Closed-drift thruster investigations

Recent data obtained from a second generation closed-drift thruster design, employing Hall current acceleration is outlined. This type device is emphasized for electric propulsion for geocentric mission applications. Because geocentric mission profiles are best achieved with a specific impulse range of 1000 to 2000 s, closed-drift thrusters are well suited for this application, permitting time payload compromises intermediate of those possible with either electrothermal or electrostatic devices. A discussion is presented of the potential advantages of using a 1000 to 2000 s device for one way orbit raising of nonpower payloads. Because closed-drift thruster operation is not space charge limited, and requires only one power circuit for steady state operation, their application is technically advantageous. Beam, plasma and thrust characteristics are detailed for a range of operating conditions

Risk Acceptance Personality Paradigm: How We View What We Don't Know We Don't Know

The purpose of integrated hazard analyses, probabilistic risk assessments, failure modes and effects analyses, fault trees and many other similar tools is to give managers of a program some idea of the risks associated with their program. All risk tools establish a set of undesired events and then try to evaluate the risk to the program by assessing the severity of the undesired event and the likelihood of that event occurring. Some tools provide qualitative results, some provide quantitative results and some do both. However, in the end the program manager and his/her team must decide which risks are acceptable and which are not. Even with a wide array of analysis tools available, risk acceptance is often a controversial and difficult decision making process. And yet, today's space exploration programs are moving toward more risk based design approaches. Thus, risk identification and good risk assessment is becoming even more vital to the engineering development process. This paper explores how known and unknown information influences risk-based decisions by looking at how the various parts of our personalities are affected by what they know and what they don't know. This paper then offers some criteria for consideration when making risk-based decisions

The Integrated Hazard Analysis Integrator

Hazard analysis addresses hazards that arise in the design, development, manufacturing, construction, facilities, transportation, operations and disposal activities associated with hardware, software, maintenance, operations and environments. An integrated hazard is an event or condition that is caused by or controlled by multiple systems, elements, or subsystems. Integrated hazard analysis (IHA) is especially daunting and ambitious for large, complex systems such as NASA s Constellation program which incorporates program, systems and element components that impact others (International Space Station, public, International Partners, etc.). An appropriate IHA should identify all hazards, causes, controls and verifications used to mitigate the risk of catastrophic loss of crew, vehicle and/or mission. Unfortunately, in the current age of increased technology dependence, there is the tendency to sometimes overlook the necessary and sufficient qualifications of the integrator, that is, the person/team that identifies the parts, analyzes the architectural structure, aligns the analysis with the program plan and then communicates/coordinates with large and small components, each contributing necessary hardware, software and/or information to prevent catastrophic loss. As viewed from both Challenger and Columbia accidents, lack of appropriate communication, management errors and lack of resources dedicated to safety were cited as major contributors to these fatalities. From the accident reports, it would appear that the organizational impact of managers, integrators and safety personnel contributes more significantly to mission success and mission failure than purely technological components. If this is so, then organizations who sincerely desire mission success must put as much effort in selecting managers and integrators as they do when designing the hardware, writing the software code and analyzing competitive proposals. This paper will discuss the necessary and sufficient requirements of one of the significant contributors to mission success, the IHA integrator. Discussions will be provided to describe both the mindset required as well as deleterious assumptions/behaviors to avoid when integrating within a large scale system

Timing of Formal Phase Safety Reviews for Large-Scale Integrated Hazard Analysis

Integrated hazard analysis (IHA) is a process used to identify and control unacceptable risk. As such, it does not occur in a vacuum. IHA approaches must be tailored to fit the system being analyzed. Physical, resource, organizational and temporal constraints on large-scale integrated systems impose additional direct or derived requirements on the IHA. The timing and interaction between engineering and safety organizations can provide either benefits or hindrances to the overall end product. The traditional approach for formal phase safety review timing and content, which generally works well for small- to moderate-scale systems, does not work well for very large-scale integrated systems. This paper proposes a modified approach to timing and content of formal phase safety reviews for IHA. Details of the tailoring process for IHA will describe how to avoid temporary disconnects in major milestone reviews and how to maintain a cohesive end-to-end integration story particularly for systems where the integrator inherently has little to no insight into lower level systems. The proposal has the advantage of allowing the hazard analysis development process to occur as technical data normally matures