SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Technical Integration Office”

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 NTRS2005

X-43D Conceptual Design and Feasibility Study

NASA s Next Generation Launch Technology (NGLT) Program, in conjunction with the office of the Director of Defense Research and Engineering (DDR&E), developed an integrated hypersonic technology demonstration roadmap. This roadmap is an integral part of the National Aerospace Initiative (NAI), a multi-year, multi-agency cooperative effort to invest in and develop, among other things, hypersonic technologies. This roadmap contains key ground and flight demonstrations required along the path to developing a reusable hypersonic space access system. One of the key flight demonstrations required for systems that will operate in the high Mach number regime is the X-43D. As currently conceived, the X-43D is a Mach 15 flight test vehicle that incorporates a hydrogen-fueled scramjet engine. The purpose of the X-43D is to gather high Mach number flight environment and engine operability information which is difficult, if not impossible, to gather on the ground. During 2003, the NGLT Future Hypersonic Flight Demonstration Office initiated a feasibility study on the X-43D. The objective of the study was to develop a baseline conceptual design, assess its performance, and identify the key technical issues. The study also produced a baseline program plan, schedule, and cost, along with a list of key programmatic risks.

Johnson, Donald B.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Atmospheric Research 2014 Technical Highlights

Atmospheric research in the Earth Sciences Division (610) consists of research and technology development programs dedicated to advancing knowledge and understanding of the atmosphere and its interaction with the climate of Earth. The Division's goals are to improve understanding of the dynamics and physical properties of precipitation, clouds, and aerosols; atmospheric chemistry, including the role of natural and anthropogenic trace species on the ozone balance in the stratosphere and the troposphere; and radiative properties of Earth's atmosphere and the influence of solar variability on the Earth's climate. Major research activities are carried out in the Mesoscale Atmospheric Processes Laboratory, the Climate and Radiation Laboratory, the Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Laboratory, and the Wallops Field Support Office. The overall scope of the research covers an end-to-end process, starting with the identification of scientific problems, leading to observation requirements for remote-sensing platforms, technology and retrieval algorithm development; followed by flight projects and satellite missions; and eventually, resulting in data processing, analyses of measurements, and dissemination from flight projects and missions. Instrument scientists conceive, design, develop, and implement ultraviolet, infrared, optical, radar, laser, and lidar technology to remotely sense the atmosphere. Members of the various Laboratories conduct field measurements for satellite sensor calibration and data validation, and carry out numerous modeling activities. These modeling activities include climate model simulations, modeling the chemistry and transport of trace species on regional-to-global scales, cloud resolving models, and developing the next-generation Earth system models. Satellite missions, field campaigns, peer-reviewed publications, and successful proposals are essential at every stage of the research process to meeting our goals and maintaining leadership of the Earth Sciences Division in atmospheric science research. Figure 1.1 shows the 20-year record of peer-reviewed publications and proposals among the various Laboratories. This data shows that the scientific work being conducted in the Laboratories is competitive with the work being done elsewhere in universities and other government agencies. The office of Deputy Director for Atmospheric Research will strive to maintain this record by rigorously monitoring and promoting quality while emphasizing coordination and integration among atmospheric disciplines. Also, an appropriate balance will be maintained between the scientists' responsibility for large collaborative projects and missions and their need to carry out active science research as a principal investigator. This balance allows members of the Laboratories to improve their scientific credentials, and develop leadership potentials. Interdisciplinary research is carried out in collaboration with other laboratories and research groups within the Earth Sciences Division, across the Sciences and Exploration Directorate, and with partners in universities and other government agencies. Members of the Laboratories interact with the general public to support a wide range of interests in the atmospheric sciences. Among other activities, the Laboratories raise the public's awareness of atmospheric science by presenting public lectures and demonstrations, by making scientific data available to wide audiences, by teaching, and by mentoring students and teachers. The Atmosphere Laboratories make substantial efforts to attract and recruit new scientists to the various areas of atmospheric research. We strongly encourage the establishment of partnerships with Federal and state agencies that have operational responsibilities to promote the societal application of our science products. This report describes our role in NASA's mission, provides highlights of our research scope and activities, and summarizes our scientists' major accomplishments during calendar year 2014. The composition of the organization is shown in Figure 1.2 for each code. This report is published in a printed version with an electronic version on our atmospheres Web site, http://atmospheres.gsfc.nasa.gov/.

