SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “(Integrated”

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 145 records · Page 8

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1998

A Survey of Applications and Research in Integrated Design Systems Technology

The initial part of the study was begun with a combination of literature searches, World Wide Web searches, and contacts with individuals and companies who were known to members of our team to have an interest in topics that seemed to be related to our study. There is a long list of such topics, such as concurrent engineering, design for manufacture, life-cycle engineering, systems engineering, systems integration, systems design, design systems, integrated product and process approaches, enterprise integration, integrated product realization, and similar terms. These all capture, at least in part, the flavor of what we describe here as integrated design systems. An inhibiting factor in this inquiry was the absence of agreed terminology for the study of integrated design systems. It is common for the term to be applied to what are essentially augmented Computer-Aided Design (CAD) systems, which are integrated only to the extent that agreements have been reached to attach proprietary extensions to proprietary CAD programs. It is also common for some to use the term integrated design systems to mean a system that applies only, or mainly, to the design phase of a product life cycle. It is likewise common for many of the terms listed earlier to be used as synonyms for integrated design systems. We tried to avoid this ambiguity by adopting the definition of integrated design systems that is implied in the introductory notes that we provided to our contacts, cited earlier. We thus arrived at this definition: Integrated Design Systems refers to the integration of the different tools and processes that comprise the engineering, of complex systems. It takes a broad view of the engineering of systems, to include consideration of the entire product realization process and the product life cycle. An important aspect of integrated design systems is the extent to which they integrate existing, "islands of automation" into a comprehensive design and product realization environment. As the study progressed, we relied increasingly upon a networking approach to lead us to new information. The departure point for such searches often was a government-sponsored project or a company initiative. The advantage of this approach was that short conversations with knowledgeable persons would usually cut through confusion over differences of terminology, thereby somewhat reducing the search space of the study. Even so, it was not until late in our eight-month inquiry that we began to see signs of convergence of the search, in the sense that a number of the latest inquiries began to turn up references to earlier contacts. As suggested above, this convergence often occurred with respect to particular government or company projects.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2011

Integration Process for the Habitat Demonstration Unit

The Habitat Demonstration Unit (HDU) is an experimental exploration habitat technology and architecture test platform designed for analog demonstration activities. The HDU previously served as a test bed for testing technologies and sub-systems in a terrestrial surface environment. in 2010 in the Pressurized Excursion Module (PEM) configuration. Due to the amount of work involved to make the HDU project successful, the HDU project has required a team to integrate a variety of contributions from NASA centers and outside collaborators The size of the team and number of systems involved With the HDU makes Integration a complicated process. However, because the HDU shell manufacturing is complete, the team has a head start on FY--11 integration activities and can focus on integrating upgrades to existing systems as well as integrating new additions. To complete the development of the FY-11 HDU from conception to rollout for operations in July 2011, a cohesive integration strategy has been developed to integrate the various systems of HDU and the payloads. The highlighted HDU work for FY-11 will focus on performing upgrades to the PEM configuration, adding the X-Hab as a second level, adding a new porch providing the astronauts a larger work area outside the HDU for EVA preparations, and adding a Hygiene module. Together these upgrades result in a prototype configuration of the Deep Space Habitat (DSH), an element under evaluation by NASA's Human Exploration Framework Team (HEFT) Scheduled activates include early fit-checks and the utilization of a Habitat avionics test bed prior to installation into HDU. A coordinated effort to utilize modeling and simulation systems has aided in design and integration concept development. Modeling tools have been effective in hardware systems layout, cable routing, sub-system interface length estimation and human factors analysis. Decision processes on integration and use of all new subsystems will be defined early in the project to maximize the efficiency of both integration and field operations. In addition a series of tailored design reviews are utilized to quickly define the systems and their integration into the DSH configuration. These processes are necessary to ensure activities, such as partially reversing integration of the X-Hab second story of the HDU and deploying and stowing the new work porch for transportation to the JSC Rock Yard and to the Arizona Black Point Lava Flow Site are performed with minimal or no complications. In addition, incremental test operations leading up to an Integrated systems test allows for an orderly systems test program. For FY-11 activities, the HDU DSH will act as a laboratory utilizing a new X-Hab inflatable second floor with crew habitation features. In addition to the day to day operations involving maintenance of the HDU and exploring the surrounding terrain, testing and optimizing the use of the new X-Hab, work porch, Hygiene Module, and other sub-system enhancements will be the focus of the FY-11 test objectives. The HDU team requires a successful integration strategy using a variety of tools and approaches to prepare the DSH for these test objectives. In a challenging environment where the prototyping influences the system design, as well as Vice versa, results of the HDU DSH field tests will influence future designs of habitat systems.

