Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “software differences”

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

Executable assertions and flight software

Executable assertions are used to test flight control software. The techniques used for testing flight software; however, are different from the techniques used to test other kinds of software. This is because of the redundant nature of flight software. An experimental setup for testing flight software using executable assertions is described. Techniques for writing and using executable assertions to test flight software are presented. The error detection capability of assertions is studied and many examples of assertions are given. The issues of placement and complexity of assertions and the language features to support efficient use of assertions are discussed.

Mahmood, A.↗

NDE Software Developed at NASA Glenn Research Center

NASA Glenn Research Center has developed several important Nondestructive Evaluation (NDE) related software packages for different projects in the last 10 years. Three of the software packages have been created with commercial-grade user interfaces and are available to United States entities for download on the NASA Technology Transfer and Partnership Office server (https://sr.grc.nasa.gov/). This article provides brief overviews of the software packages.

image processing↗

Integration of an expert system into a user interface language demonstration

The need for a User Interface Language (UIL) has been recognized by the Space Station Program Office as a necessary tool to aid in minimizing the cost of software generation by multiple users. Previous history in the Space Shuttle Program has shown that many different areas of software generation, such as operations, integration, testing, etc., have each used a different user command language although the types of operations being performed were similar in many respects. Since the Space Station represents a much more complex software task, a common user command language--a user interface language--is required to support the large spectrum of space station software developers and users. To assist in the selection of an appropriate set of definitions for a UIL, a series of demonstration programs was generated with which to test UIL concepts against specific Space Station scenarios using operators for the astronaut and scientific community. Because of the importance of expert system in the space station, it was decided that an expert system should be embedded in the UIL. This would not only provide insight into the UIL components required but would indicate the effectiveness with which an expert system could function in such an environment.

Stclair, D. C.↗

Software Validation Work With The ZPPR-15 Data

The analysis activities for fast reactors involve using many different pieces of software that are relied upon for their predictive capabilities. For this software to be considered reliable, documented proof that the predictions of the software are accurate is required. In this manuscript, the validation work that covers some of the Argonne software used in fast reactor design activities is discussed and displayed. This validation work includes neutron and gamma flux distributions, reaction rate distributions, and reactivity worth. In an ideal world, a reactor development program would have access to a comprehensive set of experimental facilities to help inform the design aspects of the reactor itself. While thermal-hydraulics experiments, and to a limited degree mechanical experiments, can be carried out today for validation needs, neutronics related experimental facilities are rather impractical because of the lack of experimental facilities. Given the desired time table for construction of new reactors, the reconstitution or creation of new neutronic experimental facilities is untenable and thus those reactor development programs must rely upon any available experimental measurements that are qualitatively similar to the design. While a methodology has been proposed to assess the similarity between the past experimental measurements and the reactor itself, that aspect is beyond the scope of this manuscript. In this manuscript, the focus is entirely placed on the analysis results for a series of experiments carried out at the ZPPR facility in Idaho in the mid-1980s. In this regard, this manuscript only shows the validation of the stated neutronics software for specific loadings of the ZPPR reactor. Because of the fuel form, its proposed enrichment, and the material content of the reactor core, the ZPPR-15 experiments were identified as potential validation data for the reactor. The ZPPR-15 experiments were intended as mockups of a 330 MWe Integral Fast Reactor program which was a follow on program to the Clinch River Breeder Reactor. In the ZPPR-15 series of experiments, measurements of the neutron spectrum, control rod worth, sodium void worth, foil reaction rate distributions, Doppler worth of heated samples, gamma dose, and axial expansion worth were all carried out and published. In many cases, these reactivity coefficients are good candidates to validate the reactivity coefficient calculation scheme used by the analysis software and included in the safety analysis activities of fast reactor development projects today. This manuscript discusses the modeling methodology and accuracy of the calculated experimental results using the LANL software MCNP and the ANL software package ARC (Argonne Reactor Codes). As will be shown, for many of the experimental measurements, the two software packages are found to be good predictive analysis tools for those experiments. In other cases, problems with the analysis methodology or underlying cross section data are exposed which indicates where predictive analysis is not as reliable. Finally, in some of the measurements the conclusion is reached that the experimental measurement cannot be reproduced with the analysis software as it is simply too difficult.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Software Validation Work With The ZPPR-15 Data

