Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “technical standards”

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 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1993

Definition of spacecraft standard interfaces by the NASA Space Assembly and Servicing Working Group (SASWG)

The purpose of the NASA Space Assembly and Servicing Working Group (SASWG) is to study enabling technologies for on-orbit spacecraft maintenance and servicing. One key technology required for effective space logistics activity is the development of standard spacecraft interfaces, including the 'Basic Set' defined by NASA, the U.S. Space Command, and industry panelists to be the following: (1) navigation aids; (2) grasping, berthing, and docking; and (3) utility connections for power, data, and fluids. Draft standards have been prepared and referred to professional standards organizations, including the AIAA, EIA, and SAE space standards committee. The objective of the SASWG is to support these committees with the technical expertise required to prepare standards, guidelines, and recommended practices which will be accepted by the ANSI and international standards organizations, including the ISO, IEC, and PASC.

Radtke, Robert↗
NASA NTRS1980

Military standards and SCATHA program update of MIL-STD-1541

The elctromagnetic compatability requirements for space systems, 15 October 1973, to be met by industry contractors for spacecraft launch vehicles and other special space systems, are considered. Deficiencies in the existing standard with respect to spacecraft charge and discharge phenomena, the technical ramifications for generating a new standard, and the upgrading of MIL-STD-1541 with requirements supplied as a result of the SCATHA program are discussed.

Frankos, D. T.↗
NASA NTRS2004

NASA's Geospatial Interoperability Office(GIO)Program

NASA produces vast amounts of information about the Earth from satellites, supercomputer models, and other sources. These data are most useful when made easily accessible to NASA researchers and scientists, to NASA's partner Federal Agencies, and to society as a whole. A NASA goal is to apply its data for knowledge gain, decision support and understanding of Earth, and other planetary systems. The NASA Earth Science Enterprise (ESE) Geospatial Interoperability Office (GIO) Program leads the development, promotion and implementation of information technology standards that accelerate and expand the delivery of NASA's Earth system science research through integrated systems solutions. Our overarching goal is to make it easy for decision-makers, scientists and citizens to use NASA's science information. NASA's Federal partners currently participate with NASA and one another in the development and implementation of geospatial standards to ensure the most efficient and effective access to one another's data. Through the GIO, NASA participates with its Federal partners in implementing interoperability standards in support of E-Gov and the associated President's Management Agenda initiatives by collaborating on standards development. Through partnerships with government, private industry, education and communities the GIO works towards enhancing the ESE Applications Division in the area of National Applications and decision support systems. The GIO provides geospatial standards leadership within NASA, represents NASA on the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Coordination Working Group and chairs the FGDC's Geospatial Applications and Interoperability Working Group (GAI) and supports development and implementation efforts such as Earth Science Gateway (ESG), Space Time Tool Kit and Web Map Services (WMS) Global Mosaic. The GIO supports NASA in the collection and dissemination of geospatial interoperability standards needs and progress throughout the agency including areas such as ESE Applications, the SEEDS Working Groups, the Facilities Engineering Division (Code JX) and NASA's Chief Information Offices (CIO). With these agency level requirements GIO leads, brokers and facilitates efforts to, develop, implement, influence and fully participate in standards development internationally, federally and locally. The GIO also represents NASA in the OpenGIS Consortium and ISO TC211. The OGC has made considerable progress in regards to relations with other open standards bodies; namely ISO, W3C and OASIS. ISO TC211 is the Geographic and Geomatics Information technical committee that works towards standardization in the field of digital geographic information. The GIO focuses on seamless access to data, applications of data, and enabling technologies furthering the interoperability of distributed data. Through teaming within the Applications Directorate and partnerships with government, private industry, education and communities, GIO works towards the data application goals of NASA, the ESE Applications Directorate, and our Federal partners by managing projects in four categories: Geospatial Standards and Leadership, Geospatial One Stop, Standards Development and Implementation, and National and NASA Activities.

Weir, Patricia↗
NASA NTRS2011

Integrated Procedures for Flight and Ground Operations Using International Standards

Imagine astronauts using the same Interactive Electronic Technical Manuals (IETM's) as the ground personnel who assemble or maintain their flight hardware, and having all of that data interoperable with design, logistics, reliability analysis, and training. Modern international standards and their corresponding COTS tools already used in other industries provide a good foundation for streamlined technical publications in the space industry. These standards cover everything from data exchange to product breakdown structure to business rules flexibility. Full Product Lifecycle Support (PLCS) is supported. The concept is to organize, build once, reuse many ways, and integrate. This should apply to all future and some current launch vehicles, payloads, space stations/habitats, spacecraft, facilities, support equipment, and retrieval ships.

