Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “planning scheduling architecture”

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 NTRS1995

Planning Complex Projects Automatically

Automated Manifest Planner (AMP) computer program applies combination of artificial-intelligence techniques to assist both expert and novice planners, reducing planning time by orders of magnitude. Gives planners flexibility to modify plans and constraints easily, without need for programming expertise. Developed specifically for planning space shuttle missions 5 to 10 years ahead, with modifications, applicable in general to planning other complex projects requiring scheduling of activities depending on other activities and/or timely allocation of resources. Adaptable to variety of complex scheduling problems in manufacturing, transportation, business, architecture, and construction.

Henke, Andrea L.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Mission Operations Planning and Scheduling System (MOPSS)

MOPSS is a generic framework that can be configured on the fly to support a wide range of planning and scheduling applications. It is currently used to support seven missions at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in roles that include science planning, mission planning, and real-time control. Prior to MOPSS, each spacecraft project built its own planning and scheduling capability to plan satellite activities and communications and to create the commands to be uplinked to the spacecraft. This approach required creating a data repository for storing planning and scheduling information, building user interfaces to display data, generating needed scheduling algorithms, and implementing customized external interfaces. Complex scheduling problems that involved reacting to multiple variable situations were analyzed manually. Operators then used the results to add commands to the schedule. Each architecture was unique to specific satellite requirements. MOPSS is an expert system that automates mission operations and frees the flight operations team to concentrate on critical activities. It is easily reconfigured by the flight operations team as the mission evolves. The heart of the system is a custom object-oriented data layer mapped onto an Oracle relational database. The combination of these two technologies allows a user or system engineer to capture any type of scheduling or planning data in the system's generic data storage via a GUI.

Wood, Terri↗
NASA NTRS2002

Automation of Coordinated Planning Between Observatories: The Visual Observation Layout Tool (VOLT)

Fulfilling the promise of the era of great observatories, NASA now has more than three space-based astronomical telescopes operating in different wavebands. This situation provides astronomers with the unique opportunity of simultaneously observing a target in multiple wavebands with these observatories. Currently scheduling multiple observatories simultaneously, for coordinated observations, is highly inefficient. Coordinated observations require painstaking manual collaboration among the observatory staff at each observatory. Because they are time-consuming and expensive to schedule, observatories often limit the number of coordinated observations that can be conducted. In order to exploit new paradigms for observatory operation, the Advanced Architectures and Automation Branch of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center has developed a tool called the Visual Observation Layout Tool (VOLT). The main objective of VOLT is to provide a visual tool to automate the planning of coordinated observations by multiple astronomical observatories. Four of NASA's space-based astronomical observatories - the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), Far Ultraviolet Spectroscopic Explorer (FUSE), Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer (RXTE) and Chandra - are enthusiastically pursuing the use of VOLT. This paper will focus on the purpose for developing VOLT, as well as the lessons learned during the infusion of VOLT into the planning and scheduling operations of these observatories.

Maks, Lori↗
NASA NTRS2012

Developing a Strategic Plan for NASA JSC's Technology Investments

Human space exploration has always been heavily influenced by goals to achieve a specific mission on a specific schedule. This approach drove rapid technology development, the rapidity of which adds risks as well as provides a major driver for costs. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is now approaching the extension of human presence throughout the solar system by balancing a proactive yet less schedule-driven development of technology with opportunistic scheduling of missions as the needed technologies are realized. This approach should provide cost effective, low risk technology development that will enable efficient and effective manned spaceflight missions. As a first step, the NASA Human Spaceflight Architecture Team (HAT) has identified a suite of critical technologies needed to support future manned missions across a range of destinations, including in cislunar space, near earth asteroid visits, lunar exploration, Mars space, and Mars exploration. The challenge now is to develop a strategy and plan for technology development that efficiently enables these missions over a reasonable time period, without increasing technology development costs unnecessarily due to schedule pressure, and subsequently mitigating development and mission risks. NASA fs Johnson Space Center (JSC), as the nation's primary center for human exploration, is addressing this challenge through an innovative approach allocating Internal Research and Development funding to projects that have been prioritized using four focus criteria, with appropriate importance weighting. These four focus criteria are the Human Space Flight Technology Needs, JSC Core Technology Competencies, Commercialization Potential, and Partnership Potential. The inherent coupling in these focus criteria have been captured in a database and have provided an initial prioritization for allocation of technology development research funding. This paper will describe this process and this database, and the preliminary technology development prioritization results.

