Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mission Assurance Management”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2018

Supply Chain Research and Analysis for Space Systems

The implementation of NASA GSFC's portfolio of mission projects relies upon inter-connected, multi-tiered supply chains of organizations operating under direct and indirect contracts and other agreements throughout the U.S. and around the world. These supply chains are subject to an inter-related array of technical/production, business, market and security risks that are amplified by the ongoing globalization of industry and technology and which can disrupt or threaten the production and delivery of products and services when needed and in conformance with requirements. In recognition of such risks and associated challenges, GSFC's SMA directorate launched an innovative Supply Chain Research and Analysis capability three years ago to gain greater insight into the operating environment, performance, capabilities and viability of current and prospective suppliers for GSFC projects and proposals. The capability uses business intelligence techniques and primarily open source information resources as part of a cost-effective, non-intrusive methodology to produce several types of research and analysis reports. The reports are based on a holistic analytical framework encompassing key technical/production, business enterprise management, market and security factors, and feature in-depth information, summary information profiles, SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis, and candidate risk concerns in order to pro-actively support SMA and project management needs. The SRA capability, which is designed to complement and support ongoing SMA/project management activities and practices, has produced over 105 reports since its start-up in early 2015.This presentation addresses the approach, methodology and performance of the Supply Chain Research and Analysiscapability and its value in assuring the success of NASA mission projects. In doing so, the presentation provides lessons-learned, best practices, case examples and address how it fits into the development of an enterprise-level Supply Chain Risk Management capability.

supply chain risk management↗
NASA NTRS2016

Tailoring NIST Security Controls for the Ground System: Selection and Implementation -- Recommendations for Information System Owners

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) invests millions of dollars in spacecraft and ground system development, and in mission operations in the pursuit of scientific knowledge of the universe. In recent years, NASA sent a probe to Mars to study the Red Planet's upper atmosphere, obtained high resolution images of Pluto, and it is currently preparing to find new exoplanets, rendezvous with an asteroid, and bring a sample of the asteroid back to Earth for analysis. The success of these missions is enabled by mission assurance. In turn, mission assurance is backed by information assurance. The information systems supporting NASA missions must be reliable as well as secure. NASA - like every other U.S. Federal Government agency - is required to manage the security of its information systems according to federal mandates, the most prominent being the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) of 2002 and the legislative updates that followed it. Like the management of enterprise information technology (IT), federal information security management takes a "one-size fits all" approach for protecting IT systems. While this approach works for most organizations, it does not effectively translate into security of highly specialized systems such as those supporting NASA missions. These systems include command and control (C&C) systems, spacecraft and instrument simulators, and other elements comprising the ground segment. They must be carefully configured, monitored and maintained, sometimes for several years past the missions' initially planned life expectancy, to ensure the ground system is protected and remains operational without any compromise of its confidentiality, integrity and availability. Enterprise policies, processes, procedures and products, if not effectively tailored to meet mission requirements, may not offer the needed security for protecting the information system, and they may even become disruptive to mission operations. Certain protective measures for the general enterprise may not be as efficient within the ground segment. This is what the authors have concluded through observations and analysis of patterns identified from the various security assessments performed on NASA missions such as MAVEN, OSIRIS-REx, New Horizons and TESS, to name a few. The security audits confirmed that the framework for managing information system security developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for the federal government, and adopted by NASA, is indeed effective. However, the selection of the technical, operational and management security controls offered by the NIST model - and how they are implemented - does not always fit the nature and the environment where the ground system operates in even though there is no apparent impact on mission success. The authors observed that unfit controls, that is, controls that are not necessarily applicable or sufficiently effective in protecting the mission systems, are often selected to facilitate compliance with security requirements and organizational expectations even if the selected controls offer minimum or non-existent protection. This paper identifies some of the standard security controls that can in fact protect the ground system, and which of them offer little or no benefit at all. It offers multiple scenarios from real security audits in which the controls are not effective without, of course, disclosing any sensitive information about the missions assessed. In addition to selection and implementation of controls, the paper also discusses potential impact of recent legislation such as the Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) of 2014 - aimed at the enterprise - on the ground system, and offers other recommendations to Information System Owners (ISOs).