Technical↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance System Model Development

While the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) utilizes a Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System to represent all the Agency’s efforts to ensure the health and performance of NASA astronauts, there is no shared mental model of a CHP system at NASA. Some groups may consider a CHP system to be only a medical kit, while others may not be using the concept at all. To facilitate the integration of functions and capabilities to ensure astronaut health and performance during vehicle development, HRP has proposed a CHP Shared Mental Model derived from the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards (NASA-STD-3001 Vol.1/Vol.2). [1] Even though many vehicle, ground, and communication systems as well as mission operations are modeled for the Artemis Campaigns, no mission level CHP system model was created to achieve the intent of the HRP CHP Shared Mental Model. The lack of this model renders it difficult to visualize and understand how the many programs work together to provide the necessary cross program functions and capabilities to ensure the health and performance of the crew throughout an Artemis mission. For this purpose, the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of HRP developed a CHP system model for the Artemis III and IV missions to provide a view of how each program contributes to and interacts with the overall CHP system. To develop the 2023 Artemis CHP system model, ExMC leveraged existing data and models from the Moon to Mars Program Office, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) and the Orion, Gateway, Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility (EHP) and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. By using a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach, existing requirements, functions, and concepts of operations were combined to create a single system model focused on representing CHP from the launch to the return to Earth segments of the Artemis III and IV missions. Additionally, by incorporating the HRP Systems Platform for Aggregating and Relating Capabilities, or SPARC tool, the data from the programs was also related back to the 2nd volume of the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standard (NASA-STD-3001, Vol.2) and the human system risks identified by the Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The first version of the 2023 Artemis CHP system model was baselined in Fall of 2023 after the model was demonstrated to be a potentially useful tool for systems engineers integrating CHP capabilities in vehicle development as well as members of the Health and Medical Technical Authority providing oversight of those programs. The model may also be useful to any stakeholder of astronaut health and performance by providing insights on how an Artemis mission satisfies the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards as well as how they mitigate the HSRB Human System Risks. This presentation highlights how the model was developed and the possible benefits of the model. [1] NASA HRP (2022), Crew Health and Performance System Whitepaper

Systems engineering↗

NASA NTRS2024

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System Model Development

Systems engineering↗

NASA NTRS1991

An overview of the NASA electronic components information management system

The NASA Parts Project Office (NPPO) comprehensive data system to support all NASA Electric, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts management and technical data requirements is described. A phase delivery approach is adopted, comprising four principal phases. Phases 1 and 2 support Space Station Freedom (SSF) and use a centralized architecture with all data and processing kept on a mainframe computer. Phases 3 and 4 support all NASA centers and projects and implement a distributed system architecture, in which data and processing are shared among networked database servers. The Phase 1 system, which became operational in February of 1990, implements a core set of functions. Phase 2, scheduled for release in 1991, adds functions to the Phase 1 system. Phase 3, to be prototyped beginning in 1991 and delivered in 1992, introduces a distributed system, separate from the Phase 1 and 2 system, with a refined semantic data model. Phase 4 extends the data model and functionality of the Phase 3 system to provide support for the NASA design community, including integration with Computer Aided Design (CAD) environments. Phase 4 is scheduled for prototyping in 1992 to 93 and delivery in 1994.

