wwww.nasa.gov

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NESC

2010

NASA ENGINEERING & SAFETY CENTER

TECHNICAL UPDATE

NESC OVERVIEW

Welcome to the NASA Engineering and Safety Center

The members of the NASA Engineering and Safety 

Center (NESC) are pleased to present our 2010 

NESC Technical Update. The primary goal of the NESC 

is to provide the engineering data and recommendations 

needed for NASA Centers and Missions Directorates to 

make better informed decisions. To accomplish this 

goal, the NESC relies on our Agency-wide, diverse, 

multi-generation teams to enable robust, timely 

and innovative solutions to NASA’s tough technical 

problems. It is our team members, especially the 

hundreds of matrixed personnel, who are the true 

strength of the NESC. We are very proud to highlight 

again this year the outstanding contributions to the 

Agency of our broad-based teams. 

The NESC continued to focus on providing real-time 

problem solving for the Space Shuttle and International 

Space Station Programs, with particular attention on 

the Space Shuttle as it flies out its remaining missions. 

We continued to actively support numerous critical 

robotic spacecraft missions, including Mars Science 

Laboratory and the James Webb Space Telescope. The 

NESC completed several significant testing milestones 

as part of our assessments this year. The composite 

crew module completed full-scale testing at the 

Langley Research Center and the first drop test of the 

crew module water landing modeling assessment was 

conducted at the U.S. Army Test Center. The NESC 

also actively engaged in a number of study teams 

exploring options for the future of human spaceflight 

exploration.

This year the NESC’s contributions reached beyond 

NASA. We applied our technical expertise to help 

address critical national and international issues. The 

NESC supported the Department of Transportation by 

providing electrical, software and systems engineering 

expertise in their investigation of unintended 

accelerations on certain automobile models. NASA 

and the NESC were also called into action to support 

the care and rescue of the 33 trapped miners in Chile.

Sharing our collective expertise and the lessons 

learned from our activities is important to the NESC 

and NASA as a whole, and we continue to look for 

new ways to communicate across the Agency and with 

our stakeholders. This publication includes many of 

our broadly applicable lessons learned and illustrates 

the collaborative model that has enabled us to be 

successful. As NASA prepares for the next phase of 

exploration, the NESC will continue to evolve to meet 

the needs of the Agency, while remaining committed to 

the premise on which we were founded — engineering 

excellence. 

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center Team in 2010
The NESC performed a review and assessment 

of structural dynamics due to the vibroacoustic 

environment predicted during operation of the 

A-3 test stand when testing large-thrust, liquidfueled engines. Illustration of the A-3 Test Stand 

under construction at Stennis Space Center.
CONTENTS

NESC Overview ............................ 6

Technical Highlights ..................... 12

Exploration Systems .................... 13

Space Operations ......................... 24

Science .................................... 28

General .................................... 33

Center Focus ................................ 42

Awards ......................................... 54

Biographies .................................. 56

Alumni .......................................... 60

Publications .................................. 61

“In these changing times, it is comforting to know that there is a NASA organization, the 

NESC, that can perform in-depth technical reviews and provide engineering advice based 

solely on the technical merits of the case. This year I will continue to rely on the NESC’s 

advice even more, as we face challenges to safely retire the Space Shuttle, and to facilitate 

development of a safe commercial human spaceflight transportation system.” 

— Bryan D. O’Connor

NASA Chief Safety and Mission Assurance Officer
PEs SEO

NCEs MTSO

Systems

Engineering Office 

Office of the 

NESC Director Principal Engineers

Management and 

Technical Support Office

NESC Chief Engineers NASA

Technical Fellows

NASA Office of Chief Engineer

NASA Engineering and Safety Center

NASA Industry

• Aerosciences

• Avionics

• Electrical Power

• Flight Mechanics

• Guidance, Navigation

 and Control

• Human Factors

• Life Support/Active

 Thermal

• Loads and Dynamics

• Materials

• Mechanical Systems

• Nondestructive

 Evaluation

• Passive Thermal

• Propulsion

• Software

• Structures

Academia

 Chief Safety & Mission

Assurance Officer

NRB NESC Review Board

Technical Disciplines Teams (TDTs)

A Unique Agency Resource

The NESC Review Board (NRB) holds weekly video conferences to peer review and approve all NESC technical assessments and reports. All technical 

decisions made by the NESC are products of the NRB.

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) works to 

ensure safety and mission success by performing independent testing, analysis, and assessments of NASA’s high-risk 

projects. To accomplish this, the NESC has established a 

model that takes advantage of the diversity of the NASA 

workforce while reaching out to and engaging the broader 

technical community outside of NASA. Two unique features 

of this model are the technical discipline teams (TDTs) and 

the NESC Review Board (NRB).

TDTs provide a reservoir of experts that supply the members 

to form teams (called assessment teams) poised to address 

issues and solve technical problems confronting the Agency. 

A NASA Technical Fellow leads each team in one of 15 specific technical disciplines. The TDT members are experts 

in their disciplines and come from across NASA, academia, 

industry and other Government agencies. The NRB is the 

decision-making body of the NESC. The Technical Fellows 

are members of the NRB, along with NESC Chief Engineers 

from each Center and the rest of the NESC’s leadership. 

This structure brings a diversity that results in robust decisions. 

Another important aspect of the NESC is its independence 

from mission directorates, their programs, and Center leadership. The NESC reports directly to the NASA Chief Engineer and is meant to be a resource for the entire Agency. 

It also provides an alternate reporting path through which 

problems can be brought to the surface and addressed.

The NESC Organization

NESC OVERVIEW
NRB NESC Review Board

NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC)

PEs SEO

NCEs MTSO

Systems

Engineering Office 

Office of the NESC Director

Principal Engineers

Management and 

Technical Support Office

NESC Chief Engineers NASA

Technical Fellows

Management and Technical

Support Office (MTSO)

The Management and Technical 

Support Office is the business office of 

the NESC and performs the necessary 

legwork for contracting and maintaining 

partnerships. The NESC has worked 

with over 100 companies or individual 

consultants, with the companies 

ranging in size from major corporations 

down to small consulting firms. In 

addition, several universities and 

academic institutions have contributed 

to NESC activities.

A Diverse Group of Technical Experts

Principal Engineers Office (PEO)

The Principal Engineers Office carries 

the primary responsibility for the 

performance of technical assessments. 

The principal engineers and back-up 

principal engineers lead assessment 

teams and provide guidance and 

assistance for other assessments team 

leads.

Office of the Director

The top tier of leadership for the NESC 

is the Office of the Director, which 

includes the NESC Director, Deputy 

Director, Deputy Director for Safety, 

Chief Scientist, and a representative 

from the astronaut corps detailed to the 

NESC as the NESC Chief Astronaut. 

The Office of the Director also chairs 

the NRB. 

NASA Technical Fellows

The NASA Technical Fellows are NASA’s 

senior technical experts in 15 engineering 

disciplines. They are the stewards of 

their discipline and as such they sponsor 

discipline-enhancing activities and 

educate the Agency through workshops 

and conferences, and oversee online 

communities.

NESC Chief Engineers (NCEs)

The NESC Chief Engineers are the 

primary NESC points of contact at 

each Center. The NCE’s proximity 

ensures that they can closely track 

the projects that are active at their 

Centers. They also help to coordinate 

the facilities and resources of each 

Center as required to support NESC 

assessments and activities. 

Systems Engineering Office (SEO)

The Systems Engineering Office 

provides system engineering and 

integration for assessments and other 

NESC activities. The SEO and the 

SEO-led Systems Engineering TDT also 

provide technical expertise in systems 

engineering processes such as systems 

analysis, statistics, data mining and 

trending, and requirements analysis. In 

addition, the SEO provides the technical 

integration for the NESC’s internal 

operations, including processing all 

requests for NESC support. 

The NESC is organized into 6 offices, which together comprise the NESC Review Board or NRB. The 

NRB reviews and approves all products and recommendations made by the NESC. The success 

of the NRB, like that of the NESC model in general, is a result of its broad diversity combined with 

outstanding technical competence. TDT members are called on to support assessment teams and 

help address issues being investigated by the NESC.

NESC OVERVIEW
Systems

Engineering 

Office 

Management

and Technical 

Support Office

NESC Chief

Engineers

Write final report

NRB approves 

final report

Team formulates 

findings, observations 

and recommendations

Outbrief to

Stakeholders

Conversion to

NASA Technical 

Memorandum

General

Distribution

Technical 

Bulletins

Lessons

Learned

Form and lead 

Assessment Team

NRB

NRB

NRB

NESC Chief Engineers

Make request

NASA Other federal agencies

Assessment Team

Assessment Team

NASA Technical Fellows (TFs)

Develop plan

Approve plan

Assessment Lead (NESC Principal Engineers) 

Systems Engineering Office Process request 

Conduct initial

evaluation

Accept request

+ Technical Discipline Teams (TDTs)

Performs testing, 

modeling, analysis,

and data collection

PEs

NCEs SEO MTSO

TFs + TDTs

2

3

1

After the plan is approved, the team 

proceeds with the assessment. This 

may entail testing, data analysis, 

literature searches, interviews, and 

modeling. The time-frame for 

completion can vary from several 

days to several years. As the 

assessment draws to a close, the 

team formulates findings, observations and recommendations drawn 

from the data produced during the 

assessment, and publishes them in 

a final report. The final report is 

presented to the NRB for approval 

and then briefed to the stakeholders.

All requests are screened and an 

initial evaluation is performed. 

Recommendations for accepting 

the task are presented to the NESC 

Review Board (NRB). The NRB then 

decides whether to proceed with the 

assessment.

Once the NESC has decided to 

accept a request, a lead is assigned 

to form a team to run the assessment, usually from the Principal 

Engineers Office. Typically, an 

assessment team will include representatives from the different NESC 

offices, plus TDT members chosen 

by the Technical Fellows that 

possess the skills and expertise 

needed for the particular assessment. The team develops the 

assessment plan, which goes back

to the NRB for comments and 

approval.

Assessments form the structure and define the process the NESC uses to investigate and solve technical issues. 

The process outlined below can be tailored to accommodate specific requirements of a given assessment.

Making Engineering Decisions Based on Data

NESC OVERVIEW
The NESC is an incredible technical resource available to help solve complex technical problems and 

provide independent risk assessments. The NESC will very quickly bring to bear exceptional technical 

expertise, analysis and testing capability in any required technical discipline to provide an independent 

assessment. This is crucial given the risks trades we deal with in the Space Shuttle Program. 

— John P. McManamen, Chief Engineer, Space Shuttle Program

After performing an assessment, the team develops a final 

engineering report documenting findings, observations, and 

recommendations. The engineering report is peer reviewed 

and approved by NESC Review Board members. Approved 

reports are not only provided to the assessment’s stakeholders but also available to those who require the information 

for future programs and projects. The report captures all 

independent test data and analysis performed. Supporting rationale for the recommendations is also recorded.

All the data collected serves as objective information for 

decision makers. While the engineering report informs and 

benefits the decision makers on the current topic being assessed, additional value is gained from having a resource for 

other programs and projects to reference when they experience similar issues. The report may also serve as lessons 

learned or guidance for future programs and projects to follow. Archived engineering reports may be located through 

the NESC website.

The Value of Engineering Reports

Safety & Mission

Assurance at Centers 4%

Program

Management 16%

NESC 

23%

Engineering & Scientific 

Organization 43%

Source of Accepted Requests: 389 Total

Anonymous 1% 

Other NASA Offices 1%

Office of Chief

Engineer 3%

Center

Management 2%

Office of Safety and

Mission Assurance 3%

External

to Agency 4%

2010 Technical Discipline Team Composition

All statistics as of Nov. 4, 2010

Aeronautics Exploration Space Operations General Science

Yearly totals 4 54 46 53 47

Aeronautics Exploration Space Operations General Science

4 54 46 56

56

63

63

53 61 52

Industry 22%

Other U.S.

Gov. 3%

University 5%

NASA 70%

Source of Accepted Requests by Mission Directorate: 389 Total

Totals by

calendar year

NESC OVERVIEW
The NASA Technical Fellows (TFs) are in a 

unique position to continually assess the 

state of their disciplines through interactions with their Technical Discipline Teams 

(TDT) and their participation in a wide variety of NESC assessments and project 

reviews. They perform a formal state-ofthe-discipline (SoD) assessment based on 

these experiences to highlight successes, 

challenges, and trends in the readiness of 

the discipline to address NASA’s missions. 

In these SoD assessments, the TFs present the top discipline technical challenges, 

which help provide a roadmap for future technology development within specific technical areas. Assessment of the 

discipline is an ongoing effort that is aided by capturing lessons learned during NESC’s assessments. 

In 2010, five such SoD assessments were 

completed and communicated to senior 

NASA management. The NASA TFs for 

Flight Mechanics, Passive Thermal, Materials, Structures, and Non-Destructive Evaluation all presented their SoD presentations 

to the NASA Chief Engineer, the Center 

engineering directors, and the NASA Chief 

Safety and Mission Assurance Officer. Assessing the SoD is a critical role for the 

NASA TF and can be an effective tool for 

maintaining the health and readiness of the technical disciplines and developing technical roadmaps to execute 

NASA’s missions.

The NESC leadership welcomes the new Resident Engineers named for 2011. They are, from 

left, Kelly Currin/KSC, Jonathan Dickey/SSC, Brian Anderson/JSC and Jared Dervan/MSFC.

Resident Engineer Program Advances to Its Second Year

The NESC Resident Engineer (RE) Program 

moves into its second year of operation for 

2011 with the selection of four new REs. The 

Program involves the competitive selection of 

junior engineers that work with the NESC for 

one year. Selected REs remain resident at their 

home Centers but are assigned to the NESC. 

While working with the NESC, the NASA Technical Fellows and Principal Engineers, they 

gain hands-on experience solving the Agency’s toughest challenges. They participate on 

a number of multi-Center NESC assessment 

teams and work other projects assigned by 

a mentor. The goal is to provide the REs with 

diverse assignments and exposure to multiple 

sub-disciplines, while developing a broader 

systems engineering perspective.

In February 2010, the President and the NASA Administrator 

announced a strategy to increase commercial participation in 

U.S. human spaceflight. This announcement marked a fundamental change for how NASA would perform their human 

spaceflight mission in the future and presents a number of 

challenges to the Agency as it moves into this new era. The 

NASA Technical Fellows (TFs), together with their Technical 

Discipline Teams (TDTs), proactively responded to this challenge by participating in technical reviews and interchanges 

with prospective commercial providers, as well as visits to 

commercial facilities. In May 2010, the TFs met with potential 

commercial providers to discuss considerations for launch 

abort system, landing system, and composite crew module 

designs. During this exchange, commercial providers had 

the opportunity to interact with NASA TFs and members of 

their TDTs to discuss their individual designs. The NASA TFs 

and their TDTs have also assisted in the identification of standards that might be applied by the commercial sector in the 

development of crewed spacecraft, as well as the identification of standard modifications and improvements that might 

better enable the development in a commercial environment.

Administrator Bolden with Members from five companies awarded Space 

Act Agreements for the development of crew concepts, technology demonstrations and investigations for future commercial support of human

spaceflight. 

NASA Technical Fellows Perform State-of-the-Discipline Assessments

Supporting NASA’s Commercial Space Operations Development

NASA Technical Fellow Steven Rickman

NESC OVERVIEW
A community of practice (CoP) is a network of individuals 

who are dedicated to, and have personal experience in a 

given engineering discipline. Through the office of the Chief 

Engineer, the NASA Technical Fellows (TF) have developed 

online communities as part of their discipline stewardship 

charter with the goal of sharing knowledge across all the 

Centers. The CoPs are part of the NASA Engineering Network (https://nen.nasa.gov) and are accessible to all NASA 

employees.

In 2010 seven new communities and three sub-communities 

were rolled out, bringing the total of sites to thirteen. In addition, a new community was formed around Autonomous 

Rendezvous & Docking (AR&D). This unique community is 

co-led by the NASA TF for Guidance, Navigation and Control 

and his predecessor.

Membership and use of the CoPs continues to grow. The 

sites are used to highlight key lessons learned, identify standards and best practices, distribute NESC Technical Bulletins, provide a forum for online discussions, and share videos 

and papers of interest. A few communities added an Ask an 

Expert function that allows anyone to pose questions that 

vetted experts respond to online. Both question and answer 

are captured and available on the CoPs.

The NASA Technical Fellows encourage all members of each 

community to contribute their individual knowledge, lessons 

learned, and other discipline expertise to the CoP sites.

Technical Fellows Engaging

Practitioners through Communities 

of Practice

The NESC Academy: Learning From the Past, Looking to the Future

The establishment of the NESC Academy helps ensure that 

the body of knowledge of senior NASA scientists and engineers remains viable and accessible. The NESC Academy 

provides the forum through which recognized discipline experts can teach the critical competencies to the NASA workforce. Initially, the classes were a three-day instructor-led 

course. The course was video taped for online delivery. 

The NESC Academy is updating the knowledge capture and 

delivery method opting for shorter video courses created 

directly by the Subject Matter Expert of the particular discipline. The focus of the content is to explain and describe 

NASA technical problems, their solutions, and impart lessons learned.

Going forward, the original Academy courses will be reconfigured and separated into shorter segments with easier web 

accessibility to the content. A re-design of the NESC Academy website will occur in 2011.

The original instructor-led Academy courses, with the exception of the Innovative Engineering course, are still available 

online at http://www.nescacademy.org. 

On the Web

NESC nesc.nasa.gov

NESC Academy www.nescacademy.org

NASA Engineering Network nen.nasa.gov

Learning About Us Through the

NESC Website

The NESC website is a communications tool that makes information available on the NESC’s current and past activities. 

In addition, the NESC has launched a Facebook page, and 

other tools for public outreach efforts. 

The NESC website has a large collection of technical reports 

and bulletins and information on how to contact the NESC. 

The information highlights include:

•	 NESC Technical Reports: All publicly available NESC

engineering reports can be downloaded. 

•	 NESC Technical Bulletins: A one-page bulletin released

when new engineering knowledge is developed or learned 

that could be broadly applicable to the larger technical 

community.

•	 Technical Update: An annual summary of the NESC’s

technical activities.

•	 NESC News: A newsletter designed to help keep the

NASA community and public informed of NESC activities. 

A free subscription is available from the NESC website.

•	 Contact Information: NASA engineers can contact the

NESC either directly or anonymously to request NESC 

engagement in NASA’s technical problems, or contact 

the NCE at their Center to discuss a potential request for 

NESC assistance.

NESC OVERVIEW
TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

The NESC collected data from water drop tests of 

an Orion boilerplate crew module. The data is being 

used to improve water drop simulations and was also 

used by the Orion Project.
TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

EXPLORATION SYSTEMS

Problem: Water landings of the Orion crew module (CM) 

will induce non-linear transient dynamics in the CM structure that are difficult to accurately model/predict. Reliable 

and accurate predictions are essential since water landing 

is driving critical structural elements of the CM design and 

overall mass. The Orion Project employed the finite-element tool LS-DYNA® to model the structural design of the 

Orion CM. In the absence of sufficient experimental data, 

it was not clear whether the Orion LS-DYNA® model could 

accurately predict the interaction of the CM with the water 

during landing, as well as the CM’s flexible body structural 

behavior with any reasonable degree of certainty. While 

the Orion Project and other NASA programs are critically 

dependent on the validity of the answers generated by the 

LS-DYNA® tool, limited test data existed to validate the 

model predictions.