GOVERNANCE↗
NASA NTRS2018

Supplier Research & Analysis Approach

"The implementation of NASA GSFC's portfolio of mission projects relies upon inter-connected, multi-tiered supply chains of organizations operating under direct and indirect contracts and other agreements throughout the U.S. and around the world. These supply chains are subject to an inter-related array of technical/production, business, market and security risks that are amplified by the ongoing globalization of industry and technology and which can disrupt or threaten the production and delivery of products and services when needed and in conformance with requirements. In recognition of such risks and associated challenges, GSFC's SMA directorate launched an innovative Supplier Research and Analysis (SRA) capability three years ago to gain greater insight into the operating environment, performance, capabilities and viability of current and prospective suppliers for GSFC projects and proposals. The capability uses business intelligence techniques and primarily open source information resources as part of a cost-effective, non-intrusive methodology to produce several types of research and analysis reports. The reports are based on a holistic analytical framework encompassing key technical/production, business enterprise management, market and security factors, and feature in-depth information, summary information profiles, SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis, and candidate risk concerns in order to pro-actively support SMA and project management needs. The SRA capability, which is designed to complement and support ongoing SMA/project management activities and practices, has produced over 95 reports since its start-up in early 2015. This presentation addresses the approach, methodology and performance of the Supplier Research and Analysis (SRA) capability and its value in assuring the success of NASA mission projects. In doing so, the presentation provides lessons-learned, best practices, case examples and address how it fits into the development of an enterprise-level Supply Chain Risk Management capability."

supplier research and analysis↗
NASA NTRS2010

Risk-Informed Safety Assurance and Probabilistic Assessment of Mission-Critical Software-Intensive Systems

This report validates and documents the detailed features and practical application of the framework for software intensive digital systems risk assessment and risk-informed safety assurance presented in the NASA PRA Procedures Guide for Managers and Practitioner. This framework, called herein the "Context-based Software Risk Model" (CSRM), enables the assessment of the contribution of software and software-intensive digital systems to overall system risk, in a manner which is entirely compatible and integrated with the format of a "standard" Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA), as currently documented and applied for NASA missions and applications. The CSRM also provides a risk-informed path and criteria for conducting organized and systematic digital system and software testing so that, within this risk-informed paradigm, the achievement of a quantitatively defined level of safety and mission success assurance may be targeted and demonstrated. The framework is based on the concept of context-dependent software risk scenarios and on the modeling of such scenarios via the use of traditional PRA techniques - i.e., event trees and fault trees - in combination with more advanced modeling devices such as the Dynamic Flowgraph Methodology (DFM) or other dynamic logic-modeling representations. The scenarios can be synthesized and quantified in a conditional logic and probabilistic formulation. The application of the CSRM method documented in this report refers to the MiniAERCam system designed and developed by the NASA Johnson Space Center.

Guarro, Sergio B.↗
NASA NTRS1990

The NASA trend analysis program

The four main areas of the NASA trend analysis program (problem/reliability, performance, supportability, and programmatic trending) are defined and illustrated with examples from Space Shuttle applications. Emphasis is on the programmatic-trending component of the program and several of the statistical techniques used. Also described is the NASA safety, reliability, maintainability, and quality assurance management information center, used to focus management attention on key near-term launch concerns and long-range mission trend issues.

Crawford, J. Larry↗
NASA NTRS2005

Challenges of Developing New Classes of NASA Self-Managing Mission

NASA is proposing increasingly complex missions that will require a high degree of autonomy and autonomicity. These missions pose hereto unforeseen problems and raise issues that have not been well-addressed by the community. Assuring success of such missions will require new software development techniques and tools. This paper discusses some of the challenges that NASA and the rest of the software development community are facing in developing these ever-increasingly complex systems. We give an overview of a proposed NASA mission as well as techniques and tools that are being developed to address autonomic management and the complexity issues inherent in these missions.

Hinchey, M. G.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Risk Management Implementation Tool

Continuous Risk Management (CM) is a software engineering practice with processes, methods, and tools for managing risk in a project. It provides a controlled environment for practical decision making, in order to assess continually what could go wrong, determine which risk are important to deal with, implement strategies to deal with those risk and assure the measure effectiveness of the implemented strategies. Continuous Risk Management provides many training workshops and courses to teach the staff how to implement risk management to their various experiments and projects. The steps of the CRM process are identification, analysis, planning, tracking, and control. These steps and the various methods and tools that go along with them, identification, and dealing with risk is clear-cut. The office that I worked in was the Risk Management Office (RMO). The RMO at NASA works hard to uphold NASA s mission of exploration and advancement of scientific knowledge and technology by defining and reducing program risk. The RMO is one of the divisions that fall under the Safety and Assurance Directorate (SAAD). I worked under Cynthia Calhoun, Flight Software Systems Engineer. My task was to develop a help screen for the Continuous Risk Management Implementation Tool (RMIT). The Risk Management Implementation Tool will be used by many NASA managers to identify, analyze, track, control, and communicate risks in their programs and projects. The RMIT will provide a means for NASA to continuously assess risks. The goals and purposes for this tool is to provide a simple means to manage risks, be used by program and project managers throughout NASA for managing risk, and to take an aggressive approach to advertise and advocate the use of RMIT at each NASA center.

