Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “best practices”

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
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2021

A Study of Lessons and Experiences of NASA Centers in the Use of Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS) Electronics

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) sponsored a Technical Assessment relating to the utilization of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) electrical, electronic, and electromechanical (EEE) parts in spaceflight systems at NASA Centers. The assessment had two primary goals. The first was to capture each NASA Centers’ current practices, best practices, lessons learned and Center-proposed recommendations on the use of COTS EEE parts and assemblies in critical ground support equipment (GSE). The second was to provide recommendations on the use of COTS, including a set of current best practices based on the Centers’ current and best practices and the NESC team’s discussions. One key achievement made by the assessment team was the characterization of the term Industry Leading Parts Manufacturers (ILPMs) as parts manufacturer with high volume automatic production facilities and which can provide documented proof of the technology, process and product qualification, and its implementation of the best practices for “zero defects” for parts quality, reliability and workmanship. The assessment concluded with numerous findings, takeaways and recommendations that will be discussed during this presentation.

commercial↗
NASA NTRS2019

WWAO-WSWC Workshop Report 2019 Final

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Western States Water Council (WSWC) and the NASA Western Water Applications Office (WWAO) hosted a joint workshop on technology transfer for water management in the Western U.S. The goals of the workshop were to understand how different agencies approach the technology transfer and research to operations (R2O) process, identify best practices, and discuss existing barriers to successful technology infusion into operational water resource management systems at the state and federal level. The workshop took place August 7-9, 2019 in Irvine, CA. Key outcomes of the meeting include the following:• U.S. Rep. Grace Napolitano provided opening remarks for the workshop, where she highlighted the critical value of water data and the importance of collaboration between state and federal agencies in working to advance the use of water data in water management, planning and policy. • A total of 33 participants (including remote participants) were part of the workshop. They included principal investigators and project teams supported by NASA (Cyanobacteria Assessment Network, Evapotranspiration for Western States, Evaporative Stress Index, the Airborne Snow Observatory, Satellite-based Snow Water Equivalent in the Sierra Nevadas, and Fallowed Area Mapping) as well as representatives from federal (USGS, NOAA, USBR, EPA) and state (CA, WY, OR, NE) agency partners. • One main outcome of the meeting was the consensus that successful transitions of new applications and new technologies into operations require careful planning, effective communication within and across institutions, resources and considerable time investments. In addition, there was broad agreement that significant lead time is often required to allow for identification of financial and technical resources to sustain operational use of new data, information and tools.• The meeting included remarks from U.S. Rep. Napolitano and discussions during presentations and breakout groups about key opportunities to develop best practices and streamline the technology transfer process. • For example, one key set of best practices that emerged revolved around the the importance of building trust and establishing clear lines of communication between the research and operational institutions. The conversations led to defining two key components of trust-building. The first aspect is purely technical. It requires effectively demonstrating that the proposed application meets the end user’s needs in terms of accuracy, format, resolution, latency, metadata and documentation. The second aspect of building trust involves developing sustained, productive and mutually-beneficial relationships with the partner operational agency. The best practices presented here span both the technical as well as the relational aspects of cultivating trust. • This workshop served as a first step in developing a broader community discussion around R2O in western water management. Many of the best practices and lessons learned described in this report represent starting places for action within the WWAO, WSWC and our colleagues’ institutions. • Effective implementation of the best practices that emerged from this workshop will require sustained investments of time, resources and transition planning. In recognition of this, the WSWC and the WWAO proposed continuation of discussions begun at the workshop through a series of semi-annual or annual workshops.