Ingalls, John↗
NASA NTRS1991

US and foreign alloy cross-reference database

Marshall Space Flight Center and other NASA installations have a continuing requirement for materials data from other countries involved with the development of joint international Spacelab experiments and other hardware. This need includes collecting data for common alloys to ascertain composition, physical properties, specifications, and designations. This data is scattered throughout a large number of specification statements, standards, handbooks, and other technical literature which make a manual search both tedious and often limited in extent. In recognition of this problem, a computerized database of information on alloys was developed along with the software necessary to provide the desired functions to access this data. The intention was to produce an initial database covering aluminum alloys, along with the program to provide a user-interface to the data, and then later to extend and refine the database to include other nonferrous and ferrous alloys.

Springer, John M.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Software technology insertion: A study of success factors

Managing software development in large organizations has become increasingly difficult due to increasing technical complexity, stricter government standards, a shortage of experienced software engineers, competitive pressure for improved productivity and quality, the need to co-develop hardware and software together, and the rapid changes in both hardware and software technology. The 'software factory' approach to software development minimizes risks while maximizing productivity and quality through standardization, automation, and training. However, in practice, this approach is relatively inflexible when adopting new software technologies. The methods that a large multi-project software engineering organization can use to increase the likelihood of successful software technology insertion (STI), especially in a standardized engineering environment, are described.

Lydon, Tom↗
NASA NTRS2007

Assuring Crew Health Protection

Amongst the recommendation of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) were the establishment of an independent technical authorities, one of which is the Health and Medical Technical Authority. This viewgraph presentation reviews the work of this Technical Authority in maintaining standards that are aimed at implementing health and medical policy, responding to medical events and emergencies consistent with acceptable levels defined by standards and providing expertise for program milestones.

Robinson, Judith L.↗
NASA NTRS2009

NASA Manned Launch Vehicle Lightning Protection Development

Historically, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) relied heavily on lightning avoidance to protect launch vehicles and crew from lightning effects. As NASA transitions from the Space Shuttle to the new Constellation family of launch vehicles and spacecraft, NASA engineers are imposing design and construction standards on the spacecraft and launch vehicles to withstand both the direct and indirect effects of lightning. A review of current Space Shuttle lightning constraints and protection methodology will be presented, as well as a historical review of Space Shuttle lightning requirements and design. The Space Shuttle lightning requirements document, NSTS 07636, Lightning Protection, Test and Analysis Requirements, (originally published as document number JSC 07636, Lightning Protection Criteria Document) was developed in response to the Apollo 12 lightning event and other experiences with NASA and the Department of Defense launch vehicles. This document defined the lightning environment, vehicle protection requirements, and design guidelines for meeting the requirements. The criteria developed in JSC 07636 were a precursor to the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) lightning standards. These SAE standards, along with Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA) DO-160, Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment, are the basis for the current Constellation lightning design requirements. The development and derivation of these requirements will be presented. As budget and schedule constraints hampered lightning protection design and verification efforts, the Space Shuttle elements waived the design requirements and relied on lightning avoidance in the form of launch commit criteria (LCC) constraints and a catenary wire system for lightning protection at the launch pads. A better understanding of the lightning environment has highlighted the vulnerability of the protection schemes and associated risk to the vehicle, which has resulted in lost launch opportunities and increased expenditures in manpower to assess Space Shuttle vehicle health and safety after lightning events at the launch pad. Because of high-percentage launch availability and long-term on-pad requirements, LCC constraints are no longer considered feasible. The Constellation vehicles must be designed to withstand direct and indirect effects of lightning. A review of the vehicle design and potential concerns will be presented as well as the new catenary lightning protection system for the launch pad. This system is required to protect the Constellation vehicles during launch processing when vehicle lightning effects protection might be compromised by such items as umbilical connections and open access hatches.

McCollum, Matthew B.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Transcriptomics Processing Pipelines for Space Biology: An Open Source and Consensus-Driven Approach

Transcriptomics holds significant value in elucidating the relationship between gene expression, experimental factors, biological factors, and various types of omics data. Enhancing our understanding of these connections is paramount for foundational biology, which plays a pivotal role in devising solutions for challenges pertinent to both space travel and terrestrial life. The NASA GeneLab project, part of the Open Science Data Repository (OSDR.nasa.gov), seeks to accelerate space biology research through cataloging and democratizing ‘omics data, including transcriptomics. Since raw omics data are largely inaccessible to non-bioinformaticians, GeneLab works with the scientific community via the Open Science Analysis Working Groups (AWGs) to develop standard processing pipelines to generate and publish processed data. Unlike raw data, processed data have greater immediate value to diverse users with varying technical backgrounds and computational capabilities. Standardizing processing workflows is essential to match the pace of raw data generation, ensure reproducibility, and enable standardized processed data for comparison across datasets. As of June 2023, transcriptomics studies comprise over half of GeneLab datasets hosted on the OSDR, including data from bulk RNA-seq and Affymetrix or Agilent 1-Channel DNA microarray assays. In collaboration with the AWGs, GeneLab developed consensus processing pipelines for these transcriptomics data types that includes quality control, background correction (microarray only), data normalization and quantification, culminating in the detection and annotation of differentially expressed genes. The work presented here describes Nextflow implementations of GeneLab’s consensus transcriptomics pipelines that automates and accelerates processing of these datasets. In addition to the core data processing, these workflows also include raw data staging and a robust verification and validation program to identify errors in real-time, stop additional downstream computation, and preserve computational resources. These workflows are used to generate GeneLab processed data hosted on the OSDR, and are publicly available as open source software for others to use at: https://github.com/nasa/GeneLab_Data_Processing.