NESC Contribution: The NESC performed a series 

of controlled drop tests of a full-sized Orion CM boilerplate to characterize vehicle responses to water impact 

and compare the results with model predictions. A team 

was formed with subject matter experts from GSFC, GRC, 

JPL, KSC, LaRC, WFF, JSC and industry contractors/consultants to conduct the testing in a littoral facility at the 

United States Army Aberdeen Test Center. The CM simulator was instrumented to measure rigid body accelerations at the vehicle’s center of gravity and preliminary heat 

shield pressures and strains. Data sets were obtained for 

two vertical drop entry angles at nominal descent velocities. Test predictions were generated from an LS-DYNA®

model of the boilerplate CM using the Orion Project’s fluid 

mesh and modeling parameters. Measured water contact 

conditions, including CM attitude and velocity, were used 

to initialize the simulations to enable a direct comparison 

of the measured data and simulation results.

Results: The simulation predictions and drop test data 

showed inadequate correlation. Comparison of predicted 

and measured acceleration data indicated improvements 

were necessary in the modeling approach. Subsequently, a refined water mesh was developed and an alternate 

method for characterizing the fluid-structure contact was 

implemented. These changes led to a strong correlation 

between the accelerations generated by the LS-DYNA® 

model and the test data. A second set of water drop tests 

are planned for early 2011 to measure heatshield pressures and strains. The independent drop tests and subsequent evaluation were being used by the Orion Project, 

providing early risk mitigation for the next crewed vehicle.

Orion Crew Module Water Drop Testing and Modeling

Test drop of an Orion crew module boilerplate to measure the acceleration profile at the vehicle center of gravity. A total of 18 drops were performed at the 

US Army’s Aberdeen Test Center, MD. The CM was previously flown on the Max Launch Abort System Project.
Problem: In January 2007, the NASA Administrator and 

Associate Administrator for the Exploration Systems Mission 

Directorate chartered the NESC to design, build, and test a 

full-scale crew module (CM) primary structure, using carbon 

fiber reinforced epoxy based composite materials. The 

overall goal of the Composite Crew Module (CCM) Project 

was to develop a team from the NASA family with handson experience in composite design, manufacturing, and 

testing in anticipation of future space exploration systems 

being made of composite materials. The CCM Project was 

planned to run concurrently with the 

Orion Project’s baseline metallic design 

within the Constellation Program so 

that features could be compared and 

discussed without inducing risk to the 

overall Program. 

NESC Contribution: During the 

design phase, the team constrained 

the design to match interfaces with 

the then-current Orion CM, including 

the internal packaging system that 

utilized a backbone for securing internal 

components. The team evaluated 

several design solutions and focused on 

one configuration that uses a composite 

sandwich structure with transitions 

to composite laminate at heavily loaded attachments. A 

unique feature of this composite design is the use of lobes 

between the webs of the backbone structure. This complex 

shape, enabled by composite technologies, places the floor 

into a membrane-type loading condition, which provides 

mass savings for the composite design and the adjacent 

heat shield system. The highly loaded and geometrically 

complex backbone-dome attachment was enabled by threedimensional woven preform technology. By connecting 

the aft dome to the backbone and placing lobes into the 

floor, designers realized a mass savings 

of approximately 150 lbs to the overall 

primary structure design.

The test article is constructed in two major 

components: upper and lower pressure 

shells. The two halves are joined in a 

process that does not use an autoclave, 

which enables subsystem packaging of 

large or complex subsystems, such as 

plumbing and cabling, prior to assembly. 

Results: The full-scale test article was 

delivered to LaRC and testing of critical 

features began. The test article was 

subjected to combined loads of internal 

pressure and static pull on critical 

CCM pressure vessel lower 

shell and backbone

The composite crew module installed in LaRC’s Combined Loads Test facility undergoing static internal pressure testing to failure.

Composite Crew Module Pressure Vessel Completes Element Testing

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

EXPLORATION SYSTEMS
interfaces to design limit loads and ultimate loads to verify 

how accurately the analysis models predicted the response 

of the structure under load. The test article was instrumented 

with approximately 300 traditional strain gauges, 3,500 

state-of-the-art fiber optic strain measurements, and six 

different two-dimensional full-field strain measurements. 

The measured strains correlated to 

the predicted strains well within the 

20-percent goal. Upon completion 

of the static testing, the test article 

was initially subjected to impact 

damage of 6 foot-pounds (ft-lbs) 

at locations representing different 

states of stress. The impact damage 

was inflicted by using a custommade, spring-loaded plunger with a 

0.5-in. hemispherical impact head. 

The 6 ft-lbs level was selected 

as a “credible threat” because it 

represented the level of damage that 

could occur as a result of a tool drop 

during spacecraft integration. The 

test article was then subjected to 

similar static tests at design ultimate 

levels and cyclic loading to see if the 

damage showed signs of growth. 

The test article was subjected 

to even greater damage, up to 26 ft-lbs in critical regions, 

and the testing was repeated to design ultimate levels and 

with cyclic loading. In all cases the test article showed no 

measurable defect growth at the damage locations. The 

final test for the CM was a static internal pressure test to 

failure. The final internal pressure achieved was 53.2 lb/in2. 

Failure occurred at the shoulder in the 

upper shell where the conical section 

meets the ceiling and appeared to be a 

disbond between the inner composite 

skin and the honeycomb core. This 

was caused by excessive throughthickness tension as the ceiling radius 

deflected under the internal pressure.

Overall, 2010 focused on testing, 

specifically damage-tolerance testing, 

cyclic-load testing, and a hydrostatic 

test to failure. Finite element model 

analysis using both coarse- and finegrid models provided exceptionally 

good correlation with measured results. 

Non-destructive techniques, including 

single side pulse echo ultrasound and 

flash infrared thermography, were 

effective methods for characterizing 

damage both in sandwich systems and 

solid laminates.

Comparison of Apollo and 

CCM pressure vessels

Apollo

CCM

Like most NESC teams, the CCM Project team is a collaborative partnership between NASA and industry, which includes design, manufacturing, tooling, inspection, and testing expertise. Partners include civil servants from nine NASA 

Centers, the Air Force Research Laboratory, and contractors 

from Alcore, Alliant Techsystems, Bally Ribbon Mills, Collier 

Corporation, Genesis Engineering, Janicki Industries, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Tayco. The team is 

organized such that all participants conduct work based 

on their individual expertise, regardless of their company or 

Center affiliation. The result is an integrated team with civil 

servant and contractor participants distributed within and 

across each of the Project disciplines. The CCM team operates across four time zones, in a virtual environment, connecting participants across the country. 

About the CCM Team

Wade Jackson and Dr. Sotiris Kellas from LaRC delivering impact damage 

to the CCM using a custom-made impact tool. 

Industry

NASA

NESC

Academia

Other Gov.

CCM team makeup by percentage

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

EXPLORATION SYSTEMS
Problem: The Orion Project requested that alternate seat 

attenuation designs be developed and analyzed for occupant 

protection in the Orion crew module (CM), with primary 

focus on providing improved crew survivability for nominal 

and contingency land landing (CLL). Emphasis was placed 

on the Project-directed goals of improving robustness and 

maximizing crew protection from acceleration forces. Due 

to the team’s in-depth knowledge of the problem and work 

with isolation systems, the NESC was later asked to evaluate 

design options in the crew seat area that mitigate the Ares I 

thrust oscillation (TO) environment and evaluate any effect on 

crew response to landing loads.

NESC Contribution: The assessment team consisted of 

designers and analysts from multiple NASA Centers including 

GSFC, GRC, JSC, JPL, and LaRC; contractors; and academia. 

Based on the Orion Project’s review of the alternate concepts, 

the NESC team focused detailed design and analysis efforts 

on investigating the effectiveness of incorporating an isolation 

system between the seat pallet and the CM pressure vessel 

structure. The NESC team developed simplified dynamic 

response models and utilized the Orion baseline models 

to examine a range of pallet isolation properties for crew 

landing attenuation. Analytical tool development and pallet 

isolation analysis were used to examine mitigation concepts 

for TO from the Ares I first-stage solid rocket booster on 

the crew using pallet isolation. Coupled loads models for 

launch and landing models using Nastran, LS-DYNA®, and 

Adams multi-body dynamics software were used to examine 

the optimal TO isolation frequency that would minimize 

crew loads during all phases of the Orion flight. In addition, 

hardware design concepts for implementation of this feature 

have been generated, hardware has been built, and testing 

is in process. The NESC team built a set of pallet isolators 

incorporating the frequency and stiffness requirements from 

the Nastran launch models. Friction dampers were added 

to the design to mitigate Launch Abort (LA) dynamic loads. 

Proof of acceptability came from LA runs in LS-DYNA® that 

compared impact results (with and without the dampers) 

using the Brinkley whole-body injury model. The NESC team 

continues to evaluate the effect of passive pallet isolation on 

the crew for landing impact. To date, model correlation is 

improving through lessons gained from testing. 

Results: The TO study confirmed the optimal crew isolation 

frequency and revealed a potential problem with a rocking 

mode of the crew seat should isolation be implemented at 

that location. The NESC team also found the pallet isolation 

approach to be advantageous from a load mitigation 

perspective. Isolating in series with the pallet struts has a lower 

effect on crew landing loads than seat isolation and a higher 

probability of successful implementation. The NESC team 

built prototype hardware and began testing to determine the 

effectiveness of the isolation frequency on crew performance 

during the TO event and the isolators’ contribution to landing 

impact loads on the crew. Isolator-level performance, strut 

impact, and system impact tests are complete. Results of 

these tests drove changes to the math models for correlation. 

The information gained from these tests will be helpful in 

developing models for exploration landing systems. In 

addition, the crew pallet isolators provide mitigation against 

dynamic loads on the crew from the launch event. The 

NESC team is also evaluating active systems to improve the 

strut performance over the baseline for all landing cases. 

This technology is being developed in collaboration with

academia. 

Development of Orion Crew Seat Energy Attenuation Mechanism Concepts

(Left) Isolator in–line with Wire Bender Strut Assembly and (above) the 

design concept intended to minimize the loads to the crew through all 

phases of flight.

Fullscale seat strut energy attenuation device being tested at 

NASA Langley Research Center’s Landing and Impact Research 

(LandIR) facility.

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

EXPLORATION SYSTEMS
Problem: Reliable injury predictive tools and injury criteria 

are required to ensure that human-rated spacecraft such as 

the Orion crew module (CM) or a commercially provided lowEarth orbit vehicle be designed with the appropriate level of 

occupant protection. Conventional tools used in the aerospace community have typically led to safe designs. Once 

the Space Shuttle is retired, NASA is expected to transition to 

a new spacecraft whose primary landing mode will likely use 

parachutes and be water based (with contingency land landings). This new spacecraft will introduce many challenges 

not seen since the Apollo Program. Approaches to ensure 

safety, such as those used in the automotive industry, may 

provide a foundation for human-rated space flight; however, 

their application to future or commercial spacecraft requires 

modification and study.

NESC Contribution: The NESC is developing injury criteria and methods for predicting injury for the Orion CM and 

future commercial space programs. These criteria and methods maximize crew member safety during critical phases of 

flight such as nominal and off-nominal landings and launch 

abort. The Hybrid III anthropomorphic testing device (ATD) 

has been thoroughly evaluated for assessing potential crew 

injuries through extensive impact sled testing at Wright Patterson Air Force Base and numerical modeling. Results from 

these finite element models are being used to complement 

the whole-body injury models (commonly referred to as the 

Brinkley criteria) which have been typically used for aerospace applications. The ATD models enable researchers to 

assess the occupant restraint systems, cushion materials, 

side constraints, flailing of limbs, and detailed seat/occupant 

interactions to minimize landing injuries to the crew.

Results: The injury criteria developed through this effort 

have been applied to suited crew members for the Orion CM. 

Numerical models of a suited crew member using the Hybrid 

III and a pressurized suit have been used to simulate Orion 

CM landing conditions. Injury criteria have been obtained and 

compared to the Human Systems Integration Requirements 

allowable limits. Additionally, the NESC has investigated suit 

trauma by evaluating two design options for the suit umbilical connector. The Total HUman Model for Safety (THUMS) 

has been used to assess injury risk and remedies have 

been developed to protect crew members from injury. 

The NESC and JSC Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD) organized a meeting to develop a 

proposed definition of acceptable landing injury risk for Orion crew members. Attendees 

included NASA, military, and civilian experts 

in biomechanical modeling, operations, and 

medicine; and occupant protection designers. The team reviewed a proposed Operationally Relevant Injury Scale (ORIS), which 

analyzes potential crew injuries in relation 

to three parameters: the Abbreviated Injury 

Scale (AIS) rating, potential impact on crew 

self-egress capability, and estimated impact 

on the crew member’s ability to return to 

flight status. The result was an injury classification, on a fourpoint scale, which was derived through relative weighting of 

the above factors. The JSC SLSD and the NESC organized 

a meeting focused on occupant protection during dynamic 

phases of flight in human-tended spacecraft. Participants 

included members from NASA, the aerospace contractor 

community, U.S. military, academia, National Association for 

Stock Car Auto Racing, Indy Racing League, National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, and the Federal 

Aviation Administration. The purpose of the meeting was 

to discuss potential follow-on work including further testing 

and analysis, development of additional analysis tools and 

techniques, occupant protection requirements, and potential 

test requirements to assess the level of occupant protection 

afforded by future vehicle designs.

Evaluation of Orion Occupant Protection through LS-DYNA® Modeling

THUMS model of a space 

suited astronaut in a seat. 

The model is used to assess blunt impact trauma 

which may potentially be 

induced by the suit rings.

Launch and entry 

suit rings

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

EXPLORATION SYSTEMS
Problem: Risk reduction sub-scale projects to validate 

the A-3 Test Stand design uncovered a critical issue: The 

chemical steam generators (CSGs) used to create vacuum 

conditions produce concentrations of free oxygen that react inside the diffuser with un-burned hydrogen from the 

engine, creating an “un-start” condition which reduces 

the flow of steam and negates the effectiveness of the 

diffuser. This afterburning can also produce temperatures 

and pressures that could cause structural damage to the 

diffuser. The A-3 Test Stand presents critical technological challenges that require in-depth understanding of the 

operation of the CSGs. The A-3 Test Stand is scheduled 

to test the developmental J-2X Engine at simulated altitude conditions by blowing steam at high speeds through 

the diffuser to create vacuum conditions in the engine test 

cell. 

NESC Contribution: The NESC supplied independent 

subject matter experts to a senior review team chartered 

to assess the identified problems. The NESC experts interacted with the SSC design team in a series of technical 

interchange meetings. 

Results: The NESC team offered suggestions to increase 

CSG system robustness and reliability. These included 

clarification of the engine nozzle wall pressure differential, minimization of secondary combustion in the diffuser 

system, and a common steam supply for two ejectors. 

Ultimately the NESC team concurred with the SSC design 

team’s solution for minimizing afterburning in the diffuser 

system.

Examination of the Altitude Simulation Capabilities of SSC’s A-3 Test Stand

(Above) Subscale diffuser for design validation of NASA Stennis 

Space Center’s A-3 Test Stand.

(Left) Mach number distribution 

showing predominantly subsonic 

flow in the diffuser (dark blue 

color along the elbow).

Problem: The A-3 Test Stand under construction at SSC consists 

of an open-frame steel structure that supports the engine and large 

test-stand components. The A-3 Test Stand is designed to provide 

high-altitude condition testing for large-thrust, liquid-fueled engines. 

Significant acoustic environments will be generated during operation 

of the test stand and supporting facilities. This may result in significant vibratory response from the stand and could have negative 

implications on electronics, metal fatigue, engine interface environment, facility mechanical components, and the local environment. Vibroacoustic environments were not explicitly addressed in the design 

phase and SSC lacks the resources and expertise to perform such a 

detailed analysis. 

NESC Contribution: At the request of the A-3 Test Stand Chief 

Engineer, the NESC formed a team of technical experts from the 

NESC, the NESC Technical Discipline Teams (TDTs), SSC, and MSFC 

to explicitly address the predicted vibroacoustic environment and its 

potential impact to collateral systems. The team gathered data from 

sub-scale testing previously performed at SSC, drawings, and the 

static analysis model. A variety of complex dynamic analysis models 

was generated by the team, which will characterize test operation 

vibroacoustic environments at locations of concern. 

Results: The team completed the assessment and pre-briefed the 

requester of the results. Deliverables will include the stakeholders’ 

briefing, report, data, and models.

Structural Dynamics Analysis Review of SSC’s A-3 Test Stand 

CRAFT Tech

A section of the test cell is lifted for installation on the A-3 test 

stand’s structural steel frame. Work on the A-3 Test Stand began 

in 2007. It is scheduled for activation in 2012.

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

EXPLORATION SYSTEMS
Problem: The NESC was requested to develop a framework 

to help Agency and program decision makers determine 

when to allow crew members to fly on a new human 

spaceflight system for the first time.

NESC Contribution: The framework will be applicable 

to both NASA and commercially developed systems. As 

a benchmark, the NESC team met with representatives 

from the United States Navy and the Air Force Flight 

Test Center to discuss their approaches to first crewed 

operations. An extensive literature search of past NASA 

programs was also conducted.

Results: The decision on first flight with a crew is ultimately 

a judgment call by the program and Agency leadership. 

However, there is some general guidance that can

be used in making these judgments. Based on previous 

experience, historical perspectives, and best practices, 

the NESC team matured and evolved the framework

into a narrative describing the key contributors to 

successfully understanding the residual risk of first flight 

with a crew, along with methods to increase confidence in 

the decision-making process. The team plans to perform 

a pathfinder exercise by using this framework to evaluate

the next human spaceflight system test program. 

Determining Readiness for Crewed Flight on New Spacecraft Systems

Problem: During the early development 

phase of the Ares I launch vehicle, 

propellant slosh dynamics in the 

Orion service module (SM) tanks were 

subjecting the launch vehicle flight 

control system to potentially destabilizing 

forces. The baseline Orion SM tanks 

are unbaffled, smooth-walled composite 

overwrapped pressure vessel designs, 

which provide very low resistance to 

propellant slosh during ascent. The Ares 

I flight control system could not meet 

stability and control margin requirements 

with the Orion SM tank slosh dynamics 

models. The Constellation Program 

requested NESC provide an independent 

review of the Ares I launch vehicle control 

sensitivity to the Orion SM propellant tank 

slosh dynamics. 

NESC Contribution: The NESC team divided the 

independent review into three primary subtasks. The first 

subtask was a thorough review of the Orion SM tank slosh 

dynamics models and the implementation methods of these 

models into the Ares I simulations. The second subtask was 

to review the plan for an Ares I tank slosh dynamics test. 

This test, designed to provide data for the Ares I upper stage 

oxygen and hydrogen tanks, would also provide validation 

data for the Orion SM tank models. The test hardware 

and instrumentation were also reviewed. An evaluation 

was performed on the state-of-the-art in computational 

fluid dynamics predictive capabilities 

for smooth-walled tanks (with and 

without baffles). In addition, a 

conceptual lightweight baffle design 

was developed, which could provide 

increased damping to mitigate the Ares 

I control sensitivities. The third subtask 

was focused on the Ares I Guidance, 

Navigation, and Control (GN&C) design 

and analysis. A team of NESC experts 

met with the Ares I teams to examine 

the launch vehicle architecture, the 

Ares I stability and flight performance 

requirements, and legacy GN&C 

references from the Saturn designs. 

The NESC team conducted a detailed 

review of the Ares I GN&C analysis 

methodologies and tools, analytic 

assumptions, modeling techniques, 

and the analysis results.

