SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Partners”

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 127 records · Page 7

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2021

Frustration in Fuzzy Protein Complexes Leads to Interaction Versatility

Disordered proteins frequently serve as interaction hubs involving a constrained variety of partners. Complexes with different partners frequently exhibit distinct binding modes, involving regions that remain disordered in the bound state. While the conformational properties of disordered proteins are well-characterized in their free states, less is known about the molecular mechanisms by which specificity can be achieved not with one but with multiple partners. Using the energy landscape theory concept of protein frustration, we demonstrate that complexes of disordered proteins exhibit a high degree of local frustration, especially at the binding interface. These suboptimal interactions lead to the possibility of multiple bound substates, each displaying distinct frustration patterns, which are differently populated in complexes with different partners. These results explain how specificity of disordered proteins can be achieved without a single common bound conformation and how the conflict between different interactions can be used to control the binding to multiple partners.

Chemical specificity↗

NASA NTRS2024

NASA's Human Research Program: Evolving Collaborations to Enable the Future of Human Spaceflight

Since its formation in 2007, the NASA Human Research Program’s (HRP) mission has been to reduce human health and performance risks for spaceflight exploration missions. The program has achieved this mission primarily through work in ground analogs and on the International Space Station. Over the last three years, NASA overall has seen transformative changes with the flight of Artemis I, formation of the Commercial LEO Destinations Program, commercial flights to the ISS, and new International Partners participating in human spaceflight. NASA’s HRP has embraced these new opportunities and is collaborating on all these fronts to collect biomedical research data. Artemis I marked the arrival of NASA’s new human spaceflight exploration missions. NASA has developed a Moon-to-Mars Architecture to map out how it will use the moon to de-risk and enable Mars missions. NASA’s HRP is a critical component to develop and deliver research and technologies for future Artemis Crew Health and Performance (CHP) Systems. The program is working closely with NASA’s Moon-to-Mars Office to ensure CHP deliverables are ready to demonstrate on the moon, as we also look toward Mars, and is developing the partnership strategies required to support these deliverables. Commercial space flights, both free flyer and suborbital missions and private astronaut missions to the ISS, are providing broader opportunities and subjects to characterize the space-induced changes to the human system and to test countermeasures. To better use these opportunities to achieve its mission, HRP has been working to understand the commercial spaceflight companies’ needs and then partner with them on aspects of mutual interest. In addition, NASA HRP continues to engage in long-standing relationships with its international partners through the International Space Life Sciences Working Group (ISLSWG) and other joint international groups. The Program is now also interested in sharing its knowledge and ability to collaborate on projects of mutual interest with new countries developing capabilities for human spaceflight. The next 10 years will shape how humanity partners on exploration missions to Mars. NASA’s HRP is committed to enabling and developing collaborative strategies with commercial and international partners to keep humans safe and productive as we explore longer and further into space.

Jancy McPhee↗

NASA NTRS2024

NASA's Human Research Program: Evolving Collaborations to Enable the Future of Human Spaceflight

Since its formation in 2007, the NASA Human Research Program’s (HRP) mission has been to protect the health and performance of astronauts as they explore beyond low Earth orbit. The HRP helps enable exploration spaceflight through a focused program of research that leads to the development and delivery of solutions to protect human health and performance during and after these missions. This research is conducted primarily in ground analogs of the spaceflight environment and on the International Space Station (ISS). Over the last 3 years, NASA has undergone transformative changes with the flight of Artemis I, the formation of the Commercial Low Earth Orbit Destinations Program, commercial flights to the ISS, and collaboration with new international partners participating in human spaceflight. The HRP has embraced these new opportunities and is collaborating on all these fronts to collect biomedical research data. Artemis I marked the arrival of NASA’s new human spaceflight exploration missions. NASA established the Moon to Mars Program Office to design a roadmap for the exploration of the lunar surface and the journey beyond to Mars. The HRP has a critical role in conducting research and delivering technologies that will lead to solutions that protect human health and performance, and is working closely with the Moon to Mars Office to ensure these deliverables are ready in time to support their strategy. The HRP is also developing the partnership strategies required to support these deliverables. Commercial space flights, both free flyer and suborbital missions and private astronaut missions to the ISS, are providing broader opportunities and more subjects to characterize spaceflight-induced changes to the human system and to test countermeasures. To better use these opportunities to achieve its mission, the HRP has been working to understand the commercial spaceflight companies’ needs and then partnering with them on aspects of mutual interest. In addition, the HRP continues to engage in long-standing relationships with its international partners through the International Space Life Sciences Working Group and other joint international groups. The HRP is interested in sharing its knowledge and collaborating on projects of mutual interest with new countries that are developing capabilities for human spaceflight. The next 10 years will shape how humanity partners on exploration missions to Mars, and the HRP is committed to enabling and developing collaborative strategies with commercial and international partners to keep humans safe and productive as they explore longer and further into space.

