Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “complex project costs”

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
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2010

Heritage and Advanced Technology Systems Engineering Lessons Learned from NASA Deep Space Missions

In the design and development of complex spacecraft missions, project teams frequently assume the use of advanced technology systems or heritage systems to enable a mission or reduce the overall mission risk and cost. As projects proceed through the development life cycle, increasingly detailed knowledge of the advanced and heritage systems within the spacecraft and mission environment identifies unanticipated technical issues. Resolving these issues often results in cost overruns and schedule impacts. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Discovery & New Frontiers (D&NF) Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for 5 missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that optimistic hardware/software inheritance and technology readiness assumptions caused cost and schedule growth for four of the five missions studied. The cost and schedule growth was not found to result from technical hurdles requiring significant technology development. The projects institutional inheritance and technology readiness processes appear to adequately assess technology viability and prevent technical issues from impacting the final mission success. However, the processes do not appear to identify critical issues early enough in the design cycle to ensure project schedules and estimated costs address the inherent risks. In general, the overruns were traceable to: an inadequate understanding of the heritage system s behavior within the proposed spacecraft design and mission environment; an insufficient level of development experience with the heritage system; or an inadequate scoping of the system-wide impacts necessary to implement an advanced technology for space flight applications. The paper summarizes the study's lessons learned in more detail and offers suggestions for improving the project's ability to identify and manage the technology and heritage risks inherent in the design solution.

Barley, Bryan↗
NASA NTRS2010

Heritage Systems Engineering Lessons from NASA Deep Space Missions

In the design and development of complex spacecraft missions, project teams frequently assume the use of advanced technology systems or heritage systems to enable a mission or reduce the overall mission risk and cost. As projects proceed through the development life cycle, increasingly detailed knowledge of the advanced and heritage systems within the spacecraft and mission environment identifies unanticipated technical issues. Resolving these issues often results in cost overruns and schedule impacts. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Discovery & New Frontiers (D&NF) Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for 5 missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that optimistic hardware/software inheritance and technology readiness assumptions caused cost and schedule growth for all five missions studied. The cost and schedule growth was not found to be the result of technical hurdles requiring significant technology development. The projects institutional inheritance and technology readiness processes appear to adequately assess technology viability and prevent technical issues from impacting the final mission success. However, the processes do not appear to identify critical issues early enough in the design cycle to ensure project schedules and estimated costs address the inherent risks. In general, the overruns were traceable to: an inadequate understanding of the heritage system s behavior within the proposed spacecraft design and mission environment; an insufficient level of development experience with the heritage system; or an inadequate scoping of the systemwide impacts necessary to implement an advanced technology for space flight applications. The paper summarizes the study s lessons learned in more detail and offers suggestions for improving the project s ability to identify and manage the technology and heritage risks inherent in the design solution.

Barley, Bryan↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Surface Systems and Interface Standardization

Space exploration on planetary surfaces will require the use of various surface systems which will likely need to interface with one another. These systems must communicate and share data, as well as distribute power and transfer fluids for sustainable surface operations. Such systems can range from landers, surface habitats, mobility systems, cargo, and In-Situ Resource Utilizations (ISRUs). Previous and current programs have developed space interoperability standards that help aid in reducing potential risks of interface integration. One example of this is the International Deep Space Interoperability Standards (IDSIS) which focuses on deep space exploration. A goal of the Artemis program is to develop a sustained human presence on the lunar surface that would be a training ground for future Mars exploration. Therefore, it will be beneficial to identify interface standards between the surface assets which will help mitigate risk and reduce complexity in the harsh environments of space exploration. A key contribution to sustainability is commonality between hardware and software interfaces. Generic interfaces for data, power, and fluids will reduce risk, promote interoperability, and define standard interfaces across surface exploration projects and programs. Standardized interfaces would be advantageous for improving efficiency and reducing overall complexity, which are critical considerations for future space exploration. Furthermore, it will provide cost reductions to the Artemis programs over their life cycle (in Operations & Maintenance (O&M) and Logistics). Unique proprietary interfaces if considered or allowed would not only increase complexity but also add cost to the programs. Of course, understanding what will work and not work effectively in these unique environments such as the lunar surface is important. These unique environments require much needed intelligent design, prototyping, comprehensive testing, and field experience, utilizing consensus on common interface solutions.