Jonathan Oribello↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA GeneLab RNASeq Consensus Pipeline: A Nextflow Implementation

The NASA GeneLab project (genelab.nasa.gov) seeks to accelerate space biology research through cataloging and democratizing omics data. Since raw omics data is largely inaccessible to non-bioinformaticians, GeneLab works with the scientific community to develop standard processing pipelines to generate and publish processed data. Unlike raw data, processed data has greater immediate value to a wide range of users with varying technical backgrounds and computational capabilities. Standardizing processing workflows is essential to match the pace of raw data generation, ensure reproducibility, and enable standardized processed data for comparison across datasets. Previously, GeneLab developed a standardized pipeline for processing RNAseq data, referred to as the ‘GeneLab RNAseq Consensus Pipeline (RCP)’, in collaboration with GeneLab’s Analysis Working Groups. The work presented here is a Nextflow implementation of GeneLab’s RCP that automates and accelerates data processing of RNASeq datasets hosted on GeneLab. In addition to the core data processing, the workflow also includes staging of GeneLab raw data and a robust verification and validation (V&V) program that runs after each processing step to identify errors in real-time, stop additional downstream computation, and preserve computational resources. The workflow, including the staging and V&V functionality, is open source for others to reuse and modify at https://github.com/nasa/GeneLab_Data_Processing/tree/master/RNAseq.

Jonathan Dejesus Oribello↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA GeneLab RNASeq Consensus Pipeline: A Nextflow Implementation

The NASA GeneLab project (genelab.nasa.gov) seeks to accelerate space biology research through cataloging and democratizing omics data. Since raw omics data is largely inaccessible to non-bioinformaticians, GeneLab works with the scientific community to develop standard processing pipelines to generate and publish processed data. Unlike raw data, processed data has greater immediate value to a wide range of users with varying technical backgrounds and computational capabilities. Standardizing processing workflows is essential to match the pace of raw data generation, ensure reproducibility, and enable standardized processed data for comparison across datasets. Previously, GeneLab developed a standardized pipeline for processing RNAseq data, referred to as the ‘GeneLab RNAseq Consensus Pipeline (RCP)’, in collaboration with GeneLab’s Analysis Working Groups. The work presented here is a Nextflow implementation of GeneLab’s RCP that automates and accelerates data processing of RNASeq datasets hosted on GeneLab. In addition to the core data processing, the workflow also includes staging of GeneLab raw data and a robust verification and validation (V&V) program that runs after each processing step to identify errors in real-time, stop additional downstream computation, and preserve computational resources. The workflow, including the staging and V&V functionality, is open source for others to reuse and modify at https://github.com/nasa/GeneLab_Data_Processing/tree/master/RNAseq.

Jonathan D Oribello↗
NASA NTRS1984

Studies of the Virgo Cluster. I - Photometry of 109 galaxies near the cluster center to serve as standards

Attention is given to the technical aspects of photometric measurements of 109 galaxies near the center of the Virgo Cluster, noting various types of radii and surface brightness for about 50 E and dE galaxies in the sample that range in absolute magnitude from -20 to -12. These data are combined with data from the literature for giant E and dwarf E galaxies in the Local Group to study the systematic properties of E galaxies over a range of one million luminosities. The radial intensity profiles derived are fitted to the manifold of King (1978) models to derive model-dependent central surface brightness, core radii, and cutoff radii.

Sandage, A.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Overcoming the Critical Shortage of STEM - Prepared Secondary Students Through Modeling and Simulation