Stecklein, Jonette M.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Mission and Implementation of an Affordable Lunar Return

We present an architecture that establishes the infrastructure for routine space travel by taking advantage of the Moon's resources, proximity and accessibility. We use robotic assets on the Moon that are teleoperated from Earth to prospect, test, demonstrate and produce water from lunar resources before human arrival. This plan is affordable, flexible and not tied to any specific launch vehicle solution. Individual surface pieces are small, permitting them to be deployed separately on small launchers or combined together on single large launchers. Schedule is our free variable; even under highly constrained budgets, the architecture permits this program to be continuously pursued using small, incremental, cumulative steps. The end stage is a fully functional, human-tended lunar outpost capable of producing 150 metric tonnes of water per year enough to export water from the Moon and create a transportation system that allows routine access to all of cislunar space. This cost-effective lunar architecture advances technology and builds a sustainable transportation infrastructure. By eliminating the need to launch everything from the surface of the Earth, we fundamentally change the paradigm of spaceflight.

Spudis, Paul↗
NASA NTRS2001

Tools for Coordinated Planning Between Observatories

With the realization of NASA's era of great observatories, there are now more than three space-based telescopes operating in different wavebands. This situation provides astronomers with a unique opportunity to simultaneously observe with multiple observatories. Yet scheduling multiple observatories simultaneously is highly inefficient when compared to observations using only one single observatory. Thus, programs using multiple observatories are limited not due to scientific restrictions, but due to operational inefficiencies. At present, multi-observatory programs are conducted by submitting observing proposals separately to each concerned observatory. To assure that the proposed observations can be scheduled, each observatory's staff has to check that the observations are valid and meet all the constraints for their own observatory; in addition, they have to verify that the observations satisfy the constraints of the other observatories. Thus, coordinated observations require painstaking manual collaboration among the observatory staff at each observatory. Due to the lack of automated tools for coordinated observations, this process is time consuming, error-prone, and the outcome of the requests is not certain until the very end. To increase observatory operations efficiency, such manpower intensive processes need to undergo re-engineering. To overcome this critical deficiency, Goddard Space Flight Center's Advanced Architectures and Automation Branch is developing a prototype effort called the Visual Observation Layout Tool (VOLT). The main objective of the VOLT project is to provide visual tools to help automate the planning of coordinated observations by multiple astronomical observatories, as well as to increase the scheduling probability of all observations.

Jones, Jeremy↗
NASA NTRS2002

Systems Engineering Approach to Technology Integration for NASA's 2nd Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle

The overall goal of the 2nd Generation RLV Program is to substantially reduce technical and business risks associated with developing a new class of reusable launch vehicles. NASA's specific goals are to improve the safety of a 2nd generation system by 2 orders of magnitude - equivalent to a crew risk of 1-in-10,000 missions - and decrease the cost tenfold, to approximately $1,000 per pound of payload launched. Architecture definition is being conducted in parallel with the maturating of key technologies specifically identified to improve safety and reliability, while reducing operational costs. An architecture broadly includes an Earth-to-orbit reusable launch vehicle, on-orbit transfer vehicles and upper stages, mission planning, ground and flight operations, and support infrastructure, both on the ground and in orbit. The systems engineering approach ensures that the technologies developed - such as lightweight structures, long-life rocket engines, reliable crew escape, and robust thermal protection systems - will synergistically integrate into the optimum vehicle. To best direct technology development decisions, analytical models are employed to accurately predict the benefits of each technology toward potential space transportation architectures as well as the risks associated with each technology. Rigorous systems analysis provides the foundation for assessing progress toward safety and cost goals. The systems engineering review process factors in comprehensive budget estimates, detailed project schedules, and business and performance plans, against the goals of safety, reliability, and cost, in addition to overall technical feasibility. This approach forms the basis for investment decisions in the 2nd Generation RLV Program's risk-reduction activities. Through this process, NASA will continually refine its specialized needs and identify where Defense and commercial requirements overlap those of civil missions.