Jaime Gomez↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Surface Systems and Interface Standardization

A key contribution to surface systems sustainability on Lunar and planetary surfaces is commonality between hardware and software interfaces. Generic interfaces for data, power, and fluids will reduce risk, promote interoperability, and define standard interfaces across surface exploration projects and programs. Standardized interfaces would be advantageous for improving efficiency and reducing overall complexity, which are critical considerations for future space exploration. Furthermore, it will provide cost reductions to NASA’s Artemis program over its life cycle (in Operations & Maintenance (O&M) and Logistics). Unique proprietary interfaces if considered or allowed would not only increase complexity but also add cost to the programs. Of course, understanding what will work and not work effectively in these unique environments such as the lunar surface is important. These unique environments require much needed intelligent design, prototyping, comprehensive testing, and field experience, utilizing consensus on common interface solutions.

Lunar↗
NASA NTRS1992

Advanced software development workstation project: Engineering scripting language. Graphical editor

Software development is widely considered to be a bottleneck in the development of complex systems, both in terms of development and in terms of maintenance of deployed systems. Cost of software development and maintenance can also be very high. One approach to reducing costs and relieving this bottleneck is increasing the reuse of software designs and software components. A method for achieving such reuse is a software parts composition system. Such a system consists of a language for modeling software parts and their interfaces, a catalog of existing parts, an editor for combining parts, and a code generator that takes a specification and generates code for that application in the target language. The Advanced Software Development Workstation is intended to be an expert system shell designed to provide the capabilities of a software part composition system.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2001

An Example of Economic Value in Rapid Prototyping

Today's modern machining projects are composed more and more of complicated and intricate structure due to a variety of reasons including the ability to computer model complex surfaces and forms. The cost of producing these forms can be extremely high not only in dollars but in time to complete. Changes are even more difficult to incorporate. The subject blade shown is an excellent example. Its complex form would have required hundreds of hours in fabrication for just a simple prototype. The procurement would have taken in the neighborhood of six weeks to complete. The actual fabrication would have been an equal amount of time to complete. An alternative to this process would have been a wood model. Although cheaper than a metal fabrication, it would be extremely time intensive and require in the neighborhood of a month to produce in-house.

Hauer, R. L.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Project Management Using Modern Guidance, Navigation and Control Theory

The idea of control theory and its application to project management is not new, however literature on the topic and real-world applications is not as readily available and comprehensive in how all the principals of Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) apply. This paper will address how the fundamental principals of modern GN&C Theory have been applied to NASA's Constellation Space Suit project and the results in the ability to manage the project within cost, schedule and budget. A s with physical systems, projects can be modeled and managed with the same guiding principles of GN&C as if it were a complex vehicle, system or software with time-varying processes, at times non-linear responses, multiple data inputs of varying accuracy and a range of operating points. With such systems the classic approach could be applied to small and well-defined projects; however with larger, multi-year projects involving multiple organizational structures, external influences and a multitude of diverse resources, then modern control theory is required to model and control the project. The fundamental principals of G N&C stated that a system is comprised of these basic core concepts: State, Behavior, Control system, Navigation system, Guidance and Planning Logic, Feedback systems. The state of a system is a definition of the aspects of the dynamics of the system that can change, such as position, velocity, acceleration, coordinate-based attitude, temperature, etc. The behavior of the system is more of what changes are possible rather than what can change, which is captured in the state of the system. The behavior of a system is captured in the system modeling and if properly done, will aid in accurate system performance prediction in the future. The Control system understands the state and behavior of the system and feedback systems to adjust the control inputs into the system. The Navigation system takes the multiple data inputs and based upon a priori knowledge of the input, will develop a statistical-based weighting of the input to determine where the system currently is located. Guidance and Planning logic of the system with the understanding of where it is (provided by the navigation system) will in turn determine where it needs to be and how to get there. Lastly, the system Feedback system is the right arm of the control system to allow it to affect change in the overall system and therefore it is critical to not only correctly identify the system feedback inputs but also the system response to the feedback inputs. And with any systems project it is critical that the objective of the system be clearly defined for not only planning but to be used to measure performance and to aid in the guidance of the system or project.

