Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Scheduling”

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 NTRSDate not supplied

Coordination between Federated Scheduling and Conflict Resolution in UAM Operations

This work proposes a federated scheduling algorithm and explores two mechanisms for coordinating federated scheduling and conflict resolution functions - two core traffic management functions in urban air mobility operations. A federated scheduling algorithm is first developed, together with data that needs to be shared among schedulers. Two mechanisms for coordinating scheduling and conflict resolution functions are then introduced and studied as conflicts in high-density operations may not be completely resolved by conflict resolution function alone. The first coordination mechanism is constructed based on the arrival scheduler at the destination and another one utilizes the departure scheduler at the origin. Experiments and trade space studies are conducted to compare these two mechanisms using fast-time traffic simulations. Results show that both mechanisms perform well in coordinating scheduling and conflict resolution functions and helping resolve all potential conflicts. Experiments also show that with proper parameter selection, both mechanisms can achieve better efficiency (less delay) while maintaining zero losses of separation.

Federated scheduling↗
NASA NTRS2021

Coordination between Federated Scheduling and Conflict Resolution in UAM Operations

This work proposes a federated scheduling algorithm and explores two mechanisms for coordinating federated scheduling and conflict resolution functions - two core traffic management functions in urban air mobility operations. A federated scheduling algorithm is first developed, together with data that needs to be shared among schedulers. Two mechanisms for coordinating scheduling and conflict resolution functions are then introduced and studied as conflicts in high-density operations may not be completely resolved by conflict resolution function alone. The first coordination mechanism is constructed based on the arrival scheduler at the destination and another one utilizes the departure scheduler at the origin. Experiments and trade space studies are conducted to compare these two mechanisms using fast-time traffic simulations. Results show that both mechanisms perform well in coordinating scheduling and conflict resolution functions and helping resolve all potential conflicts. Experiments also show that with proper parameter selection, both mechanisms can achieve better efficiency (less delay) while maintaining zero losses of separation.

Federated scheduling↗
NASA NTRS2014

An Optimizing Space Data-Communications Scheduling Method and Algorithm with Interference Mitigation, Generalized for a Broad Class of Optimization Problems

NASA's space data-communications infrastructure-the Space Network and the Ground Network-provide scheduled (as well as some limited types of unscheduled) data-communications services to user spacecraft. The Space Network operates several orbiting geostationary platforms (the Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS)), each with its own servicedelivery antennas onboard. The Ground Network operates service-delivery antennas at ground stations located around the world. Together, these networks enable data transfer between user spacecraft and their mission control centers on Earth. Scheduling data-communications events for spacecraft that use the NASA communications infrastructure-the relay satellites and the ground stations-can be accomplished today with software having an operational heritage dating from the 1980s or earlier. An implementation of the scheduling methods and algorithms disclosed and formally specified herein will produce globally optimized schedules with not only optimized service delivery by the space data-communications infrastructure but also optimized satisfaction of all user requirements and prescribed constraints, including radio frequency interference (RFI) constraints. Evolutionary algorithms, a class of probabilistic strategies for searching large solution spaces, is the essential technology invoked and exploited in this disclosure. Also disclosed are secondary methods and algorithms for optimizing the execution efficiency of the schedule-generation algorithms themselves. The scheduling methods and algorithms as presented are adaptable to accommodate the complexity of scheduling the civilian and/or military data-communications infrastructure within the expected range of future users and space- or ground-based service-delivery assets. Finally, the problem itself, and the methods and algorithms, are generalized and specified formally. The generalized methods and algorithms are applicable to a very broad class of combinatorial-optimization problems that encompasses, among many others, the problem of generating optimal space-data communications schedules.

ground stations↗
NASA NTRS2016

Contribution of Schedule Delays to Cost Growth: How to Make Peace with a Marching Army

Numerous research papers have shown that cost and schedule growth are interrelated for NASA space science missions. Although there has shown to be a strong correlation of cost growth with schedule growth, it is unclear what percentage of cost growth is caused by schedule growth and how schedule growth can be controlled. This paper attempts to quantify this percentage by looking at historical data and show detailed examples of how schedule growth influences cost growth. The paper also addresses a methodology to show an alternate approach for assessing and setting a robust baseline schedule and use schedule performance metrics to help assess if the project is performing to plan. Finally, recommendations are presented to help control schedule growth in order to minimize cost growth for NASA space science missions.

schedule↗
NASA NTRS1976

Are accidents scheduled

Two major sets of safety problems associated with project scheduling are examined. The first set involves problems resulting from the improper scheduling of the safety tasks. The second involves problems which result from inadequate attention to scheduling of those project tasks which lead to tests and operations and includes condensed schedules, modified schedules, schedule workarounds, eliminated portions of the schedules and strung out schedules.