Thomas, Dale↗
NASA NTRS2002

Systems Engineering Approach to Technology Integration for NASA's 2nd Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle

The overall goal of the 2nd Generation RLV Program is to substantially reduce technical and business risks associated with developing a new class of reusable launch vehicles. NASA's specific goals are to improve the safety of a 2nd-generation system by 2 orders of magnitude - equivalent to a crew risk of 1-in-10,000 missions - and decrease the cost tenfold, to approximately $1,000 per pound of payload launched. Architecture definition is being conducted in parallel with the maturating of key technologies specifically identified to improve safety and reliability, while reducing operational costs. An architecture broadly includes an Earth-to-orbit reusable launch vehicle, on-orbit transfer vehicles and upper stages, mission planning, ground and flight operations, and support infrastructure, both on the ground and in orbit. The systems engineering approach ensures that the technologies developed - such as lightweight structures, long-life rocket engines, reliable crew escape, and robust thermal protection systems - will synergistically integrate into the optimum vehicle. To best direct technology development decisions, analytical models are employed to accurately predict the benefits of each technology toward potential space transportation architectures as well as the risks associated with each technology. Rigorous systems analysis provides the foundation for assessing progress toward safety and cost goals. The systems engineering review process factors in comprehensive budget estimates, detailed project schedules, and business and performance plans, against the goals of safety, reliability, and cost, in addition to overall technical feasibility. This approach forms the basis for investment decisions in the 2nd Generation RLV Program's risk-reduction activities. Through this process, NASA will continually refine its specialized needs and identify where Defense and commercial requirements overlap those of civil missions.

Thomas, Dale↗
NASA NTRS1994

Panel to review EOSDIS plans

Formed in Jan. 1992, the Panel to Review EOSDIS Plans was charged with advising NASA on its plans for developing the Earth Observing System (EOS) Data and Information System (EOSDIS). Specifically, the panel was asked to do the following: assess the validity of the engineering and technical underpinnings of the EOSDIS; assess its potential value to scientific users; suggest how technical risk can be minimized; and assess whether current plans are sufficiently resilient to be adaptable to changing technology and requirements such as budget environments, data volumes, new users, and new databases. The panel completed an interim report (Addendum A) and transmitted it to NASA and other interested parties in the government on 9 Apr. 1992. Because of a delay in NASA's plans to select the contractor for EOSDIS, the panel was not able to complete its review of the program according to the original government request. With the issuance of a letter report (Addendum B) on 28 Sep. 1992, the panel became inactive until such time as NASA could release the details of the contractor's proposed architecture, schedule, and costs for developing EOSDIS. In early 1993, NASA awarded the contract for the EOSDIS Core System (ECS). On 20 Apr. 1993, NASA asked the panel to reconvene to do the following: ( 1) complete its review of NASA's approach to the EOSDIS architecture and implementation; (2) appraise NASA's responses to the panel's previous recommendations; and (3) review the planning for EOSDIS in the context of NASA's role in the Global Change Data and Information System (GCDIS) implementation plan. To respond to the NASA charge, the panel met three times in 1993 including sessions with NASA officials and the EOSDIS contractor. In addition, several of the panel members visited individual Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAAC's) to obtain additional views of EOSDIS. The panel has now obtained substantial information on the EOSDIS budget, contractor work program, and current baseline architecture that was not previously available, due to procurement restrictions. This report presents the panel's findings and recommendations based on this additional information.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2013