The analysis activities for fast reactors involve using many different pieces of software that are relied upon for their predictive capabilities. For this software to be considered reliable, documented proof that the predictions of the software are accurate is required. In this manuscript, the validation work that covers some of the Argonne software used in fast reactor design activities is discussed and displayed. This validation work includes neutron and gamma flux distributions, reaction rate distributions, and reactivity worth. In an ideal world, a reactor development program would have access to a comprehensive set of experimental facilities to help inform the design aspects of the reactor itself. While thermal-hydraulics experiments, and to a limited degree mechanical experiments, can be carried out today for validation needs, neutronics related experimental facilities are rather impractical because of the lack of experimental facilities. Given the desired time table for construction of new reactors, the reconstitution or creation of new neutronic experimental facilities is untenable and thus those reactor development programs must rely upon any available experimental measurements that are qualitatively similar to the design. While a methodology has been proposed to assess the similarity between the past experimental measurements and the reactor itself, that aspect is beyond the scope of this manuscript. In this manuscript, the focus is entirely placed on the analysis results for a series of experiments carried out at the ZPPR facility in Idaho in the mid-1980s. In this regard, this manuscript only shows the validation of the stated neutronics software for specific loadings of the ZPPR reactor. Because of the fuel form, its proposed enrichment, and the material content of the reactor core, the ZPPR-15 experiments were identified as potential validation data for the reactor. The ZPPR-15 experiments were intended as mockups of a 330 MWe Integral Fast Reactor program which was a follow on program to the Clinch River Breeder Reactor. In the ZPPR-15 series of experiments, measurements of the neutron spectrum, control rod worth, sodium void worth, foil reaction rate distributions, Doppler worth of heated samples, gamma dose, and axial expansion worth were all carried out and published. In many cases, these reactivity coefficients are good candidates to validate the reactivity coefficient calculation scheme used by the analysis software and included in the safety analysis activities of fast reactor development projects today. This manuscript discusses the modeling methodology and accuracy of the calculated experimental results using the LANL software MCNP and the ANL software package ARC (Argonne Reactor Codes). As will be shown, for many of the experimental measurements, the two software packages are found to be good predictive analysis tools for those experiments. In other cases, problems with the analysis methodology or underlying cross section data are exposed which indicates where predictive analysis is not as reliable. Finally, in some of the measurements the conclusion is reached that the experimental measurement cannot be reproduced with the analysis software as it is simply too difficult.

Aliberti, Gerardo↗

A Software Tool for Integrated Optical Design Analysis

Design of large precision optical systems requires multi-disciplinary analysis, modeling, and design. Thermal, structural and optical characteristics of the hardware must be accurately understood in order to design a system capable of accomplishing the performance requirements. The interactions between each of the disciplines become stronger as systems are designed lighter weight for space applications. This coupling dictates a concurrent engineering design approach. In the past, integrated modeling tools have been developed that attempt to integrate all of the complex analysis within the framework of a single model. This often results in modeling simplifications and it requires engineering specialist to learn new applications. The software described in this presentation addresses the concurrent engineering task using a different approach. The software tool, Integrated Optical Design Analysis (IODA), uses data fusion technology to enable a cross discipline team of engineering experts to concurrently design an optical system using their standard validated engineering design tools.