Gill, Tracy↗

NASA NTRS2015

UAS-NAS Integrated Human in the Loop: Test Environment Report

The desire and ability to fly Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) is of increasing urgency. The application of unmanned aircraft to perform national security, defense, scientific, and emergency management are driving the critical need for less restrictive access by UAS to the NAS. UAS represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the NAS. NASA's UAS Integration in the NAS Project is conducting research in the areas of Separation Assurance/Sense and Avoid Interoperability (SSI), Human Systems Integration (HSI), and Communication to support reducing the barriers of UAS access to the NAS. This research was broken into two research themes namely, UAS Integration and Test Infrastructure. UAS Integration focuses on airspace integration procedures and performance standards to enable UAS integration in the air transportation system, covering Sense and Avoid (SAA) performance standards, command and control performance standards, and human systems integration. The focus of the Test Infrastructure theme was to enable development and validation of airspace integration procedures and performance standards, including the execution of integrated test and evaluation. In support of the integrated test and evaluation efforts, the Project developed an adaptable, scalable, and schedulable relevant test environment incorporating live, virtual, and constructive elements capable of validating concepts and technologies for unmanned aircraft systems to safely operate in the NAS. To accomplish this task, the Project planned to conduct three integrated events: a Human-in-the-Loop simulation and two Flight Test series that integrated key concepts, technologies and/or procedures in a relevant air traffic environment. Each of the integrated events were built on the technical achievements, fidelity and complexity of previous simulations and tests, resulting in research findings that support the development of regulations governing the access of UAS into the NAS. The purpose of this document is to describe how well the system under test was representative

Human in the Loop↗

NASA NTRS2015

Integrated Test and Evaluation Flight Test 3 Flight Test Plan

The desire and ability to fly Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) is of increasing urgency. The application of unmanned aircraft to perform national security, defense, scientific, and emergency management are driving the critical need for less restrictive access by UAS to the NAS. UAS represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the NAS. NASA's UAS Integration into the NAS Project is conducting research in the areas of Separation Assurance/Sense and Avoid Interoperability, Human Systems Integration (HSI), and Communication to support reducing the barriers of UAS access to the NAS. This research is broken into two research themes namely, UAS Integration and Test Infrastructure. UAS Integration focuses on airspace integration procedures and performance standards to enable UAS integration in the air transportation system, covering Sense and Avoid (SAA) performance standards, command and control performance standards, and human systems integration. The focus of Test Infrastructure is to enable development and validation of airspace integration procedures and performance standards, including the integrated test and evaluation. In support of the integrated test and evaluation efforts, the Project will develop an adaptable, scalable, and schedulable relevant test environment capable of evaluating concepts and technologies for unmanned aircraft systems to safely operate in the NAS. To accomplish this task, the Project will conduct a series of Human-in-the-Loop and Flight Test activities that integrate key concepts, technologies and/or procedures in a relevant air traffic environment. Each of the integrated events will build on the technical achievements, fidelity and complexity of the previous tests and technical simulations, resulting in research findings that support the development of regulations governing the access of UAS into the NAS.