Hill, Terry↗
NASA NTRS2019

Enabling Assurance in the MBSE Environment

A number of specific benefits that fit within the hallmarks of effective development are realized with implementation of model-based approaches to systems and assurance. Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) enabled by standardized modeling languages (e.g., SysML®) is at the core. These benefits in the context of spaceflight system challenges can include: Improved management of complex development, Reduced risk in the development process, Improved cost management, Improved design decisions. With appropriate modeling techniques the assurance community can improve early oversight and insight into project development. NASA has shown the basic constructs of SysML in an MBSE environment offer several key advantages, within a Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA) initiative.

Evans, John W.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Global Environmental Micro Sensors Test Operations in the Natural Environment

ENSCO, Inc. is developing an innovative atmospheric observing system known as Global Environmental Micro Sensors (GEMS). The GEMS concept features an integrated system of miniaturized in situ, airborne probes measuring temperature, relative humidity, pressure, and vector wind velocity. In order for the probes to remain airborne for long periods of time, their design is based on a helium-filled super-pressure balloon. The GEMS probes are neutrally buoyant and carried passively by the wind at predetermined levels. Each probe contains onboard satellite communication, power generation, processing, and geolocation capabilities. ENSCO has partnered with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Kennedy Space Center (KSC) for a project called GEMS Test Operations in the Natural Environment (GEMSTONE) that will culminate with limited prototype flights of the system in spring 2007. By leveraging current advances in micro and nanotechnology, the probe mass, size, cost, and complexity can be reduced substantially so that large numbers of probes could be deployed routinely to support ground, launch, and landing operations at KSC and other locations. A full-scale system will improve the data density for the local initialization of high-resolution numerical weather prediction systems by at least an order of magnitude and provide a significantly expanded in situ data base to evaluate launch commit criteria and flight rules. When applied to launch or landing sites, this capability will reduce both weather hazards and weather-related scrubs, thus enhancing both safety and cost-avoidance for vehicles processed by the Shuttle, Launch Services Program, and Constellation Directorates. The GEMSTONE project will conclude with a field experiment in which 10 to 15 probes are released over KSC in east central Florida. The probes will be neutrally buoyant at different altitudes from 500 to 3000 meters and will report their position, speed, heading, temperature, humidity, and pressure via satellite. The GEMS data will be validated against reference observations provided by current weather instrumentation located at KSC. This paper will report on the results of the GEMSTONE project and discuss the challenges encountered in developing an airborne sensor system.

Adams, Mark L.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Planning and Estimation of Operations Support Requirements

Life Cycle Cost (LCC) estimates during the proposal and early design phases, as well as project replans during the development phase, are heavily focused on hardware development schedules and costs. Operations (phase E) costs are typically small compared to the spacecraft development and test costs. This, combined with the long lead time for realizing operations costs, can lead to de-emphasizing estimation of operations support requirements during proposal, early design, and replan cost exercises. The Discovery and New Frontiers (D&NF) programs comprise small, cost-capped missions supporting scientific exploration of the solar system. Any LCC growth can directly impact the programs' ability to fund new missions, and even moderate yearly underestimates of the operations costs can present significant LCC impacts for deep space missions with long operational durations. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) D&NF Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for 5 missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that 4 out of the 5 missions studied had significant overruns at or after launch due to underestimation of the complexity and supporting requirements for operations activities; the fifth mission had not launched at the time of the mission. The drivers behind these overruns include overly optimistic assumptions regarding the savings resulting from the use of heritage technology, late development of operations requirements, inadequate planning for sustaining engineering and the special requirements of long duration missions (e.g., knowledge retention and hardware/software refresh), and delayed completion of ground system development work. This paper updates the D&NF LCC study, looking at the operations (phase E) cost drivers in more detail and extending the study to include 2 additional missions and identifies areas for increased emphasis by project management in order to improve the fidelity of operations estimates.