Wilardson, Tony↗
NASA NTRS2016

ESIP Information Quality Cluster (IQC)

The Information Quality Cluster (IQC) within the Federation of Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP) was initially formed in 2011 and has evolved significantly over time. The current objectives of the IQC are to: 1. Actively evaluate community data quality best practices and standards; 2. Improve capture, description, discovery, and usability of information about data quality in Earth science data products; 3. Ensure producers of data products are aware of standards and best practices for conveying data quality, and data providers distributors intermediaries establish, improve and evolve mechanisms to assist users in discovering and understanding data quality information; and 4. Consistently provide guidance to data managers and stewards on how best to implement data quality standards and best practices to ensure and improve maturity of their data products. The activities of the IQC include: 1. Identification of additional needs for consistently capturing, describing, and conveying quality information through use case studies with broad and diverse applications; 2. Establishing and providing community-wide guidance on roles and responsibilities of key players and stakeholders including users and management; 3. Prototyping of conveying quality information to users in a more consistent, transparent, and digestible manner; 4. Establishing a baseline of standards and best practices for data quality; 5. Evaluating recommendations from NASA's DQWG in a broader context and proposing possible implementations; and 6. Engaging data providers, data managers, and data user communities as resources to improve our standards and best practices. Following the principles of openness of the ESIP Federation, IQC invites all individuals interested in improving capture, description, discovery, and usability of information about data quality in Earth science data products to participate in its activities.

data products↗
NASA NTRS2008

A Grid Sourcing and Adaptation Study Using Unstructured Grids for Supersonic Boom Prediction

NASA created the Supersonics Project as part of the NASA Fundamental Aeronautics Program to advance technology that will make a supersonic flight over land viable. Computational flow solvers have lacked the ability to accurately predict sonic boom from the near to far field. The focus of this investigation was to establish gridding and adaptation techniques to predict near-to-mid-field (<10 body lengths below the aircraft) boom signatures at supersonic speeds using the USM3D unstructured grid flow solver. The study began by examining sources along the body the aircraft, far field sourcing and far field boundaries. The study then examined several techniques for grid adaptation. During the course of the study, volume sourcing was introduced as a new way to source grids using the grid generation code VGRID. Two different methods of using the volume sources were examined. The first method, based on manual insertion of the numerous volume sources, made great improvements in the prediction capability of USM3D for boom signatures. The second method (SSGRID), which uses an a priori adaptation approach to stretch and shear the original unstructured grid to align the grid and pressure waves, showed similar results with a more automated approach. Due to SSGRID s results and ease of use, the rest of the study focused on developing a best practice using SSGRID. The best practice created by this study for boom predictions using the CFD code USM3D involved: 1) creating a small cylindrical outer boundary either 1 or 2 body lengths in diameter (depending on how far below the aircraft the boom prediction is required), 2) using a single volume source under the aircraft, and 3) using SSGRID to stretch and shear the grid to the desired length.

Carter, Melissa B.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Improved Benchmarking of Cohesive Elements in Abaqus Standard for Predicting Disbond and Delamination in Composite Structures