Wright, Shayla L.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Varying Levels of Automation on UAS Operator Responses to Traffic Resolution Advisories in Civil Airspace

Continuing demand for the use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) has put increasing pressure on operations in civil airspace. The need to fly UAS in the National Airspace System (NAS) in order to perform missions vital to national security and defense, emergency management, and science is increasing at a rapid pace. In order to ensure safe operations in the NAS, operators of unmanned aircraft, like those of manned aircraft, may be required to maintain separation assurance and avoid loss of separation with other aircraft while performing their mission tasks. This experiment investigated the effects of varying levels of automation on UAS operator performance and workload while responding to conflict resolution instructions provided by the Tactical Collision Avoidance System II (TCAS II) during a UAS mission in high-density airspace. The purpose of this study was not to investigate the safety of using TCAS II on UAS, but rather to examine the effect of automation on the ability of operators to respond to traffic collision alerts. Six licensed pilots were recruited to act as UAS operators for this study. Operators were instructed to follow a specified mission flight path, while maintaining radio contact with Air Traffic Control and responding to TCAS II resolution advisories. Operators flew four, 45 minute, experimental missions with four different levels of automation: Manual, Knobs, Management by Exception, and Fully Automated. All missions included TCAS II Resolution Advisories (RAs) that required operator attention and rerouting. Operator compliance and reaction time to RAs was measured, and post-run NASA-TLX ratings were collected to measure workload. Results showed significantly higher compliance rates, faster responses to TCAS II alerts, as well as less preemptive operator actions when higher levels of automation are implemented. Physical and Temporal ratings of workload were significantly higher in the Manual condition than in the Management by Exception and Fully Automated conditions.

Kenny, Caitlin↗
NASA NTRS1974

MSFC Skylab corollary experiments

The evolution of the development and integration of Skylab experiments from initial concepts through mission operations is documented. All experiment systems are covered as well as management controls which were developed and exercised to assure acceptable operational capability and optimize data acquisition for final scientific results.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1984

The First Spacelab Mission

The role of the mission manager in coordinating the payload with the space transportation system is studied. The establishment of the investigators working group to assist in achieving the mission objectives is examined. Analysis of the scientific requirements to assure compatibility with available resources, and analysis of the payload in order to define orbital flight requirements are described. The training of payload specialists, launch site integration, and defining the requirements for the operation of the integrated payload and the payload operations control center are functions of the mission manager. The experiences gained from the management of the Spacelab One Mission, which can be implemented in future missions, are discussed. Examples of material processing, earth observations, and life sciences advances from the First Spacelab Mission are presented.

Craft, H.↗
NASA NTRS1989

The new Space Shuttle Transportation System (STS) - Problem, performance, supportability, and programmatic trending program

This paper describes the NASA Space Shuttle Trend Analysis program. The four main areas of the program - problem/reliability, performance, supportability, and programmatic trending - are defined, along with motivation for these areas, the statistical methods used, and illustrative Space Shuttle applications. Also described is the NASA Safety, Reliability, Maintainability and Quality Assurance (SRM&QA) Management Information Center, used to focus management attention on key near-term launch concerns and long-range mission trend issues. Finally, the computer data bases used to support the program and future program enhancements are discussed.

Crawford, J. L.↗
NASA NTRS1993

NASA Automatic Information Security Handbook

This handbook details the Automated Information Security (AIS) management process for NASA. Automated information system security is becoming an increasingly important issue for all NASA managers and with rapid advancements in computer and network technologies and the demanding nature of space exploration and space research have made NASA increasingly dependent on automated systems to store, process, and transmit vast amounts of mission support information, hence the need for AIS systems and management. This handbook provides the consistent policies, procedures, and guidance to assure that an aggressive and effective AIS programs is developed, implemented, and sustained at all NASA organizations and NASA support contractors.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2005

Integrated Systems Health Management for Space Exploration

Integrated Systems Health Management (ISHM) is a system engineering discipline that addresses the design, development, operation, and lifecycle management of components, subsystems, vehicles, and other operational systems with the purpose of maintaining nominal system behavior and function and assuring mission safety and effectiveness under off-nominal conditions. NASA missions are often conducted in extreme, unfamiliar environments of space, using unique experimental spacecraft. In these environments, off-nominal conditions can develop with the potential to rapidly escalate into mission- or life-threatening situations. Further, the high visibility of NASA missions means they are always characterized by extraordinary attention to safety. ISHM is a critical element of risk mitigation, mission safety, and mission assurance for exploration. ISHM enables: In-space maintenance and repair; a) Autonomous (and automated) launch abort and crew escape capability; b) Efficient testing and checkout of ground and flight systems; c) Monitoring and trending of ground and flight system operations and performance; d) Enhanced situational awareness and control for ground personnel and crew; e) Vehicle autonomy (self-sufficiency) in responding to off-nominal conditions during long-duration and distant exploration missions; f) In-space maintenance and repair; and g) Efficient ground processing of reusable systems. ISHM concepts and technologies may be applied to any complex engineered system such as transportation systems, orbital or planetary habitats, observatories, command and control systems, life support systems, safety-critical software, and even the health of flight crews. As an overarching design and operational principle implemented at the system-of-systems level, ISHM holds substantial promise in terms of affordability, safety, reliability, and effectiveness of space exploration missions.

