Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mission Operations Assurance”

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 NTRSDate not supplied

Dynamic Assurance of Autonomous Systems through Ground Control Software∗

Assurance cases are being increasingly acknowledged as a way to build trust in complex systems with autonomous capabilities [1]. An assurance case is a comprehensive, defensible, and valid justification that a system will function as intended for the specific mission and operating environment. Such justifications for systems with autonomous capabilities are often based on various probabilistic quantifications [2]. Due to the dynamic nature of the environmental conditions in which these systems operate, as well as the changing nature of the autonomous systems themselves, these probabilistic quantifications cannot be simply estimated once during design time. Rather, they need to be continually evaluated during systems operations to ensure that the assurance case justifications are valid. We refer to the assurance case that combines both the static and dynamic elements as a Dynamic Assurance Case (DAC).

dynamic assurance case↗
NASA NTRS1992

Space technology research plans

Development of new technologies is the primary purpose of the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST). OAST's mission includes the following two goals: (1) to conduct research to provide fundamental understanding, develop advanced technology and promote technology transfer to assure U.S. preeminence in aeronautics and to enhance and/or enable future civil space missions: and (2) to provide unique facilities and technical expertise to support national aerospace needs. OAST includes both NASA Headquarters operations as well as programmatic and institutional management of the Ames Research Center, the Langley Research Center and the Lewis Research Center. In addition. a considerable portion of OAST's Space R&T Program is conducted through the flight and science program field centers of NASA. Within OAST, the Space Technology Directorate is responsible for the planning and implementation of the NASA Space Research and Technology Program. The Space Technology Directorate's mission is 'to assure that OAST shall provide technology for future civil space missions and provide a base of research and technology capabilities to serve all national space goals.' Accomplishing this mission entails the following objectives: y Identify, develop, validate and transfer technology to: (1) increase mission safety and reliability; (2) reduce flight program development and operations costs; (3) enhance mission performance; and (4) enable new missions. Provide the capability to: (1) advance technology in critical disciplines; and (2) respond to unanticipated mission needs. In-space experiments are an integral part of OAST's program and provides for experimental studies, development and support for in-space flight research and validation of advanced space technologies. Conducting technology experiments in space is a valuable and cost effective way to introduce advanced technologies into flight programs. These flight experiments support both the R&T base and the focussed programs within OAST.

Hook, W. Ray↗
NASA NTRS2018

IV&V Planning & Execution Initiative

Independent verification and validation (IV&V) is a systems engineering discipline which seeks to provide confidence that mission-critical software-dependent systems will operate safely and achieve all mission objectives. In order to optimize application of IV&V resources, it is necessary to identify specific assurance objectives that are most likely to reveal difficulty and therefore to increase confidence. Software assurance literature deals predominantly with the code itself. However, our experience is that the most significant software-related issues are discovered via analysis of other system artifacts such as operations concepts, requirements and design. Consequently, it is desirable to, when assessing risk and defining assurance objectives, consider all facets of the software system architecture. We describe in this presentation progress and lessons learned from an IV&V capability development initiative to enhance the IV&V project planning process using all available architecture information.

Risk↗
NASA NTRS2007

AIRSAR Web-Based Data Processing

The AIRSAR automated, Web-based data processing and distribution system is an integrated, end-to-end synthetic aperture radar (SAR) processing system. Designed to function under limited resources and rigorous demands, AIRSAR eliminates operational errors and provides for paperless archiving. Also, it provides a yearly tune-up of the processor on flight missions, as well as quality assurance with new radar modes and anomalous data compensation. The software fully integrates a Web-based SAR data-user request subsystem, a data processing system to automatically generate co-registered multi-frequency images from both polarimetric and interferometric data collection modes in 80/40/20 MHz bandwidth, an automated verification quality assurance subsystem, and an automatic data distribution system for use in the remote-sensor community. Features include Survey Automation Processing in which the software can automatically generate a quick-look image from an entire 90-GB SAR raw data 32-MB/s tape overnight without operator intervention. Also, the software allows product ordering and distribution via a Web-based user request system. To make AIRSAR more user friendly, it has been designed to let users search by entering the desired mission flight line (Missions Searching), or to search for any mission flight line by entering the desired latitude and longitude (Map Searching). For precision image automation processing, the software generates the products according to each data processing request stored in the database via a Queue management system. Users are able to have automatic generation of coregistered multi-frequency images as the software generates polarimetric and/or interferometric SAR data processing in ground and/or slant projection according to user processing requests for one of the 12 radar modes.