Traditional approaches for aircraft certification require the assumption of an initial flaw condition, either represented as barely visible impact damage (BVID) or through inclusion of a Teflon insert to serve as surrogate damage. Based on the initial composite damage state, the structure must be shown to demonstrate structural durability and damage tolerance (DaDT) according to the following criteria: a. Damage displays no detrimental growth under cyclic loading b. The structure is able to sustain design limit load (DLL) Currently, the only available manner for validating structural performance is through test. Since damage can occur over a wide variety of areas within a structure, this approach has proven to be increasingly expensive and time consuming for composite airframes and acreage structure within the design-test-certification building block. A further complicating factor is the requirement to accurately capture the most critical damage morphologies as a starting condition. To understand the severity of the damage, it is either required to experimentally determine the most critical areas at tremendous expense or rely on legacy data of similar structural testing, which limits design space expansion. A preferred solution is to use advanced analysis to provide improved understanding of load margins for critical locations based on a wide variety of potential starting damage conditions. The standard industry approach for DaDT certification adheres to the use of the traditional virtual crack closure technique (VCCT) method. VCCT is generally a preferred method because it conforms to the current certification principles of damage from a known flaw, and when used correctly, can be effective at predicting delamination propagation under static and cyclic loading. The VCCT method requires the inclusion of an initial flaw in the finite element (FE) model requiring a-priori knowledge of the flaw location. This in turn requires a plethora of analysis cases to be examined to cover a reasonable span of potential damage states. Additionally, the VCCT approach requires node-to-node connectivity rendering it incompatible with the best practices and approaches for using continuum damage mechanics (CDM) based progressive damage and failure analysis (PDFA) tools within a typical FE solver. Alternatives to VCCT have emerged in the form of cohesive elements which utilize the cohesive zone model (CZM). Unlike VCCT which models linear elastic fracture mechanics, cohesive elements couples continuum and fracture based responses through the use of bilinear traction separation laws. These laws are defined based on a penalty stiffness, a cohesive strength, and a strain energy release rate. The approach can be mesh regularized with native cohesive elements within many FE solvers such as Abaqus and LS-DYNA. In Phase I of the NASA Advanced Composites Consortium (ACC) post-buckled stiffened panel with BVID, Strength and Life [1], the performance of cohesive elements were benchmarked in comparison to VCCT and LEFM solutions and showed good agreement using Abaqus explicit [2]. To realize savings on current and future programs, it is still necessary to close technical gaps related to the use of cohesive elements with Abaqus Standard. Within a program environment, standard finite element analysis is the preferred analytical capability for quasi-static loading as it eliminates uncertainty due to oscillatory behavior commonly seen with explicit analysis. This oscillatory behavior creates difficulties in writing margins of safety based on the analysis. The use of negative tangent stiffness material models complicates convergence which typically requires the use of numerical controls such as viscous damping to overcome. To date, there has not been a comprehensive study on how to establish best practices for cohesive element convergence for predictive capability within the Abaqus implicit solver. In pursuit of these goals, under the NASA ACC program, several numerical benchmark problems were proposed including pure mode I (double cantilevered beam – DCB), pure mode II (end notch flexure – ENF), and symmetric/unsymmetric evolving mixed mode (single leg bend – SLB). This paper focuses on the use of cohesive elements to model the delamination through the use of CZM. Specifically, finite element models for the DCB, ENF, symmetric SLB, and unsymmetric SLB, are developed and various solution controls for convergence are studied to develop a best practice. Once the best practice has been developed, the predictive capability of the objective CZM model is used to analyze the hat pull-off strength of a standard hat stiffened configuration under various loading conditions.

Abaqus↗
NASA NTRS2001

Aerospace Technology Innovation

Commercializing technology is a daunting task. Of every 11 new product ideas, only one will successfully make it to the marketplace. Fully 46% of new product investment becomes sunk in cost. Yet, a few good companies consistently attain an 80% technology commercialization success rate and have lead the way in establishing best practices. The NASA Incubator program consists of nine incubators, each residing near a NASA research center. The purpose of the incubators is to use the best practices is to use the best practices of technology commercialization to help early stage businesses successfully launch new products that incorporate NASA technology.

Turner, Janelle↗
NASA NTRS2017

International Space Agency CIO Forum Industrial Control System (ICS) and Cyber

This briefing covers Industrial Control System (ICS) best practices for enhancing cyber protection. The briefing provides a very high-level overview of best practices currently being pursued by NASA as well as by other US government agencies such as NIST and DHS ICS-CERT. All information presented in this slide deck is publicly available and no sensitive information is provided in these slides. These slides will be used to generate discussion around best practices within the international community in the area of ICS cyber protections.

Powell, Robert↗
NASA NTRS2017

How Should Life Support Be Modeled and Simulated?

Why do most space life support research groups build and investigate large models for systems simulation? The need for them seems accepted, but are we asking the right questions and solving the real problems? The modeling results leave many questions unanswered. How then should space life support be modeled and simulated? Life support system research and development uses modeling and simulation to study dynamic behavior as part of systems engineering and analysis. It is used to size material flows and buffers and plan contingent operations. A DoD sponsored study used the systems engineering approach to define a set of best practices for modeling and simulation. These best practices describe a systems engineering process of developing and validating requirements, defining and analyzing the model concept, and designing and testing the model. Other general principles for modeling and simulation are presented. Some specific additional advice includes performing a static analysis before developing a dynamic simulation, applying the mass and energy conservation laws, modeling on the appropriate system level, using simplified subsystem representations, designing the model to solve a specific problem, and testing the model on several different problems. Modeling and simulation is necessary in life support design but many problems are outside its scope.

