SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “standardization”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 163 records · Page 9

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2011

Achieving Innovation and Affordability Through Standardization of Materials Development and Testing

The successful expansion of development, innovation, and production within the aeronautics industry during the 20th century was facilitated by collaboration of government agencies with the commercial aviation companies. One of the initial products conceived from the collaboration was the ANC-5 Bulletin, first published in 1937. The ANC-5 Bulletin had intended to standardize the requirements of various government agencies in the design of aircraft structure. The national space policy shift in priority for NASA with an emphasis on transferring the travel to low earth orbit to commercial space providers highlights an opportunity and a need for the national and global space industries. The same collaboration and standardization that is documented and maintained by the industry within MIL-HDBK-5 (MMPDS-01) and MIL-HBDK-17 (nonmetallic mechanical properties) can also be exploited to standardize the thermal performance properties, processing methods, test methods, and analytical methods for use in aircraft and spacecraft design and associated propulsion systems. In addition to the definition of thermal performance description and standardization, the standardization for test methods and analysis for extreme environments (high temperature, cryogenics, deep space radiation, etc) would also be highly valuable to the industry. Its subsequent revisions and conversion to MIL-HDBK-5 and then MMPDS-01 established and then expanded to contain standardized mechanical property design values and other related design information for metallic materials used in aircraft, missiles, and space vehicles. It also includes guidance on standardization of composition, processing, and analytical methods for presentation and inclusion into the handbook. This standardization enabled an expansion of the technologies to provide efficiency and reliability to the consumers. It can be established that many individual programs within the government agencies have been overcome with development costs generated from these nonstandard requirements. Without industry standardization and acceptance, the programs are driven to shoulder the costs of determining design requirements, performance criteria, and then material qualification and certification. A significant investment that the industry could make to both reduce individual program development costs and schedules while expanding commercial space flight capabilities would be to invest in standardizing material performance properties for high temperature, cryogenic, and deep space environments for both metallic and nonmetallic materials.

Bray, M. H.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Standardized Modular Power Interfaces for Future Space Explorations Missions

Earlier studies show that future human explorations missions are composed of multi-vehicle assemblies with interconnected electric power systems. Some vehicles are often intended to serve as flexible multi-purpose or multi-mission platforms. This drives the need for power architectures that can be reconfigured to support this level of flexibility. Power system developmental costs can be reduced, program wide, by utilizing a common set of modular building blocks. Further, there are mission operational and logistics cost benefits of using a common set of modular spares. These benefits are the goals of the Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Modular Power System (AMPS) project. A common set of modular blocks requires a substantial level of standardization in terms of the Electrical, Data System, and Mechanical interfaces. The AMPS project is developing a set of proposed interface standards that will provide useful guidance for modular hardware developers but not needlessly constrain technology options, or limit future growth in capability. In 2015 the AMPS project focused on standardizing the interfaces between the elements of spacecraft power distribution and energy storage. The development of the modular power standard starts with establishing mission assumptions and ground rules to define design application space. The standards are defined in terms of AMPS objectives including Commonality, Reliability-Availability, Flexibility-Configurability and Supportability-Reusability. The proposed standards are aimed at assembly and sub-assembly level building blocks. AMPS plans to adopt existing standards for spacecraft command and data, software, network interfaces, and electrical power interfaces where applicable. Other standards including structural encapsulation, heat transfer, and fluid transfer, are governed by launch and spacecraft environments and bound by practical limitations of weight and volume. Developing these mechanical interface standards is more difficult but an essential part of defining physical building blocks of modular power. This presentation describes the AMPS projects progress towards standardized modular power interfaces.

Spacecraft Power↗

NASA NTRS1994

Diversification and Challenges of Software Engineering Standards

The author poses certain questions in this paper: 'In the future, should there be just one software engineering standards set? If so, how can we work towards that goal? What are the challenges of internationalizing standards?' Based on the author's personal view, the statement of his position is as follows: 'There should NOT be just one set of software engineering standards in the future. At the same time, there should NOT be the proliferation of standards, and the number of sets of standards should be kept to a minimum.It is important to understand the diversification of the areas which are spanned by the software engineering standards.' The author goes on to describe the diversification of processes, the diversification in the national and international character of standards organizations, the diversification of the professional organizations producing standards, the diversification of the types of businesses and industries, and the challenges of internationalizing standards.