Kramer, G.↗

NASA NTRS1999

International Space Station ECLSS Technical Task Agreement Summary Report

This Technical Memorandum provides a summary of current work accomplished under Technical Task Agreement (TTA) by the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) regarding the International Space Station (ISS) Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS). Current activities include ECLSS component design and development, computer model development, subsystem/integrated system testing, life testing, and general test support provided to the ISS program. Under ECLSS design, MSFC was responsible for the six major ECLSS functions, specifications and standard, component design and development, and was the architectural control agent for the ISS ECLSS. MSFC was responsible for ECLSS analytical model development. In-house subsystem and system level analysis and testing were conducted in support of the design process, including testing air revitalization, water reclamation and management hardware, and certain nonregenerative systems. The activities described herein were approved in task agreements between MSFC and NASA Headquarters Space Station Program Management Office and their prime contractor for the ISS, Boeing. These MSFC activities are in line to the designing, development, testing, and flight of ECLSS equipment planned by Boeing. MSFC's unique capabilities for performing integrated systems testing and analyses, and its ability to perform some tasks cheaper and faster to support ISS program needs, are the basis for the TTA activities.

Ray, C. D.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Advanced Information Systems Technology for NASA Earth System Digital Twins (ESDT)

ESA and NASA have both started programs to design and develop Digital Twins of the Earth and/or Earth systems. Organized around interconnected, multi-domain, high-scale modeling capabilities, the three major components of an Earth System Digital Twin are a continuously updated Digital Replica of the Earth System of interest, dynamic Forecasting models, and Impact Assessment capabilities. Earth System Digital Twins integrate diverse Earth and human activity models, continuous observations, and information system capabilities to provide unified, comprehensive representations and predictions that can be utilized for monitoring the health of the Planet, as well as for developing actionable information to support decision making. More generally, Digital Twins will help researchers better understand the fundamental Earth systems that impact everything from wildfires to climate change. This Townhall will first provide a short description of ESA’s, NASA’s and CNES’s current efforts in Digital Twins: • Destination Earth (DestinE) is the first initiative of the European Union to create a Digital Twin of the Earth, particularly focused on weather and climate, and as a coordinated effort between the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), ESA and the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT). • Additionally, ESA is developing several Digital Twin Earth Precursor Activities to study some of the key scientific and technical challenges associated with building a “Digital Twin Earth”. These include forests, hydrology, Antarctica, food systems, oceans, and climate hot spots Digital Twin prototypes. • NASA Earth Science Technology Office (ESTO)’s Advanced Information Systems Technology (AIST) Program has started an initiative in Earth System Digital Twins (ESDT), with 14 current projects in this area, developing various information systems technologies and prototypes that will help prepare the development of future NASA Digital Twins. • CNES is currently developing the concept of a Digital Twin Factory (DTF), which relies on a data lake, a high computing capability using clouds and/or HPC and has thematic algorithms and methodologies able to generate registered and coherent layers of information in order to enrich a datacube from which physical indicators can be computed spatially. NASA, ESA and CNES are also currently defining science use cases that will be presented during the townhall; those and a few short discussions of current projects will serve as a starting point to engage a dialogue about Digital Twins of the Earth with the IGARSS community.

earth science remote sensing; Information systems↗

NASA NTRS2020

Broadening JPL’s Mission Formulation Paradigm with Human Centered Design

Within NASA’s highly competitive environment for funding, Human Centered Design (HCD) and cybernetics could provide advantages to proposers during the mission formulation phase. Opportunities are limited when it comes to funding new science missions. Proposers are challenged to make a compelling case about the scientific desirability, technical feasibility, and resource viability of their concepts. Organizations follow established processes for proposal development using teams that typically include scientists, engineers, and managers. These team members are highly experienced subject matter experts (SME) in their own disciplines, and can respond to requirements from the solicitation. However, they are typically not trained as designers and communicators. Their approach is rooted within NASA’s science and technology paradigm. How can we improve the proposal development process, refine workflow between team members, and deliver clear and appealing offerings to the stakeholders and evaluators? These questions have been addressed by today’s most innovative companies (e.g., Apple, Google, 3M, Dyson), where the design process is not limited simply to engineering and management, but involves an all-encompassing approach drawing from fields such as social sciences, design, and the arts. Like these commercial enterprises, NASA currently employs systems thinking and integrated design, but can benefit further by moving beyond its current practices, which are mostly driven by rigid engineering, technology, science, and project management considerations. At JPL’s Innovation Foundry and through the Solar System Mission Formulation Office, we broadened this paradigm by including HCD in the mission formulation workflow. Our goal was to create a proposal with improved clarity and appeal, thus helping our team to communicate its message and aid evaluators with their work. In this paper we provide examples and lessons learned from our recent proposal development effort using HCD. We discuss touch points where we infused non-linear designerly approaches and cybernetic circularity into the workflow. Implemented design topics include operational design for team building; process design throughout distinct phases of the proposal development and writing process; communication design for streamlined exchange of information within the team and to stakeholders; interaction design; graphic design; and creating boundary objects. While these approaches may feel new or foreign to SMEs and managers in the aerospace community, they produced significant benefits in this mission formulation effort. We will describe how such approaches can be used to broaden NASA’s technology-driven paradigm through design, thus creating an environment which fosters innovation, improved communication, and strategic advantage for proposers and their organizations.

