Project update: engineering constraints, mission design, and schedule for MER landing sites selection
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
MER project↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Project Schedule”
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.
Ares I-X Roll Control System Development
Project Managers often face challenging technical, schedule and budget issues. This presentation will explore how the Ares I-X Roll Control System Integrated Product Team (IPT) mitigated challenges such as concurrent engineering requirements and environments and evolving program processes, while successfully managing an aggressive project schedule and tight budget. IPT challenges also included communications and negotiations among inter- and intra-government agencies, including the US Air Force, NASA/MSFC Propulsion Engineering, LaRC, GRC, KSC, WSTF, and the Constellation Program. In order to successfully meet these challenges it was essential that the IPT define those items that most affected the schedule critical path, define early mitigation strategies to reduce technical, schedule, and budget risks, and maintain the end-product focus of an "unmanned test flight" context for the flight hardware. The makeup of the IPT and how it would function were also important considerations. The IPT consisted of NASA/MSFC (project management, engineering, and safety/quality) and contractors (Teledyne Brown Engineering and Pratt and Whitney Rocketdyne, who supplied heritage hardware experience). The early decision to have a small focused IPT working "badgelessly" across functional lines to eliminate functional stove-piping allowed for many more tasks to be done by fewer people. It also enhanced a sense of ownership of the products, while still being able to revert back to traditional roles in order to provide the required technical independence in design reviews and verification closures. This presentation will highlight several prominent issues and discuss how they were mitigated and the resulting Lessons Learned that might benefit other projects.
Unger, Ronald J.↗
An Enabling Technology for New Planning and Scheduling Paradigms
The Night Projects Directorate at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center is developing a new planning and scheduling environment and a new scheduling algorithm to enable a paradigm shift in planning and scheduling concepts. Over the past 33 years Marshall has developed and evolved a paradigm for generating payload timelines for Skylab, Spacelab, various other Shuttle payloads, and the International Space Station. The current paradigm starts by collecting the requirements, called ?ask models," from the scientists and technologists for the tasks that are to be scheduled. Because of shortcomings in the current modeling schema, some requirements are entered as notes. Next, a cadre with knowledge of vehicle and hardware modifies these models to encompass and be compatible with the hardware model; again, notes are added when the modeling schema does not provide a better way to represent the requirements. Finally, the models are modified to be compatible with the scheduling engine. Then the models are submitted to the scheduling engine for automatic scheduling or, when requirements are expressed in notes, the timeline is built manually. A future paradigm would provide a scheduling engine that accepts separate science models and hardware models. The modeling schema would have the capability to represent all the requirements without resorting to notes. Furthermore, the scheduling engine would not require that the models be modified to account for the capabilities (limitations) of the scheduling engine. The enabling technology under development at Marshall has three major components: (1) A new modeling schema allows expressing all the requirements of the tasks without resorting to notes or awkward contrivances. The chosen modeling schema is both maximally expressive and easy to use. It utilizes graphical methods to show hierarchies of task constraints and networks of temporal relationships. (2) A new scheduling algorithm automatically schedules the models without the intervention of a scheduling expert. The algorithm is tuned for the constraint hierarchies and the complex temporal relationships provided by the modeling schema. It has an extensive search algorithm that can exploit timing flexibilities and constraint and relationship options. (3) An innovative architecture allows multiple remote users to simultaneously model science and technology requirements and other users to model vehicle and hardware characteristics. The architecture allows the remote users to submit scheduling requests directly to the scheduling engine and immediately see the results. These three components are integrated so that science and technology experts with no knowledge of the vehicle or hardware subsystems and no knowledge of the internal workings of the scheduling engine have the ability to build and submit scheduling requests and see the results. The immediate feedback will hone the users' modeling skills and ultimately enable them to produce the desired timeline. This paper summarizes the three components of the enabling technology and describes how this technology would make a new paradigm possible.