Jones, Harry W.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Risk Informed Philosophy: Using What We Fear to Lose to Guide Us to Success

When an organization sets out on a new effort, program, or project, one of the first steps undertaken is to understand the related requirements. Most often, these requirements come in the form of standards, directives, or other organizational processes, and are derived to meet a broad range of efforts, programs, and projects. The net result is that organizations or teams are forced to start with a maximum set of requirements and expend time and energy tailoring the set of requirements down to what is more appropriate for the effort, program, or project at hand. This presentation will present an alternate method for the application of requirements or best practices that is based upon the actual risks to the safety, performance, or success of the effort. This additive route for applying best practices and requirements also encourages an early exploration of the risks, thus yielding a better understanding of where resources should be applied. This presentation also extends this concept of risk-based application of best practices and requirements to the selection of organization-wide improvement or standardization efforts, such as Lean, Six Sigma, and Quality Management Systems.

Darpel, Scott↗
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 NTRS2009

Integrated Risk and Knowledge Management Program -- IRKM-P

The NASA Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) IRKM-P tightly couples risk management and knowledge management processes and tools to produce an effective "modern" work environment. IRKM-P objectives include: (1) to learn lessons from past and current programs (Apollo, Space Shuttle, and the International Space Station); (2) to generate and share new engineering design, operations, and management best practices through preexisting Continuous Risk Management (CRM) procedures and knowledge-management practices; and (3) to infuse those lessons and best practices into current activities. The conceptual framework of the IRKM-P is based on the assumption that risks highlight potential knowledge gaps that might be mitigated through one or more knowledge management practices or artifacts. These same risks also serve as cues for collection of knowledge particularly, knowledge of technical or programmatic challenges that might recur.

Lengyel, David M.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Functional Fault Modeling Conventions and Practices for Real-Time Fault Isolation

The purpose of this paper is to present the conventions, best practices, and processes that were established based on the prototype development of a Functional Fault Model (FFM) for a Cryogenic System that would be used for real-time Fault Isolation in a Fault Detection, Isolation, and Recovery (FDIR) system. The FDIR system is envisioned to perform health management functions for both a launch vehicle and the ground systems that support the vehicle during checkout and launch countdown by using a suite of complimentary software tools that alert operators to anomalies and failures in real-time. The FFMs were created offline but would eventually be used by a real-time reasoner to isolate faults in a Cryogenic System. Through their development and review, a set of modeling conventions and best practices were established. The prototype FFM development also provided a pathfinder for future FFM development processes. This paper documents the rationale and considerations for robust FFMs that can easily be transitioned to a real-time operating environment.

Ferrell, Bob↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Notes on Digital-Data Analysis

The presentation is an overview and discussion of concepts normally encountered during digital-signal processing of sampled time histories. It is not a comprehensive literature survey, but simply a practical guide for best usage. Sections of the talk cover: digital sampling and representation, the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem, aliasing or frequency folding, the power spectrum, windowing and spectral spreading, scalloping, and best practices. The Advanced Air Transport Technology Project supports this effort.

Aeroacoustics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developmental and Cryogenic Thermal Vacuum (TVAC) Testing Lessons Learned

Developmental thermal vacuum (TVAC) testing is a critical step in maturing hardware designs and validating performance prior to flight qualification. Unlike qualification or acceptance testing, developmental testing provides flexibility to explore design margins, uncover integration challenges, and refine test approaches before formal verification activities begin. This presentation highlights the value of developmental testing while sharing common pitfalls encountered during developmental TVAC campaigns. Lessons learned from hands-on testing experience, including extensive developmental testing at cryogenic temperatures, will be shared in this presentation. Topics include test planning and preparation, instrumentation strategies, contamination control considerations, troubleshooting unexpected anomalies, and approaches for staying on schedule while meeting test objectives. The audience will gain practical insights and best practices that can improve test efficiency, reduce risk, and enhance the overall success of future developmental TVAC efforts.

Mackenzie Byrnes↗
NASA NTRS2020

Researching the Effect of Parameter Changes on FUN3D Simulations and ROM Generation

This paper discusses the preliminary background and resulting research conducted on the effect of plateau length on CFD results and ROM generation. Within this research, smaller studies were conducted to assess both CFD and ROM parameters for a determination of best practices. The results in this paper lead to a preliminary assessment of potential best practices for ROM generation moving forward.