Human Spaceflight Technology Needs - A Foundation for JSC's Technology Strategy

Human space exploration has always been heavily influenced by goals to achieve a specific mission on a specific schedule. This approach drove rapid technology development, the rapidity of which adds risks as well as provides a major driver for costs and cost uncertainty. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is now approaching the extension of human presence throughout the solar system by balancing a proactive yet less schedule-driven development of technology with opportunistic scheduling of missions as the needed technologies are realized. This approach should provide cost effective, low risk technology development that will enable efficient and effective manned spaceflight missions. As a first step, the NASA Human Spaceflight Architecture Team (HAT) has identified a suite of critical technologies needed to support future manned missions across a range of destinations, including in cis-lunar space, near earth asteroid visits, lunar exploration, Mars moons, and Mars exploration. The challenge now is to develop a strategy and plan for technology development that efficiently enables these missions over a reasonable time period, without increasing technology development costs unnecessarily due to schedule pressure, and subsequently mitigating development and mission risks. NASA's Johnson Space Center (JSC), as the nation s primary center for human exploration, is addressing this challenge through an innovative approach in allocating Internal Research and Development funding to projects. The HAT Technology Needs (TechNeeds) Database has been developed to correlate across critical technologies and the NASA Office of Chief Technologist Technology Area Breakdown Structure (TABS). The TechNeeds Database illuminates that many critical technologies may support a single technical capability gap, that many HAT technology needs may map to a single TABS technology discipline, and that a single HAT technology need may map to multiple TABS technology disciplines. The TechNeeds Database greatly clarifies understanding of the complex relationships of critical technologies to mission and architecture element needs. Extensions to the core TechNeeds Database allow JSC to factor in and appropriately weight JSC Center Core Technology Competencies, and considerations of Commercialization Potential and Partnership Potential. The inherent coupling among these, along with an appropriate importance weighting, has provided an initial prioritization for allocation of technology development research funding for JSC. The HAT Technology Needs Database, with a core of built-in reports, clarifies and communicates complex technology needs for cost effective human space exploration such that an organization seeking to assure that research prioritization supports human spaceflight of the future can be successful.

Stecklein, Jonette M.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Supporting Increased Autonomy for a Mars Rover

This paper presents an architecture and a set of technology for performing autonomous science and commanding for a planetary rover. The MER rovers have outperformed all expectations by lasting over 1100 sols (or Martian days), which is an order of magnitude longer than their original mission goal. The longevity of these vehicles will have significant effects on future mission goals, such as objectives for the Mars Science Laboratory rover mission (scheduled to fly in 2009) and the Astrobiology Field Lab rover mission (scheduled to potentially fly in 2016). Common objectives for future rover missions to Mars include the handling of opportunistic science, long-range or multi-sol driving, and onboard fault diagnosis and recovery. To handle these goals, a number of new technologies have been developed and integrated as part of the CLARAty architecture. CLARAty is a unified and reusable robotic architecture that was designed to simplify the integration, testing and maturation of robotic technologies for future missions. This paper focuses on technology comprising the CLARAty Decision Layer, which was designed to support and validate high-level autonomy technologies, such as automated planning and scheduling and onboard data analysis.

autonomous science↗
NASA NTRS2003

A Subjective Assessment of Alternative Mission Architecture Operations Concepts for the Human Exploration of Mars at NASA Using a Three-Dimensional Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model

The primary driver for developing missions to send humans to other planets is to generate significant scientific return. NASA plans human planetary explorations with an acceptable level of risk consistent with other manned operations. Space exploration risks can not be completely eliminated. Therefore, an acceptable level of cost, technical, safety, schedule, and political risks and benefits must be established for exploratory missions. This study uses a three-dimensional multi-criteria decision making model to identify the risks and benefits associated with three alternative mission architecture operations concepts for the human exploration of Mars identified by the Mission Operations Directorate at Johnson Space Center. The three alternatives considered in this study include split, combo lander, and dual scenarios. The model considers the seven phases of the mission including: 1) Earth Vicinity/Departure; 2) Mars Transfer; 3) Mars Arrival; 4) Planetary Surface; 5) Mars Vicinity/Departure; 6) Earth Transfer; and 7) Earth Arrival. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and subjective probability estimation are used to captures the experts belief concerning the risks and benefits of the three alternative scenarios through a series of sequential, rational, and analytical processes.

Tavana, Madjid↗
NASA NTRS1994

The SAX Italian scientific satellite. The on-board implemented automation as a support to the ground control capability