software standards international standards softwar↗

NASA NTRS2022

Automation & Autonomy Standards and Guidelines for Space Vehicles

The NASA Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) requested HRP conduct a survey of industry and government standards and guidelines for the interaction of automation/autonomy with humans. Guidance for verification testing of human-automation designs was also requested. A rapid response was requested so that the deliverables could be provided as part of a future NASA solicitation for automated systems for HLS. The project began with a broad review and analysis of prior NASA work in this area, as well as external standards related to human interaction with automation/autonomy. The team reviewed approximately 200 documents, and interviewed multiple industry and government subject matter experts (SMEs). “Gold standard” documents were selected for focus and key categories were identified. A cross-walk of standards was created, and common standards and guidelines were selected and rephrased (where necessary) to be information-rich, concise, and usable. Verification guidelines and examples were also developed. The final report includes an introduction to automation and autonomy, selected standards and guidelines, verification method guidance, and research gaps. In addition to the report, the team delivered a list of candidate standards for autonomous vehicles, as well as a list of candidate standards for a future NASA-STD-3001 update on automation/autonomy. The presentation will describe the rapid response project approach and methods, examples of standards and guidelines identified and delivered to OCHMO, and research needed to develop additional automation/autonomy design guidance where gaps currently exist.

automation↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Standard measures in Analogs of Spaceflight

Standard measures are defined as research measures (physiological, performance, or otherwise) that quantify the subject’s health and performance before, during, and after a spaceflight or a spaceflight analog mission. The Standard Measures Cross-Cutting Project (SMCCP) collects and analyzes standard measures that support assessment and quantification of health risks and efficacy of countermeasures and technologies required to prevent or mitigate adverse outcomes from exposure to the spaceflight environment. SMCCP uses the following spaceflight analogs: - Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) in Houston, TX: 4-person isolation/confinement; nominal mission duration of 45 days; run by the Human Research Program (HRP). SMCCP uses weekly questionnaires to gather data on the crewmembers’ emotional and mental state and collects blood samples biweekly to measure crewmembers’ serum cortisol levels at the start, middle, and end of the mission. - Institute for Biomedical Problems (IBMP) Ground-Based Experimental Complex, called NEK, in Moscow, Russia: 6-person isolation/confinement; duration of 8 months; run by IBMP. Standard measures data collected during NEK are the same as for HERA above. - :envihab in Cologne, Germany: 12-person bed rest facility; closed environment; 30 to 60-day campaigns; run by the German Aerospace Center (DLR). For bedrest studies, SMCCP uses the international standard measures as documented in the International Academy of Astronautics publication titled Guidelines for Standardization of Bed Rest Studies in the Spaceflight Context (June 2014). These international standard measures evaluate potential changes in bone, muscle, cardiovascular, and visual systems, as well as changes in psychology and nutrition. The international standard measures complement those collected during studies by individual investigators and allow comparison of responses across different bed rest and countermeasures durations. In this presentation, we will review available SMCCP data collected during the recent isolation studies in HERA (C6) and NEK (SIRIUS-21), and during the SANS (SM1, SM2) bed rest studies in :envihab. These standard measures datasets are made available to concurrent investigators in the given mission or campaign via data sharing agreements and/or data sharing plans and to other investigators that have been granted retrospective access to the data (researchers with IRB approved protocols, risk custodians) to advance understanding of physiological and behavioral risks associated with these spaceflight analogs.

