Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “nasa”

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

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

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Climate Information and Lessons Learned from the NASA Earth eXchange (NEX), Short-term Prediction Research and Transition Center (NASA SPoRT), and the NASA Regional Climate Model Evaluation System (RCMES)

Climate resilience can emerge from a combination of (1) climate projections that enable future-oriented planning and (2) contemporary observations that can be used for adaptation in the face of realized climate. NASA is uniquely positioned to provide global climate projections and satellite-based observations to users who must take a global perspective on climate risk (e.g., supply chain managers). Here, we will share the capabilities and experiences of three NASA projects. The first project, the NASA Earth eXchange (NEX) provides two downscaled climate projections, NEX-GDDP-CMIP6, a global 25 km resolution product, and NEX-DCP30-CMIP6, an 800 m resolution product covering the coterminous U.S. specifically designed for U.S. National Climate Assessment (NCA). NEX also offers land surface products that mirror the twice-daily products provided by the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) but are derived from operational geostationary weather satellite data collected at 5-10 minutes intervals. The second project, the Short-term Prediction Research and Transition Center (SPoRT), was established in 2002 to transition unique NASA satellite products and capabilities to stakeholders to improve decision-making that benefits society. SPoRT provides products and capabilities derived from NASA observations and models to end users in government, academia, and the private sector. SPoRT translates NASA Earth science into actionable solutions reaching over 400 stakeholders across 80 organizations. Finally, the Regional Climate Model Evaluation System (RCMES) is designed to facilitate regional-scale evaluations of climate models by providing standardized access to a vast and comprehensive set of observations, such as satellite, in-situ, and reanalyses, and modeling resources such as CMIP & CORDEX. These three projects form part of the core capabilities at the NASA Centers deliver climate information under the new NASA Earth Science to Action (ES2A) strategy.

NEX↗
NASA NTRS2011

Experimental Investigations of the NASA Common Research Model in the NASA Langley National Transonic Facility and NASA Ames 11-Ft Transonic Wind Tunnel (Invited)

Experimental aerodynamic investigations of the NASA Common Research Model have been conducted in the NASA Langley National Transonic Facility and the NASA Ames 11-ft wind tunnel. Data have been obtained at chord Reynolds numbers of 5 million for five different configurations at both wind tunnels. Force and moment, surface pressure and surface flow visualization data were obtained in both facilities but only the force and moment data are presented herein. Nacelle/pylon, tail effects and tunnel to tunnel variations have been assessed. The data from both wind tunnels show that an addition of a nacelle/pylon gave an increase in drag, decrease in lift and a less nose down pitching moment around the design lift condition of 0.5 and that the tail effects also follow the expected trends. Also, all of the data shown fall within the 2-sigma limits for repeatability. The tunnel to tunnel differences are negligible for lift and pitching moment, while the drag shows a difference of less than ten counts for all of the configurations. These differences in drag may be due to the variation in the sting mounting systems at the two tunnels.

Rivers, S. M.↗
NASA NTRS1996

Development of an Outreach Program for NASA: "NASA Ambassadors"

It is widely known that the average American citizen has either no idea or the wrong impression of what NASA is doing. The most common impression is that NASA's sole mission is to build and launch spacecraft and that the everyday experience of the common citizen would be impacted very little if NASA failed to exist altogether. Some feel that most of NASA's efforts are much too expensive and that the money would be better used on other efforts. Others feel that most of NASA's efforts either fail altogether or fail to meet their original objectives. Yet others feel that NASA is so mired in bureaucracy that it is no longer able to function. The goal of the NASA Ambassadors Program (NAP) is to educate the general populace as to what NASA's mission and goals actually are, to re-excite the "man on the street" with NASA's discoveries and technologies, and to convince him that NASA really does impact his everyday experience and that the economy of the U.S. is very dependent on NASA-type research. Each of the NASA centers currently run a speakers bureau through its Public Affairs Office (PAO). The speakers, NASA employees, are scheduled on an "as available" status and their travel is paid by NASA. However, there are only a limited number of them and their message may be regarded as being somewhat biased as they are paid by NASA. On the other hand, there are many members of NASA's summer programs which come from all areas of the country. Most of them not only believe that NASA's mission is important but are willing and able to articulate it to others. Furthermore, in the eyes of the public, they are probably more effective as ambassadors for NASA than are the NASA employees, as they do not derive their primary funding from it. Therefore it was decided to organize materials for them to use in presentations to general audiences in their home areas. Each person who accepted these materials was to be called a "NASA Ambassador".