Moore, Jim↗

Certification Processes for Safety-Critical and Mission-Critical Aerospace Software

This document is a quick reference guide with an overview of the processes required to certify safety-critical and mission-critical flight software at selected NASA centers and the FAA. Researchers and software developers can use this guide to jumpstart their understanding of how to get new or enhanced software onboard an aircraft or spacecraft. The introduction contains aerospace industry definitions of safety and safety-critical software, as well as, the current rationale for certification of safety-critical software. The Standards for Safety-Critical Aerospace Software section lists and describes current standards including NASA standards and RTCA DO-178B. The Mission-Critical versus Safety-Critical software section explains the difference between two important classes of software: safety-critical software involving the potential for loss of life due to software failure and mission-critical software involving the potential for aborting a mission due to software failure. The DO-178B Safety-critical Certification Requirements section describes special processes and methods required to obtain a safety-critical certification for aerospace software flying on vehicles under auspices of the FAA. The final two sections give an overview of the certification process used at Dryden Flight Research Center and the approval process at the Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL).

Nelson, Stacy↗

Certification Processes for Safety-Critical and Mission-Critical Aerospace Software

This document is a quick reference guide with an overview of the processes required to certify safety-critical and mission-critical flight software at selected NASA centers and the FAA. Researchers and software developers can use this guide to jumpstart their understanding of how to get new or enhanced software onboard an aircraft or spacecraft. The introduction contains aerospace industry definitions of safety and safety-critical software, as well as, the current rationale for certification of safety-critical software. The Standards for Safety-Critical Aerospace Software section lists and describes current standards including NASA standards and RTCA DO-178B. The Mission-Critical versus Safety-Critical software section explains the difference between two important classes of software: safety-critical software involving the potential for loss of life due to software failure and mission-critical software involving the potential for aborting a mission due to software failure. The DO-178B Safety-critical Certification Requirements section describes special processes and methods required to obtain a safety-critical certification for aerospace software flying on vehicles under auspices of the FAA. The final two sections give an overview of the certification process used at Dryden Flight Research Center and the approval process at the Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL).

Nelson, Stacy↗

NASA Data Acquisition System Software Development for Rocket Propulsion Test Facilities

Current NASA propulsion test facilities include Stennis Space Center in Mississippi, Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama, Plum Brook Station in Ohio, and White Sands Test Facility in New Mexico. Within and across these centers, a diverse set of data acquisition systems exist with different hardware and software platforms. The NASA Data Acquisition System (NDAS) is a software suite designed to operate and control many critical aspects of rocket engine testing. The software suite combines real-time data visualization, data recording to a variety formats, short-term and long-term acquisition system calibration capabilities, test stand configuration control, and a variety of data post-processing capabilities. Additionally, data stream conversion functions exist to translate test facility data streams to and from downstream systems, including engine customer systems. The primary design goals for NDAS are flexibility, extensibility, and modularity. Providing a common user interface for a variety of hardware platforms helps drive consistency and error reduction during testing. In addition, with an understanding that test facilities have different requirements and setups, the software is designed to be modular. One engine program may require real-time displays and data recording; others may require more complex data stream conversion, measurement filtering, or test stand configuration management. The NDAS suite allows test facilities to choose which components to use based on their specific needs. The NDAS code is primarily written in LabVIEW, a graphical, data-flow driven language. Although LabVIEW is a general-purpose programming language; large-scale software development in the language is relatively rare compared to more commonly used languages. The NDAS software suite also makes extensive use of a new, advanced development framework called the Actor Framework. The Actor Framework provides a level of code reuse and extensibility that has previously been difficult to achieve using LabVIEW. The

Herbert, Phillip W., Sr.↗

Experiences in improving the state of the practice in verification and validation of knowledge-based systems

Knowledge-based systems (KBS's) are in general use in a wide variety of domains, both commercial and government. As reliance on these types of systems grows, the need to assess their quality and validity reaches critical importance. As with any software, the reliability of a KBS can be directly attributed to the application of disciplined programming and testing practices throughout the development life-cycle. However, there are some essential differences between conventional software and KBSs, both in construction and use. The identification of these differences affect the verification and validation (V&V) process and the development of techniques to handle them. The recognition of these differences is the basis of considerable on-going research in this field. For the past three years IBM (Federal Systems Company - Houston) and the Software Technology Branch (STB) of NASA/Johnson Space Center have been working to improve the 'state of the practice' in V&V of Knowledge-based systems. This work was motivated by the need to maintain NASA's ability to produce high quality software while taking advantage of new KBS technology. To date, the primary accomplishment has been the development and teaching of a four-day workshop on KBS V&V. With the hope of improving the impact of these workshops, we also worked directly with NASA KBS projects to employ concepts taught in the workshop. This paper describes two projects that were part of this effort. In addition to describing each project, this paper describes problems encountered and solutions proposed in each case, with particular emphasis on implications for transferring KBS V&V technology beyond the NASA domain.