Standard Measures↗

DOE OSTI2019

History and Status of DOE’s Standardized Canister

[Poster] The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for managing spent nuclear fuel (SNF) currently in its possession, as well as SNF that will come into its possession in the future. DOE will rely upon the standardized canister to confine radionuclides and precluding the moderator in order to ensure safe, long-term management and disposition of SNF in its possession. This strategy helps minimize characterization costs (i.e., funds and exposure) and other technical challenges associated with the traditional approach of relying on fuel-specific properties to demonstrate compliance with the regulator. The use of the standardized canister offers the following benefits: • The standardized canister design is complete. It has been tested under a variety of drop and accident scenarios and was subsequently licensed under 10 CFR 72 as a storage system as part of the Foster Wheeler Environmental Corporation (FWENC) Facility. It is also part of the license submittal for Yucca Mountain. • There is high confidence that the standardized canister design can be stored within commercially-available storage casks and licensed as part of a transportation-system package. • A robust standardized canister simplifies accident analyses and does not rely on characterization of the contained waste. This simplifies safety analysis, provides a greater level of confidence with stakeholders and reduces cost and risk. • A common design for the associated packaging, closure, and loadout facilities results in significant savings. • The DOE standardized canister would simplify design efforts, procurement, and fabrication. • Standardizing handling activities and associated training, procedures, equipment, and tooling leads to enhanced safety and surety of operations. The standardized canister is the preferred package for these materials. It withstood scrutiny by the Yucca Mountain Repository License Application, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste, the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, an American Society of Mechanical Engineers peer review, and the FWENC storage license application. This evaluation summarizes and documents the status of the design and rationale for the DOE standardized canister, and outlines remaining needs before deployment. In addition, it discusses the factors that have the potential to influence storage, transportation, and disposal of DOE SNF.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2018

Leakage Rate Testing Considerations and Implementation of ANSI N 14.5-2014 Standard within EnergySolutions Type (B) cask fleet - 18629

In March 2016, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff issued Information Notice 2016-04: 'ANSI N14.5-2014 Revision and leakage rate testing considerations'. American National Standards Institute (ANSI) N14.5, 'American National Standard for Radioactive Materials-Leakage Tests on Packages for Shipment', applies to leakage rate testing of Low Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) Type B packages operated under 10CFR71. In their information notice NRC is encouraging Type B cask license holders and licensees (cask users) to adapt a new version of ANSI N 14.5 standard. Typically, leakage rate testing for Type B packages (or casks) is performed at different stages of cask development (design and fabrication leak tests) and operations (periodic/maintenance and pre-shipment leak tests) with the purpose to reasonably assure that the packaging will contain radioactive material under both normal and hypothetical accident conditions of transport described in 10CFR71. The standard was updated to provide a modern, robust and standardized approach for performance of leak rate testing on Type B casks by the industry stakeholders. Although implementation of new version of the leak testing standard may not be problematic for a modern Type B package designs, it may be extremely challenging to apply its principles to the existing legacy Type B casks which were designed/fabricated more then 20-30 years ago based on older requirements. Majority of such casks are not 'leak test' friendly. Some of legacy Type B packages may not readily available to meet newer ANSI N 14.5 standard requirements and will require implementation of alternative compensatory measures in lieu of the standard's requirements. In addition, the new standard mandates implementation of additional requirements for leak rate testing performance and personnel qualifications during routine maintenance of Type B casks by owner and during operations of casks by users. The focus of the paper will be to discuss ANSI N 14.5-2014 requirements and provide specific examples on how these requirements will impact the current leak rate test practices. This will be illustrated based on several Type B cask models operated within EnergySolutions fleet (both newer and legacy cask designs). Finally, the paper will cover considerations of the cask closure design features that have to be considered by Type B cask designers in order to ensure robustness of leak testing during design, fabrication and, most importantly, operation of a package. This information shall benefit both owners and users of Type B casks with respect to improvement of the cask designs and Type B cask operational experience. (author)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2017

Development of a new IEC standard for HDL-programmed devices performing category B or C functions - 147

This paper presents an ongoing project within IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) SC45A regarding the development of a new standard addressing the development of HDL (Hardware Description Language) -Programmable Devices (HPDs) carrying out category B or C functions. This paper initially presents the context and the approach that was adopted for the development of the initial proposal, presented at the IEC SC45A meeting in the Republic of South Korea in March 2016. The objective of this paper is to present the current state of progress of the new standard, which has now been allocated the project number IEC 62566-2. A number of key points and topics for discussion in the coming months are presented. It is hoped that the standard will be published in 2019, completing the body of normative requirements for all function categories and for all technological families currently addressed by the IEC SC45A set of standards. The final content of the standard will be based on a necessary compromise between the need to maintain coherence with the SC45A set of standards, in particular with requirements imported from IEC 62566 and IEC 62138, and the need to perfect requirements specific to class 2 and 3 HPD developments. A number of conclusions and recommendations are made, especially the need to encourage the use of HPDs when they are well suited to the target application, even if no standards currently exist. It is only through such experiences that relevant, industrially-applicable standards can be developed. In order to harmonize requirements between countries and increase the competitively of nuclear power, stakeholders should be encouraged to contribute to, and endorse standards where they are available. (authors)