Chu, Anhua↗
NASA NTRS1997

NASA X-34 Technology in Motion

The X-34 technology development program is a joint industry/government project to develop, test, and operate a small, fully-reusable hypersonic flight vehicle. The objective is to demonstrate key technologies and operating concepts applicable to future reusable launch vehicles. Integrated in the vehicle are various systems to assure successful completion of mission objectives, including the Main Propulsion System (MPS). NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) is responsible for developing the X-34's MPS including the design and complete build package for the propulsion system components. The X-34 will be powered by the Fastrac Engine, which is currently in design and development at NASA-MSFC. Fastrac is a single-stage main engine, which burns a mixture of liquid oxygen (LOX) and kerosene(RP-1). The interface between the MPS and Fastrac engine are critical for proper system operation and technologies applicable to future reusable launch vehicles. Deneb's IGRIP software package with the Dynamic analysis option provided a key tool for conducting studies critical to this interface as well as a mechanism to drive the design of the LOX and RP-1 feedlines. Kinematic models were created for the Fastrac Engine and the feedlines for various design concepts. Based on the kinematic simulation within Envision, design and joint limits were verified and system interference controlled. It was also critical to the program to evaluate the effect of dynamic loads visually, providing a verification tool for dynamic analysis and in some cases uncovering areas that had not been considered. Deneb's software put the X-34 technology in motion and has been a key factor in facilitating the strenuous design schedule.

Beech, Geoffrey↗
NASA NTRS2006

Advanced Technologies for Future Spacecraft Cockpits and Space-based Control Centers

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a new era of Space Exploration, aimed at sending crewed spacecraft beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO), in medium and long duration missions to the Lunar surface, Mars and beyond. The challenges of such missions are significant and will require new technologies and paradigms in vehicle design and mission operations. Current roles and responsibilities of spacecraft systems, crew and the flight control team, for example, may not be sustainable when real-time support is not assured due to distance-induced communication lags, radio blackouts, equipment failures, or other unexpected factors. Therefore, technologies and applications that enable greater Systems and Mission Management capabilities on-board the space-based system will be necessary to reduce the dependency on real-time critical Earth-based support. The focus of this paper is in such technologies that will be required to bring advance Systems and Mission Management capabilities to space-based environments where the crew will be required to manage both the systems performance and mission execution without dependence on the ground. We refer to this concept as autonomy. Environments that require high levels of autonomy include the cockpits of future spacecraft such as the Mars Exploration Vehicle, and space-based control centers such as a Lunar Base Command and Control Center. Furthermore, this paper will evaluate the requirements, available technology, and roadmap to enable full operational implementation of onboard System Health Management, Mission Planning/re-planning, Autonomous Task/Command Execution, and Human Computer Interface applications. The technology topics covered by the paper include enabling technology to perform Intelligent Caution and Warning, where the systems provides directly actionable data for human understanding and response to failures, task automation applications that automate nominal and Off-nominal task execution based on human input or integrated health state-derived conditions. Shifting from Systems to Mission Management functions, we discuss the role of automated planning applications (tactical planning) on-board, which receive data from the other cockpit automation systems and evaluate the mission plan against the dynamic systems and mission states and events, to provide the crew with capabilities that enable them to understand, change, and manage the timeline of their mission. Lastly, we discuss the role of advanced human interface technologies that organize and provide the system md mission information to the crew in ways that maximize their situational awareness and ability to provide oversight and control of aLl the automated data and functions.

Garcia-Galan, Carlos↗
NASA NTRS1983

Productivity in an evolutionary space station

Space station productivity is treated from a systems point of view, considering the functions and attributes of space station development, formation, and operation that affect productivity. An optimum planning method is needed to assure that the station will have mission flexibility, technology advancement, maintainability, and evolutionary capability. Advanced technology will be designed into the housekeeping and utility functions of the station. Greater risk taking may be allowed into designs if the potential benefits of the advanced system support the risk, and if the system can be buffered from causing a failure cascade throughout the station. A common data base is needed to store and track all designs, developments, and changes in the station subsystems. Systems that can be automated and free the human inhabitants for more productive work are favored, as are modular components that are highly fault-free. Human control must also be possible, especially during check-out and verification, and also for teaching the automated systems new or modified tasks.