Results: The NESC concluded that despite both the Ares 

I and Orion teams utilizing best practices, assumptions, 

and methodologies, a flight control system design using 

existing architecture — that would accommodate the low 

damping values in the unbaffled Orion SM tanks — could not 

be identified. The NESC recommended the Orion Project 

pursue a tank redesign that would increase the minimum 

damping value, and the redesigned Ares I GN&C systems 

use this updated value to ensure robust stability and control 

margins exist throughout all ascent phases. 

Ares I Control System Sensitivity to Orion SM Tank Slosh Dynamics

Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, and Space Shuttle programs made different determinations on the appropriate time to fly a crew for the first time.

Mechanical technician Arnold Kuchenmeister 

adjusts one of the SM’s engine propellant tanks 

in a mock-up of an Orion SM at GRC.

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

EXPLORATION SYSTEMS
Problem: The Pad Abort-1 (PA-1) test vehicle 

attitude control motor controller DC/DC buck 

converter experienced repeated failures during board- and box-level testing and poses 

a significant risk to meeting the PA-1 test 

schedule.

NESC Contribution: The NESC was requested 

to participate in the Failure Review Board (FRB) 

and follow-up meetings to assist in determining 

proximal cause of the failures and provide recommendations for correcting the problem. 

Results: After evaluation, the FRB determined 

the layout design of the controller printed circuit 

board was enhancing inductive transient voltage 

spikes on the high-frequency buck converter 

chip and causing the frequent failures. Recommendations to improve the design were provided and the PA-1 full firing test was subsequently 

successfully completed.

PA-1 Attitude Control Motor Controller Board Failure Investigation Support

Artists concept of a high altitude abort sequence.

Problem: NASA must continue to gain the necessary 

insight to ensure crew safety. 

Toward this goal, the Objective 

System Conceptual Study for 

the Max Launch Abort System 

is the continuing effort associated with producing realistic 

flight vehicle options for an 

alternate design launch abort 

system. This effort is leveraging the accomplishments of the 

NESC-sponsored Max Launch 

Abort System flight test that 

successfully flew in July 2009. 

NESC Contribution: The 

NESC is currently developing 

design alternatives for a capsule-type launch abort system, 

capable of flying on multiple 

launch vehicles. This effort is 

utilizing the NESC’s Agencywide teaming model to matrix 

expertise from across NASA in 

disciplines critical to flight crew 

safety. This approach allows engineers to continue off-line 

development work of their respective systems, while gaining 

the knowledge and experience they will need to be “smart 

buyers” of commercial systems. Only through hands-on 

design, development, and test work will NASA be able to 

maintain and expand the expertise required to ensure crew 

safety in the future. Numerous design options have been 

explored, resulting in two leading candidates currently undergoing analysis, modeling, and testing.

Results: The NESC will provide recommendations to future 

programs or entities regarding design options and additional studies for specific analysis, testing, and/or modeling to 

gain additional knowledge and experience associated with 

launch abort systems.

Launch Abort System Concept Study for Crew Safety

Dr. David Schuster (center), NASA Technical Fellow for Aerosciences, Dr. Jeremy T. Pinier (left) and David Witte 

(right), both from NASA Langley Research Center, discuss grid fins during set up of the MLAS model prior to testing.

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

EXPLORATION SYSTEMS
Problem: The Orion Project 

Launch Abort Vehicle (LAV) is 

designed to carry its astronaut 

crew safely away from the Ares 

I launch vehicle in the event of a 

catastrophic failure. The LAV is 

controlled using a series of jets that 

maintain its attitude and trajectory 

as it travels away from the failing 

launch vehicle. At certain flight 

conditions the effectiveness of this 

control system has been shown 

to be degraded due to complex 

interactions between its thruster 

and control motor rocket plumes. 

An independent investigation of 

these rocket plume interactions 

was requested by the Orion 

Project.

NESC Contribution: The LAV is 

a complex control system that is 

difficult and expensive to test in 

a wind tunnel, so the Project has 

relied heavily on computational 

fluid dynamics (CFD) to perform 

design studies and predict 

performance. The NESC is 

performing independent CFD 

analyses, to further validate the 

LAV design and identify areas of 

highest risk in the application of 

the analyses.

Results: The NESC will provide 

data generated using methods 

independent of those used by 

the Project. Comparison of 

these two data sources will help 

better quantify uncertainty in 

the analyses and provide higher 

confidence in the Orion/LAV 

vehicle design.

Review of Orion Launch Abort Vehicle Jet Interaction Aerodynamics

Computational Fluid 

Dynamics

Attitude Control Motor (ACM) Jets

ACM/AM Jet interaction

Abort motor 

(AM) plumes

Problem: The Launch Abort Vehicle (LAV) employed by the 

Orion Project employs a complex active control system to 

maintain its attitude and trajectory during flight. The present control system may not be adequate to maintain vehicle 

stability in certain flight regimes, particularly transonic flight. 

The Constellation Program (CxP) requested the NESC to investigate alternative methods for stabilizing the LAV as risk 

reduction for times when the control system was inadequate 

at these conditions.

NESC Contribution: Under the Max Launch Abort System 

Project, the NESC proposed the use of grid, or lattice fins as 

a mechanism for enhancing vehicle stability. These control 

surfaces have been used by other launch vehicles, most notably the Russian Soyuz spacecraft. The NESC is leveraging 

this experience to develop and test a set of grid fins that 

could be employed on the Orion LAV to increase stability.

Results: The NESC is investigating the aerodynamic performance and structural and mechanism design for better 

ways to perform weight estimates and accomplish integrated 

simulations of a LAV concept with grid fins installed. This 

study will also propose additional concepts and strategies 

for stability augmentation. This information will enable the 

CxP to determine the best approach to stability augmentation should it be required.

Orion Launch Abort Vehicle Stability Augmentation Study

Aerodynamic performance testing of 

the LAV configured with grid fins in the 

ARC Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel.

Computational Fluid Dynamics analysis of LAV configuration. 

CFD analysis was used to study interactions between the 

LAV’s rocket plumes and attitude control motor plumes. 

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

EXPLORATION SYSTEMS
Problem: NESC was requested by the Kennedy Space Center Safety & Mission Assurance (S&MA) organization to provide an independent technical assessment of the Ares I-X 

launch drift during lift-off from the launch pad. The S&MA 

concern was that flame impingement on pad structures from 

greater than expected vehicle drift could weaken the structure and present an unknown hazard to the ground operations crews.

NESC Contribution: NESC experts from the Flight Mechanics, Loads & Dynamics, Structures, and Guidance, Navigation, & Control Technical Discipline Teams assessed both 

the vehicle drift analysis and the flame impingement analysis 

on the pad Fixed Service Structure (FSS) and Vehicle Stabilization System (VSS).

Results: The environmental modeling, structural analyses, 

and resulting allowable launch drift envelope definition were 

adequate for assuring that the VSS and Ares I-X access 

structures would not incur gross structural failures during the 

launch of Ares I-X. However, there were numerous recommendations for future Ares analysis and modeling, including: additional peer reviews, better coordination of ground 

and flight loads analysis and modeling, and improvements to 

ground system structural models.

Ares I-X Launch Drift Support

For complex software systems with a large number of requirements and 

capabilities, CASE tools may be used to help simplify the definition and 

design of interfaces between major components, such as between the 

Orion spacecraft and Ares launch vehicle.

Problem: The Constellation Program (CxP) started capturing system requirements at Levels II and III using computer-aided software engineering (CASE) tools in an effort 

to analyze the system behavior across the Ares I and Orion 

vehicle interfaces. Computer-aided design (CAD) tools 

perform a similar function for mechanical disciplines. The 

CxP requested the NESC to perform an independent assessment to capture the lessons learned and best use of 

these CASE tools.

NESC Contribution: The NESC is currently assessing 

the use of CASE tools within NASA. Phase I of this assessment entailed capturing the process and tools used 

by NASA and the Ares I and Orion system development 

teams. The CxP CASE tool process successes and gaps 

were identified, as well as the capabilities of the selected 

tools. Phase II will demonstrate best practices for the use 

of these CASE tools scoped to a single project, as well as 

scoped for use across projects within a major program. A 

guidelines document will be created to capture the results. 

Results: The NESC team has completed Phase I and initiated Phase II. Within Phase I the team assessed the process and difficulties in using these CASE tools to capture 

and analyze the behavior of the Orion and Ares I vehicle 

interfaces. In one effort, the text requirements for the Ares 

I/Orion abort requirements were modeled to analyze the 

communication states between these two systems. Building the executable models allowed automated and manual 

analysis and determined nominal and off-nominal behavior, incorrect requirements, and missing requirements.

Assessing CxP Risk Mitigation Through the Use of CASE Tools

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

EXPLORATION SYSTEMS
The NESC continued to perform assessments 

on the Space Shuttle to support safe fly-out of 

the remaining missions.
TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

SPACE OPERATIONS

Problem: Two Russian modules on the 

International Space Station (ISS), the MiniResearch Module-2 (MRM-2) and the Service Module (SM), do not meet requirements for protection from micrometeoroids 

and orbital debris (MMOD). The ISS Program requested the NESC to propose concepts for on-orbit augmentation of Russian 

module MMOD shielding and to evaluate 

previously proposed shield designs. 

NESC Contribution: During this activity, 

the primary Russian contractor for the ISS, 

Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation Energia (RSC-E), developed shield augmentation for both modules. The NESC team 

evaluated the RSC-E MMOD shield designs. The team evaluated the probability 

of no penetration (PNP) for the two modules 

using the RSC-E-augmented shields and 

compared the results to the requirements. 

In addition, the team suggested possible 

modifications to further enhance the MMOD 

protection. The team also evaluated earlier proposals for 

increasing the protection on the SM. These included moving 

the SM solar array to a permanently vertical position to act 

as an MMOD shield and installing a set of retractable panels 

that would project out of the SM’s side to shield the highestrisk areas.

Results: The team determined that the RSC-E designs, 

while decreasing the risk for both modules, did not decrease 

the risk sufficiently to meet their respective ISS requirements. The team has quantified the effect of different options on module PNPs and continues to work on providing 

recommendations to the ISS Program.

MMOD Shielding for the ISS Russian Modules Review

Color-coded contour of the highest MMOD-risk regions of the surface of the ISS Service Module.

Problem: Personnel safety concerns increase when expendable launch vehicle (ELV) payloads contain hazardous 

commodities such as hydrazine or nitrogen tetroxide (N204). 

Pyrotechnic-operated valves (pyrovalves) are often used in 

propulsion systems to isolate and control these propellants. 

Payload safety reviewers and spacecraft programs have not 

always agreed on the number of mechanical inhibits that

pyrovalves represent in meeting safety requirements and

on the credibility of leakage as a failure mode. These issues, 

and how control systems and software inhibits are implemented, have caused concerns and changes to spacecraft 

systems late in the launch-processing flow. NASA Payload 

Safety requested an assessment to clarify Agency payload 

safety policies.

NESC Contribution: An assessment is in progress to ascertain the number of inhibits the pyrovalves represent and 

to determine if leakage is a credible concern. Also, to ensure 

safe application to ELV payloads, pyrovalve requirements 

were reviewed in areas of design, fabrication, quality assurance, and testing. The products from the assessment will 

assist the ELV payload safety community in developing payload safety policies regarding pyrovalves.

Results: A team of subject matter experts is evaluating 

the minimum requirements for reliable pyrovalve operation, 

and draft requirements have been written. Other expert 

sub-teams are evaluating pyrovalve construction, historical 

leakage and inadvertent operation, electronic and software 

safety, and reliability of pyrovalves and controls. Pyrovalves 

and control systems for the Mars Science Laboratory have 

been a focus of this activity.

Expendable Launch Vehicle Pyrovalve Reliability and Safety Policy Review 

Assessment Lead Regor Saulsberry (left) and Deputy Steve Woods from 

WSTF, discuss pyrovalve configurations.
Problem: The Russian Mini-Research Module-2 (MRM-2) 

on the International Space Station (ISS) does not meet the 

minimum requirement for the probability of no penetration 

(PNP) from micrometeoroids and orbital debris (MMOD). 

The United States (U.S.) and Russian MMOD communities 

agree on this fact but disagree on the risk of catastrophic 

failure due to an MMOD impact. The catastrophic risk assessment presented by the primary Russian ISS contractor, 

Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation Energia (RSC-E), 

was approximately one order of magnitude less than a corresponding estimate produced by NASA. Consequently, the 

ISS Program requested the NESC to perform an independent evaluation of the RSC-E and NASA risk assessments.

NESC Contribution: The NESC team reviewed the methodologies, assumptions, and processes used by both parties to derive their respective estimates of catastrophic 

risk. Members on the NESC team included individuals who 

helped create the application used by NASA to estimate 

catastrophic risk for the ISS.

Results: The team identified several possible sources of 

divergence between the two MMOD communities. During 

the assessment, subsequent risk calculations performed by 

RSC-E and NASA converged so that by the time the assessment concluded, the RSC-E estimate was roughly twice as 

high as the U.S. estimate, instead of a factor of ten.

Review of MMOD Risk to the ISS Russian Mini-Research Module-2

The Russian mini-research module, MRM-2 with Zarya FGB storage module in the foreground.

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

SPACE OPERATIONS
Problem: The International Space 

Station (ISS) Sabatier Assembly (SA) 

is a Hamilton Sundstrand design and 

an addition to ISS life support systems that produce water and recover 

oxygen from carbon dioxide (CO2) 

exhaled by the crew. The Sabatier 

combines CO2 from the Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly (CDRA) 

with the hydrogen (H2) gas from the 

Oxygen Generation System (OGS) 

to electrolyze water. The reaction at 

elevated temperatures creates water 

vapor and methane gas. The water 

is condensed and pumped from the water feed system to 

the OGS for electrolysis to produce oxygen (O2) for crew 

consumption. The Sabatier process recovers about 50 percent of the O2 that is consumed by the crew and partially 

closes the O2 loop. There are risks of detonation in the H2 

feed lines and in the vent lines for the methane that is common to the OGS process. 

NESC Contribution: The SA has had more than 20 years 

of ground testing, and the CO2 and H2 reaction process is 

well understood. The NESC analyzed risks in the SA operation, controls, and safety. Risks to the crew from detonation of gases and the potential loss of the CDRA and OGS 

from standalone operation were also 

assessed. 

Results: NESC verified that the 

firmware and software (SA and ISS) 

controls are adequate for normal operations and for safing the systems. 

Redundant sensors and indications 

of problems, inward leakage of O2, 

and sensor limits to prevent detonation within the systems design are 

present. If detonation should occur 

there is containment to ensure no 

hazard to the crew. The SA reaction temperature is self-regulating so 

there is no risk of a runaway reaction. Prevention of failed 

“on” heaters is mitigated by redundant controls. Although 

structural design stress analysis shows containment of the 

shock pressure wave within the H2 flex hose is unknown in 

a detonation scenario, the SA controls, detection limits, and 

shutdown logics are adequate to prevent detonation mixtures from occurring in the flex hoses. There is a low risk 

and probability of detonation in the methane vent valve because that requires two simultaneous failures in both SA and 

OGS within the first few seconds during SA startup. There is 

adequate ISS recovery time and spares to replace the vent 

valve, if necessary. NESC concurred with the activation of 

the SA on the ISS.

Problem: The International Space Station (ISS) Program requested the NESC to independently evaluate the installation 

and operation of the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer 2 instrument (AMS-02) on the ISS. This evaluation was to identify 

any previously unknown or unaddressed interface risks to the 

ISS, AMS-02, or the Space Shuttle (during AMS-02 launch 

and delivery in February 2011). Concerns arose because 

the AMS-02 instrument was to undergo a major reconfiguration (late in pre-launch integration and checkout) to replace 

the high-field-strength, cryogenically cooled electromagnet 

at the core of the instrument with a previously flown, lowerfield-strength permanent magnet subsystem. The magnet 

design modification was necessary due to below-design-life 

projections for the cryogenic cooling system following integrated instrument thermal-vacuum testing.

NESC Contribution: The NESC team reviewed the AMS-02 

Project’s thermal vacuum performance data and assessed 

the design alterations required to replace the cryogenically 

cooled electromagnet system with the permanent magnet. 

The team verified that the ISS and Space Shuttle Program 

integration teams had captured all of the delta requirements 

changes for Space Shuttle and ISS operations resulting from 

the magnet change out. The NESC team reported its findings to the ISS Program Manager, helping to clear the AMS02 instrument for delivery to KSC for launch to ISS.

Results: The NESC team provided two recommendations 

to the ISS Program and the AMS-02 Integration Office: 1) 

provide a focused set of integration regression tests to verify 

the hardware, avionics, wiring, and other plumbing on the 

instrument still operated properly after the magnet change; 

and 2) review and approve revised analysis packages received from the instrument development consortium.

ISS Sabatier Assembly Operation Assessment 

Review of the AMS-02 Magnet Subsystem Replacement

Technicians at KSC’s Space Station Processing Facility move AMS-02 from 

a fixed stand to a rotation stand to begin processing for launch.

The Sabatier Assembly combines 

carbon dioxide and 

hydrogen gas to 

produce water and 

methane gas. The 

methane is vented 

overboard while the 

water is used by the 

Oxygen Generation 

System to produce 

oxygen for the crew.

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

SPACE OPERATIONS
Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) solution of the Mars 

Science Laboratory during entry to Mars. The NESC 

sponsored a CFD model validation effort using data

collected in the LaRC 31-Inch Mach 10 Wind Tunnel.
Problem: A top priority of the Cassini spacecraft’s current 

Equinox mission is to determine if Saturn’s moon Titan exhibits a magnetic field. To measure the magnetic field, the 

spacecraft must dip into the Titan atmosphere below the 

ionosphere and within 880 km (547 mi) of the surface, which 

is 70 km lower that any previous flyby. If the atmosphere is 

too thick during this low approach, then large aerodynamic 

torques could drive the spacecraft out of control or unanticipated heating could damage sensitive instruments. 

NESC Contribution: The NESC team conducted an assessment of the Cassini Titan “T-70” flyby to predict the 

range of atmospheric characteristics, aerodynamic torques, 

and heating likely to be encountered by the spacecraft. In 

addition, the team recommended a spacecraft orientation 

that would minimize the aerodynamic torques and maximize the controllability (safety) margin during the closest approach. Thrusters would fire during the flyby to maintain the 

desired orientation. 

Results: The NESC data, used in Cassini mission simulations, showed that the flyby would be within the desired 

safety margins when using the identified spacecraft orientation, thus allowing the mission team to go forward with the 

flyby. The flyby was successfully completed on June 21, 

2010, where the spacecraft pointing was maintained within 

the predicted limits, and key data were obtained that will increase the scientific understanding of the evolution and interior of Titan.

Problem: Hayabusa is a Japan Aerospace Exploration 

Agency (JAXA) mission that explored and retrieved sample material from a near-Earth asteroid and whose sample 

return capsule (SRC) re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere 

over Australia on June 13, 2010. NASA has sparse entry, 

descent, and landing (EDL) data for super-orbital re-entry 

events. This re-entry provided a rare opportunity to acquire data from such an event. To take advantage of this 

opportunity, NASA initiated an observation project utilizing 

NASA’s DC-8 airborne laboratory mounted with approximately 12 instruments to observe the re-entry event. This 

super-orbital re-entry observation effort was managed by 

ARC with observation flight objectives and methods similar to the Stardust SRC re-entry observation campaign in 

January 2006. A couple of key differences were that Hayabusa was not a NASA mission, and its SRC did not reenter the Earth’s atmosphere over United States airspace. 

