SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
The new breed of autonomous goal-driven spacecraft contain much more onboard capability than their syquence-driven predecessors, demanding corresponding advances in software verification techniques. Although autonomous systems are deterministic, they are hightly sensitive to the environment, such that the response of a system in certain contexts must be explored in detail in order to prove confidence in both the design and implementaiton.
Two independent coronagraph experiments that require 24/7 availability with different optical layouts and different motion control requirements are commanded and controlled with the same Java software system executing on many geographically scattered computer systems interconnected via TCP/IP. High availability of a distributed system requires that the computers have a robust communication messaging system making the mix of TCP/IP (a robust transport), and XML (a robust message) a natural choice. XML also adds the configuration flexibility. Java then adds object-oriented paradigms, exception handling, heavily tested libraries, and many third party tools for implementation robustness. The result is a software system that provides users 24/7 access to two diverse experiments with XML files defining the differences
As NASA’s role in spaceflight operations change, so too does its design priorities. NASA’s flagship venture, the Space Launch System (SLS), is being created primarily to explore deep space. While commercial partners conduct low Earth orbit resupplies, tests, and even transportation of astronauts, NASA can divert more resources to more exciting projects - going back to the moon, or onwards to Mars. In the short term, this goal manifests in the upcoming Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1) test of the SLS, slated for as early as 2019. SLS, with the Orion capsule, will travel farther than any human-rated spacecraft has gone before. As the most powerful launch vehicle ever created, SLS requires many new innovations to ensure mission success. One such technology is the launch control software, which is the focus of this internship. The SLS launch control software is composed of many functions, all of which require rigorous testing to meet the standard of life-critical code. To facilitate easier testing, the first project I undertook was to customize the open-source tool Wireshark to the software team’s needs. Wireshark is a network protocol analyzer that can take in information about custom information packets. The launch control software will have several protocols that are custom to NASA. I ensured that all necessary component files were the correct file type and in the correct structure for Wireshark to compile. Having allowed Wireshark access to understand custom NASA data packets, testers of the launch control software will be able to find anomalies easier.
There have been a number of simulation packages developed for the purpose of designing, testing and validating computer systems, digital systems and software systems. Complex analytical tools based on Markov and semi-Markov processes have been designed to estimate the reliability and performance of simulated systems. Petri nets have received wide acceptance for modeling complex and highly parallel computers. In this research data flow models for computer systems are investigated. Data flow models can be used to simulate both software and hardware in a uniform manner. Data flow simulation techniques provide the computer systems designer with a CAD environment which enables highly parallel complex systems to be defined, evaluated at all levels and finally implemented in either hardware or software. Inherent in data flow concept is the hierarchical handling of complex systems. In this paper we will describe how data flow can be used to model computer system.
Topics: Test Tools; Electronic Components and Circuits; Electronic Systems; Physical Sciences; Materials; Computer Software; Mechanics; Machinery/Automation; Manufacturing/Fabrication; Life Sciences.
Exhaust plumes from large solid rocket motors fired at ATK's Promontory test site carry particulates to high altitudes and typically produce deposits that fall on regions downwind of the test area. As populations and communities near the test facility grow, ATK has become increasingly concerned about the impact of motor testing on those surrounding communities. To assess the potential impact of motor testing on the community and to identify feasible mitigation strategies, it is essential to have a tool capable of predicting plume behavior downrange of the test stand. A software package, called PlumeTracker, has been developed and validated at ATK for this purpose. The code is a point model that offers a time-dependent, physics-based description of plume transport and precipitation. The code can utilize either measured or forecasted weather data to generate plume predictions. Next-Generation Radar (NEXRAD) data and field observations from twenty-three historical motor test fires at Promontory were collected to test the predictive capability of PlumeTracker. Model predictions for plume trajectories and deposition fields were found to correlate well with the collected dataset.
