ALBERT

Description: Evolution of Space Station Freedom is justified for reasons which vary from more effectively utilizing the manned base to providing a means for incorporating new technologies as they become available. Increasing or, more importantly, balancing the resources that are provided to the users is very critical to effectively utilizing the station. At permanently manned phases of the program, there will be four crew members that will be supporting and monitoring three laboratories. Accepted user mission databases have shown a demand for more crew, power, and volume than is provided by the baseline. As the work done in space by NASA continues to expand, the station will take a more active role in the missions. New functionalities for its operation and support of other missions will be required. One important driver for growth, particularly in the area of structures, is the inability of the baseline configuration to store all the Orbital Replacement Units (ORU) spares that will be required on orbit. New technologies drive growth by providing a means of streamlining operations and possibly reducing the demand on ExtraVehicular Activity (EVA). They will also ensure that the station does not become plagued with obsolete equipment.

Description: Past designs of complex aerospace systems involved an environment consisting of collocated design teams with project managers, technical discipline experts, and other experts (e.g., manufacturing and systems operation). These experts were generally qualified only on the basis of past design experience and typically had access to a limited set of integrated analysis tools. These environments provided less than desirable design fidelity, often lead to the inability of assessing critical programmatic and technical issues (e.g., cost, risk, technical impacts), and generally derived a design that was not necessarily optimized across the entire system. The continually changing, modern aerospace industry demands systems design processes that involve the best talent available (no matter where it resides) and access to the the best design and analysis tools. A solution to these demands involves a design environment referred to as collaborative engineering. The collaborative engineering environment evolving within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a capability that enables the Agency's engineering infrastructure to interact and use the best state-of-the-art tools and data across organizational boundaries. Using collaborative engineering, the collocated team is replaced with an interactive team structure where the team members are geographical distributed and the best engineering talent can be applied to the design effort regardless of physical location. In addition, a more efficient, higher quality design product is delivered by bringing together the best engineering talent with more up-to-date design and analysis tools. These tools are focused on interactive, multidisciplinary design and analysis with emphasis on the complete life cycle of the system, and they include nontraditional, integrated tools for life cycle cost estimation and risk assessment. NASA has made substantial progress during the last two years in developing a collaborative engineering environment. NASA is planning to use this collaborative engineering engineering infrastructure to provide better aerospace systems life cycle design and analysis, which includes analytical assessment of the technical and programmatic aspects of a system from "cradle to grave." This paper describes the recent NASA developments in the area of collaborative engineering, the benefits (realized and anticipated) of using the developed capability, and the long-term plans for implementing this capability across Agency.

Description: An in-space construction (erectable) approach to assembling Freedom is planned but the increasing complexity of the station design along with a decrease in shuttle capability over the past several years has led to an assembly sequence that requires more resources (EVA, lift, volume) than the shuttle can provide given a fixed number of flights. One way to address these issues is to adopt a pre-integrated approach to assembling Freedom. A pre-integrated approach combines station primary structure and distributed systems into discrete sections that are assembled and checked out on the ground. The section is then launched as a single structural entity on the shuttle and attached to the orbiting station is then launched as a single structural entity on the shuttle and attached to the orbiting station with a minimum of EVA. The feasibility of a pre-integrated approach to assembling Freedon is discussed. The structural configuration, packaging, and shuttle integration of discrete pre-integrated elements for Freedom assembly are discussed. It is shown that the pre-integrated approach to assembly reduces EVA and increases shuttle margin with respect to mass, volume, and center of gravity limits when compared to the baseline Freedom assembly sequence.

Description: A toolset for the rapid development of small satellite systems has been created. The objective of this tool is to support the definition of spacecraft mission concepts to satisfy a given set of mission and instrument requirements. The objective of this report is to provide an introduction to understanding and using the SMALLSAT Model. SMALLSAT is a computer-aided Phase A design and technology evaluation tool for small satellites. SMALLSAT enables satellite designers, mission planners, and technology program managers to observe the likely consequences of their decisions in terms of satellite configuration, non-recurring and recurring cost, and mission life cycle costs and availability statistics. It was developed by Princeton Synergetic, Inc. and User Systems, Inc. as a revision of the previous TECHSAT Phase A design tool, which modeled medium-sized Earth observation satellites. Both TECHSAT and SMALLSAT were developed for NASA.