NESC Contribution: The NESC supported the Mission 

Readiness Review of the NASA component of this effort. 

The NESC team included subject matter experts from 

seven Centers, with experience and expertise in instrumentation, logistics, high-velocity atmospheric re-entry, 

and several NASA projects including both Stardust and 

the Hypersonic Thermodynamic Infrared Measurements 

(HYTHIRM) airborne observation projects. This team was 

assembled to review and assess the science objectives, 

approach, and methods of the airborne observation, and 

make recommendations, all to maximize the probability of 

success. 

Results: On June 13, 2010, the NASA effort successfully 

observed the Hayabusa’s SRC as it re-entered the Earth’s 

atmosphere over Australia. 

Review of the Cassini Flyby Parameters for Close Encounter of Titan

Earth Re-entry Observation of Hayabusa Sample Return Capsule

Aerodynamic 

pressures and the 

resulting forces 

and moments were 

predicted on the 

Cassini spacecraft 

during the Titan 

flyby using a Direct 

Simulation Monte 

Carlo method.

(Left) Greg Merkes of NASA Ames’ video team operating an 

HDTV camera on board NASA’s DC-8 airborne laboratory. 

(Above) Image of the capsule’s successful re-entry over 

Australia and breakup of the spacecraft.

Capsule

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

SCIENCE
Computational fluid dynamics 

solution of yaw-jet firing.

Problem: The Mars Science Lab (MSL), Sample Analysis at Mars (SAM) instrument, WideRange Pumps (WRP) are molecular-flow turbopumps designed to provide the “vacuum” that 

the SAM instruments need to pull helium and 

CO2 gas through the instrument sensors. Two 

WRPs on SAM are mounted on the center support plate and operate at 100,000 rpm. Due to 

anomalies during build-up and life testing, the 

NESC was asked to review the design, test history, performance, strengths, and weaknesses 

and provide recommendations to the Project.

NESC Contribution: The NESC gathered a 

team of experts in mechanism design and performed an assessment of the project’s position and plan forward. The team consisted of 

mechanism design engineering authorities and 

analysts from multiple NASA Centers including 

GSFC, JPL, GRC, MSFC, and HQ, and their 

contractors. 

NESC expert team members provided input on bearing configuration design changes and recommendations. These 

included reinforcing the decisions for retainer types that 

might prolong operational life. Team members performed 

previously omitted rotor dynamics analyses and confirmed 

the presence of a 30,000-rpm system resonance as well as 

another resonance slightly above 100,000 rpm. 

This modeling tool was used to evaluate potential modifications to the system that might 

reduce the effects from operating through 

resonance. The tool showed that given the 

envelope constraints, modification would not 

have a significant effect on performance; therefore, significant redesign would be required to 

change these characteristics.

The NESC team performed a bearing retainer 

stress analysis to model the source and progression of a cracked retainer. This analysis provided confidence in the most probable 

cause for the cracked retainers and illustrated 

the high-strength margins during nominal operations.

Results: The NESC’s contributions were valuable to the Project by providing a better understanding of the system through analyses, conducting an independent evaluation of the pump assembly, 

and giving guidance to the Project for its path forward by 

experts in the industry. In many cases, the NESC’s position 

provided the Project with reinforcement of its plan to acquire 

the resources needed to move forward with the least-risk 

posture. The NESC team worked with the SAM Project to 

produce a flight product that has high confidence for meeting the mission requirements.

Assessment of Wide-Range Pump on Sample Analysis at Mars Instrument

Problem: The Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) entry capsule 

will be using the first active control system flown at Mars 

since the Viking Lander. It is important to validate computational predictions of the interactions between aerodynamic 

flow over the vehicle and reaction control system (RCS) jet 

plumes to ensure the controller applies the intended torques.

NESC Contribution: The NESC is conducting an aerodynamic/RCS interaction test in the LaRC 31-Inch Mach 10 

Wind Tunnel. Model force and moment measurements with 

cold-jets scaled to match MSL flight conditions will provide 

validation data for computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analyses. An earlier wind tunnel test was attempted by the MSL 

Project, but aerodynamic heating of the balance affected 

measurements resulting in no useful data. A key modification 

in the NESC test was the fabrication of a shield to completely 

cover the balance and flow-through sting that supplies nitrogen gas to the RCS jets. To compare to the experiment data, 

new CFD calculations are being run by ARC and LaRC for 

independent model validation. 

Results: Wind tunnel testing began in September 2010. 

Early indications show that the thermal effects have been almost completely eliminated. To date the test has collected 

extensive data for CFD model validation that will support 

MSL flight decisions. 

MSL Aerodynamic Reaction Control System Interaction Model Validation

Two Wide Range Pumps are 

used on the Sample Analysis 

at Mars instrument to provide 

vacuum that pulls helium and 

carbon dioxide gas through the 

instrument sensors.

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

SCIENCE
TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

SCIENCE

Problem: The Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) is using pyrovalves with stainless steel (SS) dual initiator, primer chamber assemblies (PCAs). A prior NESC study identified that 

a timing skew between firings of the initiators had a direct 

effect on the success or failure of the valve to operate as 

intended. The valve manufacturer developed a new design 

in an effort to minimize the effect of firing 

skew times. The new SS design uses a 

separate flow channel from each initiator 

forming a “V” shaped configuration (VPCA). This appears to have solved several design shortcomings of the heritage 

aluminum PCA which has a “Y” shaped 

(Y-PCA) flow channel design. Statistically based testing was performed to 

quantify the improvement and provide 

data for the MSL and future applications. The NESC was requested to initiate a detailed, empirically based study to 

generate the desired reliability data. 

NESC Contribution: The NESC team 

measured the booster interface temperature and pressures for both the “V” and 

“Y” configurations. Additional testing is 

being performed to quantify the amount of command skew 

needed and characterize the larger flow channels.

Results: The SS V-PCA produced an average booster interface temperature of 2,300 °F versus 1,400 °F for the legacy 

aluminum design during single initiator firings. This demonstrated a greater SS V-PCA booster 

ignition margin. However, the SS 

V-PCA showed no improvement 

during simultaneous firings (skew 

less than 5 μs). Both PCA designs 

failed to produce a reliable ignition 

temperature. Additionally, doubling 

the diameter of the flow passages in 

the SS V-PCA (four times the crosssectional area) did not eliminate the 

simultaneous firing anomaly. The 

NESC team recommended that firing commands be separated by at 

least 2 ms to guard against potential valve operational failure. NESC 

technical bulletins (TB) 10-02 and TB 

09-01 provide additional information 

on this important issue and are available at nesc.nasa.gov.

Problem: The Wilkinson Microwave 

Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) encountered sudden and unexplained periodic step voltage drops beginning in 

August 2009 and extending through 

December 2009. These step voltage drops posed a significant risk 

to completing the extended mission. 

Left unchecked, the bus voltage was 

expected to drop below the level 

necessary to maintain operational 

capabilities by early 2010. GSFC Engineering requested assistance from 

the NESC to determine the source of 

the observed anomalous battery behavior and provide corrective action recommendations.

NESC Contribution: The NESC assembled a team of subject matter experts from across NASA, academia, and industry to examine the anomalous behavior and determine what 

corrective measures might be appropriate to stem the negative performance characteristics. The NESC team quickly 

identified critical accelerated ground testing of the WMAP 

flight spare battery needed to characterize the on-orbit performance and was able to successfully duplicate the voltage 

collapse signature displayed on-orbit, as well as potential 

causes attributed to the behavior.

Results: The NESC team identified 

a previously undetected characteristic associated with nickel-hydrogen 

common pressure vessel (CPV) battery cells that was most likely causing the problems exhibited. While 

age and other normal degradation 

effects were ultimately discounted 

as contributing to the phenomenon, 

internal voltage-driven electrolyte 

creep and subsequent establishment 

of bridging between the cells within 

the CPV were determined to likely be 

causing an ionic current flow that ultimately depleted the capacity of one 

of the two internal cells. The limited time available to address the issue could not provide a definitive finding of the 

theorized coupling; however, laboratory testing of an equivalent electrolytic bridge in a CPV confirmed comparable losses as those experienced on-orbit along with the observed 

voltage behavior. A comprehensive set of recommendations 

for maintaining the health of the remaining, and thus far unaffected, cells was provided to GSFC Engineering to address 

the degradation with the battery performance.

As a result of the recommendations, WMAP was able to successfully complete the planned mission operations without 

further battery degradation.

Study of Stainless Steel Pyrovalve Configurations and Firing Skew Timing

WMAP Anomalous Battery Operations Investigation

Newly designed pyrovalve showing separate 

flame channels.

WMAP 23 amp-hr NiH2 common-pressure-vessel 

based flight battery during ground acceptance testing 

prior to launch.
TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

SCIENCE

Problem: The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) employs a mechanical cooler to condition the optical module and detectors of the mid-infrared instrument (MIRI) to 

7 Kelvins or less. The performance degradation from ideal 

imaging, due to vibration sources (both pulsating from the 

mechanical pump and random from the cold gas) will be 

simulated by analysis with no plans to validate the models 

by testing. These cold gas force simulations use estimated 

forces from analyses that have not been thoroughly reviewed 

by independent subject matter experts in the relevant fields.

NESC Contribution: This assessment will provide an indepth review of the Northrop Grumman (NG) analysis and 

disturbance models in determining if a credible risk exists 

with the operation of the cryocooler system on the MIRI detectors. The NESC team will conduct independent modeling 

and analysis to enhance the credibility of the overall JWST 

simulation results and, if possible, make recommendations 

for model validation tests.

Results: The NESC team has confirmed that the NG analysis 

of forced pulsating forces using the Sage model (analysis approach, assumptions, boundary conditions, and parameter 

sensitivities) is appropriate and provided conservative predictions of the resulting forces. The NESC team is performing computational fluid dynamics analyses to determine the 

forces generated by unsteady gas fluid dynamics interacting 

with the cryocooler complex geometry (valves, sharp turns, 

etc.). In order to independently estimate the attenuation of 

pulsating sources, distributed parameter impedance models 

of the coolant line will be constructed to determine the overall JWST flow-induced vibratory environment.

James Webb Space Telescope Cryocooler Disturbance Model Review

Problem: The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) will 

be launched on an Ariane rocket to the second LaGrange 

point in 2014. The telescope’s solar heat gain is limited by a 

deployable sunshield composed of five 0.001-in. and 0.002-

in. Kapton® membranes. The membranes are folded and 

restrained for launch, so trapped air must be vented during 

ascent to prevent overpressurization and damage. Analysis 

is the primary means used to verify that the maximum allowable pressure differences across the membranes (on the 

order of 0.005 lb/in2 differential) are not exceeded. The NESC 

was asked to perform an independent assessment of the analytical methods that 

are being used to predict the JWST sunshield ascent pressures.

NESC Contribution: The NESC is currently assessing the JWST sunshield 

venting analysis methodology. As part 

of the assessment, the NESC identified 

a concern of Helmholtz instability (similar 

to a flapping flag). Axial venting along a 

slack membrane might cause instability 

that would increase stress at the membrane hold-down points. A scaled blowing test using prototypic membranes was 

performed to assess the membrane flapping potential during ascent.

Results: No instabilities were observed 

in the membranes at any time during the 

NESC test, demonstrating that Helmholtz 

instability during ascent is not an issue. 

The final NESC assessment product will 

be an engineering report that reviews the 

JWST Program’s analysis approach, assumptions, and its relation to the results 

of the contractor’s sectional sunshield 

vacuum venting tests.

James Webb Space Telescope Sunshade Venting Analysis

Artist’s concept of the JWST. The elongated 

hexagonal-shaped sunshades are extremely thin. 

The folded membranes must release air trapped 

between the layers as the telescope is launched 

from earth to the vacuum of space. 
TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

SCIENCE

Time-Optimal Spacecraft Slewing GNC Technology Demonstration

Problem: Time-optimal attitude maneuvering is desirable for 

NASA mission applications in which the spacecraft is tasked 

with making several widely spaced science observations in 

a short period of time. Typically three-axis reaction wheel, 

or control moment gyro, controlled spacecraft use a wellestablished ‘eigenaxis trajectory’ technique for large angle 

attitude maneuvering. The eigenaxis trajectory is favored 

for attitude rotations because it is simple to implement in 

the spacecraft’s on-board flight software. This maneuvering 

technique accomplishes the desired attitude maneuver but 

in a non-optimized manner. In order to follow the eigenaxis 

trajectory, the spacecraft’s attitude control system must 

overcome inertial dynamics while remaining within the 

momentum and torque limits of the wheels. These constraints 

must be taken into account to optimize the maneuver so that 

the slew time is minimized.

NESC Contribution: The Transition Region and Coronal 

Explorer (TRACE) is a three-axis stabilized spacecraft that 

has steadily been pointing within 5 arcsec of the Sun since 

April, 1998. In July 2010 as part of the plan to decommission 

the TRACE spacecraft, GSFC solicited ideas for on-orbit 

experiments utilizing the spacecraft bus. The NESC Guidance, 

Navigation and Control (GNC) Technical Discipline Team 

(TDT) canvassed the GNC community of practice for possible

experiments and responded with a GNC discipline advancing 

test concept. The Attitude Control System (ACS) engineer 

that originally designed the TRACE ACS was asked to 

review the feasibility and the merits of performing an onorbit time-optimal slew experiment. There was technical 

agreement within the GNC community that having access 

to TRACE as an orbital test bed represented a unique highpayoff opportunity. Specifically it would allow demonstration 

of advanced control algorithms, developed by the Naval 

Postgraduate School (NPS) and C. S. Draper Laboratory 

(CSDL), for performing large-angle time-optimal spacecraft 

attitude slew maneuvers. 

The objective of this on-orbit experiment was twofold: 

to establish the technical maturity of the optimal slew law 

algorithm and to demonstrate that the overall maneuver 

operational concept was low risk. Both NASA and the 

Air Force mission managers want to confidently perform 

similar optimal slew maneuvers on operational spacecraft. 

A collaborative effort was subsequently initiated involving 

the NPS, CSDL, the US Air Force (USAF), NESC, and the 

TRACE Flight Operations team at GSFC. The USAF agreed 

to sponsor engineering work by both CSDL and NPS to 

tailor their time-optimal attitude slew law for the TRACE 

demonstration. NESC’s technical participation, sponsorship 

and team coordination was instrumental in accomplishing 

this on-orbit GNC technology demonstration. In particular 

the NESC supported the GSFC TRACE Flight Operations 

and Flight Software teams in their effort to verify that the 

time-optimal slew maneuver could be safely implemented. 

The GNC TDT worked with the experimenters to define 

the demonstration and was part of the team that planned 

the schedule of events, particularly contingency plans for 

additional maneuver experiments to help resolve anomalies 

in the flight data.

Results: The TRACE flight demonstrations compared 

favorably with pre-test predicted performance. The time 

optimal maneuver demonstrated on TRACE minimized 

the transfer time between two attitude end states even 

though it normally is accomplished by traversing a greater 

angular distance than the eigenaxis maneuver. As it was 

implemented for demonstration on the TRACE spacecraft, 

the time optimal maneuver used special non-eigenaxis 

attitude trajectories to take advantage of the spacecraft’s 

nonlinear system dynamics. The maneuvers were executed 

by commanding the reaction wheel assembly controller with 

stored time-tagged commands that were pre-computed in 

ground software. 

The TRACE demonstration significantly contributed to 

advancing the Technology Readiness Level of this optimal 

control technology. Future demonstrations on other 

spacecraft will include the use of on-board flight software 

to compute the time optimal attitude commands rather than 

pre-computing them using ground software and uploading 

them to the spacecraft.
Problem: Entry, descent, and 

landing (EDL) flight simulations are typically developed for 

specific tasks. In many cases 

once the effort is completed, 

the simulation models are not 

adequately documented or retained. Many projects or studies requiring EDL would benefit 

from high-fidelity simulations 

with a library of validated and 

documented models. Phase 2 

of this activity extends the effort 

completed in Phase 1 by including additional models.

NESC Contribution: An NESC 

team converted and archived 

relevant EDL models and scripts 

into a secure user library with 

appropriate user documentation 

and test cases during Phase 1 

of this activity. These models included mass and aerodynamic vehicle models, atmospheric 

and gravity models, and guidance and control algorithms. 

Phase 2 is providing additional new models not included in 

Phase 1: a multimode Kalman Navigation Filter for onboard 

state estimation, aerodynamic uncertainties for dispersion 

analyses, updated Earth environment models, additional 

guidance models for aerocapture and aerobraking, and several basic attitude-control models.

Results: Products of this activity are expected to help define 

the required architectures and investment strategies to aid a 

wide range of future robotic and human exploration missions. 

The inclusion of the additional models from Phase 2 will increase the types of systems and problems that the Agency 

can rapidly evaluate in systems analysis studies, preliminary 

design, mission development and execution. This will also 

reduce the response time for time-critical assessments.

COPV Life Prediction Model Development 

Problem: Stress rupture of composite overwrapped pressure vessels (COPVs) is an insidious failure 

mode that can occur at normal 

operating pressures and temperatures resulting in a sudden COPV 

burst. Deficiencies were identified 

in the parameters and structure of 

stress rupture lifetime modeling 

approaches previously used. The 

objective of this work is to develop 

a validated life prediction model for 

stress rupture of COPVs.

NESC Contribution: To address 

this problem, the NESC assembled 

a team of experts from JPL, LaRC, GRC, MSFC, JSC, and 

academia with backgrounds in composite modeling, statistical methods and uncertainty, reliability engineering, COPV 

fabrication, and strand testing. This team will develop an 

empirically based model including the effects of proof testing and uncertainty treatment.

Results: Analysis and testing will 

be conducted over several years 

and will involve testing of both 

composite strands and sub-scale 

vessels. During 2010, the NESC 

team worked with experts at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to design strand specimens, 

strand grips, and test rigs (shown 

in figure). Construction and testing 

of a prototype test rig is underway 

with work continuing on specimen 

design. Design of experiments 

principles are being used to plan 

efficient test matrices. After the 

comprehensive testing is completed, the NESC team will 

compile and document the strand and subscale COPV empirical data, reliability estimation models, findings and recommendations, and a list of underlying assumptions. Testing methods and lessons learned will be compiled along with 

any recommended follow-on testing.

Simulation Framework for Rapid Entry, Decent, and Landing Analysis 

TRN

Velocimeter

Altimeter Star tracker

IMU120 km

20 km

15 km

5 km

2 km

1km

30 m

-800 -440

-175 -130 -120 -30

Multimode Kalman Navigation Filter

Actual Trajectory

Estimated Trajectory

Illustration of the Design for Stress Rupture Test Fixture 

showing a composite strand under tension.

Knife Edge 

bearing

Load cell

Test

specimen

Attitude controllers, aerobraking managers, aero uncertainties and gravity models among others to extend successful EDL mission simulation capabilities are being developed to facilitate rapid prototyping of future missions. 

Illustration is of a Multimode Kalman Navigation filter model. 

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

GENERAL
Improving Spacecraft Connector Selection and Application Processes

Problem: Multiple NASA projects want to use the latest 

series of Actel RTAX-S Field-Programmable Gate Arrays 

(FPGAs). These parts offer significant advantages over the 

use of previous FPGA versions (RTSX-S or RTSX-SU) with 

regard to maintenance of signal integrity, capacity, capability, 

speed, and electrostatic discharge tolerance. Reported 

user application-related failures in 

the previous generation of FPGAs 

(RTSX-S) precipitated concerns 

late in the hardware-design cycle 

for several NASA projects, causing 

significant cost impacts and higher 

mission risks.

