SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “concurrent engineering design”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1992

Design of a prototype Advanced Main Combustion Chamber for the Space Shuttle Main Engine

Development of a prototype advanced main combustion chamber is underway at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. The Advanced Main Combustion Chamber (AMCC) project is being approached utilizing a 'concurrent engineering' concept where groups from materials, manufacturing, stress, quality, and design are involved from the initiation of the project. The AMCC design has been tailored to be compatible with the investment casting process. Jacket, inlet/outlet manifolds, inlet/outlet neck coolant flow splitters, support ribs, actuator lugs, and engine controller mounting bracket will all be a part of the one-piece AMCC casting. Casting of the AMCC in a one-piece configuration necessitated a method of forming a liner in its structural jacket. A method of vacuum plasma spraying the liner is being developed. In 1994, the AMCC will be hot-fired on the Technology Test Bed Space Shuttle Main Engine.

Lackey, J. D.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Model-Based Systems Engineering in Concurrent Engineering Centers

Concurrent Engineering Centers (CECs) are specialized facilities with a goal of generating and maturing engineering designs by enabling rapid design iterations. This is accomplished by co-locating a team of experts (either physically or virtually) in a room with a focused design goal and a limited timeline of a week or less. The systems engineer uses a model of the system to capture the relevant interfaces and manage the overall architecture. A single model that integrates other design information and modeling allows the entire team to visualize the concurrent activity and identify conflicts more efficiently, potentially resulting in a systems model that will continue to be used throughout the project lifecycle. Performing systems engineering using such a system model is the definition of model-based systems engineering (MBSE); therefore, CECs evolving their approach to incorporate advances in MBSE are more successful in reducing time and cost needed to meet study goals. This paper surveys space mission CECs that are in the middle of this evolution, and the authors share their experiences in order to promote discussion within the community.

systems engineering↗

NASA NTRS2015

Model-Based Systems Engineering in Concurrent Engineering Centers

Concurrent Engineering Centers (CECs) are specialized facilities with a goal of generating and maturing engineering designs by enabling rapid design iterations. This is accomplished by co-locating a team of experts (either physically or virtually) in a room with a narrow design goal and a limited timeline of a week or less. The systems engineer uses a model of the system to capture the relevant interfaces and manage the overall architecture. A single model that integrates other design information and modeling allows the entire team to visualize the concurrent activity and identify conflicts more efficiently, potentially resulting in a systems model that will continue to be used throughout the project lifecycle. Performing systems engineering using such a system model is the definition of model-based systems engineering (MBSE); therefore, CECs evolving their approach to incorporate advances in MBSE are more successful in reducing time and cost needed to meet study goals. This paper surveys space mission CECs that are in the middle of this evolution, and the authors share their experiences in order to promote discussion within the community.

Iwata, Curtis↗

NASA NTRS2015

Model-Based Systems Engineering in Concurrent Engineering Centers

Concurrent Engineering Centers (CECs) are specialized facilities with a goal of generating and maturing engineering designs by enabling rapid design iterations. This is accomplished by co-locating a team of experts (either physically or virtually) in a room with a narrow design goal and a limited timeline of a week or less. The systems engineer uses a model of the system to capture the relevant interfaces and manage the overall architecture. A single model that integrates other design information and modeling allows the entire team to visualize the concurrent activity and identify conflicts more efficiently, potentially resulting in a systems model that will continue to be used throughout the project lifecycle. Performing systems engineering using such a system model is the definition of model-based systems engineering (MBSE); therefore, CECs evolving their approach to incorporate advances in MBSE are more successful in reducing time and cost needed to meet study goals. This paper surveys space mission CECs that are in the middle of this evolution, and the authors share their experiences in order to promote discussion within the community.

MODEL↗

NASA NTRS1991

F-15 composite engine access door

This paper presents a summary of the successfully concluded phase 1 of the two-phase Design and Manufacture of Advanced Thermoplastic Structures (DMATS) program. It addresses the design, manufacture, and validation testing of a thermoplastic F-15E forward engine access door and includes lessons learned during the concurrent product and process design development phases of the program.