Jaap, John↗
Enabling a New Planning and Scheduling Paradigm
The Flight Projects Directorate at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center is developing a new planning and scheduling environment and a new scheduling algorithm to enable a paradigm shift in planning and scheduling concepts. Over the past 33 years Marshall has developed and evolved a paradigm for generating payload timelines for Skylab, Spacelab, various other Shuttle payloads, and the International Space Station. The current paradigm starts by collecting the requirements, called "tasks models," from the scientists and technologists for the tasks that they want to be done. Because of shortcomings in the current modeling schema, some requirements are entered as notes. Next a cadre with knowledge of vehicle and hardware modifies these models to encompass and be compatible with the hardware model; again, notes are added when the modeling schema does not provide a better way to represent the requirements. Finally, another cadre further modifies the models to be compatible with the scheduling engine. This last cadre also submits the models to the scheduling engine or builds the timeline manually to accommodate requirements that are expressed in notes. A future paradigm would provide a scheduling engine that accepts separate science models and hardware models. The modeling schema would have the capability to represent all the requirements without resorting to notes. Furthermore, the scheduling engine would not require that the models be modified to account for the capabilities (limitations) of the scheduling engine. The enabling technology under development at Marshall has three major components. (1) A new modeling schema allows expressing all the requirements of the tasks without resorting to notes or awkward contrivances. The chosen modeling schema is both maximally expressive and easy to use. It utilizes graphics methods to show hierarchies of task constraints and networks of temporal relationships. (2) A new scheduling algorithm automatically schedules the models without the intervention of a scheduling expert. The algorithm is tuned for the constraint hierarchies and the complex temporal relationships provided by the modeling schema. It has an extensive search algorithm which can exploit timing flexibilities and constraint and relationship options. (3) A web-based architecture allows multiple remote users to simultaneously model science and technology requirements and other users to model vehicle and hardware characteristics. The architecture allows the users to submit scheduling requests directly to the scheduling engine and immediately see the results. These three components are integrated so that science and technology experts with no knowledge of the vehicle or hardware subsystems and no knowledge of the internal workings of the scheduling engine have the ability to build and submit scheduling requests and see the results. The immediate feedback will hone the users' modeling skills and ultimately enable them to produce the desired timeline. This paper summarizes the three components of the enabling technology and describes how this technology would make a new paradigm possible.
Jaap, John↗
Saturn Report
Both the Department of Defense and NASA have clearly defined missions for the Saturn which cannot be performed by a lesser vehicle. In addition, many missions which can be marginally performed by less capable vehicles in the early years, will benefit greatly by use of the Saturn. Lastly, there are, no doubt, missions for the Saturn which cannot be clearly foresen at this time but which will come to light in the normal course of events. Although the Saturn need Is well established, the selection of the upper stage configurations remains to be made. Among the many factors to be considered in such a selection, the mission requirements are among the most important and caution must be exercised in compromising the potential of the Saturn to meet these requirements for such expedients as somewhat faster and less expensive vehicle development schedules. It is thus the purpose of this chapter to review for the reader the many Saturn applications of foreseeable interest to the Department of Defense and NASA. Having done this, the relative priorities of the missions will be discussed and the relatively high priority missions will be incorporated into a suggested launch schedule. Other NASA projects leading into and supporting the Saturn projects will be indicated. A funding plan based on the Saturn launch schedule will then be developed for the spacecraft and payloads involved. The chapter will conclude with a discussion of the constraints placed upon the Saturn configuration by the missions and payloads.
Source record↗
Marshall Space Flight Center In-House Earned Value System (EVS)
The Earned Value System (EVS) is a project management budgeting and scheduling process for in-house project and institutional applications. This viewgraph presentation includes images of the system's computer interface.
Smith, Donnie↗
Developing a Standard Test Program for CubeSats
Developers of CubeSats and other miniaturized satellites often lack the schedule and budget to devise and implement an extensive environmental test campaign. CubeSat projects have become increasingly common at Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) over the past few years, revealing the need for a standard CubeSat test program to maximize the likelihood of mission success while meeting project cost and schedule constraints. In this paper, we describe our efforts to develop a general protoflight test program for CubeSats in low-Earth orbit (LEO) and compare this test program with a typical test program for non-CubeSat LEO satellites and instruments. We investigate the effectiveness of the CubeSat test program—both as a design and workmanship screen and as a standard needing minimal project-specific tailoring—and discuss potential areas for improvement.