Anderson, J. L.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Human Performance Modeling and Simulation for Launch Team Applications

This paper describes ongoing research into modeling and simulation of humans for launch team analysis, training, and evaluation. The initial research is sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA)'s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) and NASA's Exploration Program and is focused on current and future launch team operations at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). The paper begins with a description of existing KSC launch team environments and procedures. It then describes the goals of new Simulation and Analysis of Launch Teams (SALT) research. The majority of this paper describes products from the SALT team's initial proof-of-concept effort. These products include a nominal case task analysis and a discrete event model and simulation of launch team performance during the final phase of a shuttle countdown; and a first proof-of-concept training demonstration of launch team communications in which the computer plays most roles, and the trainee plays a role of the trainee's choice. This paper then describes possible next steps for the research team and provides conclusions. This research is expected to have significant value to NASA's Exploration Program.

Peaden, Cary J.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Advanced Ground Systems Maintenance Prognostics Project

The project implements prognostics capabilities to predict when a component system or subsystem will no longer meet desired functional or performance criteria, called the end of life. The capability also provides an assessment of the remaining useful life of a hardware component. The project enables the delivery of system health advisories to ground system operators. This project will use modeling techniques and algorithms to assess components' health andpredict remaining life for such components. The prognostics capability being developed will beused:during the design phase and during pre/post operations to conduct planning and analysis ofsystem design, maintenance & logistics plans, and system/mission operations plansduring real-time operations to monitor changes to components' health and assess their impacton operations.This capability will be interfaced to Ground Operations' command and control system as a part ofthe AGSM project to help assure system availability and mission success. The initial modelingeffort for this capability will be developed for Liquid Oxygen ground loading applications.

Prognostics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

What Is the OPP Approach to the Next Generation of Laboratory Requirements

Planetary Protection Quality Management System NASA’s Office of Planetary Protection uses a quality-based process evaluation approach to verify planetary protection bioburden compliance over a project’s life cycle. The verification strategy shifts from a comparative direct assay approach validating hardware bioburden at a “moment in time,” to one that implements a continual quality assurance demonstration of the analytical process via established data requirements, laboratory operational, and management parameters throughout the mission’s entire assembly process. Laboratory quality-based systems and management strategies are standardized and implemented across government and industry. A standardized laboratory quality system approach increases transparency throughout the project’s life cycle and aligns planetary protection analytical approaches with government and industry practices to support both NASA and commercial endeavors. Strategies include the implementation of a laboratory quality management structure that documents and routinely validates parameters critical to experimental design and data collection, provides data quality assessment parameters, and ultimately validates that the collected data is of sufficient quality and quantity to meet the specified technical goals. Planetary protection can draw on these practices to provide a systematic process-based quality approach to support planetary protection validation and compliance requirements. Quality approaches including data quality objectives, method performance, data acceptance criteria and the associated laboratory quality management system are presented to provide an overview and framework for a planetary protection laboratory quality management system.

Amy Baker↗
NASA NTRS2002

Managing Risk for Cassini During Mission Operations and Data Analysis (MOandDA)

A Risk Management Process has been tailored for Cassini that not only satisfies the requirements of NASA and JPL, but also allows the Program to proactively identify and assess risks that threaten mission objectives. Cassini Risk Management is a team effort that involves both management and engineering staff. The process is managed and facilitated by the Mission Assurance Manager (MAM), but requires regular interactions with Program Staff and team members to instill the risk management philosophy into the day to day mission operations. While Risk Management is well defined for projects in the development phase, it is a relatively new concept for Mission Operations. The Cassini team has embraced this process and has begun using it in an effective, proactive manner, to ensure mission success. It is hoped that the Cassini Risk Management Process will form the basis by which risk management is conducted during MO&DA on future projects. proactive in identifying, assessing and mitigating risks before they become problems. Cost ehtiveness is achieved by: Comprehensively identifying risks Rapidly assessing which risks require the expenditure of pruject cewums Taking early actions to mitigate these risks Iterating the process frequently, to be responsive to the dynamic internal and external environments The Cassini Program has successfully implemented a Risk Management Process for mission operations, The initial SRL has been developed and input into he online tool. The Risk Management webbased system has been rolled out for use by the flight team and risk owners we working proactive in identifying, assessing and mitigating risks before they become problems. Cost ehtiveness is achieved by: Comprehensively identifying risks Rapidly assessing which risks require the expenditure of pruject cewums Taking early actions to mitigate these risks Iterating the process frequently, to be responsive to the dynamic internal and external environments The Cassini Program has successfully implemented a Risk Management Process for mission operations, The initial SRL has been developed and input into he online tool. The Risk Management webbased system has been rolled out for use by the flight team and risk owners we working put into place will become visible and will be illusmted in future papers.

risk management↗
NASA NTRS1999

JPL process for tailoring mission assurance to specific projects

This document identifies a processs for tailoring Mission Assurance (MA) activities to JPL flight projects. These MA activities are to be accomplished during appropriate phases of projects involved in design, development, test, fabrication, launch and mission operations. MA is the responsibility of all participants on a project; it enhances their contribution to the success of the mission.