Newhouse, Marilyn E.↗
NASA NTRS2002

A System for Planning Ahead

A software system that uses artificial intelligence techniques to help with complex Space Shuttle scheduling at Kennedy Space Center is commercially available. Stottler Henke Associates, Inc.(SHAI), is marketing its automatic scheduling system, the Automated Manifest Planner (AMP), to industries that must plan and project changes many different times before the tasks are executed. The system creates optimal schedules while reducing manpower costs. Using information entered into the system by expert planners, the system automatically makes scheduling decisions based upon resource limitations and other constraints. It provides a constraint authoring system for adding other constraints to the scheduling process as needed. AMP is adaptable to assist with a variety of complex scheduling problems in manufacturing, transportation, business, architecture, and construction. AMP can benefit vehicle assembly plants, batch processing plants, semiconductor manufacturing, printing and textiles, surface and underground mining operations, and maintenance shops. For most of SHAI's commercial sales, the company obtains a service contract to customize AMP to a specific domain and then issues the customer a user license.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1993

Mission engineering

Goddard Space Flight Center's projects are facing new challenges with respect to the cost effective development and operation of spaceflight missions. Challenges, such as cost limits, compression of schedules, rapidly changing technology, and increasing mission complexity are making the mission development process more dynamic. A concept of 'Mission Engineering' as a means of addressing these challenges is proposed. It is an end-to-end, multimission development methodology that seeks to integrate the development processes between the space, ground, science, and operations segments of a mission. It thereby promotes more mission-oriented system solutions, within and across missions.

Ondrus, Paul↗
NASA NTRS2003

Space Based Communications

Current space lift launches on the Eastern and Western Range require extensive ground-based real-time tracking, communications and command/control systems. These are expensive to maintain and operate and cover only limited geographical areas. Future spaceports will require new technologies to provide greater launch and landing opportunities, support simultaneous missions, and offer enhanced decision support models and simulation capabilities. These ranges must also have lower costs and reduced complexity while continuing to provide unsurpassed safety to the public, flight crew, personnel, vehicles and facilities. Commercial and government space-based assets for tracking and communications offer many attractive possibilities to help achieve these goals. This paper describes two NASA proof-of-concept projects that seek-to exploit the advantages of a space-based range: Iridium Flight Modem and Space-Based Telemetry and Range Safety (STARS). Iridium Flight Modem uses the commercial satellite system Iridium for extremely low cost, low rate two-way communications and has been successfully tested on four aircraft flights. A sister project at Goddard Space Flight Center's (GSFC) Wallops Flight Facility (WFF) using the Globalstar system has been tested on one rocket. The basic Iridium Flight Modem system consists of a L1 carrier Coarse/Acquisition (C/A)-Code Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver, an on-board computer, and a standard commercial satellite modem and antennas. STARS uses the much higher data rate NASA owned Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS), a C/A-Code GPS receiver, an experimental low-power transceiver, custom built command and data handler processor, and digitized flight termination system (FTS) commands. STARS is scheduled to fly on an F-15 at Dryden Flight Research Center in the spring of 2003, with follow-on tests over the next several years.

