NASA's software issues. Beginning in the late fall of 2010, focus topics were chosen and interview questions were developed, based on the NASA top software challenges. Between February 2011 and November 2011, the Benchmark Team interviewed a total of 18 organizations, consisting of five NASA Centers, five industry organizations, four defense services organizations, and four university or university R and D laboratory organizations. A software assurance representative also participated in each of the interviews to focus on assurance and software safety best practices. Interviewees provided a wealth of information on each topic area that included: software policy, software acquisition, software assurance, testing, training, maintaining rigor in small projects, metrics, and use of the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) framework, as well as a number of special topics that came up in the discussions. NASA's software engineering practices compared favorably with the external organizations in most benchmark areas, but in every topic, there were ways in which NASA could improve its practices. Compared to defense services organizations and some of the industry organizations, one of NASA's notable weaknesses involved communication with contractors regarding its policies and requirements for acquired software. One of NASA's strengths was its software assurance practices, which seemed to rate well in comparison to the other organizational groups and also seemed to include a larger scope of activities. An unexpected benefit of the software benchmarking study was the identification of many opportunities for collaboration in areas including metrics, training, sharing of CMMI experiences and resources such as instructors and CMMI Lead Appraisers, and even sharing of assets such as documented processes. A further unexpected benefit of the study was the feedback on NASA practices that was received from some of the organizations interviewed. From that feedback, other potential areas where NASA could improve were highlighted, such as accuracy of software cost estimation and budgetary practices. The detailed report contains discussion of the practices noted in each of the topic areas, as well as a summary of observations and recommendations from each of the topic areas. The resulting 24 recommendations from the topic areas were then consolidated to eliminate duplication and culled into a set of 14 suggested actionable recommendations. This final set of actionable recommendations, listed below, are items that can be implemented to improve NASA's software engineering practices and to help address many of the items that were listed in the NASA top software engineering issues. 1. Develop and implement standard contract language for software procurements. 2. Advance accurate and trusted software cost estimates for both procured and in-house software and improve the capture of actual cost data to facilitate further improvements. 3. Establish a consistent set of objectives and expectations, specifically types of metrics at the Agency level, so key trends and models can be identified and used to continuously improve software processes and each software development effort. 4. Maintain the CMMI Maturity Level requirement for critical NASA projects and use CMMI to measure organizations developing software for NASA. 5.onsolidate, collect and, if needed, develop common processes principles and other assets across the Agency in order to provide more consistency in software development and acquisition practices and to reduce the overall cost of maintaining or increasing current NASA CMMI maturity levels. 6. Provide additional support for small projects that includes: (a) guidance for appropriate tailoring of requirements for small projects, (b) availability of suitable tools, including support tool set-up and training, and (c) training for small project personnel, assurance personnel and technical authorities on the acceptable options for tailoring requirements and performing assurance on small projects. 7. Develop software training classes for the more experienced software engineers using on-line training, videos, or small separate modules of training that can be accommodated as needed throughout a project. 8. Create guidelines to structure non-classroom training opportunities such as mentoring, peer reviews, lessons learned sessions, and on-the-job training. 9. Develop a set of predictive software defect data and a process for assessing software testing metric data against it. 10. Assess Agency-wide licenses for commonly used software tools. 11. Fill the knowledge gap in common software engineering practices for new hires and co-ops.12. Work through the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) program with universities in strengthening education in the use of common software engineering practices and standards. 13. Follow up this benchmark study with a deeper look into what both internal and external organizations perceive as the scope of software assurance, the value they expect to obtain from it, and the shortcomings they experience in the current practice. 14. Continue interactions with external software engineering environment through collaborations, knowledge sharing, and benchmarking.

Rarick, Heather L.↗

NASA NTRS2000

NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging Program

NEPP program objectives are to: (1) Access the reliability of newly available electronic parts and packaging technologies for usage on NASA projects through validations, assessments, and characterizations, and the development of test methods/tools; (2)Expedite infusion paths for advanced (emerging) electronic parts and packaging technologies by evaluations of readiness for manufacturability and project usage consideration; (3) Provide NASA projects with technology selection, application, and validation guidelines for electronic parts and packaging hardware and processes; nd (4) Retain and disseminate electronic parts and packaging quality assurance, reliability validations, tools, and availability information to the NASA community.

