Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “staffing”

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 NTRS2006

Providing Housing, Food and Medical Support for 25,000 Katrina Evacuees with 12 Hours Notice: The Harris County Medical Support of the Superdome Evacuees

Hurricane Katrina was responsible for trapping 25,000 people in the New Orleans Superdome and isolating many others throughout Louisiana and Mississippi. The transport of these evacuees to the Reliant Park (Houston, Texas) used 500 buses each containing about 55 people. Processing the arriving evacuees included addressing their health status and medical needs as follows: an initial triage at disembarkation, a secondary triage in the Reliant Astrodome and Center, and definitive clinical care in the Reliant Arena "Katrina" Clinic. Baylor College of Medicine (BCM) physicians boarded buses and identified the sickest for emergency transport to Harris County Hospital District (HCHD) hospitals. BCM departments represented included pediatrics, family and community medicine, internal medicine, radiology, obstetrics and gynecology, orthopedics, surgery, and psychiatry. Astrodome and Center triage was managed by BCM physicians and staffed by HCHD Nurses and volunteers from Texas and beyond. The Reliant Astrodome, Center and Arena reached peak headcounts of 15,000,4500, and 2500, respectively Most evacuees visiting the triage sites in the Astrodome and Center were treated using "over-the-counter" medications with the remaining being transported to the "Katrina" clinic. The clinic was equipped with a lab, pharmacy, digital X-ray, and ultrasound machines in addition to electronic patient records created using 80 computer terminals. The Katrina clinic saw more than 15,000 patients during 15 days of operations (2,000 on the first full day), administered 10,000 tetanus shots, and filled thousands of prescriptions. At the peak of operations, the clinic saw 150 patients/hour with 25 physicians scheduled for each 12-hour shift. Approximately 900 people were transported to hospital emergency rooms. Within 3 weeks of arriving at the Reliant Park facilities, more than 90% of the families found permanent housing, enrolled children in schools, and found work. Using data obtained from manual and electronic medical records, this presentation will document the major milestones and lessons learned from this extraordinary project to help the Katrina evacuees.

Hamilton, Douglas↗
NASA NTRS2010

Configuring Airspace Sectors with Approximate Dynamic Programming

In response to changing traffic and staffing conditions, supervisors dynamically configure airspace sectors by assigning them to control positions. A finite horizon airspace sector configuration problem models this supervisor decision. The problem is to select an airspace configuration at each time step while considering a workload cost, a reconfiguration cost, and a constraint on the number of control positions at each time step. Three algorithms for this problem are proposed and evaluated: a myopic heuristic, an exact dynamic programming algorithm, and a rollouts approximate dynamic programming algorithm. On problem instances from current operations with only dozens of possible configurations, an exact dynamic programming solution gives the optimal cost value. The rollouts algorithm achieves costs within 2% of optimal for these instances, on average. For larger problem instances that are representative of future operations and have thousands of possible configurations, excessive computation time prohibits the use of exact dynamic programming. On such problem instances, the rollouts algorithm reduces the cost achieved by the heuristic by more than 15% on average with an acceptable computation time.

Bloem, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2011

Safety and Mission Assurance for In-House Design Lessons Learned from Ares I Upper Stage

This viewgraph presentation identifies lessons learned in the course of the Ares I Upper Stage design and in-house development effort. The contents include: 1) Constellation Organization; 2) Upper Stage Organization; 3) Presentation Structure; 4) Lesson-Importance of Systems Engineering/Integration; 5) Lesson-Importance of Early S&MA Involvement; 6) Lesson-Importance of Appropriate Staffing Levels; 7) Lesson-Importance S&MA Team Deployment; 8) Lesson-Understanding of S&MA In-Line Engineering versus Assurance; 9) Lesson-Importance of Close Coordination between Supportability and Reliability/Maintainability; 10) Lesson-Importance of Engineering Data Systems; 11) Lesson-Importance of Early Development of Supporting Databases; 12) Lesson-Importance of Coordination with Safety Assessment/Review Panels; 13) Lesson-Implementation of Software Reliability; 14) Lesson-Implementation of S&MA Technical Authority/Chief S&MA Officer; 15) Lesson-Importance of S&MA Evaluation of Project Risks; 16) Lesson-Implementation of Critical Items List and Government Mandatory Inspections; 17) Lesson-Implementation of Critical Items List Mandatory Inspections; 18) Lesson-Implementation of Test Article Safety Analysis; and 19) Lesson-Importance of Procurement Quality.