Unmanned↗

NASA NTRS2016

Human Exploration Spacecraft Testbed for Integration and Advancement (HESTIA)

The proposed paper will cover ongoing effort named HESTIA (Human Exploration Spacecraft Testbed for Integration and Advancement), led at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Johnson Space Center (JSC) to promote a cross-subsystem approach to developing Mars-enabling technologies with the ultimate goal of integrated system optimization. HESTIA also aims to develop the infrastructure required to rapidly test these highly integrated systems at a low cost. The initial focus is on the common fluids architecture required to enable human exploration of mars, specifically between life support and in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) subsystems. An overview of the advancements in both integrated technologies, in infrastructure, in simulation, and in modeling capabilities will be presented, as well as the results and findings of integrated testing,. Due to the enormous mass gear-ratio required for human exploration beyond low-earth orbit, (for every 1 kg of payload landed on Mars, 226 kg will be required on Earth), minimization of surface hardware and commodities is paramount. Hardware requirements can be minimized by reduction of equipment performing similar functions though for different subsystems. If hardware could be developed which meets the requirements of both life support and ISRU it could result in the reduction of primary hardware and/or reduction in spares. Minimization of commodities to the surface of mars can be achieved through the creation of higher efficiency systems producing little to no undesired waste, such as a closed-loop life support subsystem. Where complete efficiency is impossible or impractical, makeup commodities could be manufactured via ISRU. Although, utilization of ISRU products (oxygen and water) for crew consumption holds great promise of reducing demands on life support hardware, there exist concerns as to the purity and transportation of commodities. To date, ISRU has been focused on production rates and purities for propulsion needs. The meshing of requirements between all potential users, producers, and cleaners of oxygen and water is crucial to guiding the development of technologies which will be used to perform these functions. Various new capabilities are being developed as part of HESTIA, which will enable the integrated testing of these technologies. This includes the upgrading of a 20' diameter habitat chamber to eventually support long duration (90+ day) human-in-the-loop testing of advanced life support systems. Additionally, a 20' diameter vacuum chamber is being modified to create Mars atmospheric pressures and compositions. This chamber, designated the Mars Environment Chamber (MEC), will eventually be upgraded to include a dusty environment and thermal shroud to simulate conditions on the surface of Mars. In view that individual technologies will be in geographically diverse locations across NASA facilities and elsewhere in the world, schedule and funding constraints will likely limit the frequency of physical integration. When this is the case, absent subsystems can be either digitally or physically simulated. Using the Integrated Power Avionics and Software (iPAS) environment, HESTIA is able to bring together data from various subsystems in simulated surroundings, insert faults, errors, time delays, etc., and feed data into computer models or physical systems capable of reproducing the output of the absent subsystems for the consumption of a local subsystems. Although imperfect, this capability provides opportunities to test subsystem integration and interactions at a fraction of the cost. When a subsystem technology is too immature for integrated testing, models can be produced using the General-Use Nodal Network Solver (GUNNS) capability to simulate the overall system performance. In doing so, even technologies not yet on the drawing board can be integrated and overall system performance estimated. Through the integrated development of technologies, as well as of the infrastructure to rapidly and at a low cost, model, simulate, and test subsystem technologies early in their development, HESTIA is pioneering a new way of developing the future of human space exploration.

Banker, Brian F.↗

DOE OSTI2025

Discovery, characterization, and application of chromosomal integration sites for stable heterologous gene expression in Rhodotorula toruloides

Rhodotorula toruloides is a non-model, oleaginous yeast uniquely suited to produce acetyl-CoA-derived chemicals. However, the lack of well-characterized genomic integration sites has impeded the metabolic engineering of this organism. Here we report a set of computationally predicted and experimentally validated chromosomal integration sites in R. toruloides. We first implemented an in silico platform by integrating essential gene information and transcriptomic data to identify candidate sites that meet stringent criteria. We then conducted a full experimental characterization of these sites, assessing integration efficiency, gene expression levels, impact on cell growth, and long-term expression stability. Among the identified sites, 12 exhibited integration efficiencies of 50% or higher, making them sufficient for most metabolic engineering applications. Using selected high-efficiency sites, we achieved simultaneous double and triple integrations and efficiently integrated long functional pathways (up to 14.7 kb). Additionally, we developed a new inducible marker recycling system that allows multiple rounds of integration at our characterized sites. Here, we validated this system by performing five sequential rounds of GFP integration and three sequential rounds of MaFAR integration for fatty alcohol production, demonstrating, for the first time, precise gene copy number tuning in R. toruloides. These characterized integration sites should significantly advance metabolic engineering efforts and future genetic tool development in R. toruloides.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2013