Ramkumar, Ramaswamy L.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Compass Concurrent Engineering Lessons Learned in Remote and Hybrid Environments

The Compass Team at NASA’s Glenn Research Center (GRC) is a concurrent engineering team which specializes in conceptual spacecraft mission designs. Detailed descriptions of the team, its history, and its operating model can be found in [1] and [2]. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the team was required to move to remote (virtual) operation from their in-person model for approximately 22 months. As the restrictions began to lift and team members were able to return in-person to the Compass Lab, the team moved into a hybrid mode of operation, with some participants still tying in remotely some or all of the time. This paper discusses many of the lessons learned from these experiences, highlighting improvements, outstanding challenges and the tools and methodologies used to address both. Throughout this discussion the terms “in-person”, “hybrid”, “virtual” and “remote” will be used. For the purposes of this paper, “in-person” will be understood to mean when team members are interacting simultaneously, physically within the Compass Lab. “Remote” or “virtual” will refer to when interactions are happening between people who are not co-located using only technology to interface. “Hybrid” will refer to when two or more participants are physically located in the Compass Lab and one or more participant(s) is participating remotely. Media richness is described as “a medium’s ability to communicate effectively based of four factors. They are the capacity for immediate feedback, the number of cues and channels it utilizes, the degree of personalization it affords, and its ability to communicate using natural language” [3]. This theory will be referenced and discussed in multiple of the following sections due to its relevance when choosing how to operate in remote and hybrid modes, as well as in making tool selections. The key to selecting the best mode of communication lays in how complicated the discussion is and the level of ambiguity involved. Not all conversations or interactions require media rich mediums. For example, providing information about which there is little to no ambiguity can easily be done in less rich methods - such as email. A conversation including high levels of ambiguity and/or complex information is better suited to a richer medium, such as in-person or a video call with shared screens.

Concurrent Engineering↗

NASA NTRS2003

Update on Integrated Optical Design Analyzer

Updated information on the Integrated Optical Design Analyzer (IODA) computer program has become available. IODA was described in Software for Multidisciplinary Concurrent Optical Design (MFS-31452), NASA Tech Briefs, Vol. 25, No. 10 (October 2001), page 8a. To recapitulate: IODA facilitates multidisciplinary concurrent engineering of highly precise optical instruments. The architecture of IODA was developed by reviewing design processes and software in an effort to automate design procedures. IODA significantly reduces design iteration cycle time and eliminates many potential sources of error. IODA integrates the modeling efforts of a team of experts in different disciplines (e.g., optics, structural analysis, and heat transfer) working at different locations and provides seamless fusion of data among thermal, structural, and optical models used to design an instrument. IODA is compatible with data files generated by the NASTRAN structural-analysis program and the Code V (Registered Trademark) optical-analysis program, and can be used to couple analyses performed by these two programs. IODA supports multiple-load-case analysis for quickly accomplishing trade studies. IODA can also model the transient response of an instrument under the influence of dynamic loads and disturbances.

Moore, James D., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS2021

Lessons Learned in Remote Participant Concurrent Engineering Concept Development Studies

Team-X was born from a need to perform rapid space mission design for principal investigator-led competed proposals in the mid-1990s. Throughout the last 25 years, Team-X at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory has expanded its application of the collaborative, concurrent study approach into every facet necessary to win competed proposals. The COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 created an immediate and new constraint on these studies – the need to conduct them with remote participants, both on the client side requesting the study, but also on the provider side producing the study. This paper provides lessons learned from dozens of design studies run by Team-X at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory during the COVID-19 pandemic. These lessons span all aspects of the information infrastructure: the people, processes, procedures, methods, tools, and “facilities”. These lessons learned will have applicability post-pandemic, as they have shown how best to incorporate participants, both on the provider side, and on the client side, who cannot travel or otherwise be co-located during collaborative, concurrent study sessions.