Childs, C.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Scheduling spacecraft operations

A prototype scheduling system named MAESTRO currently under development is being used to explore possible approaches to the spacecraft operations scheduling problem. Results indicate that the appropriate combination of heuristic and other techniques can provide an acceptable solution to the scheduling problem over a wide range of operational scenarios and management approaches. These can include centralized or distributed instrument or systems control, batch or incremental scheduling, scheduling loose resource envelopes or exact profiles, and scheduling with varying degrees of user intervention. Techniques used within MAESTRO to provide this flexibility and power include constraint propagation mechanisms, multiple asynchronous processes, prioritized transaction-based command management, resource opportunity calculation, user-alterable selection and placement mechanisms, and maintenance of multiple schedules and resource profiles. These techniques and scheduling complexities requiring them are discussed.

Britt, Daniel L.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Expert system for on-board satellite scheduling and control

An Expert System is described which Rockwell Satellite and Space Electronics Division (S&SED) is developing to dynamically schedule the allocation of on-board satellite resources and activities. This expert system is the Satellite Controller. The resources to be scheduled include power, propellant and recording tape. The activities controlled include scheduling satellite functions such as sensor checkout and operation. The scheduling of these resources and activities is presently a labor intensive and time consuming ground operations task. Developing a schedule requires extensive knowledge of the system and subsystems operations, operational constraints, and satellite design and configuration. This scheduling process requires highly trained experts anywhere from several hours to several weeks to accomplish. The process is done through brute force, that is examining cryptic mnemonic data off line to interpret the health and status of the satellite. Then schedules are formulated either as the result of practical operator experience or heuristics - that is rules of thumb. Orbital operations must become more productive in the future to reduce life cycle costs and decrease dependence on ground control. This reduction is required to increase autonomy and survivability of future systems. The design of future satellites require that the scheduling function be transferred from ground to on board systems.

Barry, John M.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Analysis of sequencing and scheduling methods for arrival traffic

The air traffic control subsystem that performs scheduling is discussed. The function of the scheduling algorithms is to plan automatically the most efficient landing order and to assign optimally spaced landing times to all arrivals. Several important scheduling algorithms are described and the statistical performance of the scheduling algorithms is examined. Scheduling brings order to an arrival sequence for aircraft. First-come-first-served scheduling (FCFS) establishes a fair order, based on estimated times of arrival, and determines proper separations. Because of the randomness of the traffic, gaps will remain in the scheduled sequence of aircraft. These gaps are filled, or partially filled, by time-advancing the leading aircraft after a gap while still preserving the FCFS order. Tightly scheduled groups of aircraft remain with a mix of heavy and large aircraft. Separation requirements differ for different types of aircraft trailing each other. Advantage is taken of this fact through mild reordering of the traffic, thus shortening the groups and reducing average delays. Actual delays for different samples with the same statistical parameters vary widely, especially for heavy traffic.

Neuman, Frank↗
NASA NTRS1990

Analysis of gain scheduled control for nonlinear plants

Gain scheduling has proven to be a successful design methodology in many engineering applications. In the absence of a sound theoretical analysis, these designs come with no guarantees of the robustness, performance, or even nominal stability of the overall gain-scheduled design. An analysis is presented for two types of nonlinear gain-scheduled control systems: (1) scheduling on a reference trajectory and (2) scheduling on the plant output. Conditions which guarantee stability, robustness, and performance properties of the global gain schedule designs are given. These conditions confirm and formalize popular notions regarding gain-scheduled designs, such as that the scheduling variable should vary slowly and capture the plant's nonlinearities.

Shamma, Jeff S.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Distributed scheduling with COMPASS

COMPASS (COMPuter Aided Scheduling System) is a sophisticated, interactive scheduling tool used within NASA. Like most existing tools, however, COMPASS is a single-user application. There is a large class of scheduling problems which may be better solved by allowing several people at various locations to build separate schedules with shared resources. DISCORS (DIStributed COmputer Resource Scheduling) is a set of services which support a distributed version of COMPASS. This architecture naturally accommodates the integration of user-defined resource models without modifying COMPASS. DISCORS services include the ability to establish and manage communications, to code messages in efficient formats, to provide fault detection and recovery, and to configure schedulers across a network. In its present form, DISCORS effectively supports distributed COMPASS, but fails to run fast and to guarantee efficient schedules. Further enhancements may allow several users to simultaneously and interactively work together to create complex schedules while COMPASS detects and coordinates the resolution of conflicting requests.