Brianna L Blocher↗
NASA NTRS2016

Assessment of the Orion-SLS Interface Management Process in Achieving the EIA 731.1 Systems Engineering Capability Model Generic Practices Level 3 Criteria

NASA is currently developing the next generation crewed spacecraft and launch vehicle for exploration beyond earth orbit including returning to the Moon and making the transit to Mars. Managing the design integration of major hardware elements of a space transportation system is critical for overcoming both the technical and programmatic challenges in taking a complex system from concept to space operations. An established method of accomplishing this is formal interface management. In this paper we set forth an argument that the interface management process implemented by NASA between the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) and the Space Launch System (SLS) achieves the Level 3 tier of the EIA 731.1 System Engineering Capability Model (SECM) for Generic Practices. We describe the relevant NASA systems and associated organizations, and define the EIA SECM Level 3 Generic Practices. We then provide evidence for our compliance with those practices. This evidence includes discussions of: NASA Systems Engineering Interface (SE) Management standard process and best practices; the tailoring of that process for implementation on the Orion to SLS interface; changes made over time to improve the tailored process, and; the opportunities to take the resulting lessons learned and propose improvements to our institutional processes and best practices. We compare this evidence against the practices to form the rationale for the declared SECM maturity level.

Jellicorse, John J.↗
NASA NTRS2016

The Business Change Initiative: A Novel Approach to Improved Cost and Schedule Management

Goddard Space Flight Center's Flight Projects Directorate employed a Business Change Initiative (BCI) to infuse a series of activities coordinated to drive improved cost and schedule performance across Goddard's missions. This sustaining change framework provides a platform to manage and implement cost and schedule control techniques throughout the project portfolio. The BCI concluded in December 2014, deploying over 100 cost and schedule management changes including best practices, tools, methods, training, and knowledge sharing. The new business approach has driven the portfolio to improved programmatic performance. The last eight launched GSFC missions have optimized cost, schedule, and technical performance on a sustained basis to deliver on time and within budget, returning funds in many cases. While not every future mission will boast such strong performance, improved cost and schedule tools, management practices, and ongoing comprehensive evaluations of program planning and control methods to refine and implement best practices will continue to provide a framework for sustained performance. This paper will describe the tools, techniques, and processes developed during the BCI and the utilization of collaborative content management tools to disseminate project planning and control techniques to ensure continuous collaboration and optimization of cost and schedule management in the future.

Schedule↗
NASA NTRS2023

NASA Passive Thermal Control Engineering Guidebook

The NASA Passive Thermal Control Engineering Guidebook provides recommendations, including best practices and lessons learned, related to the passive thermal control engineering discipline. Topics include analysis (including documentation and review), thermal hardware (design/selection, vendors, and integration), testing, and flight operations. The passive thermal discipline includes thermal control and thermal protection systems. The passive thermal control discipline, which is addressed in this Guidebook, is broad and covers internal and external systems, component passive thermal analysis, vehicle on-orbit attitude timeline analysis, integrated thermal analysis, various thermal control apparatus (heaters and controls, coatings, blankets and insulations, isolators, geometric design for view factors, materials emissivity/absorptivity properties), passive cooling of avionics, purge, vent, and drain for vehicle cavities and compartments, thermal model development and correlation, thermal cycle and thermal-vacuum testing. Topics related to thermal protection systems (TPS) are not within the scope of this document. The Guidebook provides a consolidated reference for early career as well as experienced engineers embarking on a new task. Leveraging the experience of the group minimizes the learning curve that exists at the start of new projects, reduces the risk of repeating mistakes, and improves the organization’s ability to deliver high-quality products efficiently. The intent of this document is to provide guidance based on collective experience, and is not intended impose constraints on project work. Best practices can vary substantially and it is important to apply judgment wisely based on careful consideration of the specific design and requirements. Implementation of the methods described will vary from project to project and should be applied in conjunction with the judgment of the thermal engineers performing and reviewing the work. The recommendations in this document are not intended to replace program, project, branch, Center, or NASA requirements and/or policies.

thermal↗