mission assurance↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Collaborative Host Facility for Lunar Operations

This project establishes a new collaborative simulation connectivity capability for JSC utilizing existing facilities. The principal collaborating organizations are Safety & Mission Assurance (Code NA) and Engineering Directorate (Code EA), but the capability is open for any JSC user. The core of the connectivity resides in Code ER7’s Concept Exploration Laboratory (CEL) and is part of ER7’s Systems Engineering Simulator (SES) complex. NA Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) work proactively in situ with EA and commercial crew counterparts to evaluate Safety Review Panel (SRP) protocols for landers, habitation modules, and lunar roving systems using the same tools, terrain models and data as the designers. NA software initiated under two JSC Center Innovation Fund (CIF) and Innovation Charge account (ICA) funded projects will be used to configure the CEL to function as an EA maintained facility. Collaboration via the CEL with the U.S. Space Force (USSF) provides visibility for USSF. The potential for commercial crew and vehicle suppliers will require IT security and associated security architecture to be implemented in additional CIF based proposals.

Collaborative Simulation Hosting↗
NASA NTRS1994

National facilities study. Volume 3: Mission and requirements model report

The National Facility Study (NFS) was initiated in 1992 by Daniel S. Goldin, Administrator of NASA as an initiative to develop a comprehensive and integrated long-term plan for future facilities. The resulting, multi-agency NFS consisted of three Task Groups: Aeronautics, Space Operations, and Space Research and Development (R&D) Task Groups. A fourth group, the Engineering and Cost Analysis Task Group, was subsequently added to provide cross-cutting functions, such as assuring consistency in developing an inventory of space facilities. Space facilities decisions require an assessment of current and future needs. Therefore, the two task groups dealing with space developed a consistent model of future space mission programs, operations and R&D. The model is a middle ground baseline constructed for NFS analytical purposes with excursions to cover potential space program strategies. The model includes three major sectors: DOD, civilian government, and commercial space. The model spans the next 30 years because of the long lead times associated with facilities development and usage. This document, Volume 3 of the final NFS report, is organized along the following lines: Executive Summary -- provides a summary view of the 30-year mission forecast and requirements baseline, an overview of excursions from that baseline that were studied, and organization of the report; Introduction -- provides discussions of the methodology used in this analysis; Baseline Model -- provides the mission and requirements model baseline developed for Space Operations and Space R&D analyses; Excursions from the baseline -- reviews the details of variations or 'excursions' that were developed to test the future program projections captured in the baseline; and a Glossary of Acronyms.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2018

Total and Spectral Solar Irradiance Sensor (TSIS) Project Status

TSIS-1 studies the Sun's energy input to Earth and how solar variability affects climate. TSIS-1 will measure both the total amount of light that falls on Earth, known as the total solar irradiance (TSI), and how that light is distributed among ultraviolet, visible and infrared wavelengths, called solar spectral irradiance (SSI). TSIS-1 will provide the most accurate measurements of sunlight and continue the long-term climate data record. TSIS-1 includes two instruments: the Total Irradiance Monitor (TIM) and the Spectral Irradiance Monitor (SIM), integrated into a single payload on the International Space Station (ISS). The TSIS-1 TIM and SIM instruments are upgraded versions of the two instruments that are flying on the Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment (SORCE) mission launched in January 2003. NASA Goddard's TSIS project responsibilities include project management, system engineering, safety and mission assurance, and engineering oversight for TSIS-1. TSIS-1 was installed on the International Space Station in December 2017. At the end of the 90-day commissioning phase, responsibility for TSIS-1 operations transitions to the Earth Science Mission Operations (ESMO) project at Goddard for its 5-year operations. NASA contracts with the University of Colorado Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics (LASP) for the design, development and testing of TSIS-1, support for ISS integration, science operations of the TSIS-1 instrument, data processing, data evaluation, calibration and delivery to the Goddard Earth Science Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC).