NESC Contribution: The NESC

conducted a 6,000-hour test of

80 units (two lots) of RTAX250S 

and 80 units (two lots) of 

RTAX2000S programmed with an

algorithm designed to emulate

expected space flight applications. The test series

subjected the parts to the voltage and temperature 

specification limit conditions. The selected representative 

space flight designs include multiple copies of a Military 

Specification 1553 Remote Terminal interface, an eight-bit 

microprocessor, Embedded Block Random Access Memory, 

an Error Detection and Correction 

algorithm, a Memory Controller, and 

a Universal Asynchronous Receiver/

Transmitter. 

Results: Following completion of 

the planned 6,000-hour test in the 

second quarter of calendar year 

2009, the results indicated no part 

failures or part “out of specification” 

conditions. These results were 

formally documented and distributed 

to Agency and industry RTAX users.

Problem: The Agency has experienced high-profile 

connector problems, the most recent and publicized of 

which being issues with the Space Shuttle’s main engine, 

low-level liquid hydrogen cutoff system (specifically the 

cryogenic feed-through connector). This problem had 

similarities to an Atlas expendable launch vehicle issue 

experienced and resolved some years earlier. This issue 

and similar occurrences pointed to the need for a broader 

Agency review of the electrical connector selection and 

application processes for space flight use, and how lessons 

learned and past problem records are fed into new programs 

to avoid recurrences.

NESC Contribution: An NESC team, which included 

members from all Centers, reviewed spacecraft electrical 

connector selection and application processes on various 

ongoing projects. This included reviewing 

how lessons learned are incorporated and 

disseminated. It is noteworthy that these 

knowledge-transfer processes fail to share 

lessons learned with potential commercial 

partners. Each Center’s controlling 

documentation for spacecraft connector 

selection and application, including the 

roles of Government and contractors, was 

also examined. In December 2008, the 

team participated in a Government InterAgency Science and Technology Wiring 

Working Group Meeting and surveyed the 

Society of Automotive Engineers Connector 

Committee members regarding their 

experience relative to NASA connector 

concerns. For this assessment, the NESC 

team attempted to determine whether spacecraft electrical 

connector selection and application processes could be 

improved.

Results: While the number of documented operational 

failures is not large when the scope of use is considered, 

the majority of spacecraft electrical connector issues are 

application related and tend to reoccur with potentially 

serious consequences to mission success and safety. 

Connector failures occur throughout the life-cycle (from 

design to field usage), but data analysis suggests that 

the majority of connector issues are application related. 

The team recommended several targeted adjustments to 

improve the effectiveness of the existing Agency Lessons 

Learned Information System and technical community 

knowledge transfer.

Risk Reduction Testing of Field Programmable Gate Arrays Completed

1- Missing or incorrect hardware; 4 - Incorrect wiring; 6 - Other OEM workmanship; 

7-Assy interference; 2-Damaged or failed; 3-Loose; 5- Not seated/mis-mated; 8- Broken

wire/conn; 9- Elec. short; 10- Corrosion/contamination; 11- Elec. open; 12- Misaligned,

13- Bent pins/connector

 1 4 6 7 2 3 5 8 9 10 11 12 13

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

P E R C E N TA G E

Circuit board using multiple RTAX2000S parts.

Failure mode distribution of connector faults and failures encountered at GSFC. The four 

blue bars on the left are workmanship-related; the red bars on the right are other modes.

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

GENERAL
TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

GENERAL

Microphone Phased-Array for Measuring Liftoff Acoustics

Problem: The high vibroacoustic environment created during liftoff can pose a significant threat to payload, avionics, 

and other critical systems of a launch vehicle. Abatement 

schemes (e.g., water injection, passing engine exhaust 

plumes through trenches, etc.) can be optimized if knowledge of noise source distribution becomes readily available. 

Currently, there is no direct means of identifying acoustic 

sources during launch vehicle liftoff.

NESC Contribution: A microphone phased-array is an 

emerging technology that uses many microphones and 

beam-forming algorithms to isolate and identify acoustic 

sources. It is extensively used in aircraft design but has not 

found its way into spacecraft applications. The current assessment’s objectives are to ruggedize the array hardware 

for use in harsh launch environments and demonstrate its 

usefulness in a series of progressively more aggressive engine firing/launch environments.

Results: An environment chamber was designed and built 

to protect an existing microphone phased-array for the initial series of tests. The initial exposure involved exposure 

to a solid rocket motor fired in a horizontal test stand. The 

planned follow-on testing involves a vertically mounted, 

5-percent–scaled model of the Ares I launch vehicle. Review 

of the initial test series showed comprehensive data collection. The resulting source maps represent the first known 

application of a microphone phased-array to characterize 

rocket engine plume environments. Future plans involve additional measurements of solid and liquid engine firings to 

determine which measurement systems require hardening to 

the increasingly more aggressive environments.

Problem: Almost every NASA Center 

has at least one flight simulation facility 

and utilizes a variety of analysis tools. 

These are, in general, independently 

developed, high-fidelity flight models 

tailored for one facility or tool, and are 

often incompatible with other facilities 

and tools, even within the same Center. 

Sharing models frequently requires 

extensive manual effort rewriting source 

code to “rehost” a simulation model in 

a new environment.

NESC Contribution: A multi-Center 

NESC team was assembled to examine 

a new method to make models more 

easily interchangeable. The team 

examined a draft American Institute of Aeronautics and 

Astronautics (AIAA) standard that attempts to address 

this problem through use of a custom Extensible Markup 

Language (XML) grammar to encode high-fidelity flight 

simulation models. Each participating Center developed a 

means to automatically import and 

validate such formatted XML models 

in their real-time simulation framework 

and provided feedback to improve the 

standard and application in NASA 

facilities.

Results: Each Center was successful 

in importing and rehosting the 

example simulation, a lifting-body 

reentry vehicle, into their real-time 

simulation framework. By leveraging 

software libraries developed both 

internal and external to NASA, 

several team members were able to 

complete the rehost in less than a 

week. Several suggestions for improvements in the standard 

were forwarded to the Modeling and Simulation Technical 

Committee of the AIAA. A final recommendation regarding 

adopting this AIAA standard within NASA is pending.

High-Fidelity Flight Simulation Model Exchange Framework Developed

A common format for Flight models can facilitate 

rapid implementation.

Solid rocket plume (top) and an acoustic energy image (bottom) showing the 

noise source distribution at indicated frequency. The double plume in the 

acoustic image is due to the reflection on the concrete floor which acted as 

an acoustic mirror.
TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

GENERAL

Launch Vehicle Shell Buckling Knockdown Factors Testing 

Problem: Refined knockdown factors may enable significant 

weight savings in launch vehicles and help mitigate their development and performance risks. The NESC Shell Buckling 

Knockdown Factor (SBKF) Project was established in March 

2007 to develop and validate new analysis-based shell buckling design factors for the Constellation Program’s Ares I and 

Ares V metallic and composite launch vehicle structures.

NESC Contribution: The NESC has supported a significant 

portion of the SBKF Project, including funding for the design 

and fabrication of a large-scale test capability, the first series 

of large-scale buckling test articles, programmatic and technical support, peer reviews, and advocacy.

Results: In 2010, the SBKF Project made significant progress in several key work areas including sub-component and 

component testing and analysis of aluminum-lithium (Al-Li) 

and composite panel concepts, Ares V structures trade studies and associated mass savings estimates, and testing of 

an alternate Al-Li alloy 2050 for the Ares V core stage. Some 

of the highlights include successful testing of two additional 

8-ft diameter, Al-Li orthogrid-stiffened barrel test articles. 

These test articles were 45-percent–scale versions of an 

Ares I upper stage liquid hydrogen barrel design, and were 

predicted to exhibit several important behavioral characteristics including longitudinal-weld land buckling and stiffener 

crippling. The high-fidelity analysis predictions of these scale 

tests continue to correlate well with the test results and, once 

validated, will become the basis of refined analysis-based 

design factors. 

In addition to the SBKF development efforts on Al-Li–stiffened cylinders, this activity is considering fiber-reinforced 

composite cylinders. The central goal of this composites 

effort is to examine how the refined buckling recommendations can be applied to composite cylinders. Experimental 

and analytical studies are underway to meet this goal. Industry partners are providing 8-ft and 13-ft diameter composite 

cylinders for buckling tests. The 8-ft diameter cylinder has an 

out-of-autoclave sandwich composite construction, and the 

13-ft diameter cylinder has an autoclave-cured, flute corecomposite construction. Both cylinders have been designed, 

and building-block experimental testing and analysis are underway.

The SBKF Project plan includes fabrication and testing of two 

27.5-ft diameter orthogrid-stiffened barrels in the Loads Introduction Structure (LIS) under development at MSFC. The 

objective of these tests is to prove that the design data and 

methods that are being developed and validated for smaller 

scale barrels can be scaled to larger-diameter barrels such 

as those that would exist in the next generation of launch 

vehicles. The test articles will be instrumented with over 700 

individual strain and displacement sensors, and low-speed 

and high-speed video image correlation systems will be used 

to obtain full-field displacement and strain measurements 

during the pre-buckling, transient-buckling, and post-buckling test phases. To this end, Space Shuttle Program External 

Tank-derived Test Article (ETTA) barrels have been designed 

and fabricated. Instrumentation has been installed on the 

first ETTA and testing will begin in February 2011.

External Tank-derived Test Article 1 in the process of having the final barrel panel welded using the Vertical Weld Tool at MSFC. Each 27.5-foot-diameter by 

20-ft-tall barrel is made up of eight individual orthogrid barrel panels and were obtained from the Space Shuttle External Tank Project.
TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

GENERAL

International Students Assist Shell Buckling Project

This past summer semester, the principal investigator for the Shell Buckling 

Knockdown Factor (SBKF) Project took 

advantage of the National Institute of 

Aerospace (NIA) Visitors Program to 

sponsor four international engineering 

students. The NIA’s Visitor Program 

facilitates research collaborations between scientists and engineers at the 

NIA, the NASA Langley Research Center, researchers and academia. The 

SKBF Project interns were Masters and 

Ph.D. level students and responsible for 

structural analysis and testing. The students split their efforts between several 

tasks. In one task two students worked as a team to develop, 

verify, and implement a unique piece of testing hardware to 

help the Project assess the effects of small geometric perturbations on the buckling response of thin-walled, bucklingcritical shells. In another task a student conducted a series 

of high-fidelity buckling analyses of imperfect composite and 

metallic shells to determine the effects of geometric and loading imperfections on the buckling of shells. In the last task the 

student studied the impact behavior of laminated composite 

plates and shells to determine the effects of impact energy, 

boundary conditions and panel curvature on the force, displacement, strain, and damage response.

Lower load introduction structure (LIS) in the Loads Test Annex facility at MSFC in preparation for External-Tank-derived Test Article testing (ETTA1).

Dr. Mark Hillburger (left) 

discusses shell buckling 

testing with international 

students (sitting, left) 

Benedikt Kriegesmann 

from Leibniz Universitaet, 

Hanover, Germany and 

(sitting, right) Massimiliano (Max) Bogge, (standing) Maria Elisa Palena, 

and Marco Maspoli, all 

from Politechnic University of Torino, Italy.
TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

GENERAL

Problem: NASA uses aerobraking to reduce the fuel 

required to deliver a spacecraft into its desired final orbit around a target planet or 

moon with a significant atmosphere. While aerobraking reduces the propellant required 

to reach the final orbit, this reduction comes at the expense 

of orbital insertion time (typically 3 to 6 months) and continuous Deep Space Network 

(DSN) coverage and requires 

a large ground staff to continuously monitor the spacecraft 

during the aerobraking maneuver. The requirement for 

ground monitoring and trajectory correction introduces 

the potential for error due to time lag between Earth and 

the spacecraft and the possibility that the critical data 

entry could occur during non-traditional working hours. 

This potential for error increases during the final orbital 

insertion phases as the requirements and frequency for 

trajectory corrections increase and the ability to correct 

prior errors decreases. Studies indicate much of the 

daily operations during aerobraking could be moved to 

the spacecraft (autonomous aerobraking), thus reducing risk and saving much of the cost required for the

aerobraking phase.

NESC Contribution: An 

NESC team is developing 

the capability to move the 

ground-based daily aerobraking maneuver processes onboard the spacecraft. 

These on-board processes 

include an ephemeris (orbital position) estimator, atmospheric density modeling, 

thermal modeling of the critical spacecraft elements, and 

maneuver strategy logic to 

keep the spacecraft safe and 

provide for the proper final 

orbital insertion.

Results: Simulations and analysis conducted during 

Phase 1 development will evaluate the viability of using autonomous aerobraking at Mars, Titan, and Venus. Pending favorable results, follow-on phases could 

ultimately include incorporating autonomous aerobraking 

on a future spacecraft mission for flight evaluation in a 

“shadow mode.” The shadow mode evaluation would 

compare calculated on-board autonomous aerobraking 

commands to the actual aerobraking commands implemented by the ground operations team. Once shadow 

mode flight validation is successfully completed, autonomous aerobraking could be used as the prime aerobraking operations strategy for future missions. 

Development of an Autonomous Aerobraking Capability

Problem: The NASA Standard for 

Models and Simulations (M&S), was 

a standard developed in response 

to Columbia Accident Investigation 

Board recommendations. Agency 

programs and projects have been 

slow to adopt the standard, in part 

because the document was necessarily written at a high level. NASASTD-7009 is in its basic revision 

and is the first document of its kind 

within NASA, or industry. It applies 

to all types of M&S applications 

and all project life-cycle phases. 

Numerous requests have been received for clarifying the intended 

implementation approaches for the 

various topics in NASA-STD-7009, including the M&S 

risk and credibility assessment, two of the key features 

of the standard.

NESC Contribution: An NESC team containing subject matter experts from multiple Centers has developed a checklist and associated 

guidelines to enable programs and 

projects to effectively implement 

NASA-STD-7009 in a value-added 

manner. These products were also 

designed to assist NASA with the 

NASA-STD-7009 transition from a 

voluntary to a mandatory standard.

Results: Many personnel affected 

by NASA-STD-7009 will benefit 

from the development of implementation guidelines and tools. 

These personnel include M&S tool 

developers and operators, systems 

analysts, decision-makers using 

M&S analysis results, and independent reviewers of M&S products. 

The team’s products include a checklist and guidelines 

for M&S reviews, changes to NESC procedures designed 

to reinforce NASA-STD-7009 concepts and requirements 

through independent assessments, and initial disciplinespecific recommended practice guidelines.

Guidelines Developed for Models and Simulations

The Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter dips into the thin Martian atmosphere 

to adjust its orbit in this artist’s concept illustration.

Verification

People 

Qualification

M&S Mgt.

Use History

Result Robustness

Validation

Input Pedigree

Uncertainty

Qualification

4

3

2

1

0

Example of a tool used in assessing model or 

simulation credibility.
TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

GENERAL

Problem: In March 2010, the NESC met with personnel from the United States Department of Transportation 

(DOT)’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

(NHTSA) to discuss possible causes of unintended accelerations in vehicles equipped with electronic throttle 

controls.

NESC Contribution: With NHTSA funding, the NESC 

forming a multi-Center team to work with NHTSA in reviewing the throttle control design for vulnerabilities that 

could possibly cause unintended accelerations. The 

team has participants from ARC, DFRC, GSFC, JSC, 

JPL, KSC, LaRC, and MSFC and includes experts in 

systems engineering, electrical engineering, software engineering, human factors, and electromagnetic compatibility. The overall goals of the study are to determine 

what specific conditions, both internal and external, are 

necessary for the electronic throttle control to fail; evaluate whether those conditions, if any, are evident in the 

reported consumer complaints; evaluate whether there 

is physical or electronic evidence left by the failure; determine the expected ranges in severity and duration that 

could be caused by the failure; evaluate whether the failure could have any effect on other interfaces, such as 

the braking system; and determine what data, if any, are 

sent to and captured by the event data recorder and the 

electronic control module.

Results: The NESC team is using a well-characterized 

systematic approach to study the electronic throttle 

control. The process began with a review of NHTSA’s 

complaint database for information that might direct 

the investigation. Then the team is developing system 

and software functional diagrams to document how the

design is intended to work. Functional failure modes, 

fault fishbone diagrams, event sequence diagrams, and 

fault trees are developed, based on literature from the 

manufacturer and testing on both electronic throttle control simulators and vehicles of interest. 

Ultimately, a test program was defined to verify any identified vulnerabilities. Once confirmed, the various categories of vulnerabilities (e.g., traceable to consumer 

complaints, warranty data, or field inspections) are being 

characterized as findings. Those vulnerabilities that cannot be substantiated by evidence are being categorized 

as observations.

Problem: The Agency requires an improved capability 

to trend technical issues encountered in NASA programs 

and projects.

NESC Contribution: The NESC is leading an Agencylevel Data Mining and Trending Working Group (DMTWG) 

whose purpose is to assist in the formulation and implementation of capability to strengthen trending of NASA 

programs and projects and to ensure appropriate visibility of data mining and trending. Through workshops, 

monthly meetings, and training, the NESC has developed 

working relationships with data mining and statistical experts within other government agencies, academia, and 

industry.

Results: The DMTWG is assisting NASA organizations 

by providing data-mining expertise to relevant NESC 

assessments, such as a request for special study from 

the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to investigate reports of unintended acceleration in certain 

vehicles. DMTWG sponsored a faculty-student team for 

a 10-week internship at KSC. The team explored datamining methodologies, focusing on open-source tools 

and in-situ database tools, as well as broadening the 

exposure of data-mining practices at KSC. This working group provides a forum to enhance data-mining and 

trending communications across the Agency by sharing 

ideas, methods, technologies, processes, tools, and lessons learned.

NASA Supports NHTSA Investigation 

NASA Continues Effort to Expand Data Mining and Trending

Components of an electronic throttle control which translate pedal position 

into throttle body opening.

Dr. Salamah Salamah (left), Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, and 

Embry-Riddle student William White explored Data Mining and Trending 

during a 10-week internship at KSC.
TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

GENERAL

Problem: The Agency has no central 

database for thermal performance test 

results and analyses from flight projects. Thermal performance testing 

and analysis costs represent a significant Agency investment, but the data 

from prior missions are often difficult 

or impossible to access. As a result, 

decision makers frequently find it difficult to effectively use available data 

to draw valid conclusions. Data from 

previous missions are being lost as 

elements are misplaced, technical experts move on to other projects, and 

file formats become obsolete.

NESC Contribution: In 2010, the 

NESC completed preliminary systems 

engineering and began prototype development of a database to collect and store thermal 

performance test data (arc jet, radiant, solar, laser, etc.) 

including test results, calibration records, article configurations, facility operating parameters, and analyses. This 

effort produced an information architecture, framework 

trade study, system requirements, 

and a concept of operations. An operational prototype was developed 

to validate the schema and facilitate 

co-development within the user community. Data from ongoing missions 

such as Mars Science Laboratory and 

Constellation Program Crew Exploration Vehicle were archived, and a plan 

to collect historical data was developed. 

Results: The NESC will provide an 

operational database accessible by 

Agency stakeholders by the end of 

2011. The database will accept data 

from facilities, engineers, principal investigators, and analysts, and allow 

users to search for holdings based on 

user-specified criteria. A follow on task will collect, digitize, and input historical data using a discipline-based 

priority plan. During 2012, development will be completed and database operations will be transferred to Agency 

arc jet facilities for management and maintenance.