Nash, Alfred↗

NASA NTRS2012

Concurrent Mission and Systems Design at NASA Glenn Research Center: The Origins of the COMPASS Team

Established at the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in 2006 to meet the need for rapid mission analysis and multi-disciplinary systems design for in-space and human missions, the Collaborative Modeling for Parametric Assessment of Space Systems (COMPASS) team is a multidisciplinary, concurrent engineering group whose primary purpose is to perform integrated systems analysis, but it is also capable of designing any system that involves one or more of the disciplines present in the team. The authors were involved in the development of the COMPASS team and its design process, and are continuously making refinements and enhancements. The team was unofficially started in the early 2000s as part of the distributed team known as Team JIMO (Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter) in support of the multi-center collaborative JIMO spacecraft design during Project Prometheus. This paper documents the origins of a concurrent mission and systems design team at GRC and how it evolved into the COMPASS team, including defining the process, gathering the team and tools, building the facility, and performing studies.

McGuire, Melissa L.↗

DOE OSTI2024

Sensitivity Analysis for the Component Design App: Analysis of Success Assured Data

A new tool has been developed to perform variance-based global sensitivity analysis (VBGSA) on data from a set-based concurrent engineering software called Success Assured (SA). The tool is part of a digital component design app, which is currently in production as an Accelerated Digital Engineering Pathfinder at Sandia National Laboratories. When working with complex digital models, it is important to understand relationships between inputs and outputs, i.e., how “sensitive” model outputs are to changes in model inputs. After extensive research and trials of various sensitivity analysis methods, it was determined that estimation of Sobol’ indices for VBGSA with Monte Carlo simulation, paired with simple surrogate models, produces the best results for SA data. This tool increases understanding of SA models and streamlines the creation of SA datasets. This report details the methodology and implementation of this sensitivity analysis tool so others can understand it and implement it.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

NASA NTRS1989

Multidisciplinary optimization for engineering systems: Achievements and potential

The currently common sequential design process for engineering systems is likely to lead to suboptimal designs. Recently developed decomposition methods offer an alternative for coming closer to optimum by breaking the large task of system optimization into smaller, concurrently executed and, yet, coupled tasks, identified with engineering disciplines or subsystems. The hierarchic and non-hierarchic decompositions are discussed and illustrated by examples. An organization of a design process centered on the non-hierarchic decomposition is proposed.

Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, Jaroslaw↗

NASA NTRS1989

Multidisciplinary optimization for engineering systems - Achievements and potential

Sobieszczanski-Sobieski, Jaroslaw↗

NASA NTRS1992

Elements of designing for cost

During recent history in the United States, government systems development has been performance driven. As a result, systems within a class have experienced exponentially increasing cost over time in fixed year dollars. Moreover, little emphasis has been placed on reducing cost. This paper defines designing for cost and presents several tools which, if used in the engineering process, offer the promise of reducing cost. Although other potential tools exist for designing for cost, this paper focuses on rules of thumb, quality function deployment, Taguchi methods, concurrent engineering, and activity-based costing. Each of these tools has been demonstrated to reduce cost if used within the engineering process.

Dean, Edwin B.↗

NASA NTRS1992

Elements of Designing for Cost

During recent history in the United States, government systems development has been performance driven. As a result, systems within a class have experienced exponentially increasing cost over time in fixed year dollars. Moreover, little emphasis has been placed on reducing cost. This paper defines designing for cost and presents several tools which, if used in the engineering process, offer the promise of reducing cost. Although other potential tools exist for designing for cost, this paper focuses on rules of thumb, quality function deployment, Taguchi methods, concurrent engineering, and activity based costing. Each of these tools has been demonstrated to reduce cost if used within the engineering process.