This paper presents the capabilities implemented in the SAX system for an efficient operations management during its in-flight mission. SAX is an Italian scientific satellite for x-ray astronomy whose major mission objectives impose quite tight constraints on the implementation of both the space and ground segment. The most relevant mission characteristics require an operative lifetime of two years, performing scientific observations both in contact and in noncontact periods, with a low equatorial orbit supported by one ground station, so that only a few minutes of communications are available each orbit. This operational scenario determines the need to have a satellite capable of performing the scheduled mission automatically and reacting autonomously to contingency situations. The implementation approach of the on-board operations management, through which the necessary automation and autonomy are achieved, follows a hierarchical structure. This has been achieved adopting a distributed avionic architecture. Nine different on-board computers, in fact, constitute the on-board data management system. Each of them performs the local control and monitors its own functions while the system level control is performed at a higher level by the data handling applications software. The SAX on-board architecture provides the ground operators with different options of intervention by three classes of telecommands. The management of the scientific operations will be scheduled by the operation control center via dedicated operating plans. The SAX satellite flight mode is presently being integrated at Alenia Spazio premises in Turin for a launch scheduled for the end of 1995. Once in orbit, the SAX satellite will be subject to intensive check-out activities in order to verify the required mission performances. An overview of the envisaged procedure and of the necessary on-ground activities is therefore depicted as well.

Martelli, Andrea↗
NASA NTRS1980

Case study: Lockheed-Georgia Company integrated design process

A case study of the development of an Integrated Design Process is presented. The approach taken in preparing for the development of an integrated design process includes some of the IPAD approaches such as developing a Design Process Model, cataloging Technical Program Elements (TPE's), and examining data characteristics and interfaces between contiguous TPE's. The implementation plan is based on an incremental development of capabilities over a period of time with each step directed toward, and consistent with, the final architecture of a total integrated system. Because of time schedules and different computer hardware, this system will not be the same as the final IPAD release; however, many IPAD concepts will no doubt prove applicable as the best approach. Full advantage will be taken of the IPAD development experience. A scenario that could be typical for many companies, even outside the aerospace industry, in developing an integrated design process for an IPAD-type environment is represented.

Waldrop, C. T.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Control framework for hand-arm coordination

Coordination of multiple manipulators requires cooperation at several levels in the control hierarchy. A distributed processing environment with no hardware dependencies except at the motor servo level would provide a flexible architecture for coordination. A system on these lines is being built to control an articulated hand and an arm. The four levels of control envisaged include a task decomposition level, a planning level, a scheduling level, and a server level. The hand will carry both force and tactile sensors, feedback from these are used to provide adaptive control in grasping tasks. The processing of the sensory information is performed by independent processes, with analyzed information being sent to the relevant layer of the system. The manipulators are also controlled by individual processes. All process can open communications with an active process sending commands or data, or receiving them. The scope of the system and the current setup are described along with future lines of development.

Agrawal, Sanjay↗
NASA NTRS1991

JPL's Space Flight Operations Center: Development project overview

The topics are covered in view graph form and include the following: (1) major elements of deep space flight programs; (2) development schedule; (3) primary design goals; (4) Space Flight Operations Center (SFOC) data systems architecture; (5) technical guidelines; (6) SFOC data system functional architecture; (7) typical SFOC node; (8) SFOC components; (9) SFOC software categories; (10) planned subsystem core diagram for Mars observer; (11) SFOC use of public domain/3rd party software; (12) SFOC hardware; (13) SFOC target six mission configuration; and (14) SFOC development status and plans.

Ebersole, M.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Managing Research in a Risk World

The Office of Chief Medical Officer (OCHMO) owns all human health and performance risks managed by the Human System Risk Board (HSRB). While the HSRB manages the risks, the Human Research Program (HRP) manages the research portion of the overall risk mitigation strategy for these risks. The HSRB manages risks according to a process that identifies and analyzes risks, plans risk mitigation and tracks and reviews the implementation of these strategies according to its decisions pertaining to the OCHMO risk posture. HRP manages risk research work using an architecture that describes evidence-based risks, gaps in our knowledge about characterizing or mitigating the risk, and the tasks needed to produce deliverables to fill the gaps and reduce the risk. A planning schedule reflecting expected research milestones is developed, and as deliverables and new evidence are generated, research progress is tracked via the Path to Risk Reduction (PRR) that reflects a risk's research plan for a design reference mission. HRP's risk research process closely interfaces with the HSRB risk management process. As research progresses, new deliverables and evidence are used by the HSRB in conjunction with other operational and non-research evidence to inform decisions pertaining to the likelihood and consequence of the risk and risk posture. Those decisions in turn guide forward work for research as it contributes to overall risk mitigation strategies. As HRP tracks its research work, it aligns its priorities by assessing the effectiveness of its contributions and maintaining specific core competencies that would be invaluable for future work for exploration missions.

Anton, W.↗