Anderson, Joel M.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Data Service Provider Cost Estimation Tool

The Data Service Provider Cost Estimation Tool (CET) and Comparables Database (CDB) package provides to NASA s Earth Science Enterprise (ESE) the ability to estimate the full range of year-by-year lifecycle cost estimates for the implementation and operation of data service providers required by ESE to support its science and applications programs. The CET can make estimates dealing with staffing costs, supplies, facility costs, network services, hardware and maintenance, commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software licenses, software development and sustaining engineering, and the changes in costs that result from changes in workload. Data Service Providers may be stand-alone or embedded in flight projects, field campaigns, research or applications projects, or other activities. The CET and CDB package employs a cost-estimation-by-analogy approach. It is based on a new, general data service provider reference model that provides a framework for construction of a database by describing existing data service providers that are analogs (or comparables) to planned, new ESE data service providers. The CET implements the staff effort and cost estimation algorithms that access the CDB and generates the lifecycle cost estimate for a new data services provider. This data creates a common basis for an ESE proposal evaluator for considering projected data service provider costs.

Fontaine, Kathy↗
NASA NTRS2012

Cost-Effective Telemetry and Command Ground Systems Automation Strategy for the Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) Mission

Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) is an Earth-orbiting, remote-sensing NASA mission slated for launch in 2014. The ground data system (GDS) being developed for SMAP is composed of many heterogeneous subsystems, ranging from those that support planning and sequencing to those used for real-time operations, and even further to those that enable science data exchange. A full end-to-end automation of the GDS may result in cost savings during mission operations, but it would require a significant upfront investment to develop such a comprehensive automation. As demonstrated by the Jason-1 and Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) missions, a measure of "lights-out" automation for routine, orbital pass, ground operations can still reduce mission costs through smaller staffing of operators and limiting their working hours. The challenge, then, for the SMAP GDS engineering team, is to formulate an automated operations strategy--and corresponding system architecture -- to minimize operator intervention during routine operations, while balancing the development costs associated with the scope and complexity of automation. This paper discusses the automated operations approach being developed for the SMAP GDS. The focus is on automating the activities involved in routine passes, which limits the scope to real-time operations. A key subsystem of the SMAP GDS -- NASA's AMMOS Mission Data Processing and Control System (AMPCS) -- provides a set of capabilities that enable such automation. Also discussed are the lights-out pass automations of the Jason-1 and WISE missions and how they informed the automation strategy for SMAP. The paper aims to provide insights into what is necessary in automating the GDS operations for Earth satellite missions.

soil moisture↗
NASA NTRS2012

Planning Coverage Campaigns for Mission Design and Analysis: Clasp for the Proposed DESDynI Mission

Mission design and analysis present challenges in that almost all variables are in constant flux, yet the goal is to achieve an acceptable level of performance against a concept of operations, which might also be in flux. To increase responsiveness, our approach is to use automated planning tools that allow for the continual modification of spacecraft, ground system, staffing, and concept of operations while returning metrics that are important to mission evaluation, such as area covered, peak memory usage, and peak data throughput. We have applied this approach to DESDynI (Deformation, Ecosystem Structure, and Dynamics of Ice) mission design concept using the CLASP (Compressed Large-scale Activity Scheduler/Planner) planning system [7], but since this adaptation many techniques have changed under the hood for CLASP and the DESDynI mission concept has undergone drastic changes, including that it has been renamed the Earth Radar Mission. Over the past two years, we have run more than fifty simulations with the CLASP-DESDynI adaptation, simulating different mission scenarios with changing parameters including targets, swaths, instrument modes, and data and downlink rates. We describe the evolution of simulations through the DESDynI MCR (Mission Concept Review) and afterwards.