Lebo, George R.↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA as a Convener: Government, Academic and Industry Collaborations Through the NASA Human Health and Performance Center

On October 18, 2010, the NASA Human Health and Performance center (NHHPC) was opened to enable collaboration among government, academic and industry members. Membership rapidly grew to 60 members (http://nhhpc.nasa.gov ) and members began identifying collaborative projects as detailed below. In addition, a first workshop in open collaboration and innovation was conducted on January 19, 2011 by the NHHPC resulting in additional challenges and projects for further development. This first workshop was a result of the SLSD successes in running open innovation challenges over the past two years. In 2008, the NASA Johnson Space Center, Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD) began pilot projects in open innovation (crowd sourcing) to determine if these new internet-based platforms could indeed find solutions to difficult technical problems. From 2008 to 2010, the SLSD issued 34 challenges, 14 externally and 20 internally. The 14 external challenges were conducted through three different vendors: InnoCentive, Yet2.com and TopCoder. The 20 internal challenges were conducted using the InnoCentive platform, customized to NASA use, and promoted as NASA@Work. The results from the 34 challenges involved not only technical solutions that were reported previously at the 61st IAC, but also the formation of new collaborative relationships. For example, the TopCoder pilot was expanded by the NASA Space Operations Mission Directorate to the NASA Tournament Lab in collaboration with Harvard Business School and TopCoder. Building on these initial successes, the NHHPC workshop in January of 2011, and ongoing NHHPC member discussions, several important collaborations are in development: Space Act Agreement between NASA and GE for collaborative projects, NASA and academia for a Visual Impairment / Intracranial Hypertension summit (February 2011), NASA and the DoD through the Defense Venture Catalyst Initiative (DeVenCI) for a technical needs workshop (June 2011), NASA and the San Diego Zoo in Biomimicry, NASA and the FAA Center of Excellence for Commercial Space Flight for collaborative projects, NASA and the FDA concerning automatic external defibrillators, and NASA and Tufts University for an education pilot. These and other collaborations will be detailed in the paper demonstrating that a government-sponsored convening entity (the NHHPC) can facilitate industry, academic, and non-profit collaborations for products of mutual benefit.

Davis, Jeffrey R.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Implementing NASA's Capability-Driven Approach: Insight into NASA's Processes for Maturing Exploration Systems

