SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Requirements Verification”

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 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2017

Cleared for Launch - Lessons Learned from the OSIRIS-REx System Requirements Verification Program

Requirements verification of a large flight system is a challenge. It is especially challenging for engineers taking on their first role in space systems engineering. This paper describes our approach to verification of the Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, Security-Regolith Explorer (OSIRIS-REx) system requirements. It also captures lessons learned along the way from developing systems engineers embroiled in this process. We begin with an overview of the mission and science objectives as well as the project requirements verification program strategy. A description of the requirements flow down is presented including our implementation for managing the thousands of program and element level requirements and associated verification data. We discuss both successes and methods to improve the managing of this data across multiple organizational interfaces. Our approach to verifying system requirements at multiple levels of assembly is presented using examples from our work at instrument, spacecraft, and ground segment levels. We include a discussion of system end-to-end testing limitations and their impacts to the verification program. Finally, we describe lessons learned that are applicable to all emerging space systems engineers using our unique perspectives across multiple organizations of a large NASA program.

Requirements Verification↗

NASA NTRS2001

Requirements, Verification, and Compliance (RVC) Database Tool

This paper describes the development, design, and implementation of the Requirements, Verification, and Compliance (RVC) database used on the International Space Welding Experiment (ISWE) project managed at Marshall Space Flight Center. The RVC is a systems engineer's tool for automating and managing the following information: requirements; requirements traceability; verification requirements; verification planning; verification success criteria; and compliance status. This information normally contained within documents (e.g. specifications, plans) is contained in an electronic database that allows the project team members to access, query, and status the requirements, verification, and compliance information from their individual desktop computers. Using commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) database software that contains networking capabilities, the RVC was developed not only with cost savings in mind but primarily for the purpose of providing a more efficient and effective automated method of maintaining and distributing the systems engineering information. In addition, the RVC approach provides the systems engineer the capability to develop and tailor various reports containing the requirements, verification, and compliance information that meets the needs of the project team members. The automated approach of the RVC for capturing and distributing the information improves the productivity of the systems engineer by allowing that person to concentrate more on the job of developing good requirements and verification programs and not on the effort of being a "document developer".

Rainwater, Neil E., II↗

NASA NTRS2010

Applying Monte Carlo Simulation to Launch Vehicle Design and Requirements Verification

This paper is focused on applying Monte Carlo simulation to probabilistic launch vehicle design and requirements verification. The approaches developed in this paper can be applied to other complex design efforts as well. Typically the verification must show that requirement "x" is met for at least "y" % of cases, with, say, 10% consumer risk or 90% confidence. Two particular aspects of making these runs for requirements verification will be explored in this paper. First, there are several types of uncertainties that should be handled in different ways, depending on when they become known (or not). The paper describes how to handle different types of uncertainties and how to develop vehicle models that can be used to examine their characteristics. This includes items that are not known exactly during the design phase but that will be known for each assembled vehicle (can be used to determine the payload capability and overall behavior of that vehicle), other items that become known before or on flight day (can be used for flight day trajectory design and go/no go decision), and items that remain unknown on flight day. Second, this paper explains a method (order statistics) for determining whether certain probabilistic requirements are met or not and enables the user to determine how many Monte Carlo samples are required. Order statistics is not new, but may not be known in general to the GN&C community. The methods also apply to determining the design values of parameters of interest in driving the vehicle design. The paper briefly discusses when it is desirable to fit a distribution to the experimental Monte Carlo results rather than using order statistics.

Hanson, John M.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Z-2 Architecture Description and Requirements Verification Results