DESDynI (Deformation, Ecosystem Structure, and Dyn↗
NASA NTRS2012

Cost-Effective Telemetry and Command Ground Systems Automation Strategy for the Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) Mission

Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) is an Earth-orbiting, remote-sensing NASA mission slated for launch in 2014.[double dagger] The ground data system (GDS) being developed for SMAP is composed of many heterogeneous subsystems, ranging from those that support planning and sequencing to those used for real-time operations, and even further to those that enable science data exchange. A full end-to-end automation of the GDS may result in cost savings during mission operations, but it would require a significant upfront investment to develop such comprehensive automation. As demonstrated by the Jason-1 and Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) missions, a measure of "lights-out" automation for routine, orbital pass ground operations can still reduce mission cost through smaller staffing of operators and limited work hours. The challenge, then, for the SMAP GDS engineering team is to formulate an automated operations strategy--and corresponding system architecture--to minimize operator intervention during operations, while balancing the development cost associated with the scope and complexity of automation. This paper discusses the automated operations approach being developed for the SMAP GDS. The focus is on automating the activities involved in routine passes, which limits the scope to real-time operations. A key subsystem of the SMAP GDS--NASA's AMMOS Mission Data Processing and Control System (AMPCS)--provides a set of capabilities that enable such automation. Also discussed are the lights-out pass automations of the Jason-1 and WISE missions and how they informed the automation strategy for SMAP. The paper aims to provide insights into what is necessary in automating the GDS operations for Earth satellite missions.

remote-sensing↗
NASA NTRS2013

Human Factors in Accidents Involving Remotely Piloted Aircraft

This presentation examines human factors that contribute to RPA mishaps and provides analysis of lessons learned. RPA accident data from U.S. military and government agencies were reviewed and analyzed to identify human factors issues. Common contributors to RPA mishaps fell into several major categories: cognitive factors (pilot workload), physiological factors (fatigue and stress), environmental factors (situational awareness), staffing factors (training and crew coordination), and design factors (human machine interface).

Merlin, Peter William↗
NASA NTRS2013

Spitzer Telemetry Processing System

The Spitzer Telemetry Processing System (SirtfTlmProc) was designed to address objectives of JPL's Multi-mission Image Processing Lab (MIPL) in processing spacecraft telemetry and distributing the resulting data to the science community. To minimize costs and maximize operability, the software design focused on automated error recovery, performance, and information management. The system processes telemetry from the Spitzer spacecraft and delivers Level 0 products to the Spitzer Science Center. SirtfTlmProc is a unique system with automated error notification and recovery, with a real-time continuous service that can go quiescent after periods of inactivity. The software can process 2 GB of telemetry and deliver Level 0 science products to the end user in four hours. It provides analysis tools so the operator can manage the system and troubleshoot problems. It automates telemetry processing in order to reduce staffing costs.