NASA is engaged in transforming human spaceflight. The Agency is shifting from an exploration-based program with human activities focused on low Earth orbit (LEO) and targeted robotic missions in deep space to a more sustainable and integrated pioneering approach. Through pioneering, NASA seeks to address national goals to develop the capacity for people to work, learn, operate, live, and thrive safely beyond the Earth for extended periods of time. However, pioneering space involves more than the daunting technical challenges of transportation, maintaining health, and enabling crew productivity for long durations in remote, hostile, and alien environments. This shift also requires a change in operating processes for NASA. The Agency can no longer afford to engineer systems for specific missions and destinations and instead must focus on common capabilities that enable a range of destinations and missions. NASA has codified a capability driven approach, which provides flexible guidance for the development and maturation of common capabilities necessary for human pioneers beyond LEO. This approach has been included in NASA policy and is captured in the Agency's strategic goals. It is currently being implemented across NASA's centers and programs. Throughout 2014, NASA engaged in an Agency-wide process to define and refine exploration-related capabilities and associated gaps, focusing only on those that are critical for human exploration beyond LEO. NASA identified 12 common capabilities ranging from Environmental Control and Life Support Systems to Robotics, and established Agency-wide teams or working groups comprised of subject matter experts that are responsible for the maturation of these exploration capabilities. These teams, called the System Maturation Teams (SMTs) help formulate, guide and resolve performance gaps associated with the identified exploration capabilities. The SMTs are defining performance parameters and goals for each of the 12 capabilities, developing maturation plans and roadmaps for the identified performance gaps, specifying the interfaces between the various capabilities, and ensuring that the capabilities mature and integrate to enable future pioneering missions. By managing system development through the SMTs instead of traditional NASA programs and projects, the Agency is shifting from mission-driven development to a more flexible, capability-driven development. The process NASA uses to establish, integrate, prioritize, and manage the SMTs and associated capabilities is iterative. NASA relies on the Human Exploration and Operation Mission Directorate's SMT Integration Team within Advanced Exploration Systems to coordinate and facilitate the SMT process. The SMT Integration team conducts regular reviews and coordination meetings among the SMTs and has developed a number of tools to help the Agency implement capability driven processes. The SMT Integration team is uniquely positioned to help the Agency coordinate the SMTs and other processes that are making the capability-driven approach a reality. This paper will introduce the SMTs and the 12 key capabilities they represent. The role of the SMTs will be discussed with respect to Agency-wide processes to shift from mission-focused exploration to a capability-driven pioneering approach. Specific examples will be given to highlight systems development and testing within the SMTs. These examples will also show how NASA is using current investments in the International Space Station and future investments to develop and demonstrate capabilities. The paper will conclude by describing next steps and a process for soliciting feedback from the space exploration community to refine NASA's process for developing common exploration capabilities.

Williams-Byrd, Julie↗
NASA NTRS1988

NASA specification for manufacturing and performance requirements of NASA standard aerospace nickel-cadmium cells

On November 25, 1985, the NASA Chief Engineer established a NASA-wide policy to maintain and to require the use of the NASA standard for aerospace nickel-cadmium cells and batteries. The Associate Administrator for Safety, Reliability, Maintainability, and Quality Assurance stated on December 29, 1986, the intent to retain the NASA standard cell usage policy established by the Office of the Chief Engineer. The current NASA policy is also to incorporate technological advances as they are tested and proven for spaceflight applications. This policy will be implemented by modifying the existing standard cells or by developing new NASA standards and their specifications in accordance with the NASA's Aerospace Battery Systems Program Plan. This NASA Specification for Manufacturing and Performance Requirements of NASA Standard Aerospace Nickel-Cadmium Cells is prepared to provide requirements for the NASA standard nickel-cadmium cell. It is an interim specification pending resolution of the separator material availability. This specification has evolved from over 15 years of nickel-cadmium cell experience by NASA. Consequently, considerable experience has been collected and cell performance has been well characterized from many years of ground testing and from in-flight operations in both geosynchronous (GEO) and low earth orbit (LEO) applications. NASA has developed and successfully used two standard flight qualified cell designs.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1999

NASA Historical Data Book: NASA Launch Systems, Space Transportation, Human Spaceflight and Space Science, 1979-1988 - Volume 5

