SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
Preventive maintenance, calibration procedures, system verification, system operating procedures, systems software fundamentals, data base (program files), and patchboard layout are discussed.
Verification and validation of expert systems is very important for the future success of this technology. Software will never be used in non-trivial applications unless the program developers can assure both users and managers that the software is reliable and generally free from error. Therefore, verification and validation of expert systems must be done. The primary hindrance to effective verification and validation is the use of methodologies which do not produce testable requirements. An extension of the flight technique panels used in previous NASA programs should provide both documented requirements and very high levels of verification for expert systems.
Systems, methods and apparatus are provided through which, in some embodiments, a formal specification is pattern-matched from scenarios, the formal specification is analyzed, and flaws in the formal specification are corrected. The systems, methods and apparatus may include pattern-matching an equivalent formal model from an informal specification. Such a model can be analyzed for contradictions, conflicts, use of resources before the resources are available, competition for resources, and so forth. From such a formal model, an implementation can be automatically generated in a variety of notations. The approach can improve the resulting implementation, which, in some embodiments, is provably equivalent to the procedures described at the outset, which in turn can improve confidence that the system reflects the requirements, and in turn reduces system development time and reduces the amount of testing required of a new system. Moreover, in some embodiments, two or more implementations can be "reversed" to appropriate formal models, the models can be combined, and the resulting combination checked for conflicts. Then, the combined, error-free model can be used to generate a new (single) implementation that combines the functionality of the original separate implementations, and may be more likely to be correct.
Absent a general method for mathematically sound, automated transformation of customer requirements into a formal model of the desired system, developers must resort to either manual application of formal methods or to system testing (either manual or automated). While formal methods have afforded numerous successes, they present serious issues, e.g., costs to gear up to apply them (time, expensive staff), and scalability and reproducibility when standards in the field are not settled. The testing path cannot be walked to the ultimate goal, because exhaustive testing is infeasible for all but trivial systems. So system verification remains problematic. System or requirements validation is similarly problematic. The alternatives available today depend on either having a formal model or pursuing enough testing to enable the customer to be certain that system behavior meets requirements. The testing alternative for non-trivial systems always have some system behaviors unconfirmed and therefore is not the answer. To ensure that a formal model is equivalent to the customer s requirements necessitates that the customer somehow fully understands the formal model, which is not realistic. The predominant view that provably correct system development depends on having a formal model of the system leads to a desire for a mathematically sound method to automate the transformation of customer requirements into a formal model. Such a method, an augmentation of requirements-based programming, will be briefly described in this paper, and a prototype tool to support it will be described. The method and tool enable both requirements validation and system verification for the class of systems whose behavior can be described as scenarios. An application of the tool to a prototype automated ground control system for NASA mission is presented.
Pathfinder is the first in a series of Mars exploration projects that are fundamental elements of the Discovery Program missions funded by the (NASA).
A Digital Flight Control Systems Verification Laboratory (DFCSVL) has been established at NASA Ames Research Center. This report describes the major elements of the laboratory, the research activities that can be supported in the area of verification and validation of digital flight control systems (DFCS), and the operating scenarios within which these activities can be carried out. The DFCSVL consists of a palletized dual-dual flight-control system linked to a dedicated PDP-11/60 processor. Major software support programs are hosted in a remotely located UNIVAC 1100 accessible from the PDP-11/60 through a modem link. Important features of the DFCSVL include extensive hardware and software fault insertion capabilities, a real-time closed loop environment to exercise the DFCS, an integrated set of software verification tools, and a user-oriented interface to all the resources and capabilities.
Requirements verification of a large flight system is a challenge. It is especially challenging for engineers taking on their first role in space systems engineering. This paper describes our approach to verification of the Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, Security-Regolith Explorer (OSIRIS-REx) system requirements. It also captures lessons learned along the way from developing systems engineers embroiled in this process. We begin with an overview of the mission and science objectives as well as the project requirements verification program strategy. A description of the requirements flow down is presented including our implementation for managing the thousands of program and element level requirements and associated verification data. We discuss both successes and methods to improve the managing of this data across multiple organizational interfaces. Our approach to verifying system requirements at multiple levels of assembly is presented using examples from our work at instrument, spacecraft, and ground segment levels. We include a discussion of system end-to-end testing limitations and their impacts to the verification program. Finally, we describe lessons learned that are applicable to all emerging space systems engineers using our unique perspectives across multiple organizations of a large NASA program.
Verification testing is an important aspect of the design process for mechanical mechanisms, and full-scale, full-length life testing is typically used to qualify any new component for use in space. However, as the required life specification is increased, full-length life tests become more costly and lengthen the development time. At the NASA Lewis Research Center, we theorized that neural network systems may be able to model the operation of a mechanical device. If so, the resulting neural network models could simulate long-term mechanical testing with data from a short-term test. This combination of computer modeling and short-term mechanical testing could then be used to verify the reliability of mechanical systems, thereby eliminating the costs associated with long-term testing. Neural network models could also enable designers to predict the performance of mechanisms at the conceptual design stage by entering the critical parameters as input and running the model to predict performance. The purpose of this study was to assess the potential of using neural networks to predict the performance and life of mechanical systems. To do this, we generated a neural network system to model wear obtained from three accelerated testing devices: 1) A pin-on-disk tribometer; 2) A line-contact rub-shoe tribometer; 3) A four-ball tribometer.