Stanboli, Alice↗
NASA NTRS2013

Planetary Protection Bioburden Analysis Program

This program is a Microsoft Access program that performed statistical analysis of the colony counts from assays performed on the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) spacecraft to determine the bioburden density, 3-sigma biodensity, and the total bioburdens required for the MSL prelaunch reports. It also contains numerous tools that report the data in various ways to simplify the reports required. The program performs all the calculations directly in the MS Access program. Prior to this development, the data was exported to large Excel files that had to be cut and pasted to provide the desired results. The program contains a main menu and a number of submenus. Analyses can be performed by using either all the assays, or only the accountable assays that will be used in the final analysis. There are three options on the first menu: either calculate using (1) the old MER (Mars Exploration Rover) statistics, (2) the MSL statistics for all the assays, or This software implements penetration limit equations for common micrometeoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) shield configurations, windows, and thermal protection systems. Allowable MMOD risk is formulated in terms of the probability of penetration (PNP) of the spacecraft pressure hull. For calculating the risk, spacecraft geometry models, mission profiles, debris environment models, and penetration limit equations for installed shielding configurations are required. Risk assessment software such as NASA's BUMPERII is used to calculate mission PNP; however, they are unsuitable for use in shield design and preliminary analysis studies. The software defines a single equation for the design and performance evaluation of common MMOD shielding configurations, windows, and thermal protection systems, along with a description of their validity range and guidelines for their application. Recommendations are based on preliminary reviews of fundamental assumptions, and accuracy in predicting experimental impact test results. The software is programmed in Visual Basic for Applications for installation as a simple add-in for Microsoft Excel. The user is directed to a graphical user interface (GUI) that requires user inputs and provides solutions directly in Microsoft Excel workbooks. This work was done by Shannon Ryan of the USRA Lunar and Planetary Institute for Johnson Space Center. Further information is contained in a TSP (see page 1). MSC- 24582-1 Micrometeoroid and Orbital Debris (MMOD) Shield Ballistic Limit Analysis Program Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas Commercially, because it is so generic, Enigma can be used for almost any project that requires engineering visualization, model building, or animation. Models in Enigma can be exported to many other formats for use in other applications as well. Educationally, Enigma is being used to allow university students to visualize robotic algorithms in a simulation mode before using them with actual hardware. This work was done by David Shores and Sharon P. Goza of Johnson Space Center; Cheyenne McKeegan, Rick Easley, Janet Way, and Shonn Everett of MEI Technologies; Mark Manning of PTI; and Mark Guerra, Ray Kraesig, and William Leu of Tietronix Software, Inc. For further information, contact the JSC Innovation Partnerships Office at (281) 483-3809. MSC-24211-1 Spitzer Telemetry Processing System NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California The Spitzer Telemetry Processing System (SirtfTlmProc) was designed to address objectives of JPL's Multi-mission Image Processing Lab (MIPL) in processing spacecraft telemetry and distributing the resulting data to the science community. To minimize costs and maximize operability, the software design focused on automated error recovery, performance, and information management. The system processes telemetry from the Spitzer spacecraft and delivers Level 0 products to the Spitzer Science Center. SirtfTlmProc is a unique system with automated error notification and recovery, with a real-time continuous service that can go quiescent after periods of inactivity. The software can process 2 GB of telemetry and deliver Level 0 science products to the end user in four hours. It provides analysis tools so the operator can manage the system and troubleshoot problems. It automates telemetry processing in order to reduce staffing costs. This work was done by Alice Stanboli, Elmain M. Martinez, and James M. McAuley of Caltech for NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. For more information, contact iaoffice @jpl.nasa.gov. This software is available for commercial licensing. Please contact Dan Broderick at Daniel.F. Broderick@jpl.nasa.gov. Refer to NPO-47803. NASA Tech Briefs, September 2013 29 This rapid response computer program predicts Orbiter Wing Leading Edge (WLE) damage caused by ice or foam impact during a Space Shuttle launch (Program "IMPACT2"). The program was developed after the Columbia accident in order to assess quickly WLE damage due to ice, foam, or metal impact (if any) during a Shuttle launch. IMPACT2 simulates an impact event in a few minutes for foam impactors, and in seconds for ice and metal impactors. The damage criterion is derived from results obtained from one sophisticated commercial program, which requires hours to carry out simulations of the same impact events. The program was designed to run much faster than the commercial program with prediction of projectile threshold velocities within 10 to 15% of commercial-program values. The mathematical model involves coupling of Orbiter wing normal modes of vibration to nonlinear or linear springmass models. IMPACT2 solves nonlinear or linear impact problems using classical normal modes of vibration of a target, and nonlinear/ linear time-domain equations for the projectile. Impact loads and stresses developed in the target are computed as functions of time. This model is novel because of its speed of execution. A typical model of foam, or other projectile characterized by material nonlinearities, impacting an RCC panel is executed in minutes instead of hours needed by the commercial programs. Target damage due to impact can be assessed quickly, provided that target vibration modes and allowable stress are known. This work was done by Robert Clark, Jr., Paul Cotter, and Constantine Michalopoulos of The Boeing Company for Johnson Space Center. For further information, contact the JSC Innovation Partnerships Office at (281) 483-3809. MSC-24988-1 Wing Leading Edge RCC Rapid Response Damage Prediction Tool (IMPACT2) Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas (3) the MSL statistics for only the accountable assays. Other options on the main menu include a data editing form and utility programs that produce various reports requested by the microbiologists and the project, and tools to generate the groupings for the final analyses. The analyses can be carried out in three ways: Each assay can be treated separately, the assays can be collectively treated for the whole zone as a group, or the assays can be collected in groups designated by the JPL Planetary Protection Manager. The latter approach was used to generate the final report because assays on the same equipment or similar equipment can be assumed to have been exposed to the same environment and cleaning. Thus, the statistics are improved by having a larger population, thereby reducing the standard deviation by the square root of N. For each method mentioned above, three reports are available. The first is a detailed report including all the data. This version was very useful in verifying the calculations. The second is a brief report that is similar to the full detailed report, but does not print out the data. The third is a grand total and summary report in which each assay requires only one line. For the first and second reports, most of the calculations are performed in the report section itself. For the third, all the calculations are performed directly in the query bound to the report. All the numerical results were verified by comparing them with Excel templates, then exporting the data from the Planetary Protection Analysis program to Excel.