Uckun, Serdar↗
NASA NTRS2011

Safety and Mission Assurance: A NASA Perspective

Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) consists of the safety, reliability, maintainability, software assurance and quality disciplines, which are applied to reduce the probability of mishaps and ensure mission success. NASA uses a risk management process which requires various organizations to identify, analyze and mitigate/control risks associated with operations and decision making processes.

Higginbotham, Scott Alan↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

SmallSat / Model-Based Mission Assurance Session Overview

SmallSat state of the art report advanced avionics section updates. Systematic CubeSat radiation hardening assurance using the SEAM platforms. Building ontologies for AI-integrated prognostic health management of spacecraft avionics.

Rebekah Austin↗
NASA NTRS2011

International Space Station as a Base Camp for Exploration Beyond Low Earth Orbit

The idea for using the International Space Station (ISS) as platform for exploration has matured in the past year and the concept continues to gain momentum. ISS provides a robust infrastructure which can be used to test systems and capabilities needed for missions to the Moon, Mars, asteroids and other potential destinations. International cooperation is a critical enabler and ISS has already demonstrated successful management of a large multi-national technical endeavor. Systems and resources needed for expeditions can be aggregated and thoroughly tested at ISS before departure thus providing wide operational flexibility and the best assurance of mission success. A small part of ISS called an Exploration Platform (ISS-EP) can be placed at Earth-Moon Libration point 1 (EML1) providing immediate benefits and flexibility for future exploration missions. We will show how ISS and the ISS-EP can be used to reduce risk and improve the operational flexibility for missions beyond low earth orbit. Life support systems and other technology developed for ISS can be evolved and adapted to the ISS-EP and other exploration spacecraft. New technology, such as electric propulsion and advanced life support systems can be tested and proven at ISS as part of an incremental development program. Commercial companies who are introducing transportation and other services will benefit with opportunities to contribute to the mission since ISS will serve as a focal point for the commercialization of low earth orbit services. Finally, we will show how use of ISS provides immediate benefits to the scientific community because its capabilities are available today and certain critical aspects of exploration missions can be simulated.

Raftery, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2021

Modernizing NASA’s Space Flight Safety and Mission Success (S&MS) Assurance Framework In Line With Evolving Acquisition Strategies and Systems Engineering Practices

This paper presents the objectives-driven, case-based safety and mission success (S&MS) assurance framework being developed by the NASA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA), including its motivations and its implementation via a S&MS Assurance Standard that is under development, supplemented by supporting standards including an S&MS Analysis Management Standard that is also under development. A need to evolve NASA’s S&MS assurance framework has emerged in recent years, resulting from the need to accommodate new acquisition models; the need to accommodate evolving systems engineering (SE) practices; the need to stipulate acceptable levels of S&MS risk; the need for improved integration of S&MS into SE; and the need for clearer risk acceptance accountability. The objectives-driven, case-based S&MS assurance framework proposed here is responsive to that need. Its key features include: • The establishment, by NASA Acquirers, of fundamental S&MS performance objectives that define limits of acceptability for the likelihoods that mission technical objectives will be accomplished and that people, assets, and environments put at risk by the mission will not be adversely affected; • The development and approval of Providers’ S&MS plans for meeting Acquirers’ S&MS performance objectives, including commitments to support Acquirer audit, investigation, and reporting needs; • The development, by Providers, of S&MS assurance cases that argue, supported by evidence, that the Provider has met, or is on track to meeting, the fundamental S&MS objectives; • The evaluation, throughout the program/project life cycle, of Provider S&MS assurance cases as the primary S&MS-related technical basis for Acquirer risk acceptance and the granting to the Provider of authority to proceed through the program/project life cycle. This proposed S&MS assurance framework is notable for its lack of prescription of traditional S&MS requirements and strategies such as defined failure tolerances, margins, or analysis requirements. Instead, Providers are given latitude to propose their own strategies for meeting the fundamental S&MS performance objectives, subject to independent review and Acquirer approval. The result is a framework for S&MS assurance that is at once both rigorous and flexible.

Assurance Case↗