"Support imaging" is imagery requested by other Cassini science teams to aid in the interpretation of their data. The generation of the spacecraft command sequences for these images is performed by the Cassini Instrument Operations Team. The process initially established for doing this was very labor-intensive, tedious and prone to human error. Team management recognized this process as one that could easily benefit from automation. Team members were tasked to document the existing manual process, develop a plan and strategy to automate the process, implement the plan and strategy, test and validate the new automated process, and deliver the new software tools and documentation to Flight Operations for use during the Cassini extended mission. In addition to the goals of higher efficiency and lower risk in the processing of support imaging requests, an effort was made to maximize adaptability of the process to accommodate uplink procedure changes and the potential addition of new capabilities outside the scope of the initial effort.
Directed Design of Experiments for Validating Probability of Detection Capability of NDE Systems (DOEPOD) Manual v.1.2 The capability of an inspection system is established by applications of various methodologies to determine the probability of detection (POD). One accepted metric of an adequate inspection system is that there is 95% confidence that the POD is greater than 90% (90/95 POD). Design of experiments for validating probability of detection capability of nondestructive evaluation (NDE) systems (DOEPOD) is a methodology that is implemented via software to serve as a diagnostic tool providing detailed analysis of POD test data, guidance on establishing data distribution requirements, and resolving test issues. DOEPOD demands utilization of observance of occurrences. The DOEPOD capability has been developed to provide an efficient and accurate methodology that yields observed POD and confidence bounds for both Hit-Miss or signal amplitude testing. DOEPOD does not assume prescribed POD logarithmic or similar functions with assumed adequacy over a wide range of flaw sizes and inspection system technologies, so that multi-parameter curve fitting or model optimization approaches to generate a POD curve are not required. DOEPOD applications for supporting inspector qualifications is included.
Funding for National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) space mission operations is tighter than ever in the current environment of federal government deficit reductions. Conventional wisdom would expect this environment to drive increasing competition between NASA centers for the limited available funds. However, recent inter-center activities at the Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center emphasize collaboration rather than competition and demonstrate the value of partnerships to increase the return on shrinking investments. These efforts cover a variety of activities and potential returns. To facilitate sharing data from test and verification through operations without levying requirements on data format or software tools, the HOSC is working with multiple centers on an evolutionary path toward a distributed data architecture and archive. The approach reduces the required investment by allowing the partners to reuse their existing formats and tools, while facilitating gone ]stop h user visibility into and controlled access to the full complement of data regardless of user or data location. The HOSC is also working on two activities to promote sharing operations implementations and leveraging the experts and expertise across multiple NASA sites. In one, the use of Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) standards for the message abstraction layer provides an interoperability layer on top of existing ground data system communication architectures. This allows missions to select the most appropriate solutions for their requirements with a minimal investment in rehosting the components in a coherent operational environment. The other emphasizes shared tools and increased remote access to minimize travel for tests and critical activities and reduce the floor space required for a dedicated operations center. This paper summarizes these and other inter-center collaboration activities at the HOSC and the benefits that each can bring, not just to the participants, but to the broader operations community.
The development of the Sampling and Caching Subsystem (SCS) on the JPL Perseverance Rover lies at the intersection of testing, robotics, and geology. The SCS team established three primary system test campaigns and venues to aid in the development of SCS through verification and validation testing – Qualification Model Dirty Testing (QMDT) to provide a venue for testing in a Martian environment, Vehicle System Testbed (VSTB) for testing while integrated with the mobility subsystem on Martian-like terrain, and the Flight Software Testbed (FSWTB) for conducting tests using the flight motor controllers and software system on a hexapod which had the ability to simulate rover tilt. Each venue contributed a vital piece to the SCS building blocks. However, the QMDT venue operating within a 10-ft diameter Thermal Vacuum chamber to simulate Martian environment provided a sui generis opportunity to fine tune the entire sampling and caching process while building the team’s knowledge base about rock drillability, system life, and target selection. On Earth, because Martian rocks are not readily available, the development team must utilize geoanalogs to the rocks and regolith on Mars. Geologists on the team helped establish a set of standard rock types to use for Mars missions, like Basalt, Sandstone, Mudstone, Gypsum, and other related geoanalogs. These geoanalogs are characterized with a standard suite of tests for density, compressibility, and other characteristics to categorize potential drillability. This concept of drillability is what links the geoanalogs on Earth to the samples we collect on Mars. With the simulant characteristics defined, these geoanalog rocks are ready to be drilled into as we do on the Martian surface. A key aspect of interacting with the surface on Mars is rock target identification and selection. The Perseverance robotic system uses the on-board cameras, instrumentation, and software to collect enough information to identify potential scientific targets. With the targets identified, SCS can place the Corer and abrade the surface or collect a sample. For a ground test activity like QMDT, the test team did not have all of the camera and instrumentation systems that the rover does, so the team developed ground test equivalents to process a rock, build a target map, and define the target. The team constructed a Rock Scanning Station to build a 3D point cloud of the rock. This point cloud was then processed and evaluated with predefined and programmed criteria in a Target Downselect Tool. A primary output of the Target Downselect Tool is a defined target that can be uploaded directly to the robotic software system to simulate and build the robotic sequences used in tests. With these insights and programmatic definition of targets, the QMDT test team was able to make the same decisions that the Perseverance surface operations team does. In addition, valuable lessons learned from developing the target selection ground tools and using them were implemented into the tools used for surface operations.
