Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Interoperability”

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 127 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Overview of Sense and Avoid/Separation Assurance Interoperability (SSI)

The UAS in the NAS project is studying the minimum operational performance standards for unmanned aerial systems (UAS's) detect-and-avoid (DAA) system in order to operate in the National Airspace System. The project is executing a series of fast-time simulation, human-in-the-loop experiments, and flight test in support of this effort. Officials of the Swiss Government (Peter Winter, Director of Aeronautical Systems, and Michel Godinat, Head of the Certification Office) are visiting NASA to become more familiar with the advances being made to integrate UAS into civilian airspace. This briefing will review the activities and results over the past 3 years within the Separation AssuranceSense-and-Avoid Interoperability team.

Santiago, Confesor↗
NASA NTRS2016

Interoperable End-To-End Space Communications Architecture Using CCSDS Building Blocks

End-to-end space communication architectures must connect system elements that may be in space, on the ground in mission operations centers, or are shared assets such as ground communications stations. End-to-end connectivity involves space communications over RF links, but also cross support services, terrestrial network circuits, and a variety of application layer protocols for commanding, telemetry, and mission operations. CCSDS has developed a large suite of interoperable, and cross-supportable, protocols for these purposes. Each of these defines a specific “layer” of functionality, such as: RF modulation, space link error coding, cross support frame delivery, or network layer routing. CCSDS has recently published a Space Communication Cross Support Architecture Requirements Document (SCCS-ARD) that describes how many of these standards fit together and how they are intended to be used. This paper provides an overview of this document, presented so as to explain the concepts so that others may use them. These concepts will be described from several key viewpoints.

Shames, Peter M.↗
NASA NTRS2019

An Update on the CCSDS Optical Communications Working Group Interoperability Standards

International space agencies around the world are working together in the Interagency Operation Advisory Group (IOAG) and the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) to develop interoperability standards for optical communications. The standards support optical communication systems for both Near Earth and Deep Space robotic and human-rated spacecraft. The standards generally address both free space links between spacecraft and free space links between spacecraft and ground. This paper will overview the history and structure of the CCSDS Optical Communications Working Group and provide an update on the set of optical communications standards being developed. The paper will address the ongoing work on High Photon Efficiency communications, High Data Rate communications, and Optical On/Off Keying communications. It will also cover the working being done within CCSDS on documenting atmospheric measurement techniques and link operations concepts.

Edwards, Bernard L.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Interoperable End-To-End Space Communications Architectures Using CCSDS Building Blocks

End-to-end space communication architectures must connect system elements that may be in space, on the ground in mission operations centers, or are shared assets such as ground communications stations. End-to-end connectivity involves space communications over RF links, but also cross support services, terrestrial network circuits, and a variety of application layer protocols for commanding, telemetry, and mission operations. CCSDS has developed a large suite of interoperable, and cross-supportable, protocols for these purposes. Each of these defines a specific “layer” of functionality, such as: RF modulation, space link error coding, cross support frame delivery, or network layer routing. CCSDS has recently published a Space Communication Cross Support Architecture Requirements Document (SCCS-ARD) that describes how many of these standards fit together and how they are intended to be used. This paper provides an overview of this document, presented so as to explain the concepts so that others may use them. These concepts will be described from several key viewpoints.

Shames, Peter M.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Application of the NASA Multiscale Analysis Tool: Multiscale Integration and Interoperability

The NASA Multiscale Analysis Tool (NASMAT) was developed recently to allow a wide variety of multiscale analysis problems to be effectively and efficiently solved. The architecture of NASMAT was established specifically to enable parallelized, “plug-and-play” functionality to reduce the complexity associated with adding new features to the code in the future and to allow end users to rapidly implement and evaluate user-defined capabilities. Additionally, the tool utilizes recursive data structures and subroutines to allow for an arbitrary number of length scales when performing multiscale analyses of heterogeneous materials. These features permit the rapid integration of user-defined capabilities (e.g., a material model, micromechanics approach, or failure theory) at all stages within a NASMAT calculation while leveraging built-in techniques where needed. Additionally, these features allow NASMAT to both be called from an external program as well as call an external program. This paper specifically focuses on the multiscale integration and interoperability of NASMAT with other analysis techniques through an illustrative, multiscale analysis of a 3D woven polymer matrix composite (PMC).

NASMAT↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA R&M Efficiency through Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) Digital Assets

At the intersection of mission, technology, and place is NASA’s need to modernize for a digital-forward future. Digitalization, the process of moving toward digital business, is occurring everywhere and remains an ongoing process across the federal government.”[1] Whereas, Digital Transformation is “employing digitization/digital technologies (e.g., Artificial Intelligence (AI), mobile, cloud, data) to change a process, product, or capability so dramatically (e.g., real-time, intelligent, personalized, anywhere, anytime) that it is unrecognizable compared to its traditional form.” [2] In order to facilitate a digital transformation it is essential for NASA to understand and identify where data exists today and which data are value-needed in the future, understand where there are unfulfilled data needs that limit the advancement of NASA work, and ensure NASA efficiency through Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) digital assets in the future. Therefore, NASA’s Reliability & Maintainability (R&M) Enterprise Data Sharing team is working to leverage both Digitization and Digital Transformation to achieve their vision of developing an R&M data discovery framework that enables our community, our partners, and our stakeholders with the ability to efficiently, robustly, and seamlessly access information that enables real-time knowledge and model-based, analytics driven, decision-making impacting R&M. As a result the R&M Enterprise Data Sharing team has conducted a survey of its Reliability, Maintainability, and Availability (RMA) community members to identify data existence (created or used) and where there are corresponding barriers to data acquisition and/or R&M or other issues as shown within this presentation.