In 1973, NASA published the first volume of the NASA Historical Data Book, a hefty tome containing mostly tabular data on the resources of the space agency between 1958 and 1968. There, broken into detailed tables, were the facts and figures associated with the budget, facilities, procurement, installations, and personnel of NASA during that formative decade. In 1988, NASA reissued that first volume of the data book and added two additional volumes on the agency's programs and projects, one each for 1958-1968 and 1969-1978. NASA published a fourth volume in 1994 that addressed NASA resources for the period between 1969 and 1978. This fifth volume of the NASA Historical Data Book is a continuation of those earlier efforts. This fundamental reference tool presents information, much of it statistical, documenting the development of four critical areas of NASA responsibility for the period between 1979 and 1988. This volume includes detailed information on the development and operation of launch systems, space transportation, human spaceflight, and space science during this era. As such, it contains in-depth statistical information about the early Space Shuttle program through the return to flight in 1988, the early efforts to build a space station, the development of new launch systems, and the launching of seventeen space science missions. A companion volume will appear late in 1999, documenting the space applications, support operations, aeronautics, and resources aspects of NASA during the period between 1979 and 1988. NASA began its operations as the nation's civilian space agency in 1958 following the passage of the National Aeronautics and Space Act. It succeeded the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA). The new organization was charged with preserving the role of the United States "as a leader in aeronautical and space science and technology" and in its application, with expanding our knowledge of the Earth's atmosphere and space, and with exploring flight both within and outside the atmosphere. By the 1980s, NASA had established itself as an agency with considerable achievements on record. The decade was marked by the inauguration of the Space Shuttle flights and haunted by the 1986 Challenger accident that temporarily halted the program. The agency also enjoyed the strong support of President Ronald Reagan, who enthusiastically announced the start of both the Space Station program and the National Aerospace Plane program.

Rumerman, Judy A.↗
NASA NTRS1996

NASA Science Institutes Plan. Report of the NASA Science Institutes Team: Final Publication (Incorporating Public Comments and Revisions)

This NASA Science Institute Plan has been produced in response to direction from the NASA Administrator for the benefit of NASA Senior Management, science enterprise leaders, and Center Directors. It is intended to provide a conceptual framework for organizing and planning the conduct of science in support of NASA's mission through the creation of a limited number of science Institutes. This plan is the product of the NASA Science Institute Planning Integration Team (see Figure A). The team worked intensively over a three-month period to review proposed Institutes and produce findings for NASA senior management. The team's activities included visits to current NASA Institutes and associated Centers, as well as approximately a dozen non-NASA research Institutes. In addition to producing this plan, the team published a "Benchmarks" report. The Benchmarks report provides a basis for comparing NASA's proposed activities with those sponsored by other national science agencies, and identifies best practices to be considered in the establishment of NASA Science Institutes. Throughout the team's activities, a Board of Advisors comprised of senior NASA officials (augmented as necessary with other government employees) provided overall advice and counsel.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2013

Langmuir Probe Measurements Within the Discharge Channel of the 20-kW NASA-300M and NASA-300MS Hall Thrusters

NASA is presently developing a high-power, high-efficiency, long-lifetime Hall thruster for the Solar Electric Propulsion Technology Demonstration Mission. In support of this task, studies have been performed on the 20-kW NASA-300M Hall thruster to aid in the overall design process. The ability to incorporate magnetic shielding into a high-power Hall thruster was also investigated with the NASA- 300MS, a modified version of the NASA-300M. The inclusion of magnetic shielding would allow the thruster to push existing state-of-the-art technology in regards to service lifetime, one of the goals of the Technology Demonstration Mission. Langmuir probe measurements were taken within the discharge channels of both thrusters in order to characterize differences at higher power levels, as well as validate ongoing modeling efforts using the axisymmetric code Hall2De. Flush-mounted Langmuir probes were also used within the channel of the NASA-300MS to verify that magnetic shielding was successfully applied. Measurements taken from 300 V, 10 kW to 600 V, 20 kW have shown plasma potentials near anode potential and electron temperatures of 4 to 12 eV at the walls near the thruster exit plane of the NASA-300MS, verifying magnetic shielding and validating the design process at this power level. Channel centerline measurements on the NASA-300M from 300 V, 10 kW to 500 V, 20 kW show the electron temperature peak at approximately 0.1 to 0.2 channel lengths upstream of the exit plane, with magnitudes increasing with discharge voltage. The acceleration profiles appear to be centered about the exit plane with a width of approximately 0.3 to 0.4 channel lengths. Channel centerline measurements on the NASA-300MS were found to be more challenging due to additional probe heating. Ionization and acceleration zones appeared to move downstream on the NASA-300MS compared to the NASA-300M, as expected based on the shift in peak radial magnetic field. Additional measurements or alternative diagnostics will be needed to verify peak electron temperatures in the NASA-300MS and compare them with model predictions.