Dean, Edwin B.↗

NASA NTRS2000

Peroxide Propulsion at the Turn of the Century

A resurgence of interest in peroxide propulsion has occurred in the last years of the 21st Century. This interest is driven by the need for lower cost propulsion systems and the need for storable reusable propulsion systems to meet future space transportation system architectures. NASA and the Air Force are jointly developing two propulsion systems for flight demonstration early in the 21st Century. One system will be a development of Boeing's AR2-3 engine, which was successfully fielded in the 1960s. The other is a new pressure-fed design by Orbital Sciences Corporation for expendable mission requirements. Concurrently NASA and industry are pursuing the key peroxide technologies needed to design, fabricate, and test advanced peroxide engines to meet the mission needs beyond 2005. This paper will present a description of the AR2-3, report the status of its current test program, and describe its intended flight demonstration. This paper will then describe the Orbital 10K engine, the status of its test program, and describe its planned flight demonstration. Finally the paper will present a plan, or technology roadmap, for the development of an advanced peroxide engine for the 21st Century.

Anderson, William E.↗

NASA NTRS1998

Distributed Parallel Processing and Dynamic Load Balancing Techniques for Multidisciplinary High Speed Aircraft Design

Multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) for large-scale engineering problems poses many challenges (e.g., the design of an efficient concurrent paradigm for global optimization based on disciplinary analyses, expensive computations over vast data sets, etc.) This work focuses on the application of distributed schemes for massively parallel architectures to MDO problems, as a tool for reducing computation time and solving larger problems. The specific problem considered here is configuration optimization of a high speed civil transport (HSCT), and the efficient parallelization of the embedded paradigm for reasonable design space identification. Two distributed dynamic load balancing techniques (random polling and global round robin with message combining) and two necessary termination detection schemes (global task count and token passing) were implemented and evaluated in terms of effectiveness and scalability to large problem sizes and a thousand processors. The effect of certain parameters on execution time was also inspected. Empirical results demonstrated stable performance and effectiveness for all schemes, and the parametric study showed that the selected algorithmic parameters have a negligible effect on performance.

Krasteva, Denitza T.↗

NASA NTRS2002

How to Quickly Import CAD Geometry into Thermal Desktop

There are several groups at JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) that are committed to concurrent design efforts, two are featured here. Center for Space Mission Architecture and Design (CSMAD) enables the practical application of advanced process technologies in JPL's mission architecture process. Team I functions as an incubator for projects that are in the Discovery, and even pre-Discovery proposal stages. JPL's concurrent design environment is to a large extent centered on the CAD (Computer Aided Design) file. During concurrent design sessions CAD geometry is ported to other more specialized engineering design packages.

Wright, Shonte↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ICME: The Design of Fit-for-Purpose Materials

With the increased emphasis on reducing the cost and time to market of new materials, ICME (Integrated Computational Materials Engineering) has become a fast growing discipline within materials science and engineering. The vision of ICME is compelling in many respects, not only for the value added in reducing time to market for new products with advanced, tailored materials, but also for enhanced efficiency and performance of these materials. Although the challenges and barriers (both technical and cultural) are formidable, substantial cost, schedule, and technical benefits can result from broad development, implementation, and validation of ICME principles. ICME is an integrated approach to the design of products, and the materials that comprise them, by linking material and structural models at multiple time and length scales. NASA’s Transformational Tools and Technology (TTT) Project sponsored a study (performed by a team led by Pratt & Whitney) in 2016 to define the potential 25-year future state required for integrated multiscale modeling of materials and systems (e.g., load-bearing structures) to accelerate the pace and reduce the expense of innovation in future aerospace and aeronautical systems. This talk will briefly review ICME, the findings of the 2040 Vision study, and discuss NASA’s TTT 2040 implementation activities: with special emphasis on recent accomplishments. The 2040 study, NASA CR 2018- 219771, envisions the development of a cyber-physical-social ecosystem comprised of experimentally verified and validated computational models, tools, and techniques, along with the associated digital tapestry, that impacts the entire supply chain to enable cost-effective, rapid, and revolutionary design of fit-for-purpose materials, components, and systems by enabling the engineer to not only “design-with-the” material but also concurrently “design-the” material.

multiscale analysis↗