The Z-2 Prototype Planetary Extravehicular Space Suit Assembly is a continuation of NASA's Z series of spacesuits. The Z-2 is another step in NASA's technology development roadmap leading to human exploration of the Martian surface. The suit was designed for maximum mobility at 8.3 psid, reduced mass, and to have high fidelity life support interfaces. As Z-2 will be man-tested at full vacuum in NASA JSC's Chamber B, it was manufactured as Class II, making it the most flight-like planetary walking suit produced to date. The Z-2 suit architecture is an evolution of previous EVA suits, namely the ISS EMU, Mark III, Rear Entry I-Suit and Z-1 spacesuits. The suit is a hybrid hard and soft multi-bearing, rear entry spacesuit. The hard upper torso (HUT) is an all-composite structure and includes a 2-bearing rolling convolute shoulder with Vernier sizing mechanism, removable suit port interface plate (SIP), elliptical hemispherical helmet and self-don/doff shoulder harness. The hatch is a hybrid aluminum and composite construction with Apollo style gas connectors, custom water pass-thru, removable hatch cage and interfaces to primary and auxiliary life support feed water bags. The suit includes Z-1 style lower arms with cam brackets for Vernier sizing and government furnished equipment (GFE) Phase VI gloves. The lower torso includes a telescopic waist sizing system, waist bearing, rolling convolute waist joint, hard brief, 2 bearing soft hip thigh, Z-1 style legs with ISS EMU style cam brackets for sizing, and conformal walking boots with ankle bearings. The Z-2 Requirements Verification Plan includes the verification of more than 200 individual requirements. The verification methods include test, analysis, inspection, demonstration or a combination of methods. Examples of unmanned requirements include suit leakage, proof pressure testing, operational life, mass, isometric man-loads, sizing adjustment ranges, internal and external interfaces such as in-suit drink bag, partial pressure relief valve, purge valve, donning stand and ISS Body Restraint Tether (BRT). Examples of manned requirements include verification of anthropometric range, suit self-don/doff, secondary suit exit method, donning stand self-ingress/egress and manned mobility covering eight functional tasks. The eight functional tasks include kneeling with object pick-up, standing toe touch, cross-body reach, walking, reach to the SIP and helmet visor. This paper will provide an overview of the Z-2 design. Z-2 requirements verification testing was performed with NASA at the ILC Houston test facility. This paper will also discuss pre-delivery manned and unmanned test results as well as analysis performed in support of requirements verification.

Graziosi, Dave↗

NASA NTRS2012

Active Mirror Predictive and Requirements Verification Software (AMP-ReVS)

This software is designed to predict large active mirror performance at various stages in the fabrication lifecycle of the mirror. It was developed for 1-meter class powered mirrors for astronomical purposes, but is extensible to other geometries. The package accepts finite element model (FEM) inputs and laboratory measured data for large optical-quality mirrors with active figure control. It computes phenomenological contributions to the surface figure error using several built-in optimization techniques. These phenomena include stresses induced in the mirror by the manufacturing process and the support structure, the test procedure, high spatial frequency errors introduced by the polishing process, and other process-dependent deleterious effects due to light-weighting of the mirror. Then, depending on the maturity of the mirror, it either predicts the best surface figure error that the mirror will attain, or it verifies that the requirements for the error sources have been met once the best surface figure error has been measured. The unique feature of this software is that it ties together physical phenomenology with wavefront sensing and control techniques and various optimization methods including convex optimization, Kalman filtering, and quadratic programming to both generate predictive models and to do requirements verification. This software combines three distinct disciplines: wavefront control, predictive models based on FEM, and requirements verification using measured data in a robust, reusable code that is applicable to any large optics for ground and space telescopes. The software also includes state-of-the-art wavefront control algorithms that allow closed-loop performance to be computed. It allows for quantitative trade studies to be performed for optical systems engineering, including computing the best surface figure error under various testing and operating conditions. After the mirror manufacturing process and testing have been completed, the software package can be used to verify that the underlying requirements have been met.

Basinger, Scott A.↗

NASA NTRS2017

International Space Station Requirement Verification for Commercial Visiting Vehicles

The COTS program demonstrated NASA could rely on commercial providers for safe, reliable, and cost-effective cargo delivery to ISS. The ISS Program has developed a streamlined process to safely integrate commercial visiting vehicles and ensure requirements are met Levy a minimum requirement set (down from 1000s to 100s) focusing on the ISS interface and safety, reducing the level of NASA oversight/insight and burden on the commercial Partner. Partners provide a detailed verification and validation plan documenting how they will show they've met NASA requirements. NASA conducts process sampling to ensure that the established verification processes is being followed. NASA participates in joint verification events and analysis for requirements that require both parties verify. Verification compliance is approved by NASA and launch readiness certified at mission readiness reviews.