Culbert, Chris↗

SSFP approach to software reuse

This talk began by presenting the Space Station Freedom Program (SSFP) definitions of software commonality and software reuse. Software commonality is the use of identical, interchangeable, functionally compatible, or similar software items to satisfy different sets of functionally similar requirements. The Software Support Environment (SSE) and the Data Management System (DMS) of onboard computing facilities are examples of SSFP common software. Software reuse is the use of identical, compatible, or similar software items in either modified or unmodified form to satisfy development activities at any point in the software life cycle; in other words, taking an existing item and applying it to another development activity. Software commonality has been mandated in several critical areas (such as the SSE and DMS) and a policy directive is under review. A software reuse study group was established in May 1988 to gather background information (see Level 2 Software Reuse Study that follows by Scott Herman). The SSFP Program Definition and Requirements Document contains requirements for SSE support in the area of software reuse. The SSE is a collection of tools and rules, and provides the common environment to be used for the life cycle management of all SSFP operational software.

Snyder, Peg↗

Mission planning for Shuttle Imaging Radar-C (SIR-C) with a real-time interactive planning software

The Shuttle Imaging Radar-C (SIR-C) mission will operate from the payload bay of the space shuttle for 8 days, gathering Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data over specific sites on the Earth. The short duration of the mission and the requirement for realtime planning offer challenges in mission planning and in the design of the Planning and Analysis Subsystem (PAS). The PAS generates shuttle ephemerides and mission planning data and provides an interactive real-time tool for quick mission replanning. It offers a multi-user and multiprocessing environment, and it is able to keep multiple versions of the mission timeline data while maintaining data integrity and security. Its flexible design allows one software to provide different menu options based on the user's operational function, and makes it easy to tailor the software for other Earth orbiting missions.

Potts, Su K.↗

Sequencing System Building Blocks: Using a Component Architecture for Sequencing Software

Over the last few years software engineering has made significant strides in making more flexible architectures and designs possible. However, at the same time, spacecraft have become more complex and flight software has become more sophisticated. Typically spacecraft are often one-of-a-kind entities that have different hardware designs, different capabilities, different instruments, etc. Ground software has become more complex and operations teams have had to learn a myriad of tools that all have different user interfaces and represent data in different ways. At Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) these themes have collided to require a new approach to producing ground system software. Two different groups have been looking at tackling this particular problem. One group is working for the JPL Mars Technology Program in the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) Focused Technology area. The other group is the JPL Multi-Mission Planning and Sequencing Group. The major concept driving these two approaches on a similar path is to provide software that can be a more cohesive flexible system that provides a set of planning and sequencing system of services. This paper describes the efforts that have been made to date to create a unified approach from these disparate groups.

multi mission planning↗

Sequence System Building Blocks: Using a Component Architecture for Sequencing Software

Over the last few years software engineering has made significant strides in making more flexible architectures and designs possible. However, at the same time, spacecraft have become more complex and flight software has become more sophisticated. Typically spacecraft are often one-of-a-kind entities that have different hardware designs, different capabilities, different instruments, etc. Ground software has become more complex and operations teams have had to learn a myriad of tools that all have different user interfaces and represent data in different ways. At Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) these themes have collided to require an new approach to producing ground system software. Two different groups have been looking at tackling this particular problem. One group is working for the JPL Mars Technology Program in the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) Focused Technology area. The other group is the JPL Multi-Mission Planning and Sequencing Group . The major concept driving these two approaches on a similar path is to provide software that can be a more cohesive flexible system that provides a act of planning and sequencing system of services. This paper describes the efforts that have been made to date to create a unified approach from these disparate groups.