Rufat-Latre, Jorge↗
NASA NTRS1992

Methodologies for building robust schedules

COMPASS is the name of a Computer Aided Scheduling System designed and built for NASA. COMPASS can be used to develop schedule of activities based upon the temporal relationships of the activities and their resource requirements. COMPASS uses this information, and guided by the user, develops precise start and stop times for the activities. In actual practice however, it is impossible to know with complete certainty what the actual durations of the scheduled activities will really be. The best that one can hope for is knowledge of the probability distribution for the durations. This paper investigates methodologies for using a scheduling tool like COMPASS that is based upon definite values for the resource requirements, while building schedules that remain valid in the face of the schedule execution perturbations. Representations for the schedules developed by these methodologies are presented, along with a discussion of the algorithm that could be used by a computer onboard a spacecraft to efficiently monitor and execute these schedules.

Dean, John H.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Iterative refinement scheduling

We present a heuristics-based approach to deep space mission scheduling which is modeled on the approach used by expert human schedulers in producing schedules for planetary encounters. New chronological evaluation techniques are used to focus the search by using information gained during the scheduling process to locate, classify, and resolve regions of conflict. Our approach is based on the assumption that during the construction of a schedule there exist several disjunct temporal regions where the demand for one resource type or a single temporal constraint dominates (bottleneck regions). If the scheduler can identify these regions and classify them based on their dominant constraint, then the scheduler can select the scheduling heuristic.

Biefeld, Eric↗
NASA NTRS1990

Automated platform management system scheduling

The Platform Management System (PMS) has been established to coordinate the operation of platform systems and payloads. Since platforms are to be out of contact with the ground more than the manned base, PMS functions are required to be more autonomous than those of the manned base. Automated replanning and rescheduling will be required to effectively and efficiently meet mission goals. In a FY88 study, we developed a phased approach to automated PMS scheduling based upon use of the same scheduling engine in both ground and space components. In the past year, we implemented a baseline, first phase, PMS scheduler prototype. Presently we are integrating this scheduler into two NASA Goddard Space Flight Center testbeds, as the ground scheduler in the Scheduling Concepts, Architectures, and Networks Testbed and as the onboard scheduler in the PMS Testbed. We will investigate rescheduling issues, evaluated operational performance and enhance the prototype to demonstrate our evolutionary approach to automated PMS scheduling.

Hull, Larry G.↗
NASA NTRS1993

OMP-26 - An interactive scheduling tool for the 26 meter subnetwork

Operations Mission Planner for the 26 Meter (26M) Antenna Subnetwork (OMP-26) is an interactive scheduling tool developed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) to assist in allocating the Deep Space Network (DSN) 26M antennas to support Earth-orbiting Spacecraft (SC). Prior to integrating OMP-26 into the 26M scheduling arena, the text-based, labor-intensive task lacked the sufficient means to support the 1992 mission support increase. Therefore, JPL developed the OMP-26 interactive scheduling tool to automate the time consuming tasks of the existing, manual scheduling process. OMP-26 has addressed the scheduling dilemma by assisting schedulers to identify and resolve conflicts more quickly through its graphical display features and constraint-checking editing capability. Although OMP-26 has reduced the scheduler's existing workload by easing the identification and resolution of conflicts, it will not meet the needs of another mission support increase to occur by 1995. Therefore, future plans for OMP-26 involve transitioning from a solely interactive scheduling tool to one that is highly automated and more powerful.

Rosas, Jody L.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Robust telescope scheduling

This paper presents a technique for building robust telescope schedules that tend not to break. The technique is called Just-In-Case (JIC) scheduling and it implements the common sense idea of being prepared for likely errors, just in case they should occur. The JIC algorithm analyzes a given schedule, determines where it is likely to break, reinvokes a scheduler to generate a contingent schedule for each highly probable break case, and produces a 'multiply contingent' schedule. The technique was developed for an automatic telescope scheduling problem, and the paper presents empirical results showing that Just-In-Case scheduling performs extremely well for this problem.