Challenges of Integrating NASA's Space Communications Networks

The transition to new technology, innovative ideas, and resistance to change is something that every industry experiences. Recent examples of this shift are changing to using robots in the assembly line construction of automobiles or the increasing use of robotics for medical procedures. Most often this is done with cost-reduction in mind, though ease of use for the customer is also a driver. All industries experience the push to increase efficiency of their systems; National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the commercial space industry are no different. NASA space communication services are provided by three separately designed, developed, maintained, and operated communications networks known as the Deep Space Network (DSN), Near Earth Network (NEN) and Space Network (SN). The Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) Program is pursuing integration of these networks and has performed a variety of architecture trade studies to determine what integration options would be the most effective in achieving a unified user mission support organization, and increase the use of common operational equipment and processes. The integration of multiple, legacy organizations and existing systems has challenges ranging from technical to cultural. The existing networks are the progeny of the very first communication and tracking capabilities implemented by NASA and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) more than 50 years ago and have been customized to the needs of their respective user mission base. The technical challenges to integrating the networks are many, though not impossible to overcome. The three distinct networks provide the same types of services, with customizable data rates, bandwidth, frequencies, and so forth. The differences across the networks have occurred in effort to satisfy their user missions' needs. Each new requirement has made the networks more unique and harder to integrate. The cultural challenges, however, have proven to be a significant obstacle for integration. Over the past few decades of use, user missions and network personnel alike have grown accustomed to the processes by which services are provided by the NASA communications and navigation networks. The culture established by each network has created several challenges that need to be overcome in order to effectively integrate the networks. As with any change, there has been resistance, an apprehension to explore automation of existing processes, and a working environment that attempts to indirectly influence change without mandating compliance. Overcoming technical and cultural challenges is essential to successfully integrating the networks and although the challenges are numerous, the integration of the networks promises a more efficient space communications network for NASA and its customers, as well as potential long-term cost savings to the agency. This paper, Challenges of Integrating NASA Legacy Communications Networks, will provide a brief overview of the current NASA space communications networks as well as the an overview of the process implemented while performing the SCaN Trade Studies and an introduction to the requirements driving integration of the SCaN Networks. This paper will describe in detail the challenges experienced, both technical and cultural, while working with NASA space communications network-specific personnel. The paper will also cover lessons learned during the performance of architecture trade studies and provide recommendations for ways to improve the process.

Systems Integration↗

DOE OSTI2025

Data for Discovery, Characterization, and Application of Chromosomal Integration Sites for Stable Heterologous Gene Expression in Rhodotorula toruloides

Rhodotorula toruloides is a non-model, oleaginous yeast uniquely suited to produce acetyl-CoA-derived chemicals. However, the lack of well-characterized genomic integration sites has impeded the metabolic engineering of this organism. Here we report a set of computationally predicted and experimentally validated chromosomal integration sites in R. toruloides . We first implemented an in silico platform by integrating essential gene information and transcriptomic data to identify candidate sites that meet stringent criteria. We then conducted a full experimental characterization of these sites, assessing integration efficiency, gene expression levels, impact on cell growth, and long-term expression stability. Among the identified sites, 12 exhibited integration efficiencies of 50% or higher, making them sufficient for most metabolic engineering applications. Using selected high-efficiency sites, we achieved simultaneous double and triple integrations and efficiently integrated long functional pathways (up to 14.7 kb). Additionally, we developed a new inducible marker recycling system that allows multiple rounds of integration at our characterized sites. We validated this system by performing five sequential rounds of GFP integration and three sequential rounds of MaFAR integration for fatty alcohol production, demonstrating, for the first time, precise gene copy number tuning in R. toruloides . These characterized integration sites should significantly advance metabolic engineering efforts and future genetic tool development in R. toruloides .