Simpson, James↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Windform® XT 2.0 Use as 3U CubeSat Primary Structure

CubeSats provide a platform for small-scale space research and technology demonstration at reduced complexity, cost, and development time. These advantages drove the NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) to develop and launch the GPX2 3U CubeSat to explore the viability of using Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) differential GPS (dGPS) in low earth orbit. To reduce manufacturing costs and increase design flexibility, the project chose additive manufactured Windform® XT 2.0 as the primary bus material rather than traditional subtractive manufactured (milled) metal. The bus is a two-part, Selective Laser Sintered, 3D-print structure consisting of a single-piece, five-walled chassis and single-walled cover. The bus was specially designed to allow the project to accommodate the payload electronics stack as well as antennas, receivers, and deployable mechanisms. By using an additive manufactured solution, LaRC was able to design in features unrealizable through traditional milling, with a lead-time of roughly two weeks. In comparison, traditional subtractive manufacturing limits geometry options due to toolpath reach and bus construction would have required multiple components for each wall. This would have resulted in a more costly, longer lead-time article with more joints, fasteners, and complexity with a commensurate increase in overall mass. A number of lessons-learned were captured during the design, analysis, and testing of the GPX2 CubeSat covering thermal and structural analysis, vibration modeling, and geometric tolerancing. Additionally, a variety of material testing and verification were performed before and during spacecraft design and integration to assure the suitability of Windform® XT 2.0 for the launch and mission environments. This article provides the highlights of designing and testing the GPX2 bus.

CubeSat↗
NASA NTRS2017

Development and Validation of NDE Standards for NASA’s Advanced Composites Project

The adoption of composite materials in aircraft manufacturing for use in structural applications continues to increase but is still relatively new to the industry. Composite components have large development and certification costs in comparison to metallic structures. Traditional methods of nondestructive evaluation (NDE) used for isotropic materials such as metals may not be adequate for composite applications and therefore is a contributing factor to the cost and complexity of developing new structural composites. Additionally, the defects of interest in composite materials are significantly different from metals. Thus, good quality composite reference standards are essential to obtaining reliable and quantifiable NDE results. Ideally, reference standards contain flaws or damage whose NDE indications most closely represent those created by actual flaws/damage. They should also be easy to duplicate and inexpensive to manufacture. NASA’s Advanced Composites Project, working with industry partners, developed a set of composite standards that contain a range of validated defects representing those typically found in aerospace composite materials. This paper will provide an overview of the standards fabricated, the manufacturing plans used to fabricate them, the types of defects included, and validation testing that has performed. Also discussed is an inter-laboratory “round-robin” test that is being performed on these standards. The paper will describe a guidance document being compiled to outline relevant inspection procedures for challenging and critical defects unique to composites where conventional techniques may not be appropriate.

Cramer, K. Elliott↗
NASA NTRS1974

MSFC Sortie Laboratory Environmental Control System (ECS) phase B design study results

Phase B effort of the Sortie Lab program has concluded. Results of that effort are presented which pertain to the definitions of the environmental control system (ECS). Numerous design studies were performed in Phase B to investigate system feasibility, complexity, weight, and cost. The results and methods employed for these design studies are included. An autonomous Sortie Lab ECS was developed which utilizes a deployed space radiator. Total system weight was projected to be 1814.4 kg including the radiator and fluids. ECS power requirements were estimated at 950 watts.

Ignatonis, A. J.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Development of the Architectural Simulation Model for Future Launch Systems and its Application to an Existing Launch Fleet