Human research↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of the Artemis Distributed Simulation FOMs

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is formulating and developing the Artemis Program, a collaboration with domestic commercial and international partners that will establish a long term human presence on the Moon and extend human exploration beyond the Earth-Moon system ahead of exploring Mars. These Artemis partners are developing a portfolio of space and surface systems to support human missions to the lunar surface and beyond. The Artemis systems will provide the mobility, habitation, and logistics infrastructure that will support human exploration and foster robust scientific investigations. Each partner will contribute one or more elements to the Artemis Program with NASA having the overarching responsibility for defining the Artemis architecture and guiding the integration of this complex system of space systems. To successfully accomplish this audacious task, NASA will rely on the development and execution of many complex models and simulations. Many of these simulations will be provided by the Artemis partners. While each of these simulations will provide important insight into the characteristics and performance of an associated system, individually they will not provide insight into the integrated performance of the architecture and the system of systems working in concert to execute a given Artemis mission. To address this need, NASA is developing a distributed simulation capability called the Artemis Distributed Simulation (ADS). ADS’s distributed nature supports the complex aggregation of constituent Artemis element simulations. Artemis partner simulations will be able to join into an ADS-based distributed simulation and interact with other Artemis element simulations while limiting the exposure of proprietary designs and data. ADS is defining a distributed simulation capability built on international simulation interoperability standards, specifically the High Level Architecture (HLA) and the Space Reference Federation Object Model (SpaceFOM). While HLA and SpaceFOM provide the substantive necessary technology basis for ADS, additional common datatypes, message definitions, and execution protocols are required. These extensions constitute the ADS Federation Object Model (FOM). This paper describes the fundamental architectural elements of ADS and the FOM extensions needed to support the complex nature of the Artemis Program. This includes the examination of the ADS FOM modules, ADS base datatypes, ADS SpaceFOM Object Class extensions, new ADS Object Classes, and new ADS Interaction Classes.

HLA↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of the Artemis Distributed Simulation FOMs

HLA↗

DOE OSTI2024

Structural studies of intrinsically disordered MLL -fusion protein AF9 in complex with peptidomimetic inhibitors

AF9 (MLLT3) and its paralog ENL(MLLT1) are members of the YEATS family of proteins with important role in transcriptional and epigenetic regulatory complexes. These proteins are two common MLL fusion partners in MLL -rearranged leukemias. The oncofusion proteins MLL-AF9/ENL recruit multiple binding partners, including the histone methyltransferase DOT1L, leading to aberrant transcriptional activation and enhancing the expression of a characteristic set of genes that drive leukemogenesis. The interaction between AF9 and DOT1L is mediated by an intrinsically disordered C-terminal ANC1 homology domain (AHD) in AF9, which undergoes folding upon binding of DOT1L and other partner proteins. We have recently reported peptidomimetics that disrupt the recruitment of DOT1L by AF9 and ENL, providing a proof-of-concept for targeting AHD and assessing its druggability. Intrinsically disordered proteins, such as AF9 AHD, are difficult to study and characterize experimentally on a structural level. In this study, we present a successful protein engineering strategy to facilitate structural investigation of the intrinsically disordered AF9 AHD domain in complex with peptidomimetic inhibitors by using maltose binding protein (MBP) as a crystallization chaperone connected with linkers of varying flexibility and length. The strategic incorporation of disulfide bonds provided diffraction-quality crystals of the two disulfide-bridged MBP–AF9 AHD fusion proteins in complex with the peptidomimetics. These successfully determined first series of 2.1–2.6 Å crystal complex structures provide high-resolution insights into the interactions between AHD and its inhibitors, shedding light on the role of AHD in recruiting various binding partner proteins. We show that the overall complex structures closely resemble the reported NMR structure of AF9 AHD/DOT1L with notable difference in the conformation of the β-hairpin region, stabilized through conserved hydrogen bonds network. These first series of AF9 AHD/peptidomimetics complex structures are providing insights of the protein–inhibitor interactions and will facilitate further development of novel inhibitors targeting the AF9/ENL AHD domain.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