Conversion↗

DOE OSTI2024

Innovating the next generation of commercial smart building software

Nearly 30% of commercial building energy use is wasted due to equipment faults and HVAC controls problems. The result is increased emissions, compromised comfort and productivity, and less reliable coordination of building power needs with a clean grid. The energy impact alone represents $17 billion in potential savings. Today’s smart building software provides a robust solution to address these operational deficiencies. Energy management and information systems (EMIS) are saving up to 9% on average, with two-year paybacks. They are being incorporated into energy management processes, commissioning services, and utility programs. As effective as they are, two barriers prevent even deeper benefits; limited personnel to fix problems once they are identified, and the expense and time to manually implement changes in control systems. In partnership with the research community, the EMIS industry is developing new capabilities to overcome these barriers. Moving beyond siloed products for either fault detection and diagnostics, or optimal control, these new capabilities empower users to not only automatically identify faults, but also to push corrective action, and control improvements to their buildings. In this paper, several areas for enhancements are documented: ‘one-time’ correction of faults such as setpoints, schedules, and economizer lockouts; short-term active testing for automated proportional integral derivative (PID) loop tuning and functional testing; and continuous supervisory control for demand flexibility and year-round efficiency. Results are presented from a pair of partner implementations out of a dozen providers integrating these enhancements into their products, including field tests from across the country, and insights into operator acceptance and integration into operations and maintenance practices.

Casillas, Armando↗

NASA NTRS1985

A review of path-independent integrals in elastic-plastic fracture mechanics, task 4

The path independent (P-I) integrals in elastic plastic fracture mechanics which have been proposed in recent years to overcome the limitations imposed on the J integral are reviewed. The P-I integrals considered herein are the J integral by Rice, the thermoelastic P-I integrals by Wilson and Yu and by Gurtin, the J* integral by Blackburn, the J sub theta integral by Ainsworth et al., the J integral by Kishimoto et al., and the delta T sub p and delta T* sub p integrals by Atluri et al. The theoretical foundation of these P-I integrals is examined with emphasis on whether or not path independence is maintained in the presence of nonproportional loading and unloading in the plastic regime, thermal gradients, and material inhomogeneities. The similarities, differences, salient features, and limitations of these P-I integrals are discussed. Comments are also made with regard to the physical meaning, the possibility of experimental measurement, and computational aspects.

Kim, K. S.↗

NASA NTRS1988

A review of path-independent integrals in elastic-plastic fracture mechanics

The objective of this paper is to review the path-independent (P-I) integrals in elastic plastic fracture mechanics which have been proposed in recent years to overcome the limitations imposed on the J-integral. The P-I integrals considered are the J-integral by Rice (1968), the thermoelastic P-I integrals by Wilson and Yu (1979) and Gurtin (1979), the J-integral by Blackburn (1972), the J(theta)-integral by Ainsworth et al. (1978), the J-integral by Kishimoto et al. (1980), and the Delta-T(p) and Delta T(p)-asterisk integrals by Alturi et al. (1982). The theoretical foundation of the P-I integrals is examined with an emphasis on whether or not the path independence is maintained in the presence of nonproportional loading and unloading in the plastic regime, thermal gradient, and material inhomogeneities. The simularities, difference, salient features, and limitations of the P-I integrals are discussed. Comments are also made with regard to the physical meaning, the possibility of experimental measurement, and computational aspects.