flexible architectures↗

New Human-Computer Interface Concepts for Mission Operations

The current climate of budget cuts has forced the space mission operations community to reconsider how it does business. Gone are the days of building one-of-kind control centers with teams of controllers working in shifts 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. Increasingly, automation is used to significantly reduce staffing needs. In some cases, missions are moving towards lights-out operations where the ground system is run semi-autonomously. On-call operators are brought in only to resolve anomalies. Some operations concepts also call for smaller operations teams to manage an entire family of spacecraft. In the not too distant future, a skeleton crew of full-time general knowledge operators will oversee the operations of large constellations of small spacecraft, while geographically distributed specialists will be assigned to emergency response teams based on their expertise. As the operations paradigms change, so too must the tools to support the mission operations team's tasks. Tools need to be built not only to automate routine tasks, but also to communicate varying types of information to the part-time, generalist, or on-call operators and specialists more effectively. Thus, the proper design of a system's user-system interface (USI) becomes even more importance than before. Also, because the users will be accessing these systems from various locations (e.g., control center, home, on the road) via different devices with varying display capabilities (e.g., workstations, home PCs, PDAS, pagers) over connections with various bandwidths (e.g., dial-up 56k, wireless 9.6k), the same software must have different USIs to support the different types of users, their equipment, and their environments. In other words, the software must now adapt to the needs of the users! This paper will focus on the needs and the challenges of designing USIs for mission operations. After providing a general discussion of these challenges, the paper will focus on the current efforts of creatin(y an effective USI for one specific suite of tools, SERS (The Spacecraft Emergency Response System), which has been built to enable lights-out operations. SERS is a Web-based collaborative environment that enables secure distributed fault management.

Fox, Jeffrey A.↗

The Knowledge-Based Software Assistant: Beyond CASE

This paper will outline the similarities and differences between two paradigms of software development. Both support the whole software life cycle and provide automation for most of the software development process, but have different approaches. The CASE approach is based on a set of tools linked by a central data repository. This tool-based approach is data driven and views software development as a series of sequential steps, each resulting in a product. The Knowledge-Based Software Assistant (KBSA) approach, a radical departure from existing software development practices, is knowledge driven and centers around a formalized software development process. KBSA views software development as an incremental, iterative, and evolutionary process with development occurring at the specification level.

Carozzoni, Joseph A.↗

Research Software Engineering: Introducing a New Computing in Science & Engineering Department

Here, this article introduces the new Research Software Engineering (RSEng) department at Computing in Science & Engineering. Through a conversation with the department coeditors, we highlight why RSEng matters, how it differs from industrial software engineering, what it means to be an RSE, and the scholarly and practical questions that lie ahead. Along the way, we draw on emerging literature, case studies, and community perspectives to frame the profession and practice of RSEng within computational science and engineering.

Lamprecht, Anna-Lena [Univ. of Potsdam (Germany)] ↗

CommBench: Micro-Benchmarking Hierarchical Networks with Multi-GPU, Multi-NIC Nodes

Modern high-performance computing systems have multiple GPUs and network interface cards (NICs) per node. The resulting network architectures have multilevel hierarchies of subnetworks with different interconnect and software technologies. These systems offer multiple vendor-provided communication capabilities and library implementations (IPC, MPI, NCCL, RCCL, OneCCL) with APIs providing varying levels of performance across the different levels. Understanding this performance is currently difficult because of the wide range of architectures and programming models (CUDA, HIP, OneAPI). We present CommBench, a library with cross-system portability and a high-level API that enables developers to easily build microbenchmarks relevant to their use cases and gain insight into the performance (bandwidth & latency) of multiple implementation libraries on different networks. We demonstrate CommBench with three sets of microbenchmarks that profile the performance of six systems. Our experimental results reveal the effect of multiple NICs on optimizing the bandwidth across nodes and also present the performance characteristics of four available communication libraries within and across nodes of NVIDIA, AMD, and Intel GPU networks.

Hidayetoglu, Mert↗