Turner, Neal↗

NASA NTRS2009

Tool for Human-Systems Integration Assessment: HSI Scorecard

This paper describes the development and rationale for a human-systems integration (HSI) scorecard that can be used in reviews of vehicle specification and design. This tool can be used to assess whether specific HSI related criteria have been met as part of a project milestone or critical event, such as technical reviews, crew station reviews, mockup evaluations, or even review of major plans or processes. Examples of HSI related criteria include Human Performance Capabilities, Health Management, Human System Interfaces, Anthropometry and Biomechanics, and Natural and Induced Environments. The tool is not intended to evaluate requirements compliance and verification, but to review how well the human related systems have been considered for the specific event and to identify gaps and vulnerabilities from an HSI perspective. The scorecard offers common basis, and criteria for discussions among system managers, evaluators, and design engineers. Furthermore, the scorecard items highlight the main areas of system development that need to be followed during system lifecycle. The ratings provide a repeatable quantitative measure to what has been often seen as only subjective commentary. Thus, the scorecard is anticipated to be a useful HSI tool to communicate review results to the institutional and the project office management.

Whitmore, Nihriban↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Earth-Independent Medical Operations (EIMO) Concept of Operations

In contrast to the current crew health paradigm for low-Earth orbit and Lunar missions, which depends on real-time communication with Mission Control, deep-space exploration missions will require a significant shift in medical operations. This shift is driven by the constraints of operating at a considerable distance from Earth, such as resource limitations—lack of resupply, restricted mass, power, volume, and data—as well as communication delays and the inability to evacuate back to Earth during emergencies. To move toward a more self-reliant medical model, a strategy is needed to gradually increase space-based crew autonomy and reduce risks to mission success in the challenging environment of deep space. This transformative change, known as "Earth-Independent Medical Operations" (EIMO), explores the gradual transfer of medical care and decision-making from Earth-based support to space-based systems. The goal of this transition is to enhance astronaut health and performance while minimizing mission risks. EIMO requires the development of a medical system that integrates seamlessly with mission planning, vehicle and spacesuit design, and data architecture. This integration is crucial for building a robust medical infrastructure that not only safeguards astronaut well-being but also ensures overall mission success. The Human Research Program (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element has revised the EIMO model-based Concept of Operations (ConOps) which outlines an initial vision for EIMO. The ConOps, which is built on the stakeholders’ need, system goals, and objectives (NGOs), presents an array of in-mission scenarios that span a wide range of medical conditions demonstrating the system’s capabilities from basic to complex events. Developed by a multidisciplinary team of systems engineers, scientists, and clinicians within ExMC, the ConOps revision includes two new scenarios(Barotrauma and Self-Medical Management and Behavioral Health and Chronic Medical Care), and implementation of findings from EIMO technical interchange meetings that focused on data and training. The envisioned EIMO Medical System (MS) operates as a system of systems, gathering data from various sources such as reference databases, real-time wearable sensors, point-of-care diagnostics, and environmental controls. The MS also incorporates advanced training tools to support autonomous medical care, assisting the Crew Medical Officer (CMO) during medical events where Ground Support is either unavailable or communication-delayed beyond practicality. Furthermore, MS functions and capabilities were decomposed from the scenarios to establish foundational requirements for EIMO and traced to the NASA Spaceflight Human-System Standard(NASA-STD-3001, Volumes 1 and 2). These traces were performed to gain insights on the alignment of EIMO requirements with the NASA standard. This work serves as an initial recommendation to increase crew autonomy gradually and safely for Mars missions and future deep-space exploration.