Hall thruster↗
NASA NTRS2016

The NASA Severe Thunderstorm Observations and Regional Modeling (NASA STORM) Project

The NASA Severe Storm Thunderstorm Observations and Regional Modeling(NASA STORM) project enhanced NASA’s severe weather research capabilities, building upon existing Earth Science expertise at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). During this project, MSFC extended NASA’s ground-based lightning detection capacity to include a readily deployable lightning mapping array (LMA). NASA STORM also enabled NASA’s Short-term Prediction and Research Transition (SPoRT) to add convection allowing ensemble modeling to its portfolio of regional numerical weather prediction (NWP) capabilities. As a part of NASA STORM, MSFC developed new open-source capabilities for analyzing and displaying weather radar observations integrated from both research and operational networks. These accomplishments enabled by NASA STORM are a step towards enhancing NASA’s capabilities for studying severe weather and positions them for any future NASA related severe storm field campaigns.

modeling↗
NASA NTRS2012

NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space

Success in executing future NASA space missions will depend on advanced technology developments that should already be underway. It has been years since NASA has had a vigorous, broad-based program in advanced space technology development, and NASA's technology base is largely depleted. As noted in a recent National Research Council report on the U.S. civil space program: Future U.S. leadership in space requires a foundation of sustained technology advances that can enable the development of more capable, reliable, and lower-cost spacecraft and launch vehicles to achieve space program goals. A strong advanced technology development foundation is needed also to enhance technology readiness of new missions, mitigate their technological risks, improve the quality of cost estimates, and thereby contribute to better overall mission cost management. Yet financial support for this technology base has eroded over the years. The United States is now living on the innovation funded in the past and has an obligation to replenish this foundational element. NASA has developed a draft set of technology roadmaps to guide the development of space technologies under the leadership of the NASA Office of the Chief Technologist. The NRC appointed the Steering Committee for NASA Technology Roadmaps and six panels to evaluate the draft roadmaps, recommend improvements, and prioritize the technologies within each and among all of the technology areas as NASA finalizes the roadmaps. The steering committee is encouraged by the initiative NASA has taken through the Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT) to develop technology roadmaps and to seek input from the aerospace technical community with this study.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2020

The Role of NASA Engineering & Safety Center (NESC) in Advancing NASA's Earth Science Missions (Past, Present, and Future)

The NASA Engineering & Safety Center (NESC) was established in 2003 to provide an independent technical resource for the resolution of challenging technical problems (through the use of studies, analysis, tests, etc.). Since its inception, NESC has completed nearly 1000 technical assessments for NASA’s Human Exploration and Operation Mission Directorate (HEOMD), Science Mission Directorate (SMD), Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), and Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD). Of the SMD related assessments, several were for the resolution of technical problems, analysis, or studies related to NASA’s Earth science missions in various phases of the project from design to operation. Some of the recent examples of NESC technical support for NASA (or NOAA) Earth science missions have been for: Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP), Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR), Cyclone Global Navigation Satellite System (CYGNSS), Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite (ICESat-II), Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS), and the soon to be launched collaboration mission with India, NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR). In this paper, we outline some of the technical challenges faced by these Earth science missions and describe how NESC contributed to their resolution. The case studies cover a wide range of disciplines involving space lidars, radars, electronics, attitude control systems, as well as Micrometeoroid Orbital Debris (MMOD) risk assessment impact to NASA missions. The efforts include strategies for risk mitigation, technical resolution of challenging problems, and failure root cause investigations combined with lessons learned reports to advance discipline knowledge, enhance NASA capabilities, and avoid future problems.