Beaudet, Robert A.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Planning Coverage Campaigns for Mission Design and Analysis: CLASP for DESDynl

Mission design and analysis presents challenges in that almost all variables are in constant flux, yet the goal is to achieve an acceptable level of performance against a concept of operations, which might also be in flux. To increase responsiveness, automated planning tools are used that allow for the continual modification of spacecraft, ground system, staffing, and concept of operations, while returning metrics that are important to mission evaluation, such as area covered, peak memory usage, and peak data throughput. This approach was applied to the DESDynl mission design using the CLASP planning system, but since this adaptation, many techniques have changed under the hood for CLASP, and the DESDynl mission concept has undergone drastic changes. The software produces mission evaluation products, such as memory highwater marks, coverage percentages, given a mission design in the form of coverage targets, concept of operations, spacecraft parameters, and orbital parameters. It tries to overcome the lack of fidelity and timeliness of mission requirements coverage analysis during mission design. Previous techniques primarily use Excel in ad hoc fashion to approximate key factors in mission performance, often falling victim to overgeneralizations necessary in such an adaptation. The new program allows designers to faithfully represent their mission designs quickly, and get more accurate results just as quickly.

Knight, Russell L.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Autonomous Aerobraking Development Software: Phase One Performance Analysis at Mars, Venus, and Titan

When entering orbit about a planet or moon with an appreciable atmosphere, instead of using only the propulsion system to insert the spacecraft into its desired orbit, aerodynamic drag can be used after the initial orbit insertion to further decelerate the spacecraft. Several past NASA missions have used this aerobraking technique to reduce the fuel required to deliver a spacecraft into a desired orbit. Aerobraking was first demonstrated at Venus with Magellan in 1993 and then was used to achieve the science orbit of three Mars orbiters: Mars Global Surveyor in 1997, Mars Odyssey in 2001, and Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter in 2006. Although aerobraking itself reduces the propellant required to reach a final low period orbit, it does so at the expense of additional mission time to accommodate the aerobraking operations phase (typically 3-6 months), a large mission operations staff, and significant Deep Space Network (DSN) coverage. By automating ground based tasks and analyses associated with aerobraking and moving these onboard the spacecraft, a flight project could save millions of dollars in operations staffing and DSN costs (Ref. 1).