DOE OSTI2024

An Energy Codes Gap Analysis Field Study in the Southwest (Final Technical Report)

The primary goal of the “An Energy Codes Gap Analysis Field Study in the Southwest” project was to improve housing through strengthened building energy code implementation in two states, Colorado and Nevada, leading to greater energy and utility bill savings for households. Colorado is a home rule state. Nevada adopts a statewide code, but cities and counties must also adopt the code, making the state function like a home rule state. To broaden the impact of the project, an additional goal was to share and amplify project experiences, findings, and lessons that can be applied in other states. To achieve these goals, the project’s key objectives were to examine how residential energy codes are implemented in partner states; to use these findings to strengthen codes implementation through enhanced education, training, and outreach; and to enhance energy code technical assistance capabilities in the two partner states. In both partner states, the project led to the creation of a quantitative baseline understanding of compliance with high-impact energy code requirements, such as foundation, wall, and ceiling R-value; window U-factor and SHGC; envelope air tightness; duct tightness; and high-efficiency lighting. It then applied this baseline information to directly inform training in geographic areas with high levels of building and construction activity. The project has placed Colorado and Nevada among 23 states across the country that have conducted a single-family residential field study based on the established U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) methodology since 2014. It has also helped each State Energy Office test models for partnership- and relationship-building among government agencies and key stakeholder groups, including the State Energy Office and relevant code administration and professional licensing agencies, building officials, designers, builders, trades and utilities. At the national level, the project helped educate and inform State and Territory Energy Offices on a replicable methodology to assess energy code construction practices, effective stakeholder engagement strategies, and tailored energy code education and training. These findings are particularly pertinent for home-rule states, such as Colorado and Nevada, which rely on local government awareness and action to advance and implement building energy codes. By raising awareness of code adoption and compliance, this project has helped to equip each partner state with data on code compliance, strategies, education, and partnership models to advance building energy codes. This in turn will have an important impact on new construction practices in Colorado and Nevada, leading to more energy efficient and affordable housing. Currently, more than 62 percent of Colorado’s population lives in one of the 55 jurisdictions that have adopted the 2021 IECC to date, while nearly 95 percent of the state's population lives in one of the 208 jurisdictions that have adopted a code at 2015 IECC levels or higher. In Nevada, the 2018 IECC was adopted by the Governor’s Office of Energy in July 2018. By July 2020, 47 percent of the adopted energy code in the state was 2018 IECC which covers 96.5 percent of Nevada’s population. The training materials funded by this project focus on the 2021 IECC and will continue to be relevant in the two states as additional jurisdictions update their building energy codes.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2026

FY25 Electric Grid Security Annual Report

Sandia’s Electric Grid Security program advances a national vision of energy dominance and accessibility, while applying our national security -emphasis on ensuring of a secure, resilient, and affordable electric system for all users. Our achievements reflect a strategic approach combining technology development; modeling, simulation, and data analytics; and partnered demonstrations and outreach to further the adoption of advanced grid and storage technologies. Our FY25 efforts leverage the strengths of our partnerships—spanning Sandia’s core science and technology competencies as well as external technology leaders—to develop the solutions today which enable the grid of tomorrow. Key accomplishments in this report that support our strategy span our technical program areas and include: • New open-source analytical tools for systems -level planning and optimization, including significant advances to the QuESt analytical environment; • Further advancement of artificial intelligence and machine learning to enhanced grid operations and planning as we rise to the challenge of new large loads; • Development of solid-state power conversion technologies and a new medium-voltage research lab; • New technologies to assess wildfire vulnerabilities and mitigate potential impacts; • Advanced applications of new cybersecurity technologies with industry partners; • Contributions to understanding the impacts of electromagnetic pulses and geomagnetic disturbances on grid components; and • Digital twin development for hybrid microgrids with multiple generators, storage, and loads. This report indicates key areas of research and engagement and summarizes the impact of Sandia’s contributions through notable accomplishments, journal publications, patents, and technical conferences and presentations. It is provided with the hope that readers discover ways we can further team to create our modern grid and apply the outcomes of our efforts. The bulk of work described herein is funded by several offices within the U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE), including the Office of Electricity (OE); Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response (CESER); former offices such as the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), the Grid Deployment Office (GDO), the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED), and other key programs at USDOE. As we continue to state in these annual reports, the contributors to our successes are too numerous to name here, though our team wishes to express our deep gratitude to the numerous program and project sponsors at the US Department of Energy, who often function equally as technical collaborators; our many partners in industry, academia, utilities, and other national labs; and fellow researchers and business partners at Sandia whose leadership and creativity have enabled the accomplishments described herein.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