medical system↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Standards Roadmapping for Mission Assurance in Commercial Spaceflight

This paper explores the application of established roadmapping approaches in standards planning and roadmap development to support mission assurance objectives. Mission assurance requires proactive planning across multiple domains including technical, schedule, cost, organizational, and policy. The intersection of these domains happens at the enterprise level, and enterprise systems engineering processes can systematically guide mission assurance activities, including development of standards roadmaps. Standards planning and development is a critical contributor to an effective mission assurance strategy, although standards are often developed and adopted reactively. Technology and standards planning is a key Enterprise Process Management activity, as identified by the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge, and technology and standards roadmaps are strategic tools used to enable that process. Technology roadmapping has proven effective in guiding enterprise architecture and concept design, and standards planning supports enterprise requirements definition and management. However, there are limited methodologies to guide such standards planning activities. The application of technology roadmapping principles to standards planning formalizes the process and establishes a repeatable framework for standards development and integration. The framework development described in this paper fills a methodological gap by adapting proven roadmapping techniques to standards planning. Through a comparison of roadmapping methodologies and a case study analysis, this approach outlines a systematic process for anticipating and planning standards needs. In the case of developing a standards integration roadmap for NASA’s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA), technology roadmapping principles were adapted to develop a roadmap framework to allow NASA and OSMA to define an agency-wide standards integration plan for commercial and industry safety and mission assurance standards. The outcome highlights key adaptations required for roadmapping in a standards context and describes the process steps to formalize a standards planning activity. The roadmapping framework adapted for standards development and integration enables more strategic, forward-looking standards planning and allows for better alignment between evolving capabilities and mission assurance requirements. Beyond its application to mission assurance, this methodology can be transferred to other domains requiring standards development, providing a systematic approach that integrates systems engineering principles into policy strategy and decision-making processes.

Enterprise Systems Engineering↗

NASA NTRS2000

Internet Access to Spacecraft

The Operating Missions as Nodes on the Internet (OMNI) project at NASA's Goddard Space flight Center (GSFC), is demonstrating the use of standard Internet protocols for spacecraft communication systems. This year, demonstrations of Internet access to a flying spacecraft have been performed with the UoSAT-12 spacecraft owned and operated by Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd. (SSTL). Previously, demonstrations were performed using a ground satellite simulator and NASA's Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS). These activities are part of NASA's Space Operations Management Office (SOMO) Technology Program, The work is focused on defining the communication architecture for future NASA missions to support both NASA's "faster, better, cheaper" concept and to enable new types of collaborative science. The use of standard Internet communication technology for spacecraft simplifies design, supports initial integration and test across an IP based network, and enables direct communication between scientists and instruments as well as between different spacecraft, The most recent demonstrations consisted of uploading an Internet Protocol (IP) software stack to the UoSAT- 12 spacecraft, simple modifications to the SSTL ground station, and a series of tests to measure performance of various Internet applications. The spacecraft was reconfigured on orbit at very low cost. The total period between concept and the first tests was only 3 months. The tests included basic network connectivity (PING), automated clock synchronization (NTP), and reliable file transfers (FTP). Future tests are planned to include additional protocols such as Mobile IP, e-mail, and virtual private networks (VPN) to enable automated, operational spacecraft communication networks. The work performed and results of the initial phase of tests are summarized in this paper. This work is funded and directed by NASA/GSFC with technical leadership by CSC in arrangement with SSTL, and Vytek Wireless.