Development of a NASA Thermal Performance Database

Problem: Fault management (FM) systems are employed in virtually all NASA 

space vehicles and ground 

systems. A FM system contains, prevents, detects, isolates, diagnoses, responds 

to, and recovers from conditions that interfere with nominal mission operations. This 

FM capability is known by 

other names across NASA, 

including Safe Hold Mode, 

Vehicle Health Management, 

Integrated Diagnostics, Prognostics and Health Management, Fault Detection, 

Isolation and Recovery, and 

Redundancy Management. During the past several decades, 

engineers working on NASA’s robotic and human spaceflight 

programs have developed methods for fault mitigation, fault 

analysis, and contingency operations. In-flight FM system 

performance has generally been successful. However, the 

design and development of FM systems have sometimes 

stressed NASA’s programmatic and engineering resources. 

Flight projects have suffered from unexpected cost growth 

and schedule slips during final FM system integration and 

test. It is apparent that reliable and affordable FM systems 

are not constrained by technology but rather by a lack 

of systematic engineering 

and programmatic discipline. The Agency currently 

lacks overarching conceptual 

guidance for architecting and 

implementing FM systems in 

spacecraft and ground systems. 

NESC Contribution: The 

NESC, in collaboration with 

JPL, is developing a NASA 

FM practitioners handbook 

to provide overarching conceptual engineering guidelines and recommended best 

practices. One objective of 

the handbook is to collect the FM engineering practices 

used across NASA for both robotic and human spaceflight 

system development. It will serve as a reference for NASA 

discipline engineers, systems engineers, and project managers who are architecting, designing, and developing FM 

systems. 

Results: The initial draft NASA FM Handbook was issued in 

September 2010, with an updated version of the handbook 

planned for early 2011. 

Development of a NASA Fault Management Practitioners Handbook

Testing of a large-scale article in the Ames Arc 

Jet facility. Data captured from test like these 

are a cornerstone of the database. 

Fault Management systems play a prominent role within NASA’s aeronautics, human and robotic spaceflight missions.
NESC Support to the Rescue of Trapped Chilean Miners

Problem: On August 5, 2010, the San José copper and gold 

mine in Chile’s Atacama Desert collapsed trapping 33 miners. After 17 days of searching, the miners were discovered 

alive approximately 2200 feet below the mine entrance. A 

rescue operation was initiated by the Chilean government 

that would lower a capsule to the miners through a newly 

bored hole, but not for over two months. The Chilean Government requested NASA’s support because of its training 

and planning for emergencies in human spaceflight, and its 

protection of humans in the hostile environment of space.

NESC Contribution: An engineer from the NESC’s Principal Engineers Office participated in a four-person NASA 

team lead by the deputy chief medical officer at JSC. The 

NESC also participated in an Agency-wide brainstorming 

session to identify ways to assist the rescuers. As the operation was being formulated, recommendations were made 

in areas of air and water supply, hygiene, communications, 

bedding, and supply chain modeling. Additional medical advice was provided at the mine site for the men trapped below 

as well as organizational advice for the rescue operations at 

the surface.

NESC personnel also led a team which, in three days, developed and documented more 

than 50 design requirements 

for the capsule to ensure the 

safety and health of the miners as they ascended. The 

overall NESC group included 

the NASA medical team, the 

NASA Technical Fellows and 

members of their Technical 

Discipline Teams and NESC 

systems engineers.

Results: The Chilean Government indicated that most of 

the suggested requirements 

were incorporated in the final 

design of the rescue system, 

which was built by the Chilean Navy. The rescue system 

components included the rescue capsule, the hoist system, 

communication devices and 

the miner’s protective gear.

Reuters/Chilean Government

The NESC contributed design expertise to the Chilean government during development of the rescue capsule.

President Obama and NASA Administrator Charles Bolden (far right) congratulate the NASA team (four leftmost) and the US 

drilling team.

TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

GENERAL
CENTER FOCUS

An External Tank-derived Test Article 1 for 

the NESC Shell Buckling Project in the process of having the final barrel panel welded 

using the Vertical Weld Tool at MSFC.
AMES RESEARCH CENTER

Nans Kunz

NESC’s Chief

Engineer at 

ARC

(Top) SOFIA 747SP flying observatory, shown with its infrared telescope 

visible, successfully completed testing of the entire flight envelope.

(Bottom) Jarren Baldwin is seen testing WCIS prototype hardware.

During 2010, Ames Research Center (ARC) continued to provide a wide variety of expertise to 

NESC activities. Approximately 32 scientists and engineers provided support to the NESC over a range 

of disciplines including human factors, wireless avionics, digital archives, composites, reentry systems, 

aerodynamics, non destructive evaluation, wind tunnel testing, software evaluation, and flight dynamics. 

The NASA Technical fellow for Human Factors is resident at ARC.

Exploration Systems

Wireless Connections in Space (WCIS): ARC supported the multi-Center NESC Wireless Connections in 

Space Project to develop and demonstrate a highly reliable wireless architecture capable of being implemented 

in radiation tolerant devices. The team developed and 

evaluated new wireless sensor network (WSN) technology based on the ZigBee Framework and IEEE 802.15.4 

Personal Area Network (PAN) standard. The robustness 

of WSNs were experimentally evaluated in the laboratory 

including assessing this technology for space vehicle, 

sensing within enclosed metal volumes. Preliminary evaluations were favorable and further evaluation may lead to 

certification for flight.

Entry, Descent, and Landing (EDL): In 2010, the NESC 

completed preliminary systems engineering and began 

prototype development of an Agency database to collect 

and store thermal performance test data (arc jet, radiant, solar, laser, etc.) and related analyses. ARC led the 

archiving of data from the Mars Science Laboratory and 

Constellation Program Crew Exploration Vehicle activities into the prototype database developed at JPL, and 

developed a plan to collect and prioritize other historical data. An operational database accessible by Agency 

stakeholders will be complete by the end of 2011, with 

operations to be handed over to Agency arc jet facilities 

in 2012.

In another EDL related activity, the NESC sponsored the 

Mission Readiness Review of the successful Hayabusa 

Re-Entry Observation Project based at ARC. A review 

team that included people from seven NASA Centers 

with expertise in instrumentation, logistics, high velocity atmospheric re-entry and a breadth of NASA projects 

including both Stardust & HYTHIRM airborne observation projects, was assembled to review and assess the 

science objectives, approach, and methods of the airborne observation, and made recommendations for the 

purpose of maximizing the probability of success.

Orion Project Launch Abort Vehicle Stability Augmentation: Due to concerns that the Orion Project’s Launch 

Abort Vehicle concept may not be able to maintain vehicle stability in certain flight regimes, the NESC is investigating the aerodynamic performance, design issues, and 

benefits of installing grid fins to enhance vehicle stability. 

As part of this investigation, the grid fins concept was 

tested in the ARC 11 by 11 and 9 by 7 foot wind tunnels.

Microphone Phased Array for Measuring 

Launch Vehicle Lift-off Acoustics: A microphone 

phased-array is an emerging technology that uses 

a large number of microphones and beam forming algorithms to identify noise sources. A microphone array developed at ARC was used during 

firing of a solid rocket motor in a horizontal test 

stand. Good data was collected from the test and 

the resulting source maps represent the first ever 

application of an array to measure a rocket plume.

Science

Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA): This year, the SOFIA open port cavity shear layer 

control system that was developed at ARC (also the subject of a previous NESC assessment) successfully completed flight testing of the entire flight envelope. Key participants of the cavity test efforts from ARC briefed the 

NESC Loads & Dynamics TDT about the results including 

vibroacoustic environment and the dynamic response.

General

In support of the Department of Transportation National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) the NESC 

investigated software states that may cause uncommanded accelerations in vehicles with electronic throttle 

controls. The NESC team modeled the vehicle software 

to analyze the electronic throttle control, cruise control, 

idle speed control, vehicle stability control and diagnostic software modules. Both commercially available and 

ARC developed software tools were used to perform this 

analysis.

CENTER FOCUS
DRYDEN FLIGHT RESEARCH CENTER

Dr. James

Stewart

NESC’s Chief

Engineer at 

DFRC

Dryden Flight Research Center (DFRC) engineers 

have contributed to the NESC’s multi-disciplinary 

teams in addressing the Agency’s most challenging 

problems. DFRC engineers supported the NESC’s 

Nondestructive Evaluation Technical Discipline 

Team (TDT) in structural testing of NESC’s full-scale 

composite crew module (CCM). Over 15 scientists 

and engineers were involved in these activities. 

DFRC engineers supported the Guidance, Navigation 

and Control (GNC) TDT by starting a collection of 

common control tools used by GNC engineers. 

DFRC engineers and contractors participated in a number of 

NESC technical assessments. In addition, a DFRC engineer 

was assigned as the Deputy of the Flight Mechanics TDT and 

participated in four NESC Ares-1X assessments.

Exploration Systems

DFRC engineers successfully supported structural testing 

of the NESC’s full-scale CCM by installing NASA-developed 

fiber-optic sensors along the windows and docking port 

to monitor real-time structural strains. Each optical fiber 

contains hundreds of strain sensors. These sensors 

successfully monitored internal pressure load testing of 

the CCM in real-time. The final test subjected the CCM to 

structural failure, where the fiber optics system was able to 

withstand this aggressive environment and returned valuable 

data to assist in post-test analyses.

Space Operations

DFRC engineering supported the technical assessment 

and reporting of the development, design, test and 

evaluation (DDT&E) process for Robustness of Space 

Flight Programmable Logic Devices (PLDs). This 

system’s level investigation was a combined hardware 

and software assessment that needed to be evaluated 

from a system perspective.

General

DFRC engineers supported the GNC TDT, including 

initiating a task to collect control system design and 

analysis tools that are used at the different NASA Centers. 

This collection of tools will allow rapid development and 

analysis of a given controller and will help educate and 

train control engineers in designing, testing, and evaluating 

control systems. This will also enable control engineers to 

understand how different NASA Centers have designed, 

tested, and evaluated their control system. The DFRC-based 

Deputy of the Flight Mechanics TDT assisted in generating 

the Flight Mechanics community of practice operational 

plan, and participated in four Constellation Program Ares 

I-X technical assessments. His experience as Deputy not 

only allowed him to see how the TDTs work, but he gained 

insight into how the NESC works with NASA as a whole. This 

experience was invaluable for his support of the CxP Pad 

Abort Flight Test. 

Brad Flick (left), Director of Research and Engineering, and Michael Delaney, an NESC team member 

for DDT&E, discuss risk mitigations for PLD usage.

(From Left) Dr. Lance Richards, Allen Parker, Anthony Piazza, and 

Dr. Hon “Patrick” Chan of the Advanced Structures and Measurement Technology Group prepare the NASA-developed fiber optic 

strain measurement equipment used on the CCM structure failure 

tests at LaRC.

Mark Davis (left) the DFRC Deputy of the Flight Mechanics TDT discusses with Dr. 

James Stewart how his NESC experience helped him better support NASA’s successful Pad Abort 1 test. The crew module was prepared for integration by DRFC.

CENTER FOCUS
GLENN RESEARCH CENTER

Richard 

Manella

NESC’s Chief

Engineer at 

GRC

During 2010, over 45 Glenn Research Center (GRC) 

engineers, scientists, and technicians provided a 

broad range of unique skills to NESC assessments, 

NESC Technical Discipline Teams (TDTs), and special 

projects.

Exploration Systems

GRC was involved with an NESC assessment to assure NASA is performing accurate non-linear deformation structural analysis for critical structures from 

a safety and weight perspective. For example, the 

nominal water landing for the Orion crew module (CM) is 

leading to the requirement for reliable predictions of vehicle 

structural response due to fluid-structure interactions. Nonlinear transient dynamics, using the commercial code LSDYNA®, are used for these 

predictions. LS-DYNA® is

capable of predicting CM/

water interaction during 

impact as well as the flexible body behavior of the 

CM structure. Currently 

the code is used to predict crew member seat 

pallet displacements and 

accelerations for injury 

predictions and for predicting structural stress in critical components such as the 

heatshield. Accurate predictions are essential since landing loads are driving structural elements of the CM design. 

Since limited test data are available to validate the numerical 

simulations for this application, work is underway to correlate the simulations with data obtained from the NESC’s fullscale CM water drop test to validate LS-DYNA® results to 

minimize vehicle weight.

Space Operations

GRC support to the ISS Solar Alpha Rotary Joint (SARJ) 

anomaly included experimental work to mimic the SARJ onorbit conditions after the STS-126 mission completed SARJ 

system servicing. The GRC vacuum roller rig (VRR) 

was used to replicate the conditions that created the 

wear debris found on-orbit. The worn rig rollers were 

then lubricated using the same grease as was provided on-orbit and testing continued in a time-accelerated manner to simulate the equivalent of 15 years 

of service. The testing demonstrated that so long as 

adequate lubrication is maintained, the structural integrity and operational effectiveness was sustainable 

for the simulated 15 years of service life. Testing using 

the VRR continues to study the lubricant life, mechanism health monitoring, and alternative roller materials for 

the SARJ system.

Science

GRC has aided the NESC in its support of Mars Science 

Laboratory’s Surface Analysis at Mars vacuum pump development by conducting rotodynamic modeling of the pump’s 

high-speed motor, bearing failure analyses, and finite element modeling of the bearing cages. The Center’s expertise 

has helped guide the assembly and testing of this critical 

hardware and helped explain observed behavior during development testing.

Technical Discipline Teams

GRC supports several TDTs and working groups including the NESC Composite Pressure Vessel (COPV) Working 

Group. COPV Working Group members initiated the carbon 

fiber stress rupture test project with Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratories. A phased project approach calls for 

testing of carbon fiber strands followed by pressure vessel 

stress rupture testing. Preliminary analysis for the design of 

the strand testing and the finite element analysis of the pressure vessel test article were completed to make critical design evaluations. Results of this project will support life prediction for vessels on the ISS and Constellation Programs. 

GRC also supported the NESC Systems Analysis Team that 

implemented NASA Standard for Modeling and Simulation 

(NASA-STD 7009).

From front, Dr. John Thesken, Eric Baker, and James Sutter, GRC

members of the COPV Working Group, examine an imperfectly released 

liner-overwrap interface in the context of modeling approaches for finite 

element analyses of composite pressure vessels.

Adam Howard (left) and Chris Dellacorte reviewing the rotodynamics 

model of the 100,000 rpm Surface Analysis at Mars (SAM) vacuum pump 

to be flown on the MSL to study the make-up of Mars.

“The flexibility and deep 

technical depth of the 

NESC has helped us to 

validate our project decisions and enhance our 

mission success.”

Mr. James Free, 

GRC Deputy

Center Director

CENTER FOCUS
The Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) along 

with its Wallops Flight Facility (WFF) continued 

participation in a wide range of NESC activities 

during 2010. More than 90 GSFC and WFF scientists, 

engineers, and technicians made significant 

contributions to NASA’s Science Exploration, 

Exploration Systems, and Space Operations 

missions. The NASA Technical Fellows for Avionics, 

Electrical Power, Guidance Navigation and Control, 

Mechanical Systems and Software are resident at 

GSFC.

Exploration Systems

GSFC provided essential support to critical NESC 

assessments for the Constellation Program, including 

the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Parachute 

Assembly System (CPAS) Assessment, the Ares 

Control Sensitivity to Orion Slosh Dynamics Review, 

the Ares First Stage Avionics Thermal Study, as 

well as the Crew Module Water Landing Modeling 

Assessment (CMWLMA). The GSFC Wallops Flight 

Facility (WFF) led development and testing of the 

avionics and associate instrumentation for the Crew Module 

(CM) simulator, which exhibited exceptional performance 

during water drop tests.

Science

GSFC initiated and contributed to NESC activities for 

important Space and Earth Science missions, including 

assessment of Cryocooler Disturbance Models for the James 

Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Taurus XL Fairing 

Frangible Separation Ring thermal assessment for the Glory 

mission, the Hayabusa Sample Return Reentry Observation 

Review, and the emergency Problem Resolution Team (PRT) 

on the anomalous in-flight performance of the common 

pressure vessel (CPV) nickel hydrogen (NiH2) battery 

aboard the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe 

(WMAP). According to the flight operations team, 

WMAP (2009 most-cited space mission in science) 

would not have successfully completed 2010 

science operations without the help and input of 

the NESC Team.

Space Operations

GSFC played a key role in NESC reviews and 

assessments that benefited critical Space 

Operations Programs, including review of the 

International Space Station (ISS) Alpha Magnetic 

Spectrometer payload, review of the ISS 

Communications Navigation & Networking ReConfigurable Testbed (CoNNeCT) antenna gimbal 

structural analysis, the Tracking & Data Relay 

Satellite System (TDRSS) Reaction Wheel Assembly 

(RWA) Lubricant Contamination assessment, as 

well as continued statistical analysis of the Shuttle 

External Tank Foam Loss for the NESC Engineering 

Statistics Team.

General

GSFC provided technical support or leadership to a variety of 

NESC discipline advancing activities, including the Fastener 

Workshop, Fault Management Handbook, Multi-Layer 

Ceramic Capacitor (MLCC) study, and Programmable Logic 

Devices study. GSFC has made extensive contributions to 

technical leadership of NESC support to the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) investigation of 

automobile sudden acceleration. Component-level avionics 

testing at GSFC, along with NESC software and systemslevel testing at automobile test facilities, are providing better 

understanding of functionality and vulnerabilities to sudden 

acceleration.

GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

Image of the Orion crew module boilerplate overlaid with

model mesh to approximate the submerged area.

John H. Day

NESC’s Chief

Engineer at 

GSFC

Timothy 

Trenkle

NESC’s Chief

Engineer at 

GSFC

(From left) Denney Keys/NASA Technical Fellow for Electrical Power, Dr. George Dakermanji/MEI, Dr. Hari Vaidyanathan/COMSAT, and Leonine Lee/GSFC Lead Battery Engineer 

test a spare WMAP CPV NiH2 battery to help assess WMAP in-flight anomalies.

CENTER FOCUS
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY

I

n 2010, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) 

scientists and engineers supported numerous 

NESC assessments for the Science and Exploration 

Systems Mission Directorates, and the Robotics 

Operations Technical Discipline Team (TDT).

Exploration Systems

JPL is leading the NESC Crew Module Water Landing 

and Modeling Assessment. These tests and analyses 

provide the necessary verification to correlate design 

results based on models and simulations to a full-scale test 

article dropped into water at nominal landing velocities and 

attitudes. The first set of drop tests has been completed and 

the planning and implementation of the second set of tests 

is underway. The accelerated schedule and independence 

of the drop tests and subsequent evaluation, provides for 

an early risk characterization for the next crewed vehicle 

potentially influencing future testing plans and design 

options. 

The NESC Composite Pressure Vessel Working Group 

(CPVWG) has developed a test plan for stress rupture (a 

Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessel (COPV) failure 

mode) based on the needs identified in previous NESC 

assessments. Based on this plan, the NESC has proceeded 

with a stress rupture model development program for which 

JPL subject matter experts provide technical leadership. 

This effort will require testing of both strands and subscale 

COPVs to provide adequate data and analytical effort that 

will provide an approach that can be used across all NASA 

programs and projects.

General

JPL is supporting the sudden acceleration 

investigation for NHTSA by providing the NESC 

assessment team with software and systems 

engineering experts. The Wireless Avionics team 

developed preliminary prototypes to prove out the 

concepts for using wireless avionic systems in space. 

Ames Research Center, GSFC, JPL and JSC avionics 

engineers are cooperatively working this task.

Science

JPL actively supported a number of assessments including 

vibroacoustic environments, thermal performance database 

development, software tools, cryocooler vibration, battery 

usage in operational missions, and pyrovalve reliability. 