NASA NTRS1985

Government-to-government cooperation in space station development

A memoranda of understanding was recently signed between the United States (NASA) and three international Space Station partners - Canada, European Space Agency (ESA), and Japan. The international partners are performing parallel Phase B preliminary design studies, concurrent with the U.S., on their proposed elements/systems for possible integration and operation with the U.S. Space Station System complex. During the 21-month Space Station Phase B study, a large amount of technical interface data will have to be transferred between the U.S. and the international partners. Scheduled bilateral technical coordination meetings will also be held. The coordination and large number of interfaces required to integrate the international requirements into the Space Station require a clean interface management organizational structure and operation procedures to accomplish the integration task. The international coordination management organizational structure, management tools, and communications network are discussed including the proposed international elements/systems being studied by the international partners.

Nassiff, S. H.↗

NASA NTRS2004

NASA Data for Water Resources Applications

Water Management Applications is one of twelve elements in the Earth Science Enterprise National Applications Program. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center is supporting the Applications Program through partnering with other organizations to use NASA project results, such as from satellite instruments and Earth system models to enhance the organizations critical needs. The focus thus far has been: 1) estimating water storage including snowpack and soil moisture, 2) modeling and predicting water fluxes such as evapotranspiration (ET), precipitation and river runoff, and 3) remote sensing of water quality, including both point source (e.g., turbidity and productivity) and non-point source (e.g., land cover conversion such as forest to agriculture yielding higher nutrient runoff). The objectives of the partnering cover three steps of: 1) Evaluation, 2) Verification and Validation, and 3) Benchmark Report. We are working with the U.S. federal agencies including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) and the Department of Agriculture (USDA). We are using several of their Decision Support Systems (DSS) tools. This includes the DSS support tools BASINS used by EPA, Riverware and AWARDS ET ToolBox by USBR and SWAT by USDA and EPA. Regional application sites using NASA data across the US. are currently being eliminated for the DSS tools. The current NASA data emphasized thus far are from the Land Data Assimilation Systems WAS) and MODIS satellite products. We are currently in the first two steps of evaluation and verification validation. Water Management Applications is one of twelve elements in the Earth Science Enterprise s National Applications Program. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center is supporting the Applications Program through partnering with other organizations to use NASA project results, such as from satellite instruments and Earth system models to enhance the organizations critical needs. The focus thus far has been: 1) estimating water storage including snowpack and soil moisture, 2) modeling and predicting water fluxes such as evapotranspiration (ET), precipitation and river runoff, and 3) remote sensing of water quality, including both point source (e.g., turbidity and productivity) and non-point source (e.g., land cover conversion such as forest to agriculture yielding higher nutrient runoff). The objectives of the partnering cover three steps of 1) Evaluation, 2) Verification and Validation, and 3) Benchmark Report. We are working with the U.S. federal agencies the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) and the Department of Agriculture (USDA). We are using several of their Decision Support Systems (DSS) tools. T us includes the DSS support tools BASINS used by EPA, Riverware and AWARDS ET ToolBox by USBR and SWAT by USDA and EPA. Regional application sites using NASA data across the US. are currently being evaluated for the DSS tools. The current NASA data emphasized thus far are from the Land Data Assimilation Systems (LDAS) and MODIS satellite products. We are currently in the first two steps of evaluation and verification and validation.

