Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Project Life Cycle”

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 NTRS1993

Lessons learned - MO&DA at JPL

The issues of how to avoid future surprise growth in Mission Operations and Data Analysis (MO&DA) costs and how to minimize total MO&DA costs for planetary missions are discussed within the context of JPL mission operations support. It is argued that there is no simple, single solution: the entire Project life-cycle must be addressed. It is concluded that cost models that can predict both MO&DA cost as well as Ground System development costs are needed. The first year MO&DA budget plotted against the total of ground and flight systems developments is shown. In order to better recognize changes and control costs in general, a modified funding line item breakdown is recommended to distinguish between development costs (prelaunch and postlaunch) and MO&DA costs.

Handley, Thomas H., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Mission architecture

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

mission architecture project life cycle system eng↗
NASA NTRS2012

IV&V Project Assessment Process Validation

The Space Launch System (SLS) will launch NASA's Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). This launch vehicle will provide American launch capability for human exploration and travelling beyond Earth orbit. SLS is designed to be flexible for crew or cargo missions. The first test flight is scheduled for December 2017. The SLS SRR/SDR provided insight into the project development life cycle. NASA IV&V ran the standard Risk Based Assessment and Portfolio Based Risk Assessment to identify analysis tasking for the SLS program. This presentation examines the SLS System Requirements Review/System Definition Review (SRR/SDR), IV&V findings for IV&V process validation correlation to/from the selected IV&V tasking and capabilities. It also provides a reusable IEEE 1012 scorecard for programmatic completeness across the software development life cycle.

Driskell, Stephen↗
NASA NTRS2011

Mars Science Laboratory Flight Software Boot Robustness Testing Project Report

On the surface of Mars, the Mars Science Laboratory will boot up its flight computers every morning, having charged the batteries through the night. This boot process is complicated, critical, and affected by numerous hardware states that can be difficult to test. The hardware test beds do not facilitate testing a long duration of back-to-back unmanned automated tests, and although the software simulation has provided the necessary functionality and fidelity for this boot testing, there has not been support for the full flexibility necessary for this task. Therefore to perform this testing a framework has been build around the software simulation that supports running automated tests loading a variety of starting configurations for software and hardware states. This implementation has been tested against the nominal cases to validate the methodology, and support for configuring off-nominal cases is ongoing. The implication of this testing is that the introduction of input configurations that have yet proved difficult to test may reveal boot scenarios worth higher fidelity investigation, and in other cases increase confidence in the robustness of the flight software boot process.

Mars Science Laboratory (MSL)↗
NASA NTRS2010

Fault Management Practice: A Roadmap for Improvement

Autonomous fault management (FM) is critical for deep space and planetary missions where the limited communication opportunities may prevent timely intervention by ground control. Evidence of pervasive architecture, design, and verification/validation problems with NASA FM engineering has been revealed both during technical reviews of spaceflight missions and in flight. These problems include FM design changes required late in the life-cycle, insufficient project insight into the extent of FM testing required, unexpected test results that require resolution, spacecraft operational limitations because certain functions were not tested, and in-flight anomalies and mission failures attributable to fault management. A recent NASA initiative has characterized the FM state-of-practice throughout the spacecraft development community and identified common NASA, DoD, and commercial concerns that can be addressed in the near term through the development of a FM Practitioner's Handbook and the formation of a FM Working Group. Initial efforts will focus on standardizing FM terminology, establishing engineering processes and tools, and training.

Fesq, Lorraine M.↗
NASA NTRS2016

NASA Standing Review Board Handbook: Revision B

This SRB Handbook provides review guidance for the program and project communities and for the SRBs regarding the expectations, processes, products, timelines, and working interfaces with review organizations, Centers, Mission Directorates, Mission Support Organizations, and Management Councils. It provides guidelines for membership selection, review implementation, review products, and reporting of results. The SRB Handbook guidance may be tailored, with the Convening Authorities' approval, to meet the needs of the Agency, Mission Directorates, Centers, and the programs and projects being reviewed. The final review agreement of the SRB, program and project, and Convening Authorities for program and project Life-Cycle Reviews (LCRs) is documented in the terms of reference, as described in Section 4.1 and Appendix H.

Tahani R Amer↗
NASA NTRS2016

Model Based Mission Assurance: NASA's Assurance Future

Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) is seeing increased application in planning and design of NASA’s missions. This suggests the question: what will be the corresponding practice of Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA)? Contemporaneously, NASA’s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) is evaluating a new objectives based approach to standards to ensure that the Safety and Mission Assurance disciplines and programs are addressing the challenges of NASA’s changing missions, acquisition and engineering practices, and technology. MBSE is a prominent example of a changing engineering practice. We use NASA’s objectives-based strategy for Reliability and Maintainability as a means to examine how MBSE will affect assurance. We surveyed MBSE literature to look specifically for these affects, and find a variety of them discussed (some are anticipated, some are reported from applications to date). Predominantly these apply to the early stages of design, although there are also extrapolations of how MBSE practices will have benefits for testing phases. As the effort to develop MBMA continues, it will need to clearly and unambiguously establish the roles of uncertainty and risk in the system model. This will enable a variety of uncertainty-based analyses to be performed much more rapidly than ever before and has the promise to increase the integration of CRM (Continuous Risk Management) and PRA (Probabilistic Risk Analyses) even more fully into the project development life cycle. Various views and viewpoints will be required for assurance disciplines, and an over-arching viewpoint will then be able to more completely characterize the state of the project/program as well as (possibly) enabling the safety case approach for overall risk awareness and communication.