Seal, Gabriella L.↗
Assured crew return capability Crew Emergency Return Vehicle (CERV) avionics
The Crew Emergency Return Vehicle (CERV) is being defined to provide Assured Crew Return Capability (ACRC) for Space Station Freedom. The CERV, in providing the standby lifeboat capability, would remain in a dormat mode over long periods of time as would a lifeboat on a ship at sea. The vehicle must be simple, reliable, and constantly available to assure the crew's safety. The CERV must also provide this capability in a cost effective and affordable manner. The CERV Project philosophy of a simple vehicle is to maximize its useability by a physically deconditioned crew. The vehicle reliability goes unquestioned since, when needed, it is the vehicle of last resort. Therefore, its systems and subsystems must be simple, proven, state-of-the-art technology with sufficient redundancy to make it available for use as required for the life of the program. The CERV Project Phase 1'/2 Request for Proposal (RFP) is currently scheduled for release on October 2, 1989. The Phase 1'/2 effort will affirm the existing project requirements or amend and modify them based on a thorough evaluation of the contractor(s) recommendations. The system definition phase, Phase 2, will serve to define CERV systems and subsystems. The current CERV Project schedule has Phase 2 scheduled to begin October 1990. Since a firm CERV avionics design is not in place at this time, the treatment of the CERV avionics complement for the reference configuration is not intended to express a preference with regard to a system or subsystem.
Myers, Harvey Dean↗
Astronomy sortie missions definition study. Volume 4: Program development requirements
Program development requirements for the selected Astronomy Sortie Missions concept were generated and are presented in four parts as follows: (1)the gross planning requirements that must be considered in subsequent phases of the project; (2)the schedules and logic networks for the design, development, and operation of the overall project; (3)the supporting research and technology required to support the project; and (4)the work breakdown data, from which cost data will be generated. Data reported in each part includes the appropriate rationale with explanations of the guidelines and assumptions that were used in the analyses and estimates.
Source record↗
Reducing NPR 7120.5D to Practice: Transitioning from Design Reviews to the SIR Hardware Review
The Gravity Recovery And Interior Laboratory (GRAIL) mission was the first Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) project initiated under NASA's revised rules for space flight project management, NPR 7120.5D, "NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements." NASA selected GRAIL through a competitive Announcement of Opportunity process and funded its Phase B Preliminary Design effort. The team's first major milestone was a JPL institutional milestone, the Project Mission System Review (PMSR), which proved an excellent tune-up for the end-of-Phase-B NASA life-cycle review, the Preliminary Design Review (PDR). Building on JPL experience on the Prometheus and Juno projects, the team successfully organized for and conducted these reviews on an aggressive schedule. For the Project Critical Design Review (CDR), lessons learned from the PDR and updated Standing Review Board (SRB) practices from the Agency were factored into the review preparation effort. Additionally, the review was held at the Principal Investigator's institution, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, rather than at the project management center (JPL), which necessitated additional cross-country coordination steps. The PMSR, PDR, and CDR were design reviews and largely paper-oriented. For the System Integration Review (SIR), the project needed to transition to a hardware review and deal with paper in a very different manner. While many of the practices employed for the design reviews were modified and retained (e.g., review preparation team, gate products management, pre-reviews, SRB coordination), the review agenda, presentation style, and slide templates were significantly changed. A key success factor concerned the handling of project open paper, which was succinctly and effectively communicated to the SRB in presentations.This paper provides a brief overview of the GRAIL mission and its project management challenges, provides a detailed description of project SIR preparation and execution activities, including positive and negative lessons learned and identifies recommendations for future NASA (and non- NASA) project teams.
NPR 7120.5D↗
Schedule Matters: Understanding the Relationship between Schedule Delays and Costs on Overruns
This paper examines the relationship between schedule delays and cost overruns on complex projects. It is generally accepted by many project practitioners that cost overruns are directly related to schedule delays. But what does "directly related to" actually mean? Some reasons or root causes for schedule delays and associated cost overruns are obvious, if only in hindsight. For example, unrealistic estimates, supply chain difficulties, insufficient schedule margin, technical problems, scope changes, or the occurrence of risk events can negatively impact schedule performance. Other factors driving schedule delays and cost overruns may be less obvious and more difficult to quantify. Examples of these less obvious factors include project complexity, flawed estimating assumptions, over-optimism, political factors, "black swan" events, or even poor leadership and communication. Indeed, is it even possible the schedule itself could be a source of delay and subsequent cost overrun? Through literature review, surveys of project practitioners, and the authors' own experience on NASA programs and projects, the authors will categorize and examine the various factors affecting the relationship between project schedule delays and cost growth. The authors will also propose some ideas for organizations to consider to help create an awareness of the factors which could cause or influence schedule delays and associated cost growth on complex projects.