NASA↗
NASA NTRS2015

Internal NASA Study: NASAs Protoflight Research Initiative

The NASA Protoflight Research Initiative is an internal NASA study conducted within the Office of the Chief Engineer to better understand the use of Protoflight within NASA. Extensive literature reviews and interviews with key NASA members with experience in both robotic and human spaceflight missions has resulted in three main conclusions and two observations. The first conclusion is that NASA's Protoflight method is not considered to be "prescriptive." The current policies and guidance allows each Program/Project to tailor the Protoflight approach to better meet their needs, goals and objectives. Second, Risk Management plays a key role in implementation of the Protoflight approach. Any deviations from full qualification will be based on the level of acceptable risk with guidance found in NPR 8705.4. Finally, over the past decade (2004 - 2014) only 6% of NASA's Protoflight missions and 6% of NASA's Full qualification missions experienced a publicly disclosed mission failure. In other words, the data indicates that the Protoflight approach, in and of it itself, does not increase the mission risk of in-flight failure. The first observation is that it would be beneficial to document the decision making process on the implementation and use of Protoflight. The second observation is that If a Project/Program chooses to use the Protoflight approach with relevant heritage, it is extremely important that the Program/Project Manager ensures that the current project's requirements falls within the heritage design, component, instrument and/or subsystem's requirements for both the planned and operational use, and that the documentation of the relevant heritage is comprehensive, sufficient and the decision well documented. To further benefit/inform this study, a recommendation to perform a deep dive into 30 missions with accessible data on their testing/verification methodology and decision process to research the differences between Protoflight and Full Qualification missions' Design Requirements and Verification & Validation (V&V) (without any impact or special request directly to the project).

Protoflight↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Role of NASA Engineering & Safety Center (NESC) in Advancing NASA’s Astrophysics Missions (Past, Present, and Future)

The NASA Engineering & Safety Center (NESC) was established in 2003 (after the Columbia accident) to provide an independent technical resource for the resolution of challenging technical problems (through the use of studies, analysis, tests, etc.) for NASA programs and projects. Since its inception, NESC has completed nearly 1000 technical assessments for NASA’s Human Exploration and Operation Mission Directorate (HEOMD), Science Mission Directorate (SMD), Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), and Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD). Of the SMD related assessments, several were for the resolution of technical problems, analysis, or studies related to NASA’s astrophysics missions in various phases of the project from design to operation. Some of the recent examples of NESC technical support for NASA astrophysics missions have been for: Hubble Space Telescope (HST), Chandra X-ray Observatory (CXO), Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope, Kepler Space Telescope, Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), and Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA). In this paper, we outline some of the technical challenges faced by these astrophysics missions and describe how NESC contributed to their resolution. The case studies cover a wide range of disciplines involving space telescopes, detectors, lasers, and attitude control systems. These efforts include innovative solutions for extending the life of the missions, technical resolution of challenging problems, strategies for risk mitigation, and failure investigations combined with lessons learned reports to advance discipline knowledge, enhance NASA capabilities, and avoid future problems.

NASA↗
NASA NTRS1998

Issues in NASA Program and Project Management. Special Edition: A Collection of Papers on NASA Procedures and Guidance 7120.5A

A key aspect of NASA's new Strategic Management System is improving the way we plan, approve, execute and evaluate our programs and projects. To this end, NASA has developed the NASA Program and Project Management processes and Requirements-NASA Procedures and Guidelines (NPG) 7120.5A, which formally documents the "Provide Aerospace Products and Capabilities" crosscutting process, and defines the processes and requirements that are responsive to the Program/Project Management-NPD 7120.4A. The Program/Project Management-NPD 7120.4A, issued November 14, 1996, provides the policy for managing programs and projects in a new way that is aligned with the new NASA environment. An Agencywide team has spent thousands of hours developing the NASA Program and Project Management Processes and Requirements-NPG 7120.5A. We have created significant flexibility, authority and discretion for the program and project managers to exercise and carry out their duties, and have delegated the responsibility and the accountability for their programs and projects.