Kim, Kwang S.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Systems Engineering and Integration for Advanced Life Support System and HST

Systems engineering (SE) discipline has revolutionized the way engineers and managers think about solving issues related to design of complex systems: With continued development of state-of-the-art technologies, systems are becoming more complex and therefore, a systematic approach is essential to control and manage their integrated design and development. This complexity is driven from integration issues. In this case, subsystems must interact with one another in order to achieve integration objectives, and also achieve the overall system's required performance. Systems engineering process addresses these issues at multiple levels. It is a technology and management process dedicated to controlling all aspects of system life cycle to assure integration at all levels. The Advanced Integration Matrix (AIM) project serves as the systems engineering and integration function for the Human Support Technology (HST) program. AIM provides means for integrated test facilities and personnel for performance trade studies, analyses, integrated models, test results, and validated requirements of the integration of HST. The goal of AIM is to address systems-level integration issues for exploration missions. It will use an incremental systems integration approach to yield technologies, baselines for further development, and possible breakthrough concepts in the areas of technological and organizational interfaces, total information flow, system wide controls, technical synergism, mission operations protocols and procedures, and human-machine interfaces.

Kamarani, Ali K.↗

NASA NTRS2006

Systems Integration Processes for NASA's Crew Launch Vehicle

NASA's Exploration Initiative will require development of many new elements to constitute a robust system of systems. New launch vehicles are needed to place cargo and crew in stable low earth orbit. This paper examines the systems integration processes NASA is utilizing to ensure integration and control of propulsion and non-propulsion elements within NASA's Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV). The objective of the CLV is to provide the transportation capabilities to meet the Constellation Program requirements for delivering a Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) or other payload to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) in support of the lunar and Mars missions. The CLV must successfully provide the capability within cost and schedule with an acceptable risk approach. This paper will describe in detail the systems engineering management processes that will be applied to assure CLV Project success through complete and efficient technical integration. Discussion of specific processes for requirements development and verification, integrated design and analysis, integrated simulation and testing and the integration of reliability, maintainability and supportability (RMS) into the design will also be included. The CLV Project is broken logically into elements by the major hardware groupings, and associated management, system engineering, and integration functions. The processes to be described herein are designed to integrate within these CLV elements and among the other Constellation projects. Launch vehicle stack integration (CLV to CEV, and Ground and Flight Operations integration) throughout the life cycle, including integrated vehicle performance through orbital insertion, recovery of the first stage, and reentry of the upper stage will also be discussed. The processes for decomposing requirements to the Elements and ensuring that requirements have been correctly validated, decomposed, allocated, and that the verification requirements are properly defined to ensure that the system design meets requirements will be discussed.

Reuter, James L.↗

NASA NTRS2006

Systems Integration Processes for NASA Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle

NASA's Exploration Initiative will require development of many new elements to constitute a robust system of systems. New launch vehicles are needed to place cargo and crew in stable Low Earth Orbit (LEO). This paper examines the systems integration processes NASA is utilizing to ensure integration and control of propulsion and nonpropulsion elements within NASA's Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV), now known as the Ares I. The objective of the Ares I is to provide the transportation capabilities to meet the Constellation Program requirements for delivering a Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) or other payload to LEO in support of the lunar and Mars missions. The Ares I must successfully provide this capability within cost and schedule, and with an acceptable risk approach. This paper will describe the systems engineering management processes that will be applied to assure Ares I Project success through complete and efficient technical integration. Discussion of technical review and management processes for requirements development and verification, integrated design and analysis, integrated simulation and testing, and the integration of reliability, maintainability and supportability (RMS) into the design will also be included. The Ares I Project is logically divided into elements by the major hardware groupings, and associated management, system engineering, and integration functions. The processes to be described herein are designed to integrate within these Ares I elements and among the other Constellation projects. Also discussed is launch vehicle stack integration (Ares I to CEV, and Ground and Flight Operations integration) throughout the life cycle, including integrated vehicle performance through orbital insertion, recovery of the first stage, and reentry of the upper stage. The processes for decomposing requirements to the elements and ensuring that requirements have been correctly validated, decomposed, and allocated, and that the verification requirements are properly defined to ensure that the system design meets requirements, will be discussed.