TSIS↗
NASA NTRS2017

Technology and Tool Development to Support Safety and Mission Assurance

The Assurance Case approach is being adopted in a number of safety-mission-critical application domains in the U.S., e.g., medical devices, defense aviation, automotive systems, and, lately, civil aviation. This paradigm refocuses traditional, process-based approaches to assurance on demonstrating explicitly stated assurance goals, emphasizing the use of structured rationale, and concrete product-based evidence as the means for providing justified confidence that systems and software are fit for purpose in safely achieving mission objectives. NASA has also been embracing assurance cases through the concepts of Risk Informed Safety Cases (RISCs), as documented in the NASA System Safety Handbook, and Objective Hierarchies (OHs) as put forth by the Agency's Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA). This talk will give an overview of the work being performed by the SGT team located at NASA Ames Research Center, in developing technologies and tools to engineer and apply assurance cases in customer projects pertaining to aviation safety. We elaborate how our Assurance Case Automation Toolset (AdvoCATE) has not only extended the state-of-the-art in assurance case research, but also demonstrated its practical utility. We have successfully developed safety assurance cases for a number of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) operations, which underwent, and passed, scrutiny both by the aviation regulator, i.e., the FAA, as well as the applicable NASA boards for airworthiness and flight safety, flight readiness, and mission readiness. We discuss our efforts in expanding AdvoCATE capabilities to support RISCs and OHs under a project recently funded by OSMA under its Software Assurance Research Program. Finally, we speculate on the applicability of our innovations beyond aviation safety to such endeavors as robotic, and human spaceflight.

Mission Assuranc↗
NASA NTRS2000

Steady-State Vacuum Ultraviolet Exposure Facility With Automated Lamp Calibration and Sample Positioning Fabricated

The Next Generation Space Telescope (NGST) will be placed in an orbit that will subject it to constant solar radiation during its planned 10-year mission. A sunshield will be necessary to passively cool the telescope, protecting it from the Sun s energy and assuring proper operating temperatures for the telescope s instruments. This sunshield will be composed of metalized polymer multilayer insulation with an outer polymer membrane (12 to 25 mm in thickness) that will be metalized on the back to assure maximum reflectance of sunlight. The sunshield must maintain mechanical integrity and optical properties for the full 10 years. This durability requirement is most challenging for the outermost, constantly solar-facing polymer membrane of the sunshield. One of the potential threats to the membrane material s durability is from vacuum ultraviolet (VUV) radiation in wavelengths below 200 nm. Such radiation can be absorbed in the bulk of these thin polymer membrane materials and degrade the polymer s optical and mechanical properties. So that a suitable membrane material can be selected that demonstrates durability to solar VUV radiation, ground-based testing of candidate materials must be conducted to simulate the total 10- year VUV exposure expected during the Next Generation Space Telescope mission. The Steady State Vacuum Ultraviolet exposure facility was designed and fabricated at the NASA Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field to provide unattended 24-hr exposure of candidate materials to VUV radiation of 3 to 5 times the Sun s intensity in the wavelength range of 115 to 200 nm. The facility s chamber, which maintains a pressure of approximately 5 10(exp -6) torr, is divided into three individual exposure cells, each with a separate VUV source and sample-positioning mechanism. The three test cells are separated by a water-cooled copper shield plate assembly to minimize thermal effects from adjacent test cells. Part of the interior sample positioning mechanism of one test cell is shown in the illustration. Of primary concern in VUV exposure is the maintenance of constant measured radiation intensity so that the sample s total exposure can be determined in equivalent Sun hours. This is complicated by the fact that a VUV lamp s intensity degrades over time, necessitating a decrease in the distance between the test samples and the lamp. The facility overcomes this challenge by periodically measuring the lamp s intensity with a cesium-iodide phototube and adjusting the sample distance as required to maintain constant exposure intensity. Sample positioning and periodic phototube location under the lamp are both achieved by a single lead-screw assembly. The lamps can be isolated from the main vacuum chamber for cleaning or replacement so that samples are not exposed to the atmosphere during a test.

Sechkar, Edward A.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Review of Significant Incidents and Close Calls in Human Spaceflight from a Human Factors Perspective

This project aims to identify poor human factors design decisions that led to error-prone systems, or did not facilitate the flight crew making the right choices; and to verify that NASA is effectively preventing similar incidents from occurring again. This analysis was performed by reviewing significant incidents and close calls in human spaceflight identified by the NASA Johnson Space Center Safety and Mission Assurance Flight Safety Office. The review of incidents shows whether the identified human errors were due to the operational phase (flight crew and ground control) or if they initiated at the design phase (includes manufacturing and test). This classification was performed with the aid of the NASA Human Systems Integration domains. This in-depth analysis resulted in a tool that helps with the human factors classification of significant incidents and close calls in human spaceflight, which can be used to identify human errors at the operational level, and how they were or should be minimized. Current governing documents on human systems integration for both government and commercial crew were reviewed to see if current requirements, processes, training, and standard operating procedures protect the crew and ground control against these issues occurring in the future. Based on the findings, recommendations to target those areas are provided.

Silva-Martinez, Jackelynne↗