Evans, John↗
NASA NTRS1993

Lessons Learned--MO&DA at JPL

The basic questions addressed in this paper are how to avoid future surprise growth in Mission Operations and Data Analysis (MO&DA) costs, and how to minimize total MO&DA costs for planetary missions. The context of this paper and its conclusions is in the arena of JPL mission operations support. The fundamental conclusion is that there is no simple, single solution: the entire Project life-cycle must be addressed.

MO&DA↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Loads and Sizing for Launch Vehicle Conceptual and Preliminary Design

Examples of both “top-down” and “bottom-up” methods for predicting launch and ascent loads, as well as launch vehicle component sizing, are presented. These techniques are most applicable during the conceptual and preliminary design stages, early in the project life-cycle where a lack of fidelity of detail is more acceptable. These techniques are applied to estimate the mass of components from the Saturn V and Space Shuttle launch vehicles, and results are compared to actual values from the flown vehicles

launch vehicles↗
NASA NTRS1996

Software Program: Software Management Guidebook

The purpose of this NASA Software Management Guidebook is twofold. First, this document defines the core products and activities required of NASA software projects. It defines life-cycle models and activity-related methods but acknowledges that no single life-cycle model is appropriate for all NASA software projects. It also acknowledges that the appropriate method for accomplishing a required activity depends on characteristics of the software project. Second, this guidebook provides specific guidance to software project managers and team leaders in selecting appropriate life cycles and methods to develop a tailored plan for a software engineering project.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1991

Space transfer vehicle concepts and requirements study. Volume 3, book 1: Program cost estimates

The Space Transfer Vehicle (STV) Concepts and Requirements Study cost estimate and program planning analysis is presented. The cost estimating technique used to support STV system, subsystem, and component cost analysis is a mixture of parametric cost estimating and selective cost analogy approaches. The parametric cost analysis is aimed at developing cost-effective aerobrake, crew module, tank module, and lander designs with the parametric cost estimates data. This is accomplished using cost as a design parameter in an iterative process with conceptual design input information. The parametric estimating approach segregates costs by major program life cycle phase (development, production, integration, and launch support). These phases are further broken out into major hardware subsystems, software functions, and tasks according to the STV preliminary program work breakdown structure (WBS). The WBS is defined to a low enough level of detail by the study team to highlight STV system cost drivers. This level of cost visibility provided the basis for cost sensitivity analysis against various design approaches aimed at achieving a cost-effective design. The cost approach, methodology, and rationale are described. A chronological record of the interim review material relating to cost analysis is included along with a brief summary of the study contract tasks accomplished during that period of review and the key conclusions or observations identified that relate to STV program cost estimates. The STV life cycle costs are estimated on the proprietary parametric cost model (PCM) with inputs organized by a project WBS. Preliminary life cycle schedules are also included.

Peffley, Al F.↗
NASA NTRS2007

NASA Systems Engineering Handbook

This handbook is intended to provide general guidance and information on systems engineering that will be useful to the NASA community. It provides a generic description of Systems Engineering (SE) as it should be applied throughout NASA. A goal of the handbook is to increase awareness and consistency across the Agency and advance the practice of SE. This handbook provides perspectives relevant to NASA and data particular to NASA. The coverage in this handbook is limited to general concepts and generic descriptions of processes, tools, and techniques. It provides information on systems engineering best practices and pitfalls to avoid. There are many Center-specific handbooks and directives as well as textbooks that can be consulted for in-depth tutorials. This handbook describes systems engineering as it should be applied to the development and implementation of large and small NASA programs and projects. NASA has defined different life cycles that specifically address the major project categories, or product lines, which are: Flight Systems and Ground Support (FS&GS), Research and Technology (R&T), Construction of Facilities (CoF), and Environmental Compliance and Restoration (ECR). The technical content of the handbook provides systems engineering best practices that should be incorporated into all NASA product lines. (Check the NASA On-Line Directives Information System (NODIS) electronic document library for applicable NASA directives on topics such as product lines.) For simplicity this handbook uses the FS&GS product line as an example. The specifics of FS&GS can be seen in the description of the life cycle and the details of the milestone reviews. Each product line will vary in these two areas; therefore, the reader should refer to the applicable NASA procedural requirements for the specific requirements for their life cycle and reviews. The engineering of NASA systems requires a systematic and disciplined set of processes that are applied recursively and iteratively for the design, development, operation, maintenance, and closeout of systems throughout the life cycle of the programs and projects.