Toll, David↗

NASA NTRS2004

NASA's Geospatial Interoperability Office(GIO)Program

NASA produces vast amounts of information about the Earth from satellites, supercomputer models, and other sources. These data are most useful when made easily accessible to NASA researchers and scientists, to NASA's partner Federal Agencies, and to society as a whole. A NASA goal is to apply its data for knowledge gain, decision support and understanding of Earth, and other planetary systems. The NASA Earth Science Enterprise (ESE) Geospatial Interoperability Office (GIO) Program leads the development, promotion and implementation of information technology standards that accelerate and expand the delivery of NASA's Earth system science research through integrated systems solutions. Our overarching goal is to make it easy for decision-makers, scientists and citizens to use NASA's science information. NASA's Federal partners currently participate with NASA and one another in the development and implementation of geospatial standards to ensure the most efficient and effective access to one another's data. Through the GIO, NASA participates with its Federal partners in implementing interoperability standards in support of E-Gov and the associated President's Management Agenda initiatives by collaborating on standards development. Through partnerships with government, private industry, education and communities the GIO works towards enhancing the ESE Applications Division in the area of National Applications and decision support systems. The GIO provides geospatial standards leadership within NASA, represents NASA on the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Coordination Working Group and chairs the FGDC's Geospatial Applications and Interoperability Working Group (GAI) and supports development and implementation efforts such as Earth Science Gateway (ESG), Space Time Tool Kit and Web Map Services (WMS) Global Mosaic. The GIO supports NASA in the collection and dissemination of geospatial interoperability standards needs and progress throughout the agency including areas such as ESE Applications, the SEEDS Working Groups, the Facilities Engineering Division (Code JX) and NASA's Chief Information Offices (CIO). With these agency level requirements GIO leads, brokers and facilitates efforts to, develop, implement, influence and fully participate in standards development internationally, federally and locally. The GIO also represents NASA in the OpenGIS Consortium and ISO TC211. The OGC has made considerable progress in regards to relations with other open standards bodies; namely ISO, W3C and OASIS. ISO TC211 is the Geographic and Geomatics Information technical committee that works towards standardization in the field of digital geographic information. The GIO focuses on seamless access to data, applications of data, and enabling technologies furthering the interoperability of distributed data. Through teaming within the Applications Directorate and partnerships with government, private industry, education and communities, GIO works towards the data application goals of NASA, the ESE Applications Directorate, and our Federal partners by managing projects in four categories: Geospatial Standards and Leadership, Geospatial One Stop, Standards Development and Implementation, and National and NASA Activities.

Weir, Patricia↗

NASA NTRS2005

International Research on ISS - The Benefits of Working Together

International Space Station is the most complex multinational cooperative space endeavor in history. Interagency agreements define utilization accommodations and resources available to each partner. Based on these arrangements, the partners select and implement research to meet agency goals and objectives. But to optimize the limited resources available to utilization, cooperation among the partners is essential. This paper describes various avenues available for partner cooperation and provides specific examples to demonstrate the value of such cooperation to accelerate and enhance science return.

Uri, John J.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Southern Impact Testing Alliance (SITA)

Efforts to form this Alliance began in 2008 to showcase the impact testing capabilities within the southern United States. Impact testing customers can utilize SITA partner capabilities to provide supporting data during all program phases-materials/component/ flight hardware design, development, and qualification. This approach would allow programs to reduce risk by providing low cost testing during early development to flush out possible problems before moving on to larger scale1 higher cost testing. Various SITA partners would participate in impact testing depending on program phase-materials characterization, component/subsystem characterization, full-scale system testing for qualification. SITA partners would collaborate with the customer to develop an integrated test approach during early program phases. Modeling and analysis validation can start with small-scale testing to ensure a level of confidence for the next step large or full-scale conclusive test shots. Impact Testing Facility (ITF) was established and began its research in spacecraft debris shielding in the early 1960's and played a malor role in the International Space Station debris shield development. As a result of return to flight testing after the loss of STS-107 (Columbia) MSFC ITF realized the need to expand their capabilities beyond meteoroid and space debris impact testing. MSFC partnered with the Department of Defense and academic institutions as collaborative efforts to gain and share knowledge that would benefit the Space Agency as well as the DoD. MSFC ITF current capabilities include: Hypervelocity impact testing, ballistic impact testing, and environmental impact testing.