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

DOE OSTI2025

Fostering Geothermal Machine Learning Success: Elevating Big Data Accessibility and Automated Data Standardization in the Geothermal Data Repository

The Department of Energy's (DOE's) Geothermal Data Repository (GDR) has implemented improvements to both its data lakes and its data standards and automated data pipelines. The GDR data lakes have reduced storage and compute-related barriers to using large geothermal datasets, enabling these large datasets to be accessed by anyone with a modern computer and internet access. More recently, the GDR has been working to further reduce barriers through streamlining the data intake process, educating users on the process and requirements, and helping users access data from the data lakes. These improvements have augmented the quantity of datasets the GDR is able to accept into its data lakes and have enabled users who are new to cloud tools to access these datasets more easily, overall increasing the accessibility of big geothermal data for use in machine learning and other projects. In addition, the GDR now has built-in data standards and pipelines for drilling data, geospatial data, and distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) data. These standardization efforts aim to enhance the real-world applicability of geothermal machine learning outcomes by improving the quality of training data. Specifically, through standardizing high-value datasets, the GDR is reducing project-specific data curation requirements, thus allowing more time for actual research. By automating this process, the burden of standardization is lifted from the user, ultimately increasing the availability of standardized data. This paper provides an update on recent improvements made to the GDR's data lakes and automated data pipelines, including: (1) streamlining the data lake intake process, (2) better educating users on the process and requirements through a new data lakes page, (3) adding data lake direct access links to GDR data lake submission pages, (4) implementing a DAS data pipeline to convert DAS data uploaded in SEG-Y format to a standardized hierarchical data format v5 (HDF5), (5) extending this pipeline to encompass data in the GDR data lake, (6) adding metadata requirements for geospatial data, (7) making user interface/user experience (UX) enhancements to the data pipelines' documentation pages, and (8) improving the GDR's data standards and pipelines pages to better guide users in ensuring that their data is standardized by the GDR's automated data pipelines. 2024 Geothermal Resources Council. All rights reserved.

accessibility↗

DOE OSTI2021

Comparison of ISO and ANSI/ANS Nuclear Criticality Safety Standards

This paper provides a high-level comparison between the international and domestic Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) standards, as requested by members of the Nuclear Criticality Safety Division. Currently, there are 18 enacted American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American National Standards (ANS) and 1 ANSI/ANS standard in progress. There are 11 NCS standards from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Technical Committee 85 (TC85) on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 (SC5) on Nuclear Fuel Cycle, Working Group 8 (WG8). There are NCS standard revisions in progress for both standards organizations.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2017

Microprobe Analysis of Pu-Ga Standards

In order to obtain quantitative analysis using an Electron Scanning Microprobe it is essential to have a standard of known composition. Most elemental and multi-elemental standards can be easily obtained from places like Elemental Scientific or other standards organizations that are NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) traceable. It is, however, more challenging to find standards for plutonium. Past work performed in our group has typically involved using the plutonium sample to be analysed as its own standard as long as all other known components of the sample have standards to be compared to [1,2,3]. Finally, this method works well enough, but this experiment was performed in order to develop a more reliable standard for plutonium using five samples of known chemistry of a plutonium gallium mix that could then be used as the main plutonium and gallium standards for future experiments.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

DOE OSTI2015

Prediction of standard-dose brain PET image by using MRI and low-dose brain [{sup 18}F]FDG PET images

