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 145 records · Page 8

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↗

Considerations in Assuring Safety of Increasingly Autonomous Systems

Recent technological advances have accelerated the development and application of increasingly autonomous (IA) systems in civil and military aviation. IA systems can provide automation of complex mission tasks-ranging across reduced crew operations, air-traffic management, and unmanned, autonomous aircraft-with most applications calling for collaboration and teaming among humans and IA agents. IA systems are expected to provide benefits in terms of safety, reliability, efficiency, affordability, and previously unattainable mission capability. There is also a potential for improving safety by removal of human errors. There are, however, several challenges in the safety assurance of these systems due to the highly adaptive and non-deterministic behavior of these systems, and vulnerabilities due to potential divergence of airplane state awareness between the IA system and humans. These systems must deal with external sensors and actuators, and they must respond in time commensurate with the activities of the system in its environment. One of the main challenges is that safety assurance, currently relying upon authority transfer from an autonomous function to a human to mitigate safety concerns, will need to address their mitigation by automation in a collaborative dynamic context. These challenges have a fundamental, multidimensional impact on the safety assurance methods, system architecture, and V&V capabilities to be employed. The goal of this report is to identify relevant issues to be addressed in these areas, the potential gaps in the current safety assurance techniques, and critical questions that would need to be answered to assure safety of IA systems. We focus on a scenario of reduced crew operation when an IA system is employed which reduces, changes or eliminates a human's role in transition from two-pilot operations.

Alves, Erin E.↗

Challenges and Opportunities of International Cooperation for Safety & Mission Assurance (SMA) on the European Service Module (ESM) of the Orion Program

ESA is providing the ESM to NASA for the Orion Program in accordance with the Implementing Arrangement (IA) established between the two Agencies in 2012. This IA is a barter agreement, in which ESA provides Service Module vehicles for the first two flights of Orion in exchange for two servicing missions to the ISS. This arrangement has provided opportunities and challenges to both communities. It represents an important opportunity for ESA to build on its experience in the development and operations of ATV and play an active role in the development and flight of a manned space vehicle. This paper will explore some of the unique aspects of this arrangement as it affects Safety & Mission Assurance (SMA).The assessment of ESM compliance with applicable safety requirements is the responsibility of the Joint Safety and Engineering Review Panel (JSERP). The JSERP has two features that are relatively unique amongst NASA safety panels. First, NASA Engineering and SMA organizations co-chair this Panel. Previously, Safety has chaired, with Engineering as a member of the Panel. Inclusion of Engineering as a co-chair has offered greater leverage within the technical community. Second, the JSERP includes a second set of co-chairs from ESA Engineering and ESA Product Assurance and Safety (PA/S) organizations. This recognizes the international arrangement as one of partnership.Another source of both opportunity and challenge is the differing experience base of ESA and NASA. NASA has decades of experience in manned spaceflight, dating back to the Mercury program and following through Gemini, Apollo, Apollo-Soyuz, Skylab, Shuttle and the International Space Station. The risk posture for manned missions is much more rigorous than for unmanned missions. ESA brings a wealth of knowledge as well, with their flights of Ariane and Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), development and operation of the Columbus module on ISS, and satellite programs. The result is that both parties have developed paradigms related to risk and failure that contribute to ESM discussions.Orion represents humanity's first venture beyond Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) in over fifty years. Much of that experience is captured in program documents, but first-hand knowledge is limited to a few spaceflight veterans. Missions to LEO have offered the opportunity of direct, near-instantaneous communications and assistance, and the ability to return to Earth within a matter of hours in case of emergency. Outward-bound missions do not have these features and will require a more autonomous spacecraft with attendant safety-related issues.This paper will explore these and other challenges as we approach the flight of the first Orion vehicle.

Ciancone, Michael L.↗

The HAL 9000 Space Operating System Real-Time Planning Engine Design and Operations Requirements

In support of future deep space manned missions, an autonomous/automated vehicle, providing crew autonomy and an autonomous response planning system, will be required due to the light time delays in communication. Vehicle capabilities as a whole must provide for tactical response to vehicle system failures and space environmental effects induced failures, for risk mitigation of permanent loss of communication with Earth, and for assured crew return capabilities. The complexity of human rated space systems and the limited crew sizes and crew skills mix drive the need for a robust autonomous capability on-board the vehicle. The HAL 9000 Space Operating System[2] designed for such missions and space craft includes the first distributed real-time planning / re-planning system. This paper will detail the software architecture of the multiple planning engine system, and the interface design for plan changes, approval and implementation that is performed autonomously. Operations scenarios will be defined for analysis of the planning engines operations and its requirements for nominal / off nominal activities. An assessment of the distributed realtime re-planning system, in the defined operations environment, will be provided as well as findings as it pertains to the vehicle, crew, and mission control requirements needed for implementation.