Garguilo, Dan↗

NASA NTRS2008

Using Life-Cycle Human Factors Engineering to Avoid $2.4 Million in Costs: Lessons Learned from NASA's Requirements Verification Process for Space Payloads

The Human Factors Implementation Team (HFIT) process has been used to verify human factors requirements for NASA International Space Station (ISS) payloads since 2003, resulting in $2.4 million in avoided costs. This cost benefit has been realized by greatly reducing the need to process time-consuming formal waivers (exceptions) for individual requirements violations. The HFIT team, which includes astronauts and their technical staff, acts as the single source for human factors requirements integration of payloads. HFIT has the authority to provide inputs during early design phases, thus eliminating many potential requirements violations in a cost-effective manner. In those instances where it is not economically or technically feasible to meet the precise metric of a given requirement, HFIT can work with the payload engineers to develop common sense solutions and formally document that the resulting payload design does not materially affect the astronaut s ability to operate and interact with the payload. The HFIT process is fully ISO 9000 compliant and works concurrently with NASA s formal systems engineering work flow. Due to its success with payloads, the HFIT process is being adapted and extended to ISS systems hardware. Key aspects of this process are also being considered for NASA's Space Shuttle replacement, the Crew Exploration Vehicle.

Carr, Daniel↗

NASA NTRS1982

NASA payload interface verification requirements - Process and implementation

The separate and combinatorial roles played by NASA and STS payload contractors in the processes of interfacing cargo with the Shuttle are described. NASA personnel aid payload interface verification beginning at the hardware development level and perform independent interface verification once the payload is delivered to the payload processing facility. The cargo is first checked for operational and flight readiness, including inspection of installed devices to specification for the interface connections. Checklists furnished to the user are returned to NASA prior to integration simulation unless formal statements of compliance or waivers are exchanged. The continuance of strict adherence to predelivery interface verification testing is emphasized as necessary for meeting the turnaround times projected for the Orbiter fleet.

Huffstetler, W. J.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Applying Monte Carlo Simulation to Launch Vehicle Design and Requirements Verification

- This presentation applies statistics to launch vehicle design, but the methods may be used for other engineering applications - Vehicle Models: What do we know when? How to separate parameters for making Monte Carlo runs - Known when assembling the vehicle but not during design - Known prior to committing to flight - Unknown at lift off - How do we correctly model the vehicle during the design phases? - Number of Monte Carlo samples - Requirements success - Design parameter values

Monte Carlo↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Launch Vehicle Design and Requirements Verification Using Statistical Methods

Monte Carlo↗

NASA NTRS2011

Requirement Assurance: A Verification Process

Requirement Assurance is an act of requirement verification which assures the stakeholder or customer that a product requirement has produced its "as realized product" and has been verified with conclusive evidence. Product requirement verification answers the question, "did the product meet the stated specification, performance, or design documentation?". In order to ensure the system was built correctly, the practicing system engineer must verify each product requirement using verification methods of inspection, analysis, demonstration, or test. The products of these methods are the "verification artifacts" or "closure artifacts" which are the objective evidence needed to prove the product requirements meet the verification success criteria. Institutional direction is given to the System Engineer in NPR 7123.1A NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements with regards to the requirement verification process. In response, the verification methodology offered in this report meets both the institutional process and requirement verification best practices.

Alexander, Michael G.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Strategies for Validation Testing of Ground Systems

In order to accomplish the full Vision for Space Exploration announced by former President George W. Bush in 2004, NASA will have to develop a new space transportation system and supporting infrastructure. The main portion of this supporting infrastructure will reside at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida and will either be newly developed or a modification of existing vehicle processing and launch facilities, including Ground Support Equipment (GSE). This type of large-scale launch site development is unprecedented since the time of the Apollo Program. In order to accomplish this successfully within the limited budget and schedule constraints a combination of traditional and innovative strategies for Verification and Validation (V&V) have been developed. The core of these strategies consists of a building-block approach to V&V, starting with component V&V and ending with a comprehensive end-to-end validation test of the complete launch site, called a Ground Element Integration Test (GEIT). This paper will outline these strategies and provide the high level planning for meeting the challenges of implementing V&V on a large-scale development program. KEY WORDS: Systems, Elements, Subsystem, Integration Test, Ground Systems, Ground Support Equipment, Component, End Item, Test and Verification Requirements (TVR), Verification Requirements (VR)

Annis, Tammy↗

NASA NTRS2012

Probabilistic Requirements (Partial) Verification Methods Best Practices Improvement. Variables Acceptance Sampling Calculators: Derivations and Verification of Plans

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center was requested to improve on the Best Practices document produced for the NESC assessment, Verification of Probabilistic Requirements for the Constellation Program, by giving a recommended procedure for using acceptance sampling by variables techniques. This recommended procedure would be used as an alternative to the potentially resource-intensive acceptance sampling by attributes method given in the document. This document contains the outcome of the assessment.