Kayali, Sammy↗

NASA NTRS2003

Just being on the Internet is Old News

E-Gov is an idea that is very popular these days. Many government agencies are adopting electronic information technology to improve both their internal and external capabilities to communicate with stakeholders and customers. This is an area where the Internet offers huge improvements in responsiveness. Unfortunately, Internet outreach traditionally has not been a budget area that received strong support in most agencies. Today, almost every government agency has some Internet presence: some extensive; others minimal. However, if you really want to reach your stakeholders and customers, just putting information out is not enough to assure it is useful. The most effective outreach sites are those that have moved beyond first generation static designs and concepts to newer communications approaches that stress two-way communication and collection and analysis of customer-oriented performance metrics. This talk discusses a few basic concepts in customer/stakeholder interaction as practiced by the very successful NASA family of websites, Science@NASA. Started 7 years ago as a single website, focusing on the science output of the Space Science Lab at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, Science@NASA in 2002 consisted of 6 websites with 450,000 subscribers and garnered over 700 million hits (approx. 64 million visits) in 2002 plus 3 international awards in the past 3 years. Focused content, tying presentation techniques to advanced communications concepts, managing and soliciting subscribers lists, automatic collection of performance metrics, soliciting and responding to customer feedback, and subscriber surveys are among the topics to be discussed. The successful NASAKids Club and the interactivity offered to children will also be covered. The attempt to make the customer/stakeholder DO SOMETHING is critical to our success.

Koczor, Ronald J.↗

NASA NTRS2004

IGS Network Coordinator Report - 2002

The IGS network is a set of permanent, continuously-operating, dual-frequency GPS stations operated by over 100 worldwide agencies. The dataset is pooled at IGS Data Centers for routine use by IGS Analysis Centers in creating precise IGS products, as well as free access by other analysts around the world. The IGS Central Bureau hosts the IGS Network Coordinator, who assures adherence to standards and provides information regarding the IGS network via the Central Bureau Information System website at http://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov.

Moore, Angelyn↗

NASA NTRS1996

NASA EEE Parts and Advanced Interconnect Program (AIP)

none given From Program Objectives: I. Accelerate the readiness of new technologies through development of validation, assessment and test method/tools II. Provide NASA Projects infusion paths for emerging technologies III. Provide NASA Projects technology selection, application and validation guidelines for harware and processes IV. Disseminate quality assurance, reliability, validation, tools and availability information to the NASA community.

NASA EEE Parts Program Advanced Interconnect Progr↗

NASA NTRS1994

Decision Making in Action: Applying Research to Practice

The importance of decision-making to safety in complex, dynamic environments like mission control centers, aviation, and offshore installations has been well established. NASA-ARC has a program of research dedicated to fostering safe and effective decision-making in the manned spaceflight environment: Because access to spaceflight is limited, environments with similar characteristics, including aviation and nuclear power plants, serve as analogs from which space-relevant data can be gathered and theories developed. Analyses of aviation accidents cite crew judgement and decision making as causes or contributing factors in over half of all accidents. Yet laboratory research on decision making has not proven especially helpful in improving the quality of decisions in these kinds of environments. One reason is that the traditional, analytic decision models are inappropriate to multi-dimensional, high-risk environments, and do not accurately describe what expert human decision makers do when they make decisions that have consequences. A new model of dynamic, naturalistic decision making is offered that may prove useful for improving decision making in complex, isolated, confined and high-risk environments. Based on analyses of crew performance in full-mission simulators and accident reports, features that define effective decision strategies in abnormal or emergency situations have been identified. These include accurate situation assessment (including time and risk assessment), appreciation of the complexity of the problem, sensitivity to constraints on the decision, timeliness of the response, and use of adequate information. More effective crews also manage their workload to provide themselves with time and resources to make good good decisions are appropriate to the demands of the situation. Effective crew decision making and overall performance are mediated by crew communication. Communication contributes to performance because it assures that all crew members have essential information, but it also regulates and coordinates crew actions and is the medium of collective thinking in response to a problem. This presentation will examine the relations between leadership, communication, decision making and overall crew performance. Implications of these findings for training will be discussed.