Rash, James↗

NASA NTRS2013

NASA Software Engineering Benchmarking Study

To identify best practices for the improvement of software engineering on projects, NASA's Offices of Chief Engineer (OCE) and Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) formed a team led by Heather Rarick and Sally Godfrey to conduct this benchmarking study. The primary goals of the study are to identify best practices that: Improve the management and technical development of software intensive systems; Have a track record of successful deployment by aerospace industries, universities [including research and development (R&D) laboratories], and defense services, as well as NASA's own component Centers; and Identify candidate solutions for NASA's software issues. Beginning in the late fall of 2010, focus topics were chosen and interview questions were developed, based on the NASA top software challenges. Between February 2011 and November 2011, the Benchmark Team interviewed a total of 18 organizations, consisting of five NASA Centers, five industry organizations, four defense services organizations, and four university or university R and D laboratory organizations. A software assurance representative also participated in each of the interviews to focus on assurance and software safety best practices. Interviewees provided a wealth of information on each topic area that included: software policy, software acquisition, software assurance, testing, training, maintaining rigor in small projects, metrics, and use of the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) framework, as well as a number of special topics that came up in the discussions. NASA's software engineering practices compared favorably with the external organizations in most benchmark areas, but in every topic, there were ways in which NASA could improve its practices. Compared to defense services organizations and some of the industry organizations, one of NASA's notable weaknesses involved communication with contractors regarding its policies and requirements for acquired software. One of NASA's strengths was its software assurance practices, which seemed to rate well in comparison to the other organizational groups and also seemed to include a larger scope of activities. An unexpected benefit of the software benchmarking study was the identification of many opportunities for collaboration in areas including metrics, training, sharing of CMMI experiences and resources such as instructors and CMMI Lead Appraisers, and even sharing of assets such as documented processes. A further unexpected benefit of the study was the feedback on NASA practices that was received from some of the organizations interviewed. From that feedback, other potential areas where NASA could improve were highlighted, such as accuracy of software cost estimation and budgetary practices. The detailed report contains discussion of the practices noted in each of the topic areas, as well as a summary of observations and recommendations from each of the topic areas. The resulting 24 recommendations from the topic areas were then consolidated to eliminate duplication and culled into a set of 14 suggested actionable recommendations. This final set of actionable recommendations, listed below, are items that can be implemented to improve NASA's software engineering practices and to help address many of the items that were listed in the NASA top software engineering issues. 1. Develop and implement standard contract language for software procurements. 2. Advance accurate and trusted software cost estimates for both procured and in-house software and improve the capture of actual cost data to facilitate further improvements. 3. Establish a consistent set of objectives and expectations, specifically types of metrics at the Agency level, so key trends and models can be identified and used to continuously improve software processes and each software development effort. 4. Maintain the CMMI Maturity Level requirement for critical NASA projects and use CMMI to measure organizations developing software for NASA. 5.onsolidate, collect and, if needed, develop common processes principles and other assets across the Agency in order to provide more consistency in software development and acquisition practices and to reduce the overall cost of maintaining or increasing current NASA CMMI maturity levels. 6. Provide additional support for small projects that includes: (a) guidance for appropriate tailoring of requirements for small projects, (b) availability of suitable tools, including support tool set-up and training, and (c) training for small project personnel, assurance personnel and technical authorities on the acceptable options for tailoring requirements and performing assurance on small projects. 7. Develop software training classes for the more experienced software engineers using on-line training, videos, or small separate modules of training that can be accommodated as needed throughout a project. 8. Create guidelines to structure non-classroom training opportunities such as mentoring, peer reviews, lessons learned sessions, and on-the-job training. 9. Develop a set of predictive software defect data and a process for assessing software testing metric data against it. 10. Assess Agency-wide licenses for commonly used software tools. 11. Fill the knowledge gap in common software engineering practices for new hires and co-ops.12. Work through the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) program with universities in strengthening education in the use of common software engineering practices and standards. 13. Follow up this benchmark study with a deeper look into what both internal and external organizations perceive as the scope of software assurance, the value they expect to obtain from it, and the shortcomings they experience in the current practice. 14. Continue interactions with external software engineering environment through collaborations, knowledge sharing, and benchmarking.