Swanson, Keith↗
NASA NTRS1993

Study and Demonstration of Planning and Scheduling Concepts for the Earth Observing System Data and Information System

The University of Colorado's Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics (CU/LASP) along with the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) designed, implemented, tested, and demonstrated a prototype of the distributed, hierarchical planning and scheduling system comtemplated for the Earth Observing System (EOS) project. The planning and scheduling prototype made use of existing systems: CU/LASP's Operations and Science Instrument Support Planning and Scheduling (OASIS-PS) software package; GSFC's Request Oriented Scheduling Engine (ROSE); and JPL's Plan Integrated Timeliner 2 (Plan-It-2). Using these tools, four scheduling nodes were implemented and tied together using a new communications protocol for scheduling applications called the Scheduling Applications Interface Language (SAIL). An extensive and realistic scenario of EOS satellite operations was then developed and the prototype scheduling system was tested and demonstrated using the scenario. Two demonstrations of the system were given to NASA personnel and EOS core system (ECS) contractor personnel. A comprehensive volume of lessons learned was generated and a meeting was held with NASA and ECS representatives to review these lessons learned. A paper and presentation on the project's final results was given at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Computing in Aerospace 9 conference.

Davis, Randal↗
NASA NTRS1999

SOFIA's Choice: Automating the Scheduling of Airborne Observations

This paper describes the problem of scheduling observations for an airborne telescope. Given a set of prioritized observations to choose from, and a wide range of complex constraints governing legitimate choices and orderings, how can we efficiently and effectively create a valid flight plan which supports high priority observations? This problem is quite different from scheduling problems which are routinely solved automatically in industry. For instance, the problem requires making choices which lead to other choices later, and contains many interacting complex constraints over both discrete and continuous variables. Furthermore, new types of constraints may be added as the fundamental problem changes. As a result of these features, this problem cannot be solved by traditional scheduling techniques. The problem resembles other problems in NASA and industry, from observation scheduling for rovers and other science instruments to vehicle routing. The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In 2 we describe the observatory in order to provide some background. In 3 we describe the problem of scheduling a single flight. In 4 we compare flight planning and other scheduling problems and argue that traditional techniques are not sufficient to solve this problem. We also mention similar complex scheduling problems which may benefit from efforts to solve this problem. In 5 we describe an approach for solving this problem based on research into a similar problem, that of scheduling observations for a space-borne probe. In 6 we discuss extensions of the flight planning problem as well as other problems which are similar to flight planning. In 7 we conclude and discuss future work.

Frank, Jeremy↗
NASA NTRS2005

The Effects of the Uncertainty of Departures on Multi-Center Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) Scheduling

The Multi-center Traffic Management Advisor (McTMA) provides a platform for regional or national traffic flow management, by allowing long-range cooperative time-based metering to constrained resources, such as airports or air traffic control center boundaries. Part of the demand for resources is made up of proposed departures, whose actual departure time is difficult to predict. For this reason, McTMA does not schedule the departures in advance, but rather relies on traffic managers to input their requested departure time. Because this happens only a short while before the aircraft's actual departure, McTMA is unable to accurately predict the amount of delay airborne aircraft will need to take in order to accommodate the departures. The proportion of demand which is made up by such proposed departures increases as the horizon over which metering occurs gets larger. This study provides an initial analysis of the severity of this problem in a 400-500 nautical mile metering horizon and discusses potential solutions to accommodate these departures. The challenge is to smoothly incorporate departures with the airborne stream while not excessively delaying the departures.' In particular, three solutions are reviewed: (1) scheduling the departures at their proposed departure time; (2) not scheduling the departures in advance; and (3) scheduling the departures at some time in the future based on an estimated error in their proposed time. The first solution is to have McTMA to automatically schedule the departures at their proposed departure times. Since the proposed departure times are indicated in their flight times in advance, this method is the simplest, but studies have shown that these proposed times are often incorrect2 The second option is the current practice, which avoids these inaccuracies by only scheduling aircraft when a confirmed prediction of departure time is obtained from the tower of the departure airport. Lastly, McTMA can schedule the departures at a predicted departure time based on statistical data of past departure time performance. It has been found that departures usually have a wheels-up time after their indicated proposed departure time, as shown in Figure 1. Hence, the departures were scheduled at a time in the future based on the mean error in proposed departure times for their airport.

Thipphavong, Jane↗