JPL provides leadership for the NESC CPVWG, which is 

responsible for understanding and communicating issues 

and risks associated with state-of-the-art and emerging 

composite pressure vessel technology. The CPVWG is 

tasked with the development of appropriate strategies, 

approaches, and methodologies to minimize technical risk 

associated with composite pressure vessels and to create/

revise technical requirements to mitigate this risk for future 

human and robotic space missions. The CPVWG coordinates 

with programs and projects throughout NASA, and has been 

working proactively to address COPV mechanical modeling 

concerns, non-destructive testing, lifetime assessment 

issues and standards development. While COPVs have been 

a priority, the CPVWG is also reviewing the state-of-the-art 

of cryogenic propellant tanks to understand the technology 

limitations and path forward to developing the technology. 

Robotics Operations TDT 

The Robotics Operations TDT, led by JPL, is working several 

tasks to advance robotic exploration. The entry, descent, and 

landing (EDL) task developed a database that is capturing 

at-risk EDL data to benefit future spacecraft designs. EDL 

experts from Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), JPL, 

Johnson Space Center (JSC), and Langley Research Center 

are populating the database with at-risk EDL data and 

expanding the base of users. The amount of data available in 

the database is increasing rapidly in this phase of the task.

Lloyd Keith

NESC’s Chief

Engineer at 

JPL

(Far Left) Water 

drop testing of an 

Orion crew module 

boilerplate.

(Right) COPV 

testing.

CENTER FOCUS
JOHNSON SPACE CENTER

Dr. Nancy

Currie

NESC’s Chief

Engineer at 

JSC

NESC personnel at Johnson Space Center (JSC) 

and the White Sands Test Facility (WSTF) support the safe and successful execution of the Space 

Shuttle Program (SSP), the continuous operation of 

the International Space Station (ISS), and the development of the human-tended spacecraft. NESC 

personnel at JSC provide real-time mission support 

as a member of both the SSP and ISS Mission Management teams and serves as a non-voting member 

on major technical boards for the SSP, ISS and the 

Constellation Program. In recognition of the importance of sharing lessons learned from decades of human 

spaceflight engineering and vehicle design, assistance 

was also provided to spacecraft developers through the 

Commercial Crew and Cargo Program. The NASA Technical Fellows for Life Support/Active Thermal, Loads and 

Dynamics, and Passive Thermal and the NESC Deputy Director for Safety are resident at JSC. Over 40 engineers 

from JSC support NESC assessments.

Exploration Systems

The NESC is actively engaged at all levels of the CxP. The 

Technical Fellows and other NESC personnel participated 

as an independent review team 

during technical sessions associated with the Program’s Preliminary Design Review. Utilizing expertise from across NASA 

and other government agencies, industry and academia; 

NESC teams continued their 

involvement in activities associated with occupant protection 

during dynamic phases of flight 

of the Orion spacecraft. Numerical models were developed 

and refined and tests were conducted to predict biomechanical response and determine the 

risk of crew injury during landing scenarios. This data is being used to define human systems integration requirements for future spacecraft and to 

assess the level of occupant protection by future vehicle 

designs. Crew seat/pallet isolation design concepts designed to mitigate the potential deleterious effects of thrust 

oscillations during ascent and landing accelerations were 

developed and tested. The NESC developed a framework 

to determine when it is acceptable to fly a crewed mission 

on a launch vehicle/spacecraft for the first time. Independent assessments of critical issues affecting Constellation 

elements include: launch abort vehicle (LAV) stabilization 

during transonic abort, LAV jet interaction aerodynamics, 

Ares I control sensitivity to Orion service module tank slosh 

dynamics, design of the liquid oxygen damper, and reliability of the Crew Exploration Vehicle Parachute Assembly 

System. NESC personnel also supported an Agency-led 

study of developing an emergency return vehicle 

to support the ISS and served as members of CxP 

and Project Standing Review Boards. 

Space Operations

NESC discipline experts supported the anomaly 

investigation of the ISS external active thermal 

control ammonia pump module failure and performed thermal analysis associated with removal 

and replacement of the failed unit and restart of the 

system. An independent assessment of the proposed STS-135 mission was conducted, including plans 

and procedures to use Soyuz spacecraft as an alternate 

means of crew return in the event the Space Shuttle is unable to return safely to Earth. NESC Life Support subject 

matter experts provided a detailed technical review of the 

risks associated with the ISS Sabatier carbon dioxide reduction system to determine its readiness for operation. 

The Technical Fellows for Life Support/Active Thermal and 

Passive Thermal provided oversight of analysis and test to 

investigate the cause and effects of face sheet damage on 

one of the ISS radiator panels. At the request of the ISS 

Program Manager, the NESC reviewed ISS micrometeoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) 

environment models, damage 

prediction and ballistic limit 

equations, and damage tolerance and failure criteria. The 

team also assessed the effects 

of proposed augmentations 

to ISS elements and began 

conceptual work for external 

shielding to provide enhanced 

protection from MMOD in 

high risk areas. The NESC 

provided technical support to 

an SSP review of a reaction 

control system thruster event 

during test stand operations 

and to ISS investigations of 

flex hose failures during proof 

pressure testing, composite 

overwrapped pressure vessel failure modes, and damage 

modes and potential on-orbit remediation options for the 

solar array rotary joint. During Space Shuttle missions, 

members of the Passive Thermal Technical Discipline Team 

provided real-time support to the Space Shuttle Thermal 

Protection System Damage Assessment Team.

Science

JSC NESC personnel performed detailed analysis and 

supported review activities associated with venting of the 

membrane sunshield on the James Webb Space Telescope. NESC thermal experts supported the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer Project by assessing the thermal effects of replacing the planned superconducting magnet 

with a previously flown design. 

CENTER FOCUS
WHITE SANDS TESTING FACILITY

WSTF Pyro Team doing test setups: From left, Technician Rick 

Madrid, WSTF Project Leader, Steve McDougle, Test Conductor 

Tony Carden and Assessment Lead, Regor Saulsberry.

Ralph Lucero visually 

inspects a COPV as 

Chris Keddy and 

Dan Hartness (right) 

discuss computer 

modeling of COPVs.

NESC Statistician Ken Johnson (left) observes as Test Conductor Tony Carden 

(right) aligns the optical pyrometer for temperature measurements of the Y-PCA.

White Sands Test Facility (WSTF) personnel are participating in several NESC activities including two 

pyrotechnic-operated valve (pyrovalve) assessments for 

the Propulsion Technical Discipline Team; in-depth planning and data collection for the NESC alternate launch 

abort system study and nondestructive evaluation (NDE) 

and modeling for the Composite Pressure Vessel Working 

Group (CPVWG). 

Pyrovalve Booster Interface Temperature Measurement: 

Testing quantified improvements of a new stainless steel (SS) 

primer chamber assembly (PCA) with V-shaped flame channels (V-PCA) over more commonly used aluminum PCAs with 

Y-shaped channels (Y-PCA). The SS V-PCA was significantly 

improved overall, except dual simultaneous initiator firings 

where no improvement was noted and should be avoided. 

Max Launch Abort System Objective System Concept 

Study: A Reaction Control System (RCS) engineer from JSC 

is leading a WSTF team to assist with the planning for manufacturing, assembling, and testing of an RCS for the design 

study. The team plans to evaluate subsystem performance 

during hot-fire tests; decontaminate, disassemble, and ship 

the RCS to an integration facility; and assist with subsystem 

installation, checkouts, and acceptance testing at the integration launch facility.

Pyrovalve Reliability Assessment for Expendable Launch 

Vehicle (ELV) Payloads: Because of their light weight and

reliability, pyrovalves are used in propulsion systems to

isolate hazardous propellants. However, there are questions 

about leakage and the number of isolation points the pyrovalves represent. A WSTF-led team is evaluating pyrovalve 

design and construction, historical leakage, inadvertent operation, and reliability to help the ELV payload community 

develop safety policies. 

Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessels: The CPVWG 

and the NASA NDE Working Group are producing a new

laser profilometer to map the interiors of cylindrical composite pressure vessels up to 55-in. long. The first generation 

system has successfully mapped the displacements resulting from wrapping, pressure proof testing, and accelerated 

stress rupture testing. External profilometry and eddy current 

scanning capabilities are being added to this system. Continued analysis of acoustic emissions has improved failure 

prediction methods. 

WSTF has also developed a specialized library of stress rupture and static strength data for various fiber types from the 

strand level up to the flight-weight component level. Data 

sets are available on the NESC CPVWG website. Unique data 

collected from carefully controlled carbon overwrapped 

vessel stress rupture testing is highly sought after by the 

aerospace and alternative fuel vehicle industry. This testing 

will generate additional data needed for current flight rational and for future design and modeling of more complex 

vessels.

CENTER FOCUS
KENNEDY SPACE CENTER

Stephen 

Minute

NESC’s Chief

Engineer at 

KSC

The NESC is involved in multiple activities and projects at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Likewise, KSC continues to provide support and expertise 

to a wide variety of NESC assessments and testing 

across the Agency. More than 20 KSC scientists, engineers, and technicians of various disciplines were 

active in NESC assessments. KSC engineers provided expertise on numerous NESC Technical Discipline 

Teams (TDTs), including: Guidance, Navigation, and 

Control; Power; Avionics; Flight Mechanics; Loads 

and Dynamics; Systems Engineering; and Structures.

Exploration Systems

Max Launch Abort System (MLAS) Objective System 

Concept Study: With the success of the first MLAS flight 

test vehicle (FTV), the NESC is exploring improvements 

to the original MLAS design in the Objective System 

Concept study. An operations engineer with KSC’s 

Vehicle Processing Directorate is working with the NESC 

on planning of this complex project. 

Commercial Crew: NASA Technical Fellows are 

sharing their knowledge in developing the appropriate 

specifications and standards in support of the KSCbased Commercial Crew Program. In particular, the 

Technical Fellows are working with the various Program 

and Center engineering organizations in developing the 

appropriate standards for use in the Commercial Crew 

Human Rating Plan. Also, KSC is supporting the NESC 

in an independent assessment of the Orbital Sciences 

Corporation plans for testing their Taurus II rocket. In 

particular, KSC is assisting with a technical review of 

ground acoustics, plume impingement, and induced 

environments.

Space Operations

The NESC was engaged in several Program assessments 

that affected ground processing at KSC including: Space 

Shuttle main engine ignition overpressure and nozzle 

cracks, expendable launch vehicle pyrovalve reliability, 

Taurus frangible joint system and Space Shuttle orbiter 

flow control valve poppet cracking. In particular, 

the NESC is involved with the on-going STS133 Shuttle External Tank (ET-137) hydrogen 

vent umbilical leakage and intertank stringer 

crack issues. During Shuttle propellant loading 

for launch of STS-133, ET-137 experienced 

excessive hydrogen leakage at the ET/ground 

interface. The NESC was involved in disassembly 

and replacement of the ground-half vent line 

disconnect and included a seal expert in 

discussions with KSC to improve understanding 

of seal and sealing surface interactions, as well as 

develop improved assembly techniques. During the same 

STS-133 propellant loading two ET intertank structural 

stringers developed cracks. The NESC is involved 

with the loads analysis, nondestructive evaluation 

techniques, metallurgical forensics, and the subsequent 

instrumentation scheme for follow-on testing.

General

NESC expertise is not only used with in NASA but crosses 

boundaries into other federal agencies too. NESC is 

consulting with the National Highway Transportation 

Safety Administration on the problem of unintended 

acceleration on passenger vehicles with electronic 

throttle controls. Two engineers from KSC Engineering 

are involved in the investigation.

The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS-02) is being prepared in the ISS 

processing facility for launch on STS-134. The NESC evaluated the planned 

installation and operation of AMS-02 in response to a major reconfiguration 

of the instrument late in the pre-launch and integration phase.

NESC personnel and NESC resident engineers from KSC participate in the 

weekly NESC Review Board to peer review all technical products produced 

by NESC assessments.

CENTER FOCUS
LANGLEY RESEARCH CENTER

Walter

Engelund

NESC’s Chief

Engineer at 

LaRC

Langley Research Center (LaRC) continues to support the NESC mission to address the Agency’s 

high risk programs and projects. Over 240 scientists, engineers and contractors at LaRC have contributed technical expertise in the areas of structures, 

materials, nondestructive evaluation, flight sciences, 

fabrication technology, loads and dynamics, computational fluid dynamics, mechanisms, guidance 

navigation and control, flight mechanics, and avionics. LaRC is the host Center for the NESC Directors 

Office, Principal Engineers Office, Systems Engineering Office, and the Management and Technical 

Support Office. LaRC is also home to the NASA Technical 

Fellows for Aerosciences, Flight Mechanics, Materials, Nondestructive Evaluation, and Structures.

Exploration Systems 

Composite Crew Module – Damage Tolerance Testing: In 

September 2009, LaRC received the NESC Composite Crew 

Module (CCM) for full scale testing. The objective of the 

testing was to characterize pre-test analytical finite element 

model strain predictions against measured strain readings. 

The testing was done at the LaRC Combined Loads Test 

System (COLTS) facility. The test matrix included a damage 

tolerance assessment phase where damage was intentionally induced to the test article, characterized using ultrasonic, 

flash infrared, and radiographic inspection techniques, and 

then subjected to ultimate design loads and cyclic loads to 

assess whether detrimental damage growth occurred. LaRC 

expertise in acoustic emission was also provided during test 

to monitor for events of interest. The final CCM test was an 

internal hydrostatic test to failure.

Science 

Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) Reaction Control System 

(RCS) Aero Interaction Evaluation: 

LaRC provided technical leadership and 

expertise to the NESC 

investigation to help 

understand and characterize the complex 

aerodynamic flow 

phenomena produced 

when the MSL entry 

vehicle fires its RCS 

jets in the wake of a hypersonic flowfield during the Entry, 

Descent, and Landing (EDL) phase. Early RCS jet location 

designs on the MSL aeroshell were subject to potential flight 

control reversals, which may have proven catastrophic to the 

mission during EDL. The jets were redesigned and relocated 

to mitigate this potential issue. The NESC developed and 

executed a wind tunnel test in the LaRC 31-inch Mach 10 

wind tunnel and also conducted a parallel computational 

fluid dynamics analysis campaign to validate the new design 

and ensure the modified RCS design works effectively. These capabilities and test techniques will also 

be useful on future entry vehicles with similar RCS 

design requirements, including the Constellation Program Orion Project and Commercial Crew Systems.

Cassini – Titan Flyby: LaRC personnel led the NESC 

assessment of the Cassini Titan “T-70” flyby to predict the range of atmospheric characteristics, aerodynamic torques, and heating likely to be encountered 

by the spacecraft. To measure Titan’s magnetic field, 

the Cassini spacecraft must dip into the atmosphere 

below the ionoshpere and within 880 kilometers (547 miles) 

of the surface, 70 km lower than any previous flyby. If the 

atmosphere is too thick during this low approach, then large 

aerodynamic torques could drive the spacecraft out of control or high heating could damage sensitive instruments. 

The NESC team recommended a spacecraft orientation that 

would minimize the aerodynamic torques and maximize the 

controllability (safety) margin during the closest approach. 

The flyby was successfully completed on June 21, 2010, 

where the spacecraft pointing was maintained within the 

predicted limits.

The NESC employed the LaRC’s Landing and Impact Research (LandIR) facility to

investigate energy attenuating seat struts for 

the Orion crew module. 

Model of the Mars Science Laboratory mounted in the LaRC 31-inch Mach 

10 wind tunnel.

From Left, Dr. Jeremy Pinier, David Witte and Dr. David Schuster in the 

LaRC Transonic Dynamics Tunnel, examine instrumentation on an alternative launch abort concept that employs grid fins for stability.

CENTER FOCUS
MARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

Steve Gentz

NESC’s Chief

Engineer at 

MSFC

More than 100 scientists, engineers, and technicians from the Marshall Space Flight Center 

(MSFC) Engineering, Safety and Mission Assurance, 

and Space Shuttle Program communities provided 

crucial technical support to over 30 NESC assessments in 2010. These investigations involved the 

areas of exploration systems, space operations, 

science, and crosscutting discipline activities. The 

NASA Technical Fellow for Propulsion is resident at 

MSFC.

Exploration Systems

Shell Buckling Knockdown Factor (SBKF): Continuation 

of SBKF investigations included fabrication and testing of 

8- and 27.5-foot diameter isogrid cylinders. Critical support 

was provided by several MSFC laboratories, departments, 

and quality organizations. Data gathered from this testing 

is applicable to the Constellation Program, future heavy lift 

booster designs, and is useful to structural analysts in general to enhance understanding of design margin in metal and 

composite tanks and other shell structures. Instrumentation 

of the first 27.5-foot diameter test article continued through 

November with initial structural testing in December. Additional testing including instrumentation of the second 27.5-

foot diameter test article is anticipated for 2011.

Space Operations

Space Shuttle Program (SSP): MSFC technical experts 

continued to participate in readiness reviews for each Space 

Shuttle flight, including those of the Space Shuttle propulsion 

elements, the Center Director’s evaluation, and the SSP and 

Agency Certificate of Flight Readiness activities. Some of 

these resulted in involvement in specific focus areas including external tank foam loss investigation, and Orbiter main 

propulsion system gaseous hydrogen flow control 

valve, and reaction control system/orbital maneuvering system thruster evaluations.

Science

MSFC Engineering provided invaluable in-depth 

analysis and review of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) cryocooler coolant flow models. This 

effort was a proactive request from the JWST Program for an independent review to determine if a 

credible risk exists with the operation of the cryocooler system on the mid-infrared instrument detectors.

General

The NESC Propulsion Technical Discipline Team sponsored 

work within the Engineering community to enhance the 

Agency’s propulsion capabilities in three key areas: knowledge transfer, propellant readiness level (PRL) determination, 

and near net shape fabrications of complex turbomachinery 

components. Propulsion training and knowledge dissemination were enhanced through the development of a handson propulsion learning center. The first version of the PRL 

(based on the technology readiness level categories) was 

released for review and presented at a July 2010 Joint Propulsion Conference. The PRL is an approach for determining the level of maturity in a propellant knowledge (i.e., how 

well is it characterized, what experience do we have applying it). Finally, powder metallurgy manufacturing was used 

to build a prototype turbopump impeller for cryogenic flow 

testing. Other discipline advancing and knowledge transfer 

work within MSFC Engineering supported by the NESC included updates to NASA specifications and standards, the 

Composite Pressure Vessel Working Group, and hosting the 

annual Agency Battery Workshop.

Combined shear/tension testing of aerospace fasteners by James Hodo, 

Electronics Technician in the Materials and Processing Lab.

The 27.5-foot-diameter Test Article 1 being installed into the MSFC 7-Axis 

Milling Machine Facility for the SBKF Project.

CENTER FOCUS
STENNIS SPACE CENTER

Richard Franzl (left) and Mark Turowski of Jacobs Technology perform integrated monitoring 

of chemical steam generator tests for the A-3 

Test Stand.

Lester Langford of Jacobs Technology, Inc. makes measurement preparations for sub-scale acoustic 

testing of the A-3 Test Stand.

Michael 

Smiles

NESC’s Chief

Engineer at 

SSC

This year, over 20 Stennis Space Center (SSC) scientists and engineers supported several NESCsponsored activities focused on A-3 Test Stand support and Health Monitoring system improvements. 

Activities employed the unique capabilities and facilities available at SSC.