Hubbs, Whitney↗

NASA NTRS2011

ISS Regenerative Life Support: Challenges and Success in the Quest for Long-Term Habitability in Space

This presentation will discuss the International Space Station s (ISS) Regenerative Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) operations with discussion of the on-orbit lessons learned, specifically regarding the challenges that have been faced as the system has expanded with a growing ISS crew. Over the 10 year history of the ISS, there have been numerous challenges, failures, and triumphs in the quest to keep the crew alive and comfortable. Successful operation of the ECLSS not only requires maintenance of the hardware, but also management of the station resources in case of hardware failure or missed re-supply. This involves effective communication between the primary International Partners (NASA and Roskosmos) and the secondary partners (JAXA and ESA) in order to keep a reserve of the contingency consumables and allow for re-supply of failed hardware. The ISS ECLSS utilizes consumables storage for contingency usage as well as longer-term regenerative systems, which allow for conservation of the expensive resources brought up by re-supply vehicles. This long-term hardware, and the interactions with software, was a challenge for Systems Engineers when they were designed and require multiple operational workarounds in order to function continuously. On a day-to-day basis, the ECLSS provides big challenges to the on console controllers. Main challenges involve the utilization of the resources that have been brought up by the visiting vehicles prior to undocking, balance of contributions between the International Partners for both systems and resources, and maintaining balance between the many interdependent systems, which includes providing the resources they need when they need it. The current biggest challenge for ECLSS is the Regenerative ECLSS system, which continuously recycles urine and condensate water into drinking water and oxygen. These systems were brought to full functionality on STS-126 (ULF-2) mission. Through system failures and recovery, the ECLSS console has learned how to balance the water within the systems, store and use water for contingencies, and continue to work with the International Partners for short-term failures. Through these challenges and the system failures, the most important lesson learned has been the importance of redundancy and operational workarounds. It is only because of the flexibility of the hardware and the software that flight controllers have the opportunity to continue operating the system as a whole for mission success.

Bazley, Jesse A.↗

NASA NTRS2007

QuEST: Qualifying Environmentally Sustainable Technologies

TEERM focuses its validation efforts on technologies that have shown promise in laboratory testing, but lack testing under realistic or field environment. Mature technologies have advantages over those that are still in the developmental stage such as being more likely to be transitioned into a working environment. One way TEERM begins to evaluate the suitability of technologies is through Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs). TRLs are a systematic metric/measurement system that supports assessments of the maturity of a particular technology and the consistent comparison of maturity between different types of technology. TEERM generally works on demonstrating/validating alternatives that fall within TRLs 5-9. In instances where a mature technology does not exist for a particular Agency application, TEERM works with technology development groups and programs such as NASA's Innovative Partnerships Program (IPP). The IPP's purpose is to identify and document available technologies in light of NASA's needs, evaluate and prioritize those technologies, and reach out to find new partners. All TEERM projects involve multiple partners. Partnering reduces duplication of effort that otherwise might occur if individuals worked their problems alone. Partnering also helps reduce individual contributors' shares of the total cost of technology validation. Through collaboration and financial commitment from project stakeholders and third-party sources, it is possible to fully fund expensive demonstration/validation efforts.

Brown, Christina↗

NASA NTRS2012

Fast Paced, Low Cost Projects at MSFC

What does an orbiting microsatellite, a robotic lander and a ruggedized camera and telescope have in common? They are all fast paced, low cost projects managed by Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) teamed with successful industry partners. MSFC has long been synonymous with human space flight large propulsion programs, engineering acumen and risk intolerance. However, there is a growing portfolio/product line within MSFC that focuses on these smaller, fast paced projects. While launching anything into space is expensive, using a managed risk posture, holding to schedule and keeping costs low by stopping at egood enough f were key elements to their success. Risk is defined as the possibility of loss or failure per Merriam Webster. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) defines risk using procedural requirement 8705.4 and establishes eclasses f to discern the acceptable risk per a project. It states a Class D risk has a medium to significant risk of not achieving mission success. MSFC, along with industry partners, has created a niche in Class D efforts. How did the big, cautious MSFC succeed on these projects that embodied the antithesis of its heritage in human space flight? A key factor toward these successful projects was innovative industry partners such as Dynetics Corporation, University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAHuntsville), Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory (JHU APL), Teledyne Brown Engineering (TBE), Von Braun Center for Science and Innovation (VCSI), SAIC, and Jacobs. Fast Affordable Satellite Technology (FastSat HSV01) is a low earth orbit microsatellite that houses six instruments with the primary scientific objective of earth observation and technology demonstration. The team was comprised of Dynetics, UAHuntsvile, SAIC, Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and VCSI with the United States Air Force Space Test Program as the customer. The team completed design, development, manufacturing, environmental test and integration in one year. FastSat HSV01 also deployed a Poly Picosatellite Orbital Deployer (PPOD) for a separate nano ]satellite class spacecraft (Cubesat: Nano Sail Demonstration) in partnership with Ames Research Center. The Robotic lunar lander is a MSFC JHU APL partnership that led to the development of a flexible architecture for landers to support robotic missions to a wide range of lunar and asteroid destinations. The team started with the goal of meeting NASA agency directives that led to the creation of a test bed focusing on GN&C and software to demonstrate the descent and landing on any airless body for the final 30 to 60 meters. The team created a complex technology demonstration as well as Guidance Control and Navigation (GN&C) algorithms providing autonomous control of the lander. The team uses a green propellant of 90% hydrogen peroxide and has completed 18 successful test flights. The International Space Station (ISS) SERVIR Environmental Research and Visualization System (ISERV) is a technology demonstration payload to assist the SERVIR project with environmental monitoring for disaster relief and humanitarian efforts. The ISERV project was a partnership with TBE. The ISERV payload consists of a commercial off the shelf camera, telescope, and MSFC developed power distribution box and interfaces on ISS with the Window Observational Research Facility in the US Lab. MSFC has identified three key areas that enabled the low cost mission success to include culture, partnering, and cost/schedule control. This paper will briefly discuss these three Class D efforts, FastSat HSV-01, the Robotic Lunar Lander and the ISERV camera system, the lessons learned, their successes and challenges.