Maddock, Robert W.↗
NASA NTRS2013

The Antarctic Search for Meteorites: A Model for Deep Space Exploration

In an era of shrinking buying power and reduced flight opportunities, NASA must extract the greatest possible value from all sources of insight into the future of human space exploration. Antarctica is one such source. The history of Antarctic exploration has many political and technical parallels with the development of space, and Antarctica's remoteness and harsh climate make it an excellent proxy for space (e.g., [1,2]). Links between exploration of space and of the Antarctic date back to the International Geophysical Year of 1957-1958, which saw both the launch of Sputnik 1 and the establishment of a station at the South Pole. The Antarctic Search for Meteorites (ANSMET) is an annual expedition to the south polar plateau to collect meteorites. Although its intent is not to simulate a space mission, the handful of astronauts who have participated in ANSMET agree that it is very similar to a long-duration space flight. Independently, NASA and other space agencies have simulated deep space exploration missions in "analog" activities at remote field sites on Earth (e.g., [3]). These include NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) [4,5], Desert Research And Technology Studies (Desert RATS) [6,7], and the Pavilion Lake Research Project (PLRP or simply Pavilion Lake) [8]. This report focuses on NEEMO, Desert RATS, and PLRP because of the author's firsthand experience with them. Other noteworthy analogs, such as the arctic Haughton Mars Project and the European Space Agency's underground Cooperative Adventure for Valuing and Exercising human behavior and performance Skills (CAVES), are not treated here. NASA analogs often include fully staffed control centers, astronauts serving as crew, and realistic mission timelines lasting one to two weeks. Analogs have provided key insights into system architectures and operational concepts for the future human exploration of deep space. They have pioneered techniques for human communication with significant speed-of-light delays, for conducting spacewalks on natural objects with negligible surface gravity, and for empowering exploration crews to work with reduced dependence on a ground control center. They have field-tested dozens of emerging technologies including spacewalking tools and full-scale prototype vehicles and habitats. They have provided valuable experience for astronauts preparing for their first space flight, and for flown crewmembers who will take command roles on later flights. Some analogs, especially PLRP, have connected observers in the field with science teams in remotely located control centers to produce high-quality, publishable scientific results. The analogs have accomplished all of this at a tiny fraction of the cost of an actual space flight. This report treats ANSMET as space flight analog. The chapter following this introduction describes ANSMET in depth. The report then presents data on logistics and crew considerations that may be useful for developers of future human space exploration missions. It offers detailed comparisons between ANSMET and past, present, and future space flights on the Space Shuttle, the International Space Station (ISS), and a proposed Mars mission. Those comparisons are intended to complement the work of Eppler [2], who compares ANSMET to the Apollo moon flights. This report also compares ANSMET with the Desert RATS, NEEMO, and PLRP analogs. It then presents observations and makes recommendations related to ANSMET's value as a simulated space mission. The report ends with a short conclusion. The remainder of this introductory chapter provides background material to help readers interpret the rest of the report. It gives brief overviews of Space Shuttle and ISS missions along with information on a notional future human flight to Mars. It also presents the general features of three of NASA's space flight "analog" projects. With those points of reference in place, the chapter concludes with an overview of ANSMET.

Love, Stanley G.↗
NASA NTRS2013

The Impact of Trajectory Prediction Uncertainty on Air Traffic Controller Performance and Acceptability

A Human-In-The-Loop air traffic control simulation investigated the impact of uncertainties in trajectory predictions on NextGen Trajectory-Based Operations concepts, seeking to understand when the automation would become unacceptable to controllers or when performance targets could no longer be met. Retired air traffic controllers staffed two en route transition sectors, delivering arrival traffic to the northwest corner-post of Atlanta approach control under time-based metering operations. Using trajectory-based decision-support tools, the participants worked the traffic under varying levels of wind forecast error and aircraft performance model error, impacting the ground automations ability to make accurate predictions. Results suggest that the controllers were able to maintain high levels of performance, despite even the highest levels of trajectory prediction errors.

trajectory prediction uncertainty↗
NASA NTRS2013

Operational Evaluatioin of Dynamic Weather Routes at American Airlines

Dynamic Weather Routes (DWR) is a search engine that continuously and automatically analyzes inflight aircraft in en route airspace and proposes simple route amendments for more efficient routes around convective weather while considering sector congestion, traffic conflicts, and active Special Use Airspace. NASA and American Airlines (AA) are conducting an operational trial of DWR at the AA System Operations Center in Fort Worth, TX. The trial includes only AA flights in Fort Worth Center airspace. Over the period from July 31, 2012 through August 31, 2012, 45% of routes proposed by DWR and evaluated by AA users - air traffic control coordinators and flight dispatchers - were rated as acceptable as proposed or with some modifications. The wind-corrected potential flying time savings for these acceptable routes totals 470 flying min, and results suggest another 1,500 min of potential savings for flights not evaluated due to staffing limitations. A sector congestion analysis shows that in only two out of 83 DWR routes rated acceptable by AA staff were the flights predicted to fly through a congested sector inside of 30 min downstream of present position. This shows that users considered sector congestion data provided by DWR automation and in nearly all cases did not accept routes through over-capacity sectors. It is estimated that 12 AA flights were given reroute clearances as a direct result of DWR for a total savings of 67 flying min.