Johnson, Kenneth L.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Probabilistic Requirements (Partial) Verification Methods Best Practices Improvement. Variables Acceptance Sampling Calculators: Empirical Testing

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center was requested to improve on the Best Practices document produced for the NESC assessment, Verification of Probabilistic Requirements for the Constellation Program, by giving a recommended procedure for using acceptance sampling by variables techniques as an alternative to the potentially resource-intensive acceptance sampling by attributes method given in the document. In this paper, the results of empirical tests intended to assess the accuracy of acceptance sampling plan calculators implemented for six variable distributions are presented.

Johnson, Kenneth L.↗

NASA NTRS1992

Integration of thermal and environmental control systems during Space Station Freedom early assembly phase

An overview of Space Station Freedom Thermal Control System (TCS) and Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) integration is presented for Stages 2-6. Particular attention is given to issues associated with integrating five distinct, functioning spacecraft with hardware not specifically designed for intermediate stages. Areas specifically addressed include integrated ECLSS temperature and humidity control performance, thermal load balancing, performance and verification requirements, interface verification procedures, TCS activation sequence, resource allocation and Space Shuttle integration.

Di Pietro, David A.↗

NASA NTRS1989

SSME Alternate Turbopump Development Program: Design verification specification for high-pressure fuel turbopump

The design and verification requirements are defined which are appropriate to hardware at the detail, subassembly, component, and engine levels and to correlate these requirements to the development demonstrations which provides verification that design objectives are achieved. The high pressure fuel turbopump requirements verification matrix provides correlation between design requirements and the tests required to verify that the requirement have been met.

Source record↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway Power Quality Lessons Learned

Power Quality is a physical description of the electrical characteristics that allow the system to function properly without significant loss of performance or life. This physical description includes steady state voltage limits, transient voltage limits in normal/abnormal conditions, ripple voltage, stability, fault conditions, and more. All which are vital for improving reliability, ensuring stable operation, defining proper fault recovery, and ensuring a ‘plug and play’ approach to design and integration. Typically, a specification for Power Quality is created based on expected system performance or an existing standard, such as the International Space Power System Interoperability Standards (ISPSIS). One example of such a specification is the Gateway Power Quality Specification. It defines the requirements and characteristics of the 120 Volt direct current electrical power system for the Gateway Electrical Power System (EPS) and the Gateway Electrical Power Consuming Equipment (EPCE). This specification also maintains a separate requirement verification section that defines test methods for requirement verification. The test methods include analysis, test, inspection, and demonstration. These test methodologies and requirements are used to ensure that the loads operate when connected to the specified power quality and performance as defined by this specification. The challenge with developing a specification is that desired system characteristics are not always fully matured before the specification is needed and many performance requirements may be application specific. This drives the need to utilize lessons learned through extensive analysis and testing as well as historical knowledge to finalize requirements. Some example requirements where this is important are Small and Large Signal Stability, Ripple Voltage, Inrush/Surge Currents, and Fault Containment. Lessons learned are also important in the testing, analysis, and verification to ensure consistent and accurate results to verify performance. This presentation will cover the lessons learned for power quality relative to ripple, inrush/surge, fault containment, testing/verification, and more.

Power Quality↗

NASA NTRS1975

Cluster man/system design requirements and verification

Discussion of the procedures employed for determining the man/system requirements that guided Skylab design, and review of the techniques used for implementing the man/system design verification. The foremost lesson learned from the design need anticipation and design verification experience is the necessity to allow for human capabilities of in-flight maintenance and repair. It is now known that the entire program was salvaged by a series of unplanned maintenance and repair events which were implemented in spite of poor design provisions for maintenance.

Orbital workers↗