Rarick, Heather L.↗

NASA NTRS1997

Space Product Development: Bringing the Benefits of Space Down to Earth

The newly developed microgravity Research Program Office was created to consolidate and integrate NASA's microgravity research efforts, comprised of the microgravity Science and Applications Program and Space Product Development Program. This resulted in an integrated agency program serving the science and industrial research communities, providing leadership, management, direction and overview of all agency microgravity research activities. This paper provides an overview of NASA's microgravity Research Program, with particular emphasis on the Space Product Development Program activities, the potential economic impact and quality of life improvements resulting from this research, and future plans for commercial microgravity research in space. The goal of the Space Product Development Program is to facilitate the use of space for commercial products and services. The unique attributes of space are exploited to conduct industry driven research in the areas of crystallography, bio-systems, agriculture, electronic and non-electronic materials. Industry uses the knowledge gained from focused space research to create new products and processes, to gain economic competitive advantages, to create new jobs and improve the quality of life on earth. The objectives of the program are implemented through NASA's Commercial Space Centers, non-profit consortia of industry, academia and government, that provide the mechanism for communication and technical expert exchange between NASA and industry. Over 200 commercial research activities have been conducted by the Commercial Space Centers and their industrial affiliates over the last four and one-half years during Space Shuttle mission, as well as sounding rocket flights. The results of this research will have a significant impact on competitive products, jobs and quality of life improvements.

Allen, Rosalie W.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Managed Development Environment Successes for MSFC's VIPA Team

This paper outlines the best practices of the Vehicle Design Team for VIPA. VIPA is the Vehicle Integrated Performance Analysis Team at MSFC. This team was created to reconnect the individual engineering disciplines to be able to perform system level technical assessments in support of program decisions. The functions of the VIPA Vehicle Design (VVD) discipline team are to maintain the controlled reference geometry and provide linked, simplified geometry for each of the other discipline analyses. The core of the VVD work, and the approach for VVD s first task of controlling the reference geometry, involves systems engineering, top-down, layout-based CAD modeling within a Product Data Manager (PDM) development environment. The topdown approach allcws for simple contrnl of very large, integrated assemblies and greatly enhances the ability to generate trade configurations and reuse data. The second W D task, model simplification for analysis, is handled within the managed environment through application of the master model concept. In this approach, there is a single controlling, or master, product definition dataset. Connected to this master model are reference datasets with live geometric and expression links. The referenced models can be for drawings, manufacturing, visualization, embedded analysis, or analysis simplification. A discussion of web based interaction, including visualization, between the design and other disciplines is included. Demonstrated examples are cited, including the Space Launch Initiative development cycle, the Saturn V systems integration and verification cycle, an Orbital Space Plane study, and NASA Exploration Office studies of Shuttle derived and clean sheet launch vehicles. The VIPA Team has brought an immense amount of detailed data to bear on program issues. A central piece of that success has been the Managed Development Environment and the VVD Team approach to modeling.

Finckenor, Jeff↗

DOE OSTI1991

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 32, No. 4, October-December 1991]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 477 Report on the International Symposium on the Use of Probabilistic Safety Assessment for Operational Safety—PSA '91, S. Chakraborty and M. Khatib-Rahbar; 488 Good Relationships Are Pivotal in Nuclear Data Bases, A. S. Heger and B. V. Koen; 494 Technical Note: The Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Panel's Evaluation of the Ulysses Space Mission, J. A. Sholtis, Jr., D. A. Huff, L. B. Gray, N. P. Klug, and R. O. Winchester; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 502 The Severe Accident Analysis Program for the Savannah River Nuclear Production Reactors, M. L. Hyder; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 511 A Framework for Selecting Suitable Control Technologies for Nuclear Power Plant Systems, R. A. Kisner; DESIGN FEATURES: 521 Containments for Gas-Cooled Power Reactors History and Status, P.W. Williams; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 537 Indoor Radon: A Natural Risk, N. H. Harley and J.H. Harley; On the Importance of the Atmospheric Parameters in the Fission Products Distribution of a Severe Reactor Accident, M. C. Barla and A. R. Bayulken; Book Review: Health Effects of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation BEIR V, C. R. Richmond; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 555 Activities Related to Waste and Spent Fuel Management, M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 567 Effects of Component Aging on the Westhinghouse Control Rod Drive System, K. Sullivan and W. Gunther; 577 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher, 580 Selected Safety-Related Events, Compiled by G. A. Murphy; 582 Operating U 8 Power Reactors, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver, RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 596 General Administrative Activities, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; 610 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 614 Proposed Rule Changes as of June 30, 1991; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 520 Workshop on PC PRAISE: A Probabilistic Fracture Mechanics Personal Computer Code for Nuclear Power Plant Piping Reliability Assessment; 536 Fifth Workshop on Nuclear Power Plant Containment Integrity; 624 New OECD "International Information System on Occupational Exposure (ISOE)"; 625 Harvard School of Public Health Announces Short Courses; 625 Eighth Power Plant Dynamics, Control and Testing Symposium; 626 Second Training Course on Off-Site Emergency Planning and Response for Nuclear Accidents; 618 The Authors; 622 Reviewers of Nuclear Safety, Vol 32.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