Description: Past designs of complex aerospace systems involved an environment consisting of collocated design teams with project managers, technical discipline experts, and other experts (e.g. manufacturing and systems operations). These experts were generally qualified only on the basis of past design experience and typically had access to a limited set of integrated analysis tools. These environments provided less than desirable design fidelity, often lead to the inability of assessing critical programmatic and technical issues (e.g., cost risk, technical impacts), and generally derived a design that was not necessarily optimized across the entire system. The continually changing, modern aerospace industry demands systems design processes that involve the best talent available (no matter where it resides) and access to the best design and analysis tools. A solution to these demands involves a design environment referred to as collaborative engineering. The collaborative engineering environment evolving within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a capability that enables the Agency's engineering infrastructure to interact and use the best state-of-the-art tools and data across organizational boundaries. Using collaborative engineering, the collocated team is replaced with an interactive team structure where the team members are geographically distributed and the best engineering talent can be applied to the design effort regardless of physical location. In addition, a more efficient, higher quality design product is delivered by bringing together the best engineering talent with more up-to-date design and analysis tools. These tools are focused on interactive, multidisciplinary design and analysis with emphasis on the complete life cycle of the system, and they include nontraditional, integrated tools for life cycle cost estimation and risk assessment. NASA has made substantial progress during the last two years in developing a collaborative engineering environment. NASA is planning to use this collaborative engineering infrastructure to provide better aerospace systems life cycle design and analysis, which includes analytical assessment of the technical and programmatic aspects of a system from "cradle to grave." This paper describes the recent NASA developments in the area of collaborative engineering, the benefits (realized and anticipated) of using the developed capability, and the long-term plans for implementing this capability across the Agency.

Description: On January 14, 2004, the President of the United States announced a new plan to explore space and extend a human presence across our solar system. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) established the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) to develop and field a Constellation Architecture that will bring the Space Exploration vision to fruition. The Constellation Architecture includes a human-rated Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) segment, managed by the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), comprised of the First Stage (FS), Upper Stage (US), and Upper Stage Engine (USE) elements. The CLV s purpose is to provide safe and reliable crew and cargo transportation into Low Earth Orbit (LEO), as well as insertion into trans-lunar trajectories. The architecture's Spacecraft segment includes, among other elements, the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), managed by the Johnson Space Flight Center (JSC), which is launched atop the CLV. MSFC is also responsible for CLV and CEV stack integration. This paper provides an overview of the Avionics and Software integration approach (which includes the Integrated System Health Management (ISHM) functions), both within the CLV, and across the CEV interface; it addresses the requirements to be met, logistics of meeting those requirements, and the roles of the various groups. The Avionics Integration and Vehicle Systems Test (ANST) Office was established at the MSFC with system engineering responsibilities for defining and developing the integrated CLV Avionics and Software system. The AIVST Office has defined two Groups, the Avionics and Software Integration Group (AVSIG), and the Integrated System Simulation and Test Integration Group (ISSTIG), and four Panels which will direct trade studies and analyses to ensure the CLV avionics and software meet CLV system and CEV interface requirements. The four panels are: 1) Avionics Integration Panel (AIP), 2) Software Integration Panel, 3) EEE Panel, and 4) Systems Simulation and Test Panel. Membership on the groups and panels includes the MSFC representatives from the requisite engineering disciplines, the First Stage, the Upper Stage, the Upper Stage Engine projects, and key personnel from other NASA centers. The four panels will take the results of trade studies and analyses and develop documentation in support of Design Analysis Cycle Reviews and ultimately the System Requirements Review.

Description: The Vision for Space Exploration provides direction for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to embark on a robust space exploration program that will advance the Nation s scientific, security, and economic interests. This plan calls for a progressive expansion of human capabilities beyond low earth orbit seeking to answer profound scientific and philosophical questions while responding to discoveries along the way. In addition, the Vision articulates the strategy for developing the revolutionary new technologies and capabilities required for the future exploration of the solar system. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration faces new challenges in successfully implementing the Vision. In order to implement a sustained and affordable exploration endeavor it is vital for NASA to do business differently. This paper provides an overview of the strategy-to-task-to-technology process being used by NASA s Exploration Systems Mission Directorate to develop the requirements and system acquisition details necessary for implementing a sustainable exploration vision.