air traffic trajectory automation↗
NASA NTRS2014

Design Visualization Internship Overview

This is a report documenting the details of my work as a NASA KSC intern for the Summer Session from June 2nd to August 8th, 2014. This work was conducted within the Design Visualization Group, a Contractor staffed organization within the C1 division of the IT Directorate. The principle responsibilities of the KSC Design Visualization Group are the production of 3D simulations of NASA equipment and facilities for the purpose of planning complex operations such as hardware transportation and vehicle assembly. My role as an intern focused on aiding engineers in using 3D scanning equipment to obtain as-built measurements of NASA facilities, as well as using CATIA and DELMIA to process this data. My primary goals for this internship focused on expanding my CAD knowledge and capabilities, while also learning more about technologies I was previously unfamiliar with, such as 3D scanning. An additional goal of mine was to learn more about how NASA operates, and how the U.S. Space Program operates on a day-to-day basis. This opportunity provided me with a front-row seat to the daily maneuvers and operations of KSC and NASA as a whole. Each work day, I was able to witness, and even take part of, a small building block of the future systems that will take astronauts to other worlds. After my experiences this summer, not only can I say that my goals have been met, but also that this experience has been the highlight of my experience in higher education.

Telescience↗
NASA NTRS2012

JPL Innovation Foundry

Space science missions are increasingly challenged today: in ambition, by increasingly sophisticated hypotheses tested; in development, by the increasing complexity of advanced technologies; in budgeting, by the decline of flagship-class mission opportunities; in management, by expectations for breakthrough science despite a risk-averse programmatic climate; and in planning, by increasing competition for scarce resources. How are the space-science missions of tomorrow being formulated? The paper describes the JPL Innovation Foundry, created in 2011, to respond to this evolving context. The Foundry integrates methods, tools, and experts that span the mission concept lifecycle. Grounded in JPL's heritage of missions, flight instruments, mission proposals, and concept innovation, the Foundry seeks to provide continuity of support and cost-effective, on-call access to the right domain experts at the right time, as science definition teams and Principal Investigators mature mission ideas from "cocktail napkin" to PDR. The Foundry blends JPL capabilities in proposal development and concurrent engineering, including Team X, with new approaches for open-ended concept exploration in earlier, cost-constrained phases, and with ongoing research and technology projects. It applies complexity and cost models, projectformulation lessons learned, and strategy analyses appropriate to each level of concept maturity. The Foundry is organizationally integrated with JPL formulation program offices; staffed by JPL's line organizations for engineering, science, and costing; and overseen by senior Laboratory leaders to assure experienced coordination and review. Incubation of each concept is tailored depending on its maturity and proposal history, and its highest leverage modeling and analysis needs.

mission development↗
NASA NTRS2013

Exploring Mission Concepts with the JPL Innovation Foundry A-Team

The JPL Innovation Foundry has established a new approach for exploring, developing, and evaluating early concepts called the A-Team. The A-Team combines innovative collaborative methods with subject matter expertise and analysis tools to help mature mission concepts. Science, implementation, and programmatic elements are all considered during an A-Team study. Methods are grouped by Concept Maturity Level (CML), from 1 through 3, including idea generation and capture (CML 1), initial feasibility assessment (CML 2), and trade space exploration (CML 3). Methods used for each CML are presented, and the key team roles are described from two points of view: innovative methods and technical expertise. A-Team roles for providing innovative methods include the facilitator, study lead, and assistant study lead. A-Team roles for providing technical expertise include the architect, lead systems engineer, and integration engineer. In addition to these key roles, each A-Team study is uniquely staffed to match the study topic and scope including subject matter experts, scientists, technologists, flight and instrument systems engineers, and program managers as needed. Advanced analysis and collaborative engineering tools (e.g. cost, science traceability, mission design, knowledge capture, study and analysis support infrastructure) are also under development for use in A-Team studies and will be discussed briefly. The A-Team facilities provide a constructive environment for innovative ideas from all aspects of mission formulation to eliminate isolated studies and come together early in the development cycle when they can provide the biggest impact. This paper provides an overview of the A-Team, its study processes, roles, methods, tools and facilities.

Team Eureka↗