The Data Management System (DMS) Advanced Development task provides for the development of concepts, new tools, DMS services, and for the testing of the Space Station DMS hardware and software. It also provides for the development of techniques capable of determining the effects of system changes/enhancements, additions of new technology, and/or hardware and software growth on system performance. This paper will address the built-in characteristics which will support network monitoring requirements in the design of the evolving DMS network implementation, functional and performance requirements for a real-time, multiprogramming, multiprocessor operating system, and the possible use of advanced development techniques such as expert systems and artificial intelligence tools in the DMS design.
The Reconfigurable Hardware in Orbit (RHinO) project is focused on creating a set of design tools that facilitate and automate design techniques for reconfigurable computing in space, using SRAM-based field-programmable-gate-array (FPGA) technology. These tools leverage an established FPGA design environment and focus primarily on space effects mitigation and power optimization. The project is creating software to automatically test and evaluate the single-event-upsets (SEUs) sensitivities of an FPGA design and insert mitigation techniques. Extensions into the tool suite will also allow evolvable algorithm techniques to reconfigure around single-event-latchup (SEL) events. In the power domain, tools are being created for dynamic power visualiization and optimization. Thus, this technology seeks to enable the use of Reconfigurable Hardware in Orbit, via an integrated design tool-suite aiming to reduce risk, cost, and design time of multimission reconfigurable space processors using SRAM-based FPGAs.
The Expert Systems Validation Associate (EVA) is a validation system which was developed at the Lockheed Software Technology Center and Artificial Intelligence Center between 1986 and 1990. EVA is an integrated set of generic tools to validate any knowledge-based system written in any expert system shell such as C Language Integrated Production System (CLIPS), ART, OPS5, KEE, and others. Many validation tools have been built in the EVA system. In this paper, we describe the testing results of applying the EVA validation tools to the Manned Maneuvering Unit (MMU) Fault Diagnosis, Isolation, and Reconfiguration (FDIR) expert system, written in CLIPS, obtained from the NASA Johnson Space Center.