Validation and verification (V&V) are procedures used to evaluate system structure or behavior with respect to a set of requirements. Although expert systems are often developed as a series of prototypes without requirements, it is not possible to perform V&V on any system for which requirements have not been prepared. In addition, there are special problems associated with the evaluation of expert systems that do not arise in the evaluation of conventional systems, such as verification of the completeness and accuracy of the knowledge base. The criticality of most NASA missions make it important to be able to certify the performance of the expert systems used to support these mission. Recommendations for the most appropriate method for integrating V&V into the Expert System Development Methodology (ESDM) and suggestions for the most suitable approaches for each stage of ESDM development are presented.
NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) recently entered into a nonexclusive license agreement with Applied Cryogenic Solutions (ACS), Inc. (Galveston, TX) to commercialize its Gas-Liquid Supersonic Cleaning and Cleaning Verification Spray System technology. This technology, developed by KSC, is a critical component of processes being developed and commercialized by ACS to replace current mechanical and chemical cleaning and descaling methods used by numerous industries. Pilot trials on heat exchanger tubing components have shown that the ACS technology provides for: Superior cleaning in a much shorter period of time. Lower energy and labor requirements for cleaning and de-scaling uper.ninih. Significant reductions in waste volumes by not using water, acidic or basic solutions, organic solvents, or nonvolatile solid abrasives as components in the cleaning process. Improved energy efficiency in post-cleaning heat exchanger operations. The ACS process consists of a spray head containing supersonic converging/diverging nozzles, a source of liquid gas; a novel, proprietary pumping system that permits pumping liquid nitrogen, liquid air, or supercritical carbon dioxide to pressures in the range of 20,000 to 60,000 psi; and various hoses, fittings, valves, and gauges. The size and number of nozzles can be varied so the system can be built in configurations ranging from small hand-held spray heads to large multinozzle cleaners. The system also can be used to verify if a part has been adequately cleaned.
The verification process and requirements for the ascent guidance interfaces and the ascent integrated guidance, navigation and control system for the space shuttle orbiter are defined as well as portions of supporting systems which directly interface with the system. The ascent phase of verification covers the normal and ATO ascent through the final OMS-2 circularization burn (all of OPS-1), the AOA ascent through the OMS-1 burn, and the RTLS ascent through ET separation (all of MM 601). In addition, OPS translation verification is defined. Verification trees and roadmaps are given.
Redundancy verification of parallel systems related to element MTBF and decision maker perspective involving acceptance risk of system failure
The verification program for the Inflight Blood Collection System (IBCS) is reported. Specific tests and methods used to verify the IBCS are included.
The experimental verification system for the production of silicon via the arc heater-sodium reduction of SiCl4 was designed, fabricated, installed, and operated. Each of the attendant subsystems was checked out and operated to insure performance requirements. These subsystems included: the arc heaters/reactor, cooling water system, gas system, power system, Control & Instrumentation system, Na injection system, SiCl4 injection system, effluent disposal system and gas burnoff system. Prior to introducing the reactants (Na and SiCl4) to the arc heater/reactor, a series of gas only-power tests was conducted to establish the operating parameters of the three arc heaters of the system. Following the successful completion of the gas only-power tests and the readiness tests of the sodium and SiCl4 injection systems, a shakedown test of the complete experimental verification system was conducted.
No abstract available
The Voyager Flight Project - DSN Telecommunications Compatibility Test Program consisted of three phases: Subsystem Design, System Design, and System Verification Tests. Subsystem Design Tests were performed during mid 1976. System Design Tests were performed during late 1976 and early 1977. System Verification Tests were performed during the spring and summer of 1977. This article describes the System Design Tests and test results that provided the basis for establishment of telecommunications design between the DSN and the Voyager Flight Project.
Dynamic model verification is the process whereby an analytical model of a dynamic system is compared with experimental data, and then qualified for future use in predicting system response in a different dynamic environment. There are various ways to conduct model verification. The approach adopted in MOVER II employs Bayesian statistical parameter estimation. Unlike curve fitting whose objective is to minimize the difference between some analytical function and a given quantity of test data (or curve), Bayesian estimation attempts also to minimize the difference between the parameter values of that function (the model) and their initial estimates, in a least squares sense. The objectives of dynamic model verification, therefore, are to produce a model which: (1) is in agreement with test data, (2) will assist in the interpretation of test data, (3) can be used to help verify a design, (4) will reliably predict performance, and (5) in the case of space structures, facilitate dynamic control.
Ground based testing is a critical and costly part of component, assembly, and system verifications of large space telescopes. At such tests, however, with integral teamwork by planners, analysts, and test personnel, segments can be included to validate specific analytical parameters and algorithms at relatively low additional cost. This paper opens with strategy of analytical verification segments added to vacuum cryogenic testing of Advanced Mirror System Demonstrator (AMSD) assemblies. These AMSD assemblies incorporate material and architecture concepts being considered in the Next Generation Space Telescope (NGST) design. The test segments for workmanship testing, cold survivability, and cold operation optical throughput are supplemented by segments for analytical verifications of specific structural, thermal, and optical parameters. Utilizing integrated modeling and separate materials testing, the paper continues with support plan for analyses, data, and observation requirements during the AMSD testing, currently slated for late calendar year 2002 to mid calendar year 2003. The paper includes anomaly resolution as gleaned by authors from similar analytical verification support of a previous large space telescope, then closes with draft of plans for parameter extrapolations, to form a well-verified portion of the integrated modeling being done for NGST performance predictions.