In developing understanding of technological systems - modeling and simulation tools aid significantly in the learning and visualization processes. In design courses we sketch , extrude, shape, refine and animate with virtual tools in 3D. Final designs are built using a 3D printer. Aspiring architects create spaces with realistic materials and lighting schemes rendered on model surfaces to create breathtaking walk-throughs of virtual spaces. Digital Electronics students design systems that address real-world needs. Designs are simulated in virtual circuits to provide proof of concept before physical construction. This vastly increases students' ability to design and build complex systems. We find students using modeling and simulation in the learning process, assimilate information at a much faster pace and engage more deeply in learning. As Pre-Engineering educators within the Career and Technical Education program at our school division's Technology Academy our task is to help learners in their quest to develop deep understanding of complex technological systems in a variety of engineering disciplines. Today's young learners have vast opportunities to learn with tools that many of us only dreamed about a decade or so ago when we were engaged in engineering and other technical studies. Today's learner paints with a virtual brush - scenes that can aid significantly in the learning and visualization processes. Modeling and simulation systems have become the new standard tool set in the technical classroom [1-5]. Modeling and simulation systems are now applied as feedback loops in the learning environment. Much of the study of behavior change through the use of feedback loops can be attributed to Stanford Psychologist Alfred Bandura. "Drawing on several education experiments involving children, Bandura observed that giving individuals a clear goal and a means to evaluate their progress toward that goal greatly increased the likelihood that they would achieve it."

Spencer, Thomas↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Interim Set of TNT Curves for LOX/LNG Explosions

Space launch companies are actively developing, or in some cases have already developed, new vehicles that use large quantities of liquid oxygen (LOX) and liquid natural gas (LNG) propellants. This propellant mixture currently lacks sound/verified explosive safety standards for use in explosive siting and flight safety analysis. In the U.S., multiple government and commercial organizations have conducted limited testing, or are preparing to conduct tests, intended to provide a sound technical basis for LOX/LNG explosive standards applicable to space launch vehicle ground and flight operations. The limited testing and analysis conducted so far indicates the potential to produce extremely energetic explosions due to the miscibility of LOX/LNG (methane), a unique feature relative to previously used propellant mixtures such as hydrogen/oxygen or kerosene/oxygen. MOX is a homogenous mixture of methane and oxygen that is possible because of methane’s 100% miscibility in LOX. Preliminary testing by N2L, Inc. described in this paper shows that it is possible to form MOX with a variety of mixing methods, and that MOX is a sensitive high explosive capable of producing overpressures greater than comparable masses of C-4. The limited amount and quality of large-scale LOX/LNG explosive test data, and the potential formation of high-explosive MOX, create significant unknowns in the determination of hazard areas (cleared of the public) for ground operations (such as a static fire test) and flights of launch vehicles with LOX/LNG propellant. This paper will review the methods used by NASA to develop and validate the LOX/LH2 blast model using large-scale explosive test programs such as Project PYRO, the Hydrogen-Oxygen Vertical Impact (HOVI), and the Large-Scale Hydrogen-Oxygen Explosion (LSHOE) tests. This paper will describe how the same process was used to prepare an interim LOX/LNG blast model that applies to various LV failure scenarios and conservatively accounts for potential MOX formation. This paper also summarizes past and future testing and modeling efforts funded by a consortium of NASA, the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and the US Space Force (USSF). These test programs should be concluded within the next 3 years and are intended to provide empirical data for model verification and validation.

Liquid Oxygen↗
NASA NTRS1990

Data Management Standards in Computer-aided Acquisition and Logistic Support (CALS)

Viewgraphs and discussion on data management standards in computer-aided acquisition and logistic support (CALS) are presented. CALS is intended to reduce cost, increase quality, and improve timeliness of weapon system acquisition and support by greatly improving the flow of technical information. The phase 2 standards, industrial environment, are discussed. The information resource dictionary system (IRDS) is described.

Jefferson, David K.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Proposed Definitions of Some Technical Terms Frequently Used in Microwave Radiometry for Remote Sensing

The use of microwave radiometry for remote sensing is a relatively young field. As a result, there are no standard definitions of many frequently used technical terms; a lot of which are conventional usages carried-over from optical remote sensing, and a lot more are shared with electrical or microwave engineering. Sometimes the divergent notions and assumptions originating from a different field may cause ambiguity or confusions. It is proposed that we establish a list of frequently used terms, together with their 'standard' definitions and hope that they will gradually gain general acceptance by the remote sensing community. It would be even more useful if the IEEE community can set up a standard committee of sort to develop and maintain the standards. To minimize the effort, the existing terms should be kept or reinterpreted as much as possible. For example, the term 'Instantaneous Field of View' (IFOV), originally coming from the optical remote sensing field, is now appearing in microwave remote sensing literature frequently. The IFOV refers to the 'beam width' or the 'diameter' of the beam's geometrical projection on earth surface. Since the definition of 'beam width' is different for an optical system versus a microwave antenna, the use of IFOV in microwave radiometry needed to be clarified. Also, the meaning of the IFOV will be different depending upon whether the beam is scanning or not, and how the scanning takes place, e.g. 'continuous scanning' vs 'stare-and-step scan.' From this one term alone, it is clear that more subtle meanings must be spell out in detail and a 'standard' definition would help in understanding and comparing systems and data in the literature. A selected list of terms with their suggested definitions will be discussed in this presentation.

Shiue, James C.↗