Stetson, Howard↗

MSFC Skylab corollary experiments

The evolution of the development and integration of Skylab experiments from initial concepts through mission operations is documented. All experiment systems are covered as well as management controls which were developed and exercised to assure acceptable operational capability and optimize data acquisition for final scientific results.

Source record↗

Saturn orbit insertion mission plan for Cassini

The Cassini mission will be launched in April 1996 and will arrive at Saturn in December 2002. Upon arrival, a large maneuver near Saturn periapsis called Saturn Orbit Insertion (SOI) will reduce the energy of the spacecraft and result in capture into Saturn orbit. SOI is one of the most critical events of the entire mission. Therefore it is prudent to determine what resources must be dedicated to assure successful execution of SOI and what operational resources can be provided to satisfy SOI science objective. To prolong undisturbed science observations near the periapsis, a delayed SOI burn strategy has been developed. To examine potential resource conflicts between science and engineering activities, key considerations such as power and data storage capability have been evaluated. Other constraints such as turning the spacecraft to burn attitude and slewing platforms for science have also been examined. Although there are many constraints and the spacecraft resources are limited, a reasonable amount of science can still be carried out prior to and during the SOI burn.

Chang, Ya-Pei Holden↗

Personnel Launch System definition

A lifting-body Personnel Launch System (PLS) is defined for assured manned access to space for future U.S. space missions. The reusable craft described is configured for reliable and safe operations, maintainability, affordability, and improved operability, and could reduce life-cycle costs associated with placing personnel into orbit. Flight simulations show the PLS to be a very flyable vehicle with very little control and propellant expenditure required during entry. The attention to crew safety has resulted in the design of a system that provides protection for the crew throughout the mission profile. However, a new operations philosophy for manned space vehicles must be adopted to fully achieve low-cost, manned earth-to-orbit transportation.

Piland, William M.↗

Exploration Challenges: Transferring Ground Repair Techniques to Space Flight Application

Fulfilling NASA's Vision for Space Exploration will demand an extended presence in space at distances from our home planet that exceed our current experience in space logistics and maintenance. The ability to perform repairs in lieu of the customary Orbital Replacement Unit (ORU) process where a faulty part is replaced will be elevated from contingency to routine to sustain operations. The use and cost effectiveness of field repairs for ground based operations in industry and the military have advanced with the development of technology in new materials, new repair techniques and new equipment. The unique environments, accessibility constraints and Extra Vehicular Activity (EVA) issues of space operations will require extensive assessment and evolution of these technologies to provide an equivalent and expected level of assurance to mission success. Challenges include the necessity of changes in design philosophy and policy, extremes in thermal cycling, disruptive forces (such as static charge and wind entrainment) on developed methods for control of materials, dramatically increased volatility of chemicals for cleaning and other compounds due to extremely low pressures, the limits imposed on dexterity and maneuverability by current EVA equipment and practices, and the necessity of unique verification methodology. This paper describes these challenges in and discusses the effects on the established ground techniques for repair. The paper also describes the leading repair methodology candidates and their beneficial attributes for resolving these issues with the evolution of technology.

McLemore, Carole A.↗

Growing the NASA Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA) Workforce of Tomorrow

The NASA Safety Center (NSC) was established in2006 in response to Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) recommendations to strengthen NASA’s safety program. The NSC supports all NASA centers and facilities. The NSC fosters world-class Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA) support for NASA programs and projects through professional development activities and the advancement of the following SMA technical disciplines: - Aviation Safety - Operational Safety - Quality Engineering - Reliability and Maintainability - SMA Technical Leadership - Software Assurance - System Safety The NSC’s Technical Excellence Office (TEO) is charged with encouraging technical excellence in NASA’s SMA community primarily through professional development products and services. TEO’s first initiative was the SMA Technical Excellence Program (STEP). STEP is a career-oriented, professional development roadmap for safety professionals, which is designed for the employee to learn specific knowledge and skills to improve performance in their current role.

Safety and Mission Assurance↗

Automation study for space station subsystems and mission ground support

An automation concept for the autonomous operation of space station subsystems, i.e., electric power, thermal control, and communications and tracking are discussed. To assure that functions essential for autonomous operations are not neglected, an operations function (systems monitoring and control) is included in the discussion. It is recommended that automated speech recognition and synthesis be considered a basic mode of man/machine interaction for space station command and control, and that the data management system (DMS) and other systems on the space station be designed to accommodate fully automated fault detection, isolation, and recovery within the system monitoring function of the DMS.

Source record↗

Budget estimates: Fiscal year 1994. Volume 3: Research and program management

The research and program management (R&PM) appropriation provides the salaries, other personnel and related costs, and travel support for NASA's civil service workforce. This FY 1994 budget funds costs associated with 23,623 full-time equivalent (FTE) work years. Budget estimates are provided for all NASA centers by categories such as space station and new technology investments, space flight programs, space science, life and microgravity sciences, advanced concepts and technology, center management and operations support, launch services, mission to planet earth, tracking and data programs, aeronautical research and technology, and safety, reliability, and quality assurance.