Source record↗
DOE OSTI2024

Modeling Framework for the Assessment of a Sustainable Hydrogen Production and Supply Chain Network in California

The cost-effective and sustainable deployment of hydrogen supply and demand networks, especially in large economic regions like California, can be challenging considering the spatial-temporal availability and variability of the different actors across the network such as production processes, distribution modes, and end-users. In this presentation, we will provide an overview and demonstration of a modeling framework used to assess the environmental, economic, and human health impacts of plausible hydrogen production and supply chain networks in California. Scenarios focus on green hydrogen production pathways using water electrolysis and biomass gasification. End-use applications included in the model are transit, medium and heavy-duty trucking, port authorities, and power and aviation companies that currently consume natural gas, diesel, and aviation fuel for their day-to-day operation. Representative locations for hydrogen production and end-use are based on recent projections of the hydrogen economy in California. All mass and energy flows, as well as estimated emissions, are based on H2A process model designs and projections of technology performance, literature review, and LBNL process, economic and life cycle modeling, and not on company data for the sake of this presentation. Human health impacts are included following methodologies developed for the University of California Irvine HyDeal project. Life cycle phases associated with hydrogen production include feedstock preparation (water and biomass), energy production and consumption (renewable, grid, and combination of renewable and grid electricity), maintenance (chemical utilization in electrolysis and natural gas combustion in gasification), carbon sequestration, hydrogen storage (compression and liquefaction), and distribution (truck and pipeline). We apply the framework utilizing California specific emission factors, financial data, and human health damages and explore the impact of network characteristics on results. Example variations include: the inclusion of policy incentives or not, different representations of the electricity grid and source, electrolysis versus gasification versus combinations of both for production, liquefaction versus compression based on producer capacity cutoffs, transportation truck versus pipeline based on existing infrastructure, and ultimate end use. Comparison of these different scenarios can help inform future projects by demonstrating the trade-offs among environmental, economic, and human health impacts. This model, automated in R, is a starting platform upon which new analysis, modeling capabilities, locations, and emission factors can be rapidly tested and integrated.

Zaki, Mohammed Tamim↗
NASA NTRS2012

Life-Cycle Assessments of Selected NASA Ground-Based Test Facilities

In the past two years, two separate facility-specific life cycle assessments (LCAs) have been performed as summer student projects. The first project focused on 13 facilities managed by NASA s Aeronautics Test Program (ATP), an organization responsible for large, high-energy ground test facilities that accomplish the nation s most advanced aerospace research. A facility inventory was created for each facility, and the operational-phase carbon footprint and environmental impact were calculated. The largest impacts stemmed from electricity and natural gas used directly at the facility and to generate support processes such as compressed air and steam. However, in specialized facilities that use unique inputs like R-134a, R-14, jet fuels, or nitrogen gas, these sometimes had a considerable effect on the facility s overall environmental impact. The second LCA project was conducted on the NASA Ames Arc Jet Complex and also involved creating a facility inventory and calculating the carbon footprint and environmental impact. In addition, operational alternatives were analyzed for their effectiveness at reducing impact. Overall, the Arc Jet Complex impact is dominated by the natural-gas fired boiler producing steam on-site, but alternatives were provided that could reduce the impact of the boiler operation, some of which are already being implemented. The data and results provided by these LCA projects are beneficial to both the individual facilities and NASA as a whole; the results have already been used in a proposal to reduce carbon footprint at Ames Research Center. To help future life cycle projects, several lessons learned have been recommended as simple and effective infrastructure improvements to NASA, including better utility metering and data recording and standardization of modeling choices and methods. These studies also increased sensitivity to and appreciation for quantifying the impact of NASA s activities.

Sydnor, George Honeycutt↗
NASA NTRS1992

Consortium for materials development in space interaction with Space Station Freedom

The Consortium for Materials Development in Space (CMDS) is one of seventeen Centers for the Commercial Development of Space (CCDS) sponsored by the Office of Commercial Programs of NASA. The CMDS formed at the University of Alabama in Huntsville in the fall of 1985. The Consortium activities therefore will have progressed for over a decade by the time Space Station Freedom (SSF) begins operation. The topic to be addressed here is: what are the natural, mutually productive relationships between the CMDS and SSF? For management and planning purposes, the Consortium organizes its activities into a number of individual projects. Normally, each project has a team of personnel from industry, university, and often government organizations. This is true for both product-oriented materials projects and for infrastructure projects. For various projects Space Station offers specific mutually productive relationships. First, SSF can provide a site for commercial operations that have evolved as a natural stage in the life cycle of individual projects. Efficiency and associated cost control lead to another important option. With SSF in place, there is the possibility to leave major parts of processing equipment in SSF, and only bring materials to SSF to be processed and return to earth the treated materials. This saves the transportation costs of repeatedly carrying heavy equipment to orbit and back to the ground. Another generic feature of commercial viability can be the general need to accomplish large through-put or large scale operations. The size of SSF lends itself to such needs. Also in addition to processing equipment, some of the other infrastructure capabilities developed in CCDS projects may be applied on SSF to support product activities. The larger SSF program may derive mutual benefits from these infrastructure abilities.

Lundquist, Charles A.↗