Taylor, James L.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Integration and Testing Challenges of Small Satellite Missions: Experiences from the Space Technology 5 Project

The Space Technology 5(ST5) payload was successfully carried into orbit on an OSC Pegasus XL launch vehicle, which was carried aloft and dropped from the OSC Lockheed L-1011 from Vandenberg Air Force Base March 22,2006, at 9:03 am Eastern time, 6:03 am Pacific time. In order to reach the completion of the development and successful launch of ST 5, the systems integration and test(I&T) team determined that a different approach was required to meet the project requirements rather than the standard I&T approach used for single, room-sized satellites. The ST5 payload, part of NASA's New Millennium Program headquartered at JPL, consisted of three micro satellites (approximately 30 kg each) and the Pegasus Support Structure (PSS), the system that connected the spacecrafts to the launch vehicle and deployed the spacecrafts into orbit from the Pegasus XL launch vehicle. ST5 was a technology demonstration payload, intended to test six (6) new technologies for potential use for future space flights along with demonstrating the ability of small satellites to perform quality science. The main technology was a science grade magnetometer designed to take measurements of the earth's magnetic field. The three spacecraft were designed, integrated, and tested at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center with integration and environmental testing occurring in the Bldg. 7-1 0-15-29. The three spacecraft were integrated and tested by the same I&T team. The I&T Manager determined that there was insufficient time in the schedule to perform the three I&T spacecraft activities in series used standard approaches. The solution was for spacecraft #1 to undergo integration and test first, followed by spacecraft #2 and #3 simultaneously. This simultaneous integration was successful for several reasons. Each spacecraft had a Lead Test Conductor who planned and coordinated their spacecraft through its integration and test activities. One team of engineers and technicians executed the integration of all three spacecraft, learning and gaining knowledge and efficiency as spacecraft #1 integration and testing progressed. They became acutely familiar with the hardware, operation and processes for I&T, thus each team member had the experience and knowledge to safely execute I&T for spacecraft #2 and #3 together. The integration team was very versatile and each member could perform many different activities or work any spacecraft, when needed. Daily meetings between the three Lead TCs and technician team allowed the team to plan and implement activities efficiently. The three (3) spacecraft and PSS were successfully integrated and tested, shipped to the launch site, and ready for launch per the I&T schedule that was planned three years previously.

Sauerwein, Timothy A.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Streamlining Payload Integration

Payload integration onto space transport vehicles and the International Space Station (ISS) is a complex process. Yet, cargo transport is the sole reason for any space mission, be it for ferrying humans, science, or hardware. As the largest such effort in history, the ISS offers a wide variety of payload experience. However, for any payload to reach the Space Station under the current process, Payload Developers face a list of daunting tasks that go well beyond just designing the payload to the constraints of the transport vehicle and its stowage topology. Payload customers are required to prove their payload s functionality, structural integrity, and safe integration - including under less than nominal situations. They must also plan for or provide training, procedures, hardware labeling, ground support, and communications. In addition, they must deal with negotiating shared consumables, integrating software, obtaining video, and coordinating the return of data and hardware. All the while, they must meet export laws, launch schedules, budget limits, and the consensus of more than 12 panel and board reviews. Despite the cost and infrastructure overhead, payload proposals have increased. Just in the span from FY08 to FY09, the NASA Payload Space Station Support Office budget rose from $78M to $96M in attempt to manage the growing manifest, but the potential number of payloads still exceeds available Payload Integration Management manpower. The growth has also increased management difficulties due to the fact that payloads are more frequently added to a flight schedule late in the flow. The current standard ISS template for payload integration from concept to payload turn-over is 36 months, or 18 months if the payload already has a preliminary design. Customers are increasingly requiring a turn-around of 3 to 6-months to meet market needs. The following paper suggests options for streamlining the current payload integration process in order to meet customer schedule needs and reduce costs for both the integration support teams and the developers, without reducing quality or compromising safety. Issues for the key integration areas of planning, training, verification, and safety are presented in a Root-Cause Analysis study, with plausible solutions provided that involve technology and tools already available to the ISS community. Although based upon the ISS process, the payload integration techniques outlined herein also offer an integration template for any space transport endeavor.