Overruns↗
The APT/ERE planning and scheduling manifesto
The Entropy Reduction Engine, ERE project, is focusing on the construction of integrated planning and scheduling systems. Specifically, the project is studying the problem of integrating planning and scheduling in the context of the closed loop plan use. The results of this research are particularly relevant when there is some element of dynamism in the environment, and thus some chance that a previously formed plan will fail. After a preliminary study of the APT management and control problem, it was felt that it presents an excellent opportunity to show some of the ERE Project's technical results. Of course, the alignment between technology and problem is not perfect, so planning and scheduling for APTs presents some new and difficult challenges as well.
Drummond, Mark↗
Year 2015 Aircraft Emission Scenario for Scheduled Air Traffic
This report describes the development of a three-dimensional scenario of aircraft fuel burn and emissions (fuel burned, NOx, CO, and hydrocarbons)for projected year 2015 scheduled air traffic. These emission inventories are available for use by atmospheric scientists conducting the Atmospheric Effects of Aviation Project (AEAP) modeling studies. Fuel burned and emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx as NO2), carbon monoxides, and hydrocarbons have been calculated on a 1 degree latitude x 1 degree longitude x 1 kilometer altitude grid and delivered to NASA as electronic files.
Baughcum, Steven L.↗
Integrated Project Management: A Case Study in Integrating Cost, Schedule, Technical, and Risk Areas
This viewgraph presentation describes a case study as a model for integrated project management. The ISS Program Office (ISSPO) developed replacement fluid filtration cartridges in house for the International Space Station (ISS). The presentation includes a step-by-step procedure and organizational charts for how the fluid filtration problem was approached.
Smith, Greg↗
ACEE Propulsion Overview
Technology for fuel-efficient subsonic CTOL transport aircraft is discussed. The engine component improvement project, the energy efficient engine project, and the advanced turboprop project are included. The overall goals and objectives of each project are reviewed and the approach and schedule for accomplishing these project goals and objectives are given.
Nored, D. L.↗
Optimum-AIV: A planning and scheduling system for spacecraft AIV
A project undertaken for the European Space Agency (ESA) is presented. The project is developing a knowledge based software system for planning and scheduling of activities for spacecraft assembly, integration, and verification (AIV). The system extends into the monitoring of plan execution and the plan repair phase. The objectives are to develop an operational kernel of a planning, scheduling, and plan repair tool, called OPTIMUM-AIV, and to provide facilities which will allow individual projects to customize the kernel to suit its specific needs. The kernel shall consist of a set of software functionalities for assistance in initial specification of the AIV plan, in verification and generation of valid plans and schedules for the AIV activities, and in interactive monitoring and execution problem recovery for the detailed AIV plans. Embedded in OPTIMUM-AIV are external interfaces which allow integration with alternative scheduling systems and project databases. The current status of the OPTIMUM-AIV project, as of Jan. 1991, is that a further analysis of the AIV domain has taken place through interviews with satellite AIV experts, a software requirement document (SRD) for the full operational tool was approved, and an architectural design document (ADD) for the kernel excluding external interfaces is ready for review.
Arentoft, M. M.↗
A survey of planning and scheduling research at the NASA Ames Research Center
NASA Ames Research Center has a diverse program in planning and scheduling. Some research projects as well as some applications are highlighted. Topics addressed include machine learning techniques, action representations and constraint-based scheduling systems. The applications discussed are planetary rovers, Hubble Space Telescope scheduling, and Pioneer Venus orbit scheduling.
Zweben, Monte↗
Building a Propulsion Experiment Project Management Environment
What do you get when you cross rocket scientists with computer geeks? It is an interactive, distributed computing web of tools and services providing a more productive environment for propulsion research and development. The Rocket Engine Advancement Program 2 (REAP2) project involves researchers at several institutions collaborating on propulsion experiments and modeling. In an effort to facilitate these collaborations among researchers at different locations and with different specializations, researchers at the Information Technology and Systems Center,' University of Alabama in Huntsville, are creating a prototype web-based interactive information system in support of propulsion research. This system, to be based on experience gained in creating similar systems for NASA Earth science field experiment campaigns such as the Convection and Moisture Experiments (CAMEX), will assist in the planning and analysis of model and experiment results across REAP2 participants. The initial version of the Propulsion Experiment Project Management Environment (PExPM) consists of a controlled-access web portal facilitating the drafting and sharing of working documents and publications. Interactive tools for building and searching an annotated bibliography of publications related to REAP2 research topics have been created to help organize and maintain the results of literature searches. Also work is underway, with some initial prototypes in place, for interactive project management tools allowing project managers to schedule experiment activities, track status and report on results. This paper describes current successes, plans, and expected challenges for this project.
Keiser, Ken↗