A significant portion of lifecycle costs for launch vehicles are generated during the operations phase. Research indicates that operations costs can account for a large percentage of the total life-cycle costs of reusable space transportation systems. These costs are largely determined by decisions made early during conceptual design. Therefore, operational considerations are an important part of vehicle design and concept analysis process that needs to be modeled and studied early in the design phase. However, this is a difficult and challenging task due to uncertainties of operations definitions, the dynamic and combinatorial nature of the processes, and lack of analytical models and the scarcity of historical data during the conceptual design phase. Ultimately, NASA would like to know the best mix of launch vehicle concepts that would meet the missions launch dates at the minimum cost. To answer this question, we first need to develop a model to estimate the total cost, including the operational cost, to accomplish this set of missions. In this project, we have developed and implemented a discrete-event simulation model using ARENA (a simulation modeling environment) to determine this cost assessment. Discrete-event simulation is widely used in modeling complex systems, including transportation systems, due to its flexibility, and ability to capture the dynamics of the system. The simulation model accepts manifest inputs including the set of missions that need to be accomplished over a period of time, the clients (e.g., NASA or DoD) who wish to transport the payload to space, the payload weights, and their destinations (e.g., International Space Station, LEO, or GEO). A user of the simulation model can define an architecture of reusable or expendable launch vehicles to achieve these missions. Launch vehicles may belong to different families where each family may have it own set of resources, processing times, and cost factors. The goal is to capture the required resource levels of the major launch elements and their required facilities. The model s output can show whether or not a certain architecture of vehicles can meet the launch dates, and if not, how much the delay cost would be. It will also produce aggregate figures of missions cost based on element procurement cost, processing cost, cargo integration cost, delay cost, and mission support cost. One of the most useful features of this model is that it is stochastic where it accepts statistical distributions to represent the processing times mimicking the stochastic nature of real systems.

Rabadi, Ghaith↗
NASA NTRS2011

Project Management Using Modern Guidance, Navigation and Control Theory

Implementing guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) theory principles and applying them to the human element of project management and control is not a new concept. As both the literature on the subject and the real-world applications are neither readily available nor comprehensive with regard to how such principles might be applied, this paper has been written to educate the project manager on the "laws of physics" of his or her project (not to teach a GN&C engineer how to become a project manager) and to provide an intuitive, mathematical explanation as to the control and behavior of projects. This paper will also address how the fundamental principles of modern GN&C were applied to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Constellation Program (CxP) space suit project, ensuring the project was managed within cost, schedule, and budget. A project that is akin to a physical system can be modeled and managed using the same over arching principles of GN&C that would be used if that project were a complex vehicle, a complex system(s), or complex software with time-varying processes (at times nonlinear) containing multiple data inputs of varying accuracy and a range of operating points. The classic GN&C theory approach could thus be applied to small, well-defined projects; yet when working with larger, multiyear projects necessitating multiple organizational structures, numerous external influences, and a multitude of diverse resources, modern GN&C principles are required to model and manage the project. The fundamental principles of a GN&C system incorporate these basic concepts: State, Behavior, Feedback Control, Navigation, Guidance and Planning Logic systems. The State of a system defines the aspects of the system that can change over time; e.g., position, velocity, acceleration, coordinate-based attitude, and temperature, etc. The Behavior of the system focuses more on what changes are possible within the system; this is denoted in the state of the system. The behavior of a system, as captured in the system modeling, when properly done will aid in accurately predicting future system performance. The Feedback Control system understands the state and behavior of the system and uses feedback to adjust control inputs into the system. The feedback, which is the right arm of the Control system, allows change to be affected in the overall system; it therefore is important to not only correctly identify the system feedback inputs, but also the system response to the feedback inputs. The Navigation system takes multiple data inputs and based on a priori knowledge of the inputs, develops a statistically based weighting of the inputs and measurements to determine the system's state. Guidance and Planning Logic of the system, complete with an understanding of where the system is (provided by the Navigation system), will in turn determine where the system needs to be and how to get it there. With any system/project, it is critical that the objective of the system/project be clearly defined -- not only to plan but to measure performance and to aid in guiding the system or the project. The system principles discussed above, which can be and have been applied to the current CxP space suit development project, can also be mapped to real-world constituents, thus allowing project managers to apply systems theories that are well defined in engineering and mathematics to a discipline (i.e., Project Management) that historically has been based in personal experience and intuition. This mapping of GN&C theory to Project Management will, in turn, permit a direct, methodical approach to Project Management, planning and control providing a tool to help predict (and guide) performance and an understanding of the project constraints, how the project can be controlled, and the impacts to external influences and inputs. This approach, to a project manager, flows down to the three bottom-line variables of cost, schedule, and scope ando the needed control of these three variables to successfully perform and complete a project.

Hill, Terry R.↗