Watson-Morgan, Lisa↗

NASA NTRS2014

Multilateral Biomedical Data Sharing in the One-year Joint US-Russian Mission on the International Space Station

The One Year Mission (1YM) by two astronauts on the International Space Station (ISS), starting in March 2015, offers a unique opportunity to expand multilateral collaboration by sharing data and resources among the partner agencies in preparation for planned space exploration missions beyond low Earth orbit. Agreements and protocols will be established for the collection, distribution, analysis and reporting of both research and clinical data. Data will be shared between the agencies sponsoring the investigators, and between the research and clinical medicine communities where common interests are identified. The assignment of only two astronauts, one Russian and the other American, to the 1YM necessitated creativity in bilateral efforts to maximize the biomedical return from the opportunity. Addition of Canadian, European and Japanese investigations make the effort even more integrative. There will be three types of investigations: joint, cross‐participation and data‐exchange. The joint investigations have US and Russian coprincipal investigators, and the data acquired will be their common responsibility. The other two types must develop data sharing agreements and processes specific to their needs. A multilateral panel of ISS partner space agencies will develop policies for international exchange of scientific information to meet their science objectives and priorities. They will promote archiving of space flight data and will inform each other and the scientific community at large about the results obtained from space life sciences studies. Integration tasks for the 1YM are based on current experience from the ISS and previous efforts on the Russian space station Mir. Closer coordination between international partners requires more common approaches to remove barriers to multilateral resource utilization on the ISS. Greater integration in implementation should increase utilization efficiency to benefit all participants in spaceflight human research. This presentation will describe the overarching principles for multilateral data collection, analysis and sharing and for data security for medical and research data shared between ISS partners prior to release in public forums.

Charles, John B.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Fostering Multilateral Involvement in Analog Research

International collaboration in space flight research is an effective means for conducting investigations and utilizing limited resources to the fullest extent. Through these multilateral collaborations mutual research questions can be investigated and resources contributed by each international partner to maximize the scientific benefits to all parties. Recently the international partners embraced this approach to initiate collaborations in ground‐based space flight analog environments. In 2011, the International Analog Research Working Group was established, and later named the International Human Space Flight Analog Research Coordination Group (HANA). Among the goals of this working group are to 1) establish a framework to coordinate research campaigns, as appropriate, to minimize duplication of effort and enhance synergy; 2) define what analogs are best to use for collaborative interests; and 3) facilitate interaction between discipline experts in order to have the full benefit of international expertise. To accomplish these goals, HANA is currently engaged in developing international research campaigns in ground‐based analogs. Plans are being made for an international solicitation for proposals to address research of common interest to all international partners. This solicitation with identify an analog environment that will best accommodate the types of investigations requested. Once selected, studies will be integrated into a campaign and implemented at the analog site. Through these combined efforts, research beneficial to all partners will be conducted efficiently to further address human risks of space exploration.

Cromwell, Ronita L.↗