Digital Transformation↗
NASA NTRS2023

Flight Mechanics Analysis Tools Interoperability and Component Sharing

Several NASA centers have developed independent flight mechanics tools to meet the science needs of missions. This NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) assessment sought to explore the ways to increase the interoperability of three specific tools: Copernicus from Johnson Space Center (JSC), the General Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT) from Goddard Spaceflight Flight Center (GSFC), and the Mission-Analysis Operations Navigation Toolkit Environment (MONTE) from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). Before this assessment, these tools were not integrated and could not easily share data, models, or components. This report contains the outcome of the NESC assessment.

General Mission Analysis Tool↗
NASA NTRS2023

Flight Mechanics Analysis Tools Interoperability and Component Sharing

As multiple flight mechanics (FM) analysis tools are developed to meet the unique scientific and operational requirements of NASA missions, sharing data, transferring models and trajectory information between tools can be complicated. The NESC recently explored ways that increase interoperability of three mission analysis tools: Copernicus, General Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT), and Mission-Analysis Operations Navigation Toolkit Environment (MONTE). These tools are used to generate a variety of products throughout all phases of a mission including: maneuver planning, trajectory optimization and design, orbit determination, performance and error analysis, trade studies and sizing. Establishing a framework to share models, component data and trajectory information is an efficient way to leverage the benefits of an analysis tool without expending development costs to duplicate functionality.

Flight Mechanics Simulation↗
NASA NTRS2024

Enabling Advanced Snow Physics within Land Surface Models Through an Interoperable Model-Physics Coupling Framework

Accurate estimation of snow accumulation and melt is a critical part of decision-making in snow-dominated watersheds. In this study, we demonstrate a flexible methodology to couple a detailed snow model, Crocus, separately to two different land surface models (LSMs), Noah-MP and Noah. The original LSMs and the coupled models (Noah-MP-Crocus and Noah-Crocus) are used to simulate snow depth, snow water equivalent, and other water and energy states and fluxes. The results of simulations are compared against a wide range of independent gridded and point scale reference datasets. Our results show that coupling the detailed snow model, Crocus, with the LSMs improves the snow depth and snow water equivalent relative to independent observations. Overall, larger improvements are obtained with coupling Crocus to the Noah LSM, with the coupled Noah-Crocus configuration reducing the RMSE and bias of snow depth from 2-12% and 57-75%, respectively, relative to Snow Data Assimilation System (SNODAS) and snow product from the University of Arizona. On the other hand, smaller improvements are obtained by coupling Crocus with Noah-MP. The Coupled Noah-MP-Crocus reduces the snow depth bias but slightly degrades the RMSE of snow depth and snow water equivalent. The corresponding impacts in other water budget terms such as evapotranspiration, soil moisture, and streamflow, however, are mixed, pointing to the significant need to improve the coupling assumptions of these processes within land models. Overall, the interoperable coupling framework demonstrated here offers the opportunity to include more detailed snow physics and processes, and to advance data assimilation systems through improved exploitation of information from snow remote sensing instruments.

Snow model↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Governing Data Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability (FAIR) Compliance

The most recent data strategy documents at both the federal and NASA levels stipulate that systems should strive for the data they manage to be Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR). The NASA Life Sciences Portal (NLSP) has already begun leading efforts in this area for HRP, initiating efforts to comply with the FAIR principles. The broad interpretation of the FAIR principles has led to a plethora of tools that use a splay of metrics specifically but variably developed to judge how compliant data and systems are with the principles. A recent review [3] identified and studied 1,180 metrics across 20 publicly available tools for checking FAIR compliance of data and systems. Because of their very recent development, many organizations and data systems managers and developers have not yet had adequate time or resources to understand these FAIR compliance tools and metrics, their variations in design, accuracy or ease of application to their specific data sets and systems. Thus, it would be best for larger organizations like NASA to approach formulating a strategy for governance of FAIR compliance that can be flexibly applied and is adaptable to an evolving awareness knowledge of FAIR compliance methods and tools. In September 2024, the NASA Science Mission Directorate(SMD) organized a workshop on NASA science data repositories, including the topics of implementing FAIR and governing FAIR compliance across SMD. The initial part of these FAIR discussions focused on developing consensus around required science metadata fields. This is challenging given the diverse nature of NASA’s scientific data portfolio, the variety of metadata models and vocabularies used, and variable level of resources available to curate these data. Later discussion focused on three possible approaches to governing FAIR compliance: distributed, in which various programs, projects or systems define their own methods for assessing FAIR compliance, reporting results up appropriate management lines; centralized, in which higher-level organization(s) specify compliance tools or methods for the various data systems; and multi-level, in which a group comprised of individuals with expertise from multiple levels with organizations is formed to provide guidance and/or specifications for governing FAIR compliance. We report on the recommendations this session yielded, and how these might be shaped specifically to help implement and govern the compliance with FAIR of Human Research Program data and systems.

governance↗