Panel Session I - NASA Space Science

An overview presented to 40th Space Congress

A New Approach to Mission Classification and Risk Management for NASA Space Flight Missions

The NASA risk classification system is meant to uide space mission development from formulation through completion of implementation. It is also meant to be the basis on which program and project managers develop and implement appropriate mission assurance and risk management strategies for the mission. In order to be useful, the risk classification system needs to provide consistent and reproducible classification results so that missions may be designed with the appropriate components, subsystems, and testing philosophy, all of which impacts mission schedule and cost. In a cost-constrained environment, a clear, robust, and reproducible approach to mission implementation becomes more critical than ever before. Once a project's risk classification level is established, the managers can define the appropriate management controls, systems engineering processes, mission assurance requirements, safety, and testing for that mission. The current NASA mission classification system will be reviewed before a new system is proposed.NASA manages space flight missions according to a four-tiered classification which assumes increasing levels of risk. We argue that risk does not change between classes. What changes are the means available to reduce risk. In performance-driven missions, the project will spend money in order to maintain performance without reducing margins. In cost-constrained missions, performance will be reduced in order to stay within budget or to maintain schedule: measurement requirements may be traded, design life may be reduced, or both. We then propose a new approach to the classification of NASA space flight missions, based on an assessment of how flexible the requirements, how exquisite the measurements, how long the lifetime, and how rigid the budget.Our proposed approach makes possible a clearer differentiation between classification levels and more effective guidance to program and project managers

Low-Cost Desalination Unit: Direct Contact Membrane Distillation

According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 783 million people do not have access to a reliable clean water source. With this many people in the world without access to clean water, a solution to this problem is highly essential. The objective of this project is to create a low-cost compact desalination unit that can be used to turn contaminated water into pure drinking. For our design, a direct contact membrane distillation (DCMD) approach was used. The DCMD system allows only for the evaporated feed water to pass through the membrane and therefore causes an increase in the amount of clean drinking water in the permeate tank. A diagram of the system and its components can be found below. The DCMD process provides a system that uses much lower temperatures and pressures than other distillation processes, thus requiring a considerably smaller amount of energy. Along with consuming low amounts of energy, the final design is a fraction of the cost of other desalination units. The low cost and low energy design will permit areas clean drinking water that previously could not afford more expensive systems. Based on experimental data and the size of this unit, a 0.39 liter increase in clean water, per day is possible. The design is simple enough that minor part upgrades or larger scaled models can be made, allowing for an increase in the clean water output.https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/capstone/1051/thumbnail.jp

Valuing Rigor in the Risk Management Process

NASA, as an organization, takes risk management (RM) seriously, and for most projects, the risk management process is exemplar. There can be challenges, though, with defining RM processes. For example, many different risk analysis methodologies are available, they can be applied with varying degrees of rigor, and they can have different value depending on how projects use them. In particular, risk analysis methodologies vary considerably in the level of quantitative detail, with more probabilistic techniques encouraged in some situations. We discussed these processes and methodologies with ten project managers (PM) at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). Our intent was not to prove with some level of statistical significance that some are more helpful than others, but rather to obtain a general understanding of how projects are identifying, and thinking, about risks. This paper describes some of the available risk processes and methodologies, and provides some insights about the benefits that can gained from their use. We provide an in-depth discussion of one quantitative methodology, Probabilistic Risk Assessments (PRAs), and conclude with a few insights from observed best practices

EoC Study Update to Examine the Cost, Schedule and Technical Changes to NASA Projects

The original National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Explanation of Change (EoC) study was conducted in 2010 to understand the underlying causes of cost and schedule growth. The first study consisted of 25 missions launched from 2000 to 2010 and looked at the events that led to growth. These events were categorized into different bins that were rolled up to quantify whether the growth was due to internal planning, or internal execution, or from external forces and found that the growth was evenly distributed among those three categories. The result of the study presented nine considerations focused at reducing growth due to project external events and internal planning events. Although no one 'magic bullet' consideration was discovered in the previous work, the nine considerations taken as a whole were postulated to help reduce cost and schedule change in future NASA missions. A recent update was conducted that included investigating 8 missions developed since the previous study to determine if the results were different. Cost, schedule, and mass increases were analyzed from the start of Phase B through Preliminary Design Review and Critical Design Review to Launch. As shown in this paper, the results are better with overall cost and schedule growth being reduced. The paper will show a comparison of the previous results to the updated results to show specific reductions and provide an explanation of which recommendations were followed

A Guide for Traffic Safety Practitioners: Best Practices for Increasing Seat Belt Use in Rural Communities

Rural motor vehicle occupants are at an increased risk for crash-related deaths compared to their urban counter-parts. One contributing factor is the lower use of seat belts in rural areas compared to urban areas. Seat belts are one of the most important strategies for reducing crash-related injuries and fatalities among road users. Preventing crash-related injuries and fatalities requires programs that promote seat belt use among rural drivers and passengers. Rural traffic safety practitioners can implement best practices, including evidence-based and promising programs, to increase seat belt use in rural areas. The Best Practices Guide for Increasing Seat Belt Use in Rural Communities is designed for rural traffic safety practitioners to plan, implement, and evaluate programs to increase seat belt use in rural communities. The guide describes evidence-based and promising seat belt programs, and shares lessons learned from traffic safety practitioners and experts. It also includes examples of seat belt programs that have been successfully adapted for use in different settings, including rural communities. The guide was informed by a literature review and environmental scan, and discussions with traffic safety practitioners and experts. It contains four modules to help traffic safety practitioners develop, implement, and evaluate rural seat belt programs: understanding seat belt use in rural communities; selecting evidence-based or promising rural seat belt program models; implementing a rural seat belt program; and evaluating a rural seat belt program