Implemented security protocols are basically pieces of software which are used to (a) authenticate the other communication partners, (b) establish a secure communication channel between them (using insecure communication media), and (c) transfer data between the communication partners in such a way that these data only available to the desired receiver, but not to anyone else. Such an implementation usually consists of the following components: the protocol-engine, which controls in which sequence the messages of the protocol are sent over the network, and which controls the assembly/disassembly and processing (e.g., decryption) of the data. the cryptographic routines to actually encrypt or decrypt the data (using given keys), and t,he interface to the operating system and to the application. For a correct working of such a security protocol, all of these components must work flawlessly. Many formal-methods based techniques for the analysis of a security protocols have been developed. They range from using specific logics (e.g.: BAN-logic [4], or higher order logics [12] to model checking [2] approaches. In each approach, the analysis tries to prove that no (or at least not a modeled intruder) can get access to secret data. Otherwise, a scenario illustrating the &tack may be produced. Despite the seeming simplicity of security protocols ("only" a few messages are sent between the protocol partners in order to ensure a secure communication), many flaws have been detected. Unfortunately, even a perfect protocol engine does not guarantee flawless working of a security protocol, as incidents show. Many break-ins and security vulnerabilities are caused by exploiting errors in the implementation of the protocol engine or the underlying operating system. Attacks using buffer-overflows are a very common class of such attacks. Errors in the implementation of exception or error handling can open up additional vulnerabilities. For example, on a website with a log-in screen: multiple tries with invalid passwords caused the expected error message (too many retries). but let the user nevertheless pass. Finally, security can be compromised by silly implementation bugs or design decisions. In a commercial VPN software, all calls to the encryption routines were incidentally replaced by stubs, probably during factory testing. The product worked nicely. and the error (an open VPN) would have gone undetected, if a team member had not inspected the low-level traffic out of curiosity. Also, the use secret proprietary encryption routines can backfire, because such algorithms often exhibit weaknesses which can be exploited easily (see e.g., DVD encoding). Summarizing, there is large number of possibilities to make errors which can compromise the security of a protocol. In today s world with short time-to-market and the use of security protocols in open and hostile networks for safety-critical applications (e.g., power or air-traffic control), such slips could lead to catastrophic situations. Thus, formal methods and automatic reasoning techniques should not be used just for the formal proof of absence of an attack, but they ought to be used to provide an end-to-end tool-supported framework for security software. With such an approach all required artifacts (code, documentation, test cases) , formal analyses, and reliable certification will be generated automatically, given a single, high level specification. By a combination of program synthesis, formal protocol analysis, certification; and proof-carrying code, this goal is within practical reach, since all the important technologies for such an approach actually exist and only need to be assembled in the right way.
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.
As part of its Systems Autonomy Demonstration Project (SADP), NASA has recently demonstrated the Thermal Expert System (TEXSYS). Advanced real-time expert system and human interface technology was successfully developed and integrated with conventional controllers of prototype space hardware to provide intelligent fault detection, isolation, and recovery capability. Many specialized skills were required, and responsibility for the various phases of the project therefore spanned multiple NASA centers, internal departments and contractor organizations. The test environment required communication among many types of hardware and software as well as between many people. The integration, testing, and configuration management tools and methodologies which were applied to the TEXSYS project to assure its safe and successful completion are detailed. The project demonstrated that artificial intelligence technology, including model-based reasoning, is capable of the monitoring and control of a large, complex system in real time.
The Mission Operations Laboratory (MOL) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) is responsible for Engineering Support capability for NASA s Ares launch system development. In pursuit of this, MOL is building the Ares Engineering and Operations Network (AEON), a web-based portal intended to provide a seamless interface to support and simplify two critical activities: a) Access and analyze Ares manufacturing, test, and flight performance data, with access to Shuttle data for comparison. b) Provide archive storage for engineering instrumentation data to support engineering design, development, and test. A mix of NASA-written and COTS software provides engineering analysis tools. A by-product of using a data portal to access and display data is access to collaborative tools inherent in a Web 2.0 environment. This paper discusses how Web 2.0 techniques, particularly social media, might be applied to the traditionally conservative and formal engineering support arena. A related paper by the author [1] considers use
Current aircraft departure release times are based on manual estimates of aircraft takeoff times. Uncertainty in takeoff time estimates may result in missed opportunities to merge into constrained en route streams and lead to lost throughput. However, technology exists to improve takeoff time estimates by using the aircraft surface trajectory predictions that enable air traffic control tower (ATCT) decision support tools. NASA s Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) is designed to use automated surface trajectory-based takeoff time estimates to improve en route tactical departure scheduling. This is accomplished by integrating an ATCT decision support tool with an en route tactical departure scheduling decision support tool. The PDRC concept and prototype software have been developed, and an initial test was completed at air traffic control facilities in Dallas/Fort Worth. This paper describes the PDRC operational concept, system design, and initial observations.