Source record↗

Separation Assurance and Collision Avoidance

Objective SACA-1: Determine the level of safety provided by tactical separation assurance safety monitoring systems for UAS missions. a) Rationale: Continuous mission-risk monitoring can provide equivalent levels of safety for UAS operations possibly reducing the burden on other safety systems. b) Approach: Utilize and adapt algorithms and approaches developed for the NextGen Airspace Systems Program for UAS applications.

Lauderdale, Todd↗

Air Traffic Management Research at NASA

The U.S. air transportation system is the most productive in the world, moving far more people and goods than any other. It is also the safest system in the world, thanks in part to its venerable air traffic control system. But as demand for air travel continues to grow, the air traffic control systems aging infrastructure and labor-intensive procedures are impinging on its ability to keep pace with demand. And that impinges on the growth of our economy. Part of NASA's current mission in aeronautics research is to invent new technologies and procedures for ATC that will enable our national airspace system to accommodate the increasing demand for air transportation well into the next generation while still maintaining its excellent record for safety. It is a challenging mission, as efforts to modernize have, for decades, been hamstrung by the inability to assure safety to the satisfaction of system operators, system regulators, and/or the traveling public. In this talk, we'll provide a brief history of air traffic control, focusing on the tension between efficiency and safety assurance, and we'll highlight some new NASA technologies coming down the pike.

Farley, Todd↗

Role of PHM in Autonomous Decision-Making: Aerospace applications

There is an increased need for onboard decision-making capabilities in cyber-physical systems be it in energy, automotive, aviation, space, or other industries as they aim for increased efficiency, resiliency, and mission assurance capabilities. Emerging next-gen technologies such as multi-rover planetary missions, distributed satellites, unmanned ground and aerial vehicle operations and smart grid systems rely on in-time risk assessment and autonomous decision-making. One critical piece of the autonomy puzzle is reliable prediction of system behavior under time-varying and potentially uncertain environmental conditions. Further, if agent states change during operation such as initiation of faults or degradation, reliable diagnostic tools need to be investigated. In this tutorial, we will revise approaches that integrates existing physics-based and data-driven models of agents interacting with probability models of the environment and component operation state. Role of existing PHM methodologies as they feed into decision-making under uncertainty will be studied. Balancing critical trade-offs between high-fidelity prognostic models, prediction time-horizons and the computational requirements for in-time cost-effective decision-making will be discussed through the implementation of surrogate models. Finally, the audience will be introduced to a real-time application of in-time trajectory planning of an unmanned aerial system (UAS) based on its PHM assessments under uncertain and varying wind conditions.

decision-making↗

Addendum report to atmospheric science facility pallet-only mode space transportation system payload feasibility study, volume 3, revision A

The feasibility of accomplishing selected atmospheric science mission using a pallet-only mode was studied. Certain unresolved issues were identified. The first issue was that of assuring that the on-board computer facility was adequate to process scientific data, control subsystems such as instrument pointing, provide mission operational program capability, and accomplish display and control. The second issue evolved from an investigation of the availability of existing substitute instruments that could be used instead of the prime instrumentation where the development tests and schedules are incompatible with the realistic budgets and shuttle vehicle schedules. Some effort was expended on identifying candidate substitute instruments, and the performance, cost, and development schedule trade-offs found during that effort were significant enough to warrant a follow-on investigation. This addendum documents the results of that follow-on effort, as it applies to the Atmospheric Sciences Facility.

Source record↗

Biomedical results of the Space Shuttle orbital flight test program

On July 4, 1982, the Space Shuttle Columbia landed at Edwards Air Force Base, CA, thus successfully completing the fourth and last in a series of Orbital Flight Tests (OFT) of the Space Transportation System (STS). The primary goal of medical operations support for the OFT was to assure the health and well-being of flight personnel during all phases of the mission. To this end, crew health status was evaluated preflight, inflight, and postflight. Biomedical flight test requirements were completed in the following areas: physiological adaptation to microgravity, cabin acoustical noise, cabin atmospheric evaluation, radiation dosimetry, crew exercise equipment evaluation, and a cardiovascular deconditioning countermeasure assessment.

Pool, S. L.↗

NASA's approach to flight confidence

NASA's confidence in the flight readiness of aerospace hardware and software is achieved by a thorough integration of safety activities into every program facet, from concept through the mission. This involves technical and administrative personnel, organizations that specify requirements, design, manufacturing, test and the operators. Reviews by inhouse and external specialists form an integral part of the assurance process. Examples of safety issues and their resolution for some power and propulsion functions are given (lithium cells, autoignition/fretting in high pressure oxygen environments, ignition sources from auxiliary power unit, and low thrust rocket engines). Finally, some comments on NASA's integrated safety activities and the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel's role in the NASA review and assessment process all of which provides added confidence in achieving a high level of mission safety and success.

Roth, G. L.↗