Purpose: Positron emission tomography (PET) is a nuclear medical imaging technology that produces 3D images reflecting tissue metabolic activity in human body. PET has been widely used in various clinical applications, such as in diagnosis of brain disorders. High-quality PET images play an essential role in diagnosing brain diseases/disorders. In practice, in order to obtain high-quality PET images, a standard-dose radionuclide (tracer) needs to be used and injected into a living body. As a result, it will inevitably increase the patient’s exposure to radiation. One solution to solve this problem is predicting standard-dose PET images using low-dose PET images. As yet, no previous studies with this approach have been reported. Accordingly, in this paper, the authors propose a regression forest based framework for predicting a standard-dose brain [{sup 18}F]FDG PET image by using a low-dose brain [{sup 18}F]FDG PET image and its corresponding magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) image. Methods: The authors employ a regression forest for predicting the standard-dose brain [{sup 18}F]FDG PET image by low-dose brain [{sup 18}F]FDG PET and MRI images. Specifically, the proposed method consists of two main steps. First, based on the segmented brain tissues (i.e., cerebrospinal fluid, gray matter, and white matter) in the MRI image, the authors extract features for each patch in the brain image from both low-dose PET and MRI images to build tissue-specific models that can be used to initially predict standard-dose brain [{sup 18}F]FDG PET images. Second, an iterative refinement strategy, via estimating the predicted image difference, is used to further improve the prediction accuracy. Results: The authors evaluated their algorithm on a brain dataset, consisting of 11 subjects with MRI, low-dose PET, and standard-dose PET images, using leave-one-out cross-validations. The proposed algorithm gives promising results with well-estimated standard-dose brain [{sup 18}F]FDG PET image and substantially enhanced image quality of low-dose brain [{sup 18}F]FDG PET image. Conclusions: In this paper, the authors propose a framework to generate standard-dose brain [{sup 18}F]FDG PET image using low-dose brain [{sup 18}F]FDG PET and MRI images. Both the visual and quantitative results indicate that the standard-dose brain [{sup 18}F]FDG PET can be well-predicted using MRI and low-dose brain [{sup 18}F]FDG PET.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

Energy and Economic Impacts of U.S. Federal Energy and Water Conservation Standards Adopted From 1987 Through 2015

This paper presents estimates of the key impacts of Federal energy and water conservation standards adopted from 1987 through 2015. The standards for consumer products and commercial and industrial equipment include those set by legislation as well as standards adopted by DOE through rulemaking. In 2015, the standards saved an estimated 4.49 quads of primary energy, which is equivalent to 5% of total U.S. energy consumption. The savings in operating costs for households and businesses totaled $63.4 billion. The average household saved $320 in operating costs as a result of residential appliance standards. The estimated reduction in CO2 emissions associated with the standards in 2015 was 238 million metric tons, which is equivalent to 4.3% of total U.S. CO2 emissions. The estimated cumulative energy savings over the period 1990-2090 amount to 216.9 quads. Accounting for the increased upfront costs of more-efficient products and the operating cost (energy and water) savings over the products’ lifetime, the standards have a cumulative net present value (NPV) of consumer benefit of between $1,627 billion and $1,887 billion, using 7 percent and 3 percent discount rates, respectively. The water conservation standards, together with energy conservation standards that also save water, reduced water use by 1.9 trillion gallons in 2015 and estimated cumulative water savings by 2090 amount to 55 trillion gallons. The estimated consumer savings in 2015 from reduced water use amounted to $12 billon.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2025

Energy and economic impacts of U.S. federal energy and water conservation standards adopted from 1987 through 2024

This paper presents estimates of the key impacts of U.S. national energy and water conservation standards adopted from 1987 through 2024. The standards for consumer products, commercial and industrial equipment, lighting products, and plumbing products include those set by legislation as well as standards adopted by the Department of Energy (DOE) through rulemaking. In 2024 alone, these standards are estimated to have saved an estimated 6.0 quads of primary energy, which is equivalent to 6.5% of total U.S. energy consumption, and 1.7 trillion gallons of water, which is equivalent to approximately 12% of the annual water withdrawals for public supply in the U.S in 2015. The estimated reduction in CO 2 emissions associated with the standards in 2024 was 270 million metric tons, which is equivalent to 5.6% of total annual U.S. CO 2 emissions from energy consumption. The annual savings in operating costs for households and businesses totaled $\$$105 billion, and the average household saved $\$$576 in operating costs as a result of standards on residential appliances and plumbing products. The estimated cumulative past and future energy and water savings from these standards amount to 307 quads of energy and almost 53 trillion gallons of water. The estimated cumulative CO 2 emissions reduction from the standards come to 10.3 billion metric tons. Accounting for the increased upfront costs of more-efficient products and the energy and water cost savings over the products’ lifetime, the standards have a cumulative net present value of benefit of $\$$3.2 trillion using 3 percent discount rate and $\$$3.5 trillion using 7 percent discount rate when discounting past and future benefits to 2024.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

