Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Workplace Charging”

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.

3 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2005

Taking the Risk Out of Risk Assessment

The ability to understand risks and have the right strategies in place when risky events occur is essential in the workplace. More and more organizations are being confronted with concerns over how to measure their risks or what kind of risks they can take when certain events transpire that could have a negative impact. NASA is one organization that faces these challenges on a daily basis, as effective risk management is critical to the success of its missions especially the Space Shuttle missions. On July 29, 1996, former NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin charged NASA s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance with developing a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) tool to support decisions on the funding of Space Shuttle upgrades. When issuing the directive, Goldin said, "Since I came to NASA [in 1992], we've spent billions of dollars on Shuttle upgrades without knowing how much they improve safety. I want a tool to help base upgrade decisions on risk." Work on the PRA tool began immediately. The resulting prototype, the Quantitative Risk Assessment System (QRAS) Version 1.0, was jointly developed by NASA s Marshall Space Flight Center, its Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, and researchers at the University of Maryland. QRAS software automatically expands the reliability logic models of systems to evaluate the probability of highly detrimental outcomes occurring in complex systems that are subject to potential accident scenarios. Even in its earliest forms, QRAS was used to begin PRA modeling of the Space Shuttle. In parallel, the development of QRAS continued, with the goal of making it a world-class tool, one that was especially suited to NASA s unique needs. From the beginning, an important conceptual goal in the development of QRAS was for it to help bridge the gap between the professional risk analyst and the design engineer. In the past, only the professional risk analyst could perform, modify, use, and perhaps even adequately understand PRA. NASA wanted to change this by developing a PRA tool that would be friendlier, more understandable, and more useful to the broader engineering community. This concept ultimately led to the look, feel, and functionality that QRAS has today.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2009

Workflow Agents vs. Expert Systems: Problem Solving Methods in Work Systems Design

During the 1980s, a community of artificial intelligence researchers became interested in formalizing problem solving methods as part of an effort called "second generation expert systems" (2nd GES). How do the motivations and results of this research relate to building tools for the workplace today? We provide an historical review of how the theory of expertise has developed, a progress report on a tool for designing and implementing model-based automation (Brahms), and a concrete example how we apply 2nd GES concepts today in an agent-based system for space flight operations (OCAMS). Brahms incorporates an ontology for modeling work practices, what people are doing in the course of a day, characterized as "activities." OCAMS was developed using a simulation-to-implementation methodology, in which a prototype tool was embedded in a simulation of future work practices. OCAMS uses model-based methods to interactively plan its actions and keep track of the work to be done. The problem solving methods of practice are interactive, employing reasoning for and through action in the real world. Analogously, it is as if a medical expert system were charged not just with interpreting culture results, but actually interacting with a patient. Our perspective shifts from building a "problem solving" (expert) system to building an actor in the world. The reusable components in work system designs include entire "problem solvers" (e.g., a planning subsystem), interoperability frameworks, and workflow agents that use and revise models dynamically in a network of people and tools. Consequently, the research focus shifts so "problem solving methods" include ways of knowing that models do not fit the world, and ways of interacting with other agents and people to gain or verify information and (ultimately) adapt rules and procedures to resolve problematic situations.

Clancey, William J.↗
NASA NTRS2002

The Idyllic Workplace

How many of us have worked in organizations where the discipline was so rigid and unyielding that it would send even a Marine Corps Drill Instructor screaming into the night? How many of us have worked in organizations where sightings of senior management were sporadic and rare, and any other interactions were by appointment only? Or, how many of us have worked in organizations where your role, absent specific direction, was to be seldom seen and rarely heard? And how many of us have worked in organizations where seemingly light itself was not permitted to escape without the acquiescence and approval of the director? Sadly, there are organizations that embody some of these conditions, and the resultant adverse effects on employee productivity, creativity and morale are profound. But what if you could work in an organization in which there was little hierarchy, where rank and seniority played no part, where there were no closed meetings or doors, where everyone knows what was expected of them, and where creativity was not only tolerated but encouraged and celebrated? Was there ever such a place? There was, and it was known as NASA's Space Station Task Force. I was fortunate enough to work there for a time, and I would like to tell you how this organization with few apparent rules led to incredibly high levels of employee satisfaction and fulfillment, and yielded work products of enduring quality. On May 20, 1982, NASA Administrator James M. Beggs established the Space Station Task Force under the direction of John D. Hodge. The Task Force was charged with the responsibility for "the development of the programmatic aspects of a Space Station as they evolve, including mission analysis, requirements definition and program management," and was authorized to draw on Space Station activities at the NASA Program Offices and Field Centers. No additional conditions or directions were provided. Hodge knew that in order to accomplish the job he had been given, he was going to have to obtain the services of the "best and the brightest" and facilitate the unleashing of the full force of their creative capabilities. In order to avoid the stultifying effects of a typical hierarchical organization, he set up a loosely structured, horizontal organization with only one supervisor of record - himself. He populated this organization with detailees from Headquarters, the field Centers and the Jet Propulsion Lab, thereby assuring himself of the political and technical expertise with which to deal with Congress and the bureaucracy, and conduct the required engineering studies and analyses.

Schoenfelder, Tony E.↗