Lufkin, Susan N.↗

NASA NTRS2003

Integrated Electrode Arrays for Neuro-Prosthetic Implants

Arrays of electrodes integrated with chip-scale packages and silicon-based integrated circuits have been proposed for use as medical electronic implants, including neuro-prosthetic devices that might be implanted in brains of patients who suffer from strokes, spinal-cord injuries, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. The electrodes of such a device would pick up signals from neurons in the cerebral cortex, and the integrated circuit would perform acquisition and preprocessing of signal data. The output of the integrated circuit could be used to generate, for example, commands for a robotic arm. Electrode arrays capable of acquiring electrical signals from neurons already exist, but heretofore, there has been no convenient means to integrate these arrays with integrated-circuit chips. Such integration is needed in order to eliminate the need for the extensive cabling now used to pass neural signals to data-acquisition and -processing equipment outside the body. The proposed integration would enable progress toward neuro-prostheses that would be less restrictive of patients mobility. An array of electrodes would comprise a set of thin wires of suitable length and composition protruding from and supported by a fine-pitch micro-ball grid array or chip-scale package (see figure). The associated integrated circuit would be mounted on the package face opposite the probe face, using the solder bumps (the balls of the ball grid array) to make the electrical connections between the probes and the input terminals of the integrated circuit. The key innovation is the insertion of probe wires of the appropriate length and material into the solder bumps through a reflow process, thereby fixing the probes in place and electrically connecting them with the integrated circuit. The probes could be tailored to any distribution of lengths and made of any suitable metal that could be drawn into fine wires. Furthermore, the wires could be coated with an insulating layer using anodization or other processes, to achieve the correct electrical impedance. The probe wires and the packaging materials must be biocompatible using such materials as lead-free solders. For protection, the chip and package can be coated with parylene.

Brandon, Erik↗

NASA NTRS2014

2014 SRP Integration Transcript

HRP's mission is to reduce the risks to human health and performance during long-duration spaceflight. The HRP Integrated Research Plan (IRP) contains the research plans for the 32 risks that require research to characterize and mitigate. From its inception the "integrate" aspect of the IRP has denoted the integrated nature of risks to human health and performance. Even though each risk in the IRP has its own research plan and is tracked separately, the interrelated nature of health and performance requires that they be addressed in an integrative or holistic fashion so that the connectedness of physiological systems within the human body and the integrated response to spaceflight can be addressed. Common characteristics of the spaceflight environment include altered gravity, atmospheres, and light/dark cycles; space radiation; isolation; noise; and periods of high or low workload. Long-term exposure to this unique environment produces a suite of physiological effects such as stress; vision, neurocognitive, and anthropometric changes; circadian misalignment; fluid shifts; cardiovascular deconditioning; immune dysregulation; and altered nutritional requirements. Expanding cross-disciplinary integrative approaches that synthesize concepts or data from two or more disciplines would improve the identification and characterization risk factors, and enable the development of countermeasures relevant to multiple risks. Cross-disciplinary approaches might also help to illuminate problem areas that may arise when a countermeasure adversely impacts risks other than those which it was developed to mitigate, or to identify groupings of physiological changes that are likely to occur that may impact the overall risk posture. In 2014 HRP embarked on a pilot study that combined four SRPs (and 12 HRP risks) - Behavioral Health, Sensorimotor, Cardiovascular, and Bone/Muscle - specifically to discuss cross-disciplinary integration. The points outlined below were suggested to seed the discussion, within the bounding constraint that research plans must be feasible and relevant to the HRP mission. While these were suggested starting points, the overall guiding principle was to allow free discussion from panel members on any aspect of integrated research that they felt was important, Existing cross-disciplinary integration as documented in the IRP (HRR), Existing or needed integration already identified by HRP, but not yet well defined within the IRP, Areas of integration that are missing.

Steinberg, Susan↗