NASA NTRS2007

The Roles of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification in the NASA Standard for Models and Simulations

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently issued an interim version of the Standard for Models and Simulations (M&S Standard) [1]. The action to develop the M&S Standard was identified in an internal assessment [2] of agency-wide changes needed in the wake of the Columbia Accident [3]. The primary goal of this standard is to ensure that the credibility of M&S results is properly conveyed to those making decisions affecting human safety or mission success criteria. The secondary goal is to assure that the credibility of the results from models and simulations meets the project requirements (for credibility). This presentation explains the motivation and key aspects of the M&S Standard, with a special focus on the requirements for verification, validation and uncertainty quantification. Some pilot applications of this standard to computational fluid dynamics applications will be provided as illustrations. The authors of this paper are the members of the team that developed the initial three drafts of the standard, the last of which benefited from extensive comments from most of the NASA Centers. The current version (number 4) incorporates modifications made by a team representing 9 of the 10 NASA Centers. A permanent version of the M&S Standard is expected by December 2007. The scope of the M&S Standard is confined to those uses of M&S that support program and project decisions that may affect human safety or mission success criteria. Such decisions occur, in decreasing order of importance, in the operations, the test & evaluation, and the design & analysis phases. Requirements are placed on (1) program and project management, (2) models, (3) simulations and analyses, (4) verification, validation and uncertainty quantification (VV&UQ), (5) recommended practices, (6) training, (7) credibility assessment, and (8) reporting results to decision makers. A key component of (7) and (8) is the use of a Credibility Assessment Scale, some of the details of which were developed in consultation with William Oberkampf, David Peercy and Timothy Trocano of Sandia National Laboratories. The focus of most of the requirements, including those for VV&UQ, is on the documentation of what was done and the reporting, using the Credibility Assessment Scale, of the level of rigor that was followed. The aspects of one option for the Credibilty Assessment Scale are (1) code verification, (2) solution verification, (3) validation, (4) predictive capability, (5) technical review, (6) process control, and (7) operator and analyst qualification.

Zang, Thomas A.↗

NASA NTRS2007

NASA's Earth Science Data Systems Standards Process Experiences

NASA has impaneled several internal working groups to provide recommendations to NASA management on ways to evolve and improve Earth Science Data Systems. One of these working groups is the Standards Process Group (SPC). The SPG is drawn from NASA-funded Earth Science Data Systems stakeholders, and it directs a process of community review and evaluation of proposed NASA standards. The working group's goal is to promote interoperability and interuse of NASA Earth Science data through broader use of standards that have proven implementation and operational benefit to NASA Earth science by facilitating the NASA management endorsement of proposed standards. The SPC now has two years of experience with this approach to identification of standards. We will discuss real examples of the different types of candidate standards that have been proposed to NASA's Standards Process Group such as OPeNDAP's Data Access Protocol, the Hierarchical Data Format, and Open Geospatial Consortium's Web Map Server. Each of the three types of proposals requires a different sort of criteria for understanding the broad concepts of "proven implementation" and "operational benefit" in the context of NASA Earth Science data systems. We will discuss how our Standards Process has evolved with our experiences with the three candidate standards.

Ullman, Richard E.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Spaceflight Human System Standards

NASA created a new approach for human system integration and human performance standards. NASA created two documents a standard and a reference handbook. The standard is titled NASA Space Flight Human-System Standard (SFHSS) and consists of two-volumes: Volume 1- Crew Health This volume covers standards needed to support astronaut health (medical care, nutrition, sleep, exercise, etc.) Volume 2 Human Factors, Habitability and Environmental Health This volume covers the standards for system design that will maintain astronaut performance (ie., environmental factors, design of facilities, layout of workstations, and lighting requirements). It includes classic human factors requirements. The new standards document is written in terms so that it is applicable to a broad range of present and future NASA systems. The document states that all new programs prepare system-specific requirements that will meet the general standards. For example, the new standard does not specify a design should accommodate specific percentiles of a defined population. Rather, NASA-STD-3001, Volume 2 states that all programs shall prepare program-specific requirements that define the user population and their size ranges. The design shall then accommodate the full size range of those users. The companion reference handbook, Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH), was developed to capture the design consideration information from NASA-STD-3000, and adds spaceflight lessons learned, gaps in knowledge, example solutions, and suggests research to further mature specific disciplines. The HIDH serves two major purposes: HIDH is the reference document for writing human factors requirements for specific systems. HIDH contains design guidance information that helps insure that designers create systems which safely and effectively accommodate the capabilities and limitations of space flight crews.