NASA NTRS1995

Universities Earth System Scientists Program

This document constitutes the final technical report for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Grant NAGW-3172. This grant was instituted to provide for the conduct of research under the Universities Space Research Association's (USRA's) Universities Earth System Scientist Program (UESSP) for the Office of Mission to Planet Earth (OMTPE) at NASA Headquarters. USRA was tasked with the following requirements in support of the Universities Earth System Scientists Programs: (1) Bring to OMTPE fundamental scientific and technical expertise not currently resident at NASA Headquarters covering the broad spectrum of Earth science disciplines; (2) Conduct basic research in order to help establish the state of the science and technological readiness, related to NASA issues and requirements, for the following, near-term, scientific uncertainties, and data/information needs in the areas of global climate change, clouds and radiative balance, sources and sinks of greenhouse gases and the processes that control them, solid earth, oceans, polar ice sheets, land-surface hydrology, ecological dynamics, biological diversity, and sustainable development; (3) Evaluate the scientific state-of-the-field in key selected areas and to assist in the definition of new research thrusts for missions, including those that would incorporate the long-term strategy of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). This will, in part, be accomplished by study and evaluation of the basic science needs of the community as they are used to drive the development and maintenance of a global-scale observing system, the focused research studies, and the implementation of an integrated program of modeling, prediction, and assessment; and (4) Produce specific recommendations and alternative strategies for OMTPE that can serve as a basis for interagency and national and international policy on issues related to Earth sciences.

Estes, John E.↗

NASA NTRS2022

NASA's Responsible AI Plan

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is an integral part of today’s process of conducting science and technology development. At NASA, AI has become an integral and important tool for researchers, engineers, data scientists, and technologists in pursuing the ground-breaking discoveries that we are known for, including the command and controlling of our spacecraft and other supporting infrastructures. Consequently, research and engineering efforts incorporating AI have permeated almost every area of our work. It is contributing to NASA’s drive toward the future, not just of space science, but for society here at home. We are dedicated to continuing the use of AI in a safe and fully transparent approach so that the public can have high confidence in the outcomes and benefits. We believe that the plan outlined here will be responsive and contribute to the call for openness across the federal government. NASA is committed to responsible use of AI in all of its activities and in all phases of development and deployment of its space and terrestrial programs missions. NASA does not deliberately focus on “AI Research” as a separate field (we have no single “AI office” or “AI program”), rather NASA uses AI to build tools for its programs. This plan, being put forward, adheres to the Responsible AI (RAI) principles set and laid down by the White House in its Presidential Executive Order 13960. Our research, engineering and technical communities have been made aware of these guidelines and we are committed to an on-going process of educating and monitoring its implementation to ensure adherence to those principles. The vast majority of NASA’s use cases, which number almost 75 today, are geared toward analyzing the petabytes of data that NASA collects from its fleet of spacecraft across all disciplines, in human space exploration, and in aeronautics, etc.

Artificial Intelligence↗