Edward J. Hoffman↗
NASA NTRS2007

NASA-STD 3001 and the Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH): Evolution of NASA-STD-3000

The Habitability & Environmental Factors and Space Medicine Divisions have developed the Space Flight Human System Standard (SFHSS) (NASA-STD-3001) to replace NASA-STD-3000 as a new NASA standard for all human spaceflight programs. The SFHSS is composed of 2 volumes. Volume 1, Crew Health, contains medical levels of care, permissible exposure limits, and fitness for duty criteria, and permissible outcome limits as a means of defining successful operating criteria for the human system. Volume 2, Habitability and Environmental Health, contains environmental, habitability and human factors standards. Development of the Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH), a companion to the standard, is currently under construction and entails the update and revision of NASA-STD-3000 data. This new handbook will, in the fashion of NASA STD-3000, assist engineers and designers in appropriately applying habitability, environmental and human factors principles to spacecraft design. Organized in a chapter-module-element structure, the HIDH will provide the guidance for the development of requirements, design considerations, lessons learned, example solutions, background research, and assist in the identification of gaps and research needs in the disciplines. Subject matter experts have been and continue to be solicited to participate in the update of the chapters. The purpose is to build the HIDH with the best and latest data, and provide a broad representation from experts in industry, academia, the military and the space program. The handbook and the two standards volumes work together in a unique way to achieve the required level of human-system interface. All new NASA programs will be required to meet Volumes 1 and 2. Volume 2 presents human interface goals in broad, non-verifiable standards. Volume 2 also requires that each new development program prepare a set of program-specific human factors requirements. These program-specific human and environmental factors requirements must be verifiable and tailored to assure the new system meets the Volume 2 standards. Programs will use the HIDH to write their verifiable program-specific requirements.

Pickett, Lynn↗
NASA NTRS2007

The Columbia Accident Investigation and The NASA Glenn Ballistic Impact Laboratory Contributions Supporting NASA's Return to Flight

On February 1, 2003, the Space Shuttle Columbia broke apart during reentry, resulting in loss of the vehicle and its seven crewmembers. For the next several months, an extensive investigation of the accident ensued involving a nationwide team of experts from NASA, industry, and academia, spanning dozens of technical disciplines. The Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB), a group of experts assembled to conduct an investigation independent of NASA, concluded in August, 2003 that the most likely cause of the loss of Columbia and its crew was a breach in the left wing leading edge Reinforced Carbon-Carbon (RCC) thermal protection system initiated by the impact of thermal insulating foam that had separated from the orbiters external fuel tank 81 seconds into the mission's launch. During reentry, this breach allowed superheated air to penetrate behind the leading edge and erode the aluminum structure of left wing, which ultimately led to the breakup of the orbiter. The findings of the CAIB were supported by ballistic impact tests, which simulated the physics of External Tank Foam impact on the RCC wing leading edge material. These tests ranged from fundamental material characterization tests to full-scale Orbiter Wing Leading Edge tests. Following the accident investigation, NASA spent the next 18 months focused on returning the shuttle safely to flight. In order to fully evaluate all potential impact threats from the many debris sources on the Space Shuttle during ascent, NASA instituted a significant impact testing program. The results from these tests led to the validation of high-fidelity computer models, capable of predicting actual or potential Shuttle impact events, were used in the certification of STS-114, NASA s Return to Flight Mission, as safe to fly. This presentation will provide a look into the inner workings of the Space Shuttle and a behind the scenes perspective on the impact analysis and testing done for the Columbia Accident Investigation and NASA's Return to Flight programs. In addition, highlights from recent Shuttle missions are presented.

Melis, Matthew E.↗