Holubec, Keith↗

NASA NTRS2011

Standards and Specifications for Ground Processing of Space Vehicles: From an Aviation-Based Shuttle Project to Global Application

Proprietary or unique designs and operations are expected early in any industry's development, and often provide a competitive early market advantage. However, there comes a time when a product or industry requires standardization for the whole industry to advance...or survive. For the space industry, that time has come. Here, we will focus on standardization of ground processing for space vehicles and their ground systems. With the retirement of the Space Shuttle, and emergence of a new global space race, affordability and sustainability are more important now than ever. The growing commercialization of the space industry and current global economic environment are driving greater need for efficiencies to save time and money. More RLV's (Reusable Launch Vehicles) are being developed for the gains of reusability not achievable with traditional ELV's (Expendable Launch Vehicles). More crew/passenger vehicles are also being developed. All of this calls for more attention needed for ground processing-repeatedly before launch and after landing/recovery. RLV's should provide more efficiencies than ELV's, as long as MRO (Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul) is well-planned-even for the unplanned problems. NASA's Space Shuttle is a primary example of an RLV which was supposed to thrive on reusability savings with efficient ground operations, but lessons learned show that costs were (and still are) much greater than expected. International standards and specifications can provide the commonality needed to simplify design and manufacturing as well as to improve safety, quality, maintenance, and operability. There are standards organizations engaged in the space industry, but ground processing is one of the areas least addressed. Challenges are encountered due to various factors often not considered during development. Multiple vehicle elements, sites, customers, and contractors pose various functional and integration difficulties. Resulting technical publication structures and methods are incongruent. Some processing products are still done on paper, some electronic, and many being converted in between. Business systems then are not fully compatible, and paper as well as electronic conversions are time-consuming and costly. NASA and its Shuttle contractors setup rules and systems to handle what has produced over 130 RLV launches, but they have had many challenges. Attempts have been made to apply aviation industry specifications to make the Shuttle more efficient with its ground processing. One efficiency project example was to make a Shuttle Maintenance Manual (SMM) based on the commercial ATA (Air Transport Association of America) Spec 100 for technical publications. This industry standard, along with others, has been a foundation for efficient global MRO of commercial airlines for years. A modified version was also made for some military aircraft. The SMM project found many similarities in Spec 100 which apply to the Shuttle, and room for expansion for space systems/structures not in aircraft. The SMM project team met with the ATA and representatives from NASA's X-33 and X-34 programs to discuss collaboration on a national space standard based on Spec 100. A pilot project was enabled for a subset of Shuttle systems. Full implementation was not yet achieved, X-33 and X-34 were cancelled, and the Shuttles were then designated for retirement. Nonetheless, we can learn from this project how to expand this concept to all space vehicle products. Since then, ATA has joined with ASD (AeroSpace and Defence Industries Association of Europe) and AIA (Aerospace Industries Association) to form a much-enhanced and expanded international specification: Sl000D, International Specification for Technical Publications. It includes air, land, and sea vehicles, missiles, support equipment, ordnance, and communications. It is used by a growing number of countries for commercial and government products. Its modular design is supported by a Common Source Dabase (CSDB), and COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) software is available for production of IETP's (Interactive Electronic Technical Publications). A few space industry products in Europe have begun to apply Sl000D already. Also, there are other related standards/specifications which have global implications. We have an opportunity to adapt Sl000D and possibly other standards for use with space vehicles and ground systems. Sl000D has plenty of flexibility to apply to any product needed. To successfully grow the viability of the space industry, all members, commercial and government, will need to engage cooperatively in developing and applying standards to move toward interoperability. If we leverage and combine the best existing space standards and specifications, develop new ones to address known gaps, and adapt the best applicable features from other industries, we can establish an infrastructure to not only accelerate current development, but also build longevity for a more cohesive international space community.

Ingalls, John↗