Orasanu, Judith↗

NASA NTRS1994

Decision Making in Action: Applying Research to Practice

The importance of decision-making to safety in complex, dynamic environments like mission control centers and offshore installations has been well established. NASA-ARC has a program of research dedicated to fostering safe and effective decision-making in the manned spaceflight environment. Because access to spaceflight is limited, environments with similar characteristics, including aviation and nuclear power plants, serve as analogs from which space-relevant data can be gathered and theories developed. Analyses of aviation accidents cite crew judgement and decision making as causes or contributing factors in over half of all accidents. A similar observation has been made in nuclear power plants. Yet laboratory research on decision making has not proven especially helpful in improving the quality of decisions in these kinds of environments. One reason is that the traditional, analytic decision models are inappropriate to multidimensional, high-risk environments, and do not accurately describe what expert human decision makers do when they make decisions that have consequences. A new model of dynamic, naturalistic decision making is offered that may prove useful for improving decision making in complex, isolated, confined and high-risk environments. Based on analyses of crew performance in full-mission simulators and accident reports, features that define effective decision strategies in abnormal or emergency situations have been identified. These include accurate situation assessment (including time and risk assessment), appreciation of the complexity of the problem, sensitivity to constraints on the decision, timeliness of the response, and use of adequate information. More effective crews also manage their workload to provide themselves with time and resources to make good decisions. In brief, good decisions are appropriate to the demands of the situation. Effective crew decision making and overall performance are mediated by crew communication. Communication contributes to performance because it assures that all crew members have essential information, but it also regulates and coordinates crew actions and is the medium of collective thinking in response to a problem. This presentation will examine the relations between leadership, communication, decision making and overall crew performance. Implications of these findings for spaceflight and training for offshore installations will be discussed.

Orasanu, Judith↗

NASA NTRS1994

Decision Making in Action

Orasanu, Judith↗

NASA NTRS1995

Decision Making in the Airplane

The Importance of decision-making to safety in complex, dynamic environments like mission control centers, aviation, and offshore installations has been well established. NASA-ARC has a program of research dedicated to fostering safe and effective decision-making in the manned spaceflight environment. Because access to spaceflight is limited, environments with similar characteristics, including aviation and nuclear power plants, serve as analogs from which space-relevant data can be gathered and theories developed. Analyses of aviation accidents cite crew judgement and decision making as causes or contributing factors in over half of all accidents. Yet laboratory research on decision making has not proven especially helpful In improving the quality of decisions in these kinds of environments. One reason is that the traditional, analytic decision models are inappropriate to multi-dimensional, high-risk environments, and do not accurately describe what expert human decision makers do when they make decisions that have consequences. A new model of dynamic, naturalistic decision making is offered that may prove useful for improving decision making in complex, isolated, confined and high-risk environments. Based on analyses of crew performance in full-mission simulators and accident reports, features that define effective decision strategies in abnormal or emergency situations have been identified. These include accurate situation assessment (including time and risk assessment), appreciation of the complexity of the problem, sensitivity to constraints on the decision, timeliness of the response, and use of adequate information. More effective crews also manage their workload to provide themselves with time and resources to make good decisions. In brief, good decisions are appropriate to the demands of the situation. Effective crew decision making and overall performance are mediated by crew communication. Communication contributes to performance because it assures that all crew members have essential information, but it also regulates and coordinates crew actions and is the medium of collective thinking In response to a problem, This presentation will examine the relations between leadership, communication, decision making and overall crew performance. Implications of these findings for training will be discussed.

Orasanu, Judith↗