Exploration Systems

A-3 Test Stand: SSC is constructing the A-3 Test 

Stand to enable liquid-fueled rocket engine testing in 

simulated altitude conditions. The NESC has been 

engaged in several activities supporting its design. The A-3 

Chief Engineer requested that the NESC perform a structural 

dynamics analysis of the test stand and its major components, which will be subjected to significant vibroacoustic 

environments during test operations. The NESC has assembled a team of experts to provide analytical confirmation that 

the dynamic environment will not have a detrimental effect 

on the stand structure and components such as propellant 

run tanks, test cell, diffuser, test article, piping systems, and 

measurement/monitor/control systems.

Sub-scale testing revealed an issue of high concentrations 

of oxygen produced by chemical steam generators, used to 

create a vacuum in the test cell, reacting with un-burned hydrogen produced by the engine causing an “un-start “condition within the diffuser. The NESC provided technical expertise in an independent review of the A-3 test stand. 

A series of sub-scale tests were conducted to understand the effects of water-injection acoustic mitigation 

techniques on reducing the diffuser exhaust noise. 

Variables investigated included high velocity water injected in the diffuser exhaust plume at different axial 

locations, impingement angles, and flow rates. NESC 

sponsored acoustic measurements and analysis led to 

improvements in the diffuser noise abatement.

Integrated Systems Health Management (ISHM):

A pilot application was developed to investigate the 

application and utility of ISHM in a rocket propulsion 

test environment. The chemical steam generator (CSG) test 

program at SSC was selected for this project. The prototype 

completed a comprehensive ISHM model for the CSG program test article that included data, knowledge, sensor validation information, anomaly detection, and diagnosis. The 

ISHM application to the propulsion test environment at SSC 

demonstrated significant improvements in both data analysis 

scope and critical test data/information access.

General

A group of SSC junior engineers and contractor engineers 

were sponsored by the NESC in support of the Max Launch 

Abort System test vehicle and the rapid prototype development of a Smart and Intelligent Sensor Payload Project sponsored by the Center. These individuals presented to SSC 

management on their involvement and resulting professional 

growth.

“The NESC has been a valuable resource to the A-3 Test Stand Project. We had test stand structural 

dynamics concerns related to design assumptions that the project could not address and we looked to 

the NESC for assistance. The team of experts assembled by the NESC did an outstanding job performing the complex analyses required to address these dynamics issues and allay any concerns.”

 — Jody Woods, A-3 Test Stand Chief Engineer, Stennis Space Center

CENTER FOCUS
Left to right: Eric Schleicher (Sierra Nevada Corporation), Wade Jackson (LaRC); William Schonberg (Missouri University of

Science and Technology); Charles Lawrence (GRC); Marshall Neipert (JSC); Mark Schoenenberger (LaRC); Jane Malin (JSC);

Kenneth Wright (University of Alabama – Huntsville); Tim Wilson (NESC Deputy Director/presenter); Sotiris Kellas (LaRC); Elizabeth 

Opila (University of Virginia); Patrick Johnston (LaRC); Ralph Roe, Jr. (NESC Director/presenter); Christopher Dellacorte (GRC); 

Joel Williamsen (Institute for Defense Analyses); Frederick Brust (Engineering Mechanics of Columbus Corporation); Paul Tartabini 

(LaRC); John Hengel (MSFC); Timothy Krantz (GRC); Patrick Forrester (NESC Chief Astronaut/presenter); Alan Leveille (independent 

consultant).

NESC Director’s Award

Honors individuals who take personal 

accountability and ownership in initiating clear and open communication on 

diverse and controversial issues. A key 

component of this award is based on 

the process of challenging engineering 

truths

Mark Schoenenberger

In recognition of advocacy, development, leadership and execution of the 

NASA Engineering and Safety Center’s 

Mars Science Laboratory Aerodynamic/Reaction Control System interaction 

validation effort

NESC Leadership Award

Honors individuals who have had a 

pronounced effect upon the technical 

activities of the NESC

Sotiris Kellas

In recognition of outstanding leadership in managing the test phase of the 

Composite Crew Module Project

William P. Schonberg

In recognition of outstanding leadership, technical insight and support 

of micrometeoroid and orbital debris 

(MMOD) protection and damage prediction for the NASA Engineering and 

Safety Center MMOD assessments

Joel Williamsen

In recognition of outstanding leadership and technical insight into the 

NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

micrometeoroid and orbital debris assessment activities

NESC Engineering

Excellence Award

Honors individual accomplishments of 

NESC-job related tasks of such magnitude and merit as to deserve special 

recognition

Frederick W. Brust

In recognition of contributions to the 

NESC Critical Initial Flaw Size Team’s 

engineering and analysis on weld sequences for the Upper Stage Simulator 

of the Ares 1-X vehicle

Christopher Dellacorte

In recognition of exceptional technical 

support in the area of tribology and mechanical systems as exemplified in the 

International Space Station Solar Array 

Alpha Rotary Joint recovery

Wade C. Jackson

In recognition of engineering excellence in developing and implementing 

the impact delivery system for characterizing durability and damage tolerance of composites on the Composite 

Crew Module Project

Patrick H. Johnston

In recognition of engineering excellence in developing a non-destructive 

phased array ultrasonic inspection 

technique for use on Pi-preforms on 

the Composite Crew Module Project

Timothy L. Krantz

In recognition of engineering excellence in the resolution of the International Space Station Solar Array Alpha 

Rotary Joint anomaly including critical 

testing and data reduction that contributed to the development of the most 

probable root cause

Charles Lawrence

In recognition of exceptional technical 

support to the Orion occupant protection study leading to advancements 

in biomechanical injury prediction and 

improvements in spacecraft seat and 

restraint designs

NESC Honor Awards

AWARDS
Alan R. Leveille

In recognition of engineering excellence in determining the cause and 

corrective action of the International 

Space Station Urine Processing Assembly-Distillation Assembly bearing 

failures 

Jane T. Malin

In recognition of engineering excellence and exceptional leadership within the Data Mining and Trending Working Group and during development of 

a linguistically based data mining tool

Marshall Neipert

In recognition of engineering excellence in the LS-DYNA analysis performed in support of the International 

Space Station Radiator Anomaly Assessment which led to an understanding of the potential failure mode root 

cause 

Elizabeth J. Opila

In recognition of engineering excellence as a member of the NASA Engineering and Safety Center supported Reinforced Carbon Carbon Root 

Cause Investigation Team

Eric Schleicher

In recognition of engineering excellence 

in developing analytical models, developing and managing pre-test strain predictions, and correlating post-test strain 

results for the Composite Crew Module 

Project

Paul V. Tartabini

In recognition of engineering excellence 

in the development and evaluation of 

Max Launch Abort System Objective 

System designs

NESC Group

Achievement Award

Honors a group of employees comprised 

of government and non-government personnel for outstanding accomplishment 

through the coordination of individual efforts that have contributed substantially 

to the accomplishment of the NESC’s 

mission

Crew Exploration Vehicle Parachute 

Assembly System Independent

Reliability Assessment Team

In recognition of outstanding contributions to the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle parachute assembly system design 

with a focus on reliability and development test plan improvements

Composite Crew Module

Non-Destructive Evaluation

and Test Team

In recognition of outstanding contributions in the field of Non-Destructive 

Evaluation and test execution on the 

Composite Crew Module Project (award 

accepted by Sotiris Kellas on behalf of 

the team)

International Space Station

Plasma Contactor Utilization

Assessment Team

In recognition of outstanding support to 

the investigation of plasma environmental effects on the International Space Station (award accepted by Kenneth Wright 

on behalf of the team)

NESC Orion Landing

Attenuation and Ares-1 Thrust

Oscillation Isolation Team

In recognition of outstanding effort in 

the development of alternative designs 

for the Orion landing attenuation system 

and for engineering an Ares-1 thrust oscillation load mitigation system through 

crew pallet isolation (award accepted by 

Charles Lawrence on behalf of the team)

KSC Engineers receive NESC Group Achievement Awards for their work on MLAS and the NESC 

Resident Engineering program. Pictured from left to right are: Pat Simpkins, Director of Engineering at KSC; Sarah Quach, MLAS Resident Engineer; Samantha Manning, MLAS Resident Engineer; and Steve Minute, NESC Chief Engineer at KSC.

Engineer of the Year 

Award issued by the 

American Institute 

of Aeronautics and 

Astronautics (AIAA) 

was awarded to 

Dr. Michael Gilbert 

for his work as the 

Chief Engineer on

the successful test

flight of the Max 

Launch Abort System in July, 2009. 

The AIAA Engineer of the Year Award

is presented to a member of AIAA who

has made a recent individual contribution

in the application of scientific and

mathematical principles leading to a 

significant accomplishment or event 

worthy of AIAA’s national or international 

recognition. 

Dr. Michael Gilbert named 

AIAA engineer of the year

AWARDS
Ralph R. Roe, Jr.

NESC Director

Mr. Ralph R. Roe, Jr. is the NESC’s Director at Langley 

Research Center (LaRC). Mr. Roe has over 27 years of 

experience in human space flight program management, technical management, and test engineering. 

Mr. Roe previously held several key positions in the Space Shuttle 

Program, including Vehicle Engineering Manager, Launch Director, 

and Kennedy Space Center Engineering Director.

Timmy R. Wilson

NESC Deputy Director

Mr. Timmy R. Wilson is NESC’s Deputy Director. Mr. 

Wilson was formerly the NESC’s Chief Engineer at 

Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Prior to joining the 

NESC, Mr. Wilson served as Deputy Chief Engineer for 

Space Shuttle Processing at KSC. Mr. Wilson has over 29 years 

of engineering and management experience supporting the Space 

Shuttle Program.

Michael P. Blythe

NESC Deputy Director for Safety

Mr. Michael P. Blythe is NESC’s Deputy Director for 

Safety and is resident at the Johnson Space Center 

(JSC). Prior to joining the NESC, Mr. Blythe served 

as the Acting Assistant Associate Administrator in the 

Office of the Administrator at NASA HQ. Mr. Blythe came to the 

Office of the Administrator from the Office of Chief Engineer where 

he served as the Director for the Engineering and Program/Project Management Division. In this capacity, he was responsible for 

establishing and implementing Agency engineering and program/

project management policy, procedures and processes to improve 

the efficiency and success of NASA’s investments

Dr. Daniel Winterhalter

Chief Scientist

Dr. Daniel Winterhalter is NESC’s Chief Scientist 

and is resident at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory 

(JPL). Dr. Winterhalter has over 32 years of experience as a research scientist at JPL. His research 

interests include the spatial evolution of the solar wind into the outer 

reaches of the heliosphere, as well as its interaction with and influence on planetary environments. In addition, as a member of

several flight teams, he has been intimately involved with the planning, launching, and operation of complex spacecraft and space 

science missions.

Dawn M. Schaible

Manager, Systems Engineering Office

Ms. Dawn M. Schaible is Manager of NESC’s Systems Engineering Office at Langley Research Center (LaRC). Prior to joining the NESC, Ms. Schaible 

worked in the International Space Station/Payload 

Processing Directorate at Kennedy Space Center. 

Ms. Schaible has over 23 years of experience in systems engineering, integration, and ground processing for the Space Shuttle and 

International Space Station Programs.

Daniel J. Tenney

Manager, Management and Technical

Support Office

Mr. Daniel J. Tenney is Manager of NESC’s Management and Technical Support Office at Langley 

Research Center (LaRC). Prior to joining the NESC, 

Mr. Tenney served as the Deputy Chief Financial Officer for Systems 

at LaRC where he managed over 30 information systems. Mr. Tenney has 21 years of professional financial, accounting, and systems 

experience at NASA.

Core Leadership Team

BIOGRAPHIES
Clinton H. Cragg

NESC Principal Engineer

Mr. Clinton H. Cragg is a Principal Engineer with 

NESC at Langley Research Center (LaRC). Mr. Cragg 

came to NESC after retiring from the U.S. Navy. Mr. 

Cragg served as the Commanding Officer of the 

U.S.S. Ohio and later as the Chief of Current Operations, U.S. European Command. Mr. Cragg has over 32 years of 

experience in supervision, command, and ship-borne nuclear safety.

Dr. Michael G. Gilbert

NESC Principal Engineer

Dr. Michael G. Gilbert is a Principal Engineer with 

NESC at Langley Research Center (LaRC). Dr. Gilbert 

was formerly the NESC Chief Engineer at LaRC. Before joining NESC, he was Head of the LaRC Systems 

Management Office. Dr. Gilbert has over 32 years of engineering, 

research, and management experience with aircraft, missile, spacecraft, Space Shuttle, and International Space Station programs.

Michael T. Kirsch

NESC Principal Engineer

Mr. Michael T. Kirsch is a Principal Engineer with 

NESC at Langley Research Center (LaRC). Mr. Kirsch 

joined NESC from the NASA’s White Sands Test Facility (WSTF) where he served as the Deputy Manager 

responsible for planning and directing developmental 

and operational tests of spacecraft propulsion systems and related 

subsystems. Mr. Kirsch has over 21 years of experience in managing 

projects and test facilities.

NESC Principal Engineers

Wayne R. Frazier

NASA Headquarters Senior SMA

Integration Manager

Mr. Wayne R. Frazier currently serves as Senior Safety and Mission Assurance Manager in the Office of 

Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA), where he is 

assigned as the Liaison Officer to NESC, the Office 

of the Chief Engineer, the Software Independent Verification and Validation Facility in West Virginia, and other remote activities of OSMA. He was formerly Manager of System Safety in the 

OSMA at NASA Headquarters and has over 35 years of experience 

in System Safety, Propulsion and Explosive Safety, Mishap Investigation, Range Safety, Pressure Systems, Crane Safety and Orbital 

Debris Mitigation.

NASA Headquarters Liaison

NESC Chief Engineers

Dr. Nancy J. Currie

NESC Chief Engineer

Dr. Nancy J. Currie is NESC’s Chief Engineer at Johnson 

Space Center (JSC). Dr. Currie came to the NESC from 

JSC, where she served as the Deputy Director of the 

Engineering Directorate. Dr. Currie has over 22 years of 

expertise in robotics and human factors engineering.

Selected as an astronaut in 1990, Dr. Currie is a veteran of four Space 

Shuttle missions and has accrued 1000 hours in space.

Dr. John H. Day

NESC Chief Engineer (Acting)

Dr. John H. Day is Acting NESC Chief Engineer at 

Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). Dr. Day was 

formerly Chief of the Electrical Engineering Division 

at GSFC. Dr. Day has over 28 years of experience in 

space power and electrical systems and in leading 

flight hardware development activities for over 16 robotic science 

missions. Dr. Day has also served as Chief Technologist for GSFC’s 

Engineering and Technology Directorate.

Walter C. Engelund

NESC Chief Engineer

Mr. Walter C. Engelund is NESC’s Chief Engineer at 

Langley Research Center (LaRC). Mr. Engelund came 

to the NESC from LaRC, where he served as the Head 

of the Atmospheric Flight and Entry Systems Branch. 

Mr. Engelund has over 21 years of experience as a 

recognized expert in launch and entry vehicle aerodynamics, atmospheric flight dynamics and hypersonic flight systems.

Steven J. Gentz

NESC Chief Engineer

Mr. Steven J. Gentz is NESC’s Chief Engineer at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). Mr. Gentz was formerly a Principal Engineer with the NESC at Langley 

Research Center (LaRC). Mr. Gentz has over 27 years 

of experience involving numerous NASA, Department 

of Defense, and industry failure analyses and incident investigations, 

including Challenger, Columbia, Tethered Satellite System, and the 

TWA 800 Accident Investigations.

R. Lloyd Keith

NESC Chief Engineer

Mr. R. Lloyd Keith is NESC’s Chief Engineer, as well

as support and backup for the Center Chief Engineer 

at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). Mr. Keith has 

over 33 years of experience working in both technical 

and managerial positions. Mr. Keith has supported a 

number of flight projects including the Mars Pathfinder Project, SeaWinds, Stardust, Mars ’98, New Millennium Deep Space 1, and the 

Flight Hardware Logistics Program.

BIOGRAPHIES
NESC Chief Engineers Continued NASA Technical Fellows

Nans Kunz

NESC Chief Engineer

Mr. Nans Kunz is NESC’s Chief Engineer at Ames Research Center (ARC). Mr. Kunz came to the NESC 

from the Systems Engineering Division at ARC. Mr. 

Kunz has over 32 years of engineering experience 

leading and managing NASA programs and projects including 

serving as the Chief Engineer of the Stratospheric Observatory For 

Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA) Project.

Richard T. Manella

NESC Chief Engineer

Mr. Richard T. Manella is NESC’s Chief Engineer at 

Glenn Research Center (GRC). Mr. Manella joined 

the NESC from GRC, where he served as the first 

Chief of the Chief Engineers Office, an office which 

he established. Mr. Manella has over 23 years of engineering and 

management experience in structural dynamics and spaceflight 

systems.

Stephen A. Minute

NESC Chief Engineer

Mr. Stephen A. Minute is NESC’s Chief Engineer at 

Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Mr. Minute came to 

the NESC from KSC, where he served as the Chief 

of the Space Shuttle Safety, Quality, and Mission Assurance Division. Mr. Minute has over 26 years of engineering and 

management experience in the Space Shuttle and International 

Space Station Programs.

Michael D. Smiles

NESC Chief Engineer

Mr. Michael D. Smiles is NESC’s Chief Engineer at 

Stennis Space Center (SSC). Mr. Smiles joined the 

NESC from SSC, where he served as the Safety and 

Mission Assurance (S&MA) Manager. Mr. Smiles has 

over 25 years of management and technical experience with NASA 

at SSC and Marshall Space Flight Center. 

Dr. James F. Stewart

NESC Chief Engineer

Dr. James F. Stewart is NESC’s Chief Engineer at 

Dryden Flight Research Center (DFRC). Dr. Stewart 

joined the NESC from DFRC where he served as the 

Dryden Exploration Mission Director. Dr. Stewart has 

over 44 years of management and technical experience leading missile and aircraft programs.

Timothy G. Trenkle

NESC Chief Engineer

Mr. Timothy G. Trenkle is NESC’s Chief Engineer at 

Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). Mr. Trenkle 

joined the NESC from GSFC, where he has over 18 

years of technical experience serving as the technical lead for a number of flight programs and technical assignments including serving as the Chief Engineer for the 

National Polar-Orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System 

(NPOESS) Preparatory Project (NPP). Mr. Trenkle is currently working a detailed assignment in the Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS) 

Office at GSFC.

Michael L. Aguilar

NASA Technical Fellow

Mr. Michael L. Aguilar is the NASA Technical Fellow for Software and is resident at Goddard Space 

Flight Center (GSFC). Mr. Aguilar joined the NESC 

from GSFC where he served as the James Webb 

Space Telescope (JWST) Instrument Software 

Manager. Mr. Aguilar has over 34 years of experience on embedded software development.

Cornelius J. Dennehy

NASA Technical Fellow

Mr. Cornelius J. Dennehy is the NASA Technical 

Fellow for Guidance Navigation and Control (GNC) 

and is resident at Goddard Space Flight Center 

(GSFC). Mr. Dennehy came to the NESC from 

the Mission Engineering and Systems Analysis Division at GSFC, 

where he served as the Division’s Assistant Chief for Technology. 

Mr. Dennehy has over 30 years of experience in the architecture, 

design, development, integration, and operation of GNC systems, 

and space platforms for communications, defense, remote sensing, and scientific mission applications.

Roberto Garcia

NASA Technical Fellow

Mr. Roberto Garcia is the NASA Technical Fellow for 

Propulsion and is resident at Marshall Space Flight 

Center (MSFC). Mr. Garcia came to the NESC from 

the Solid Propulsion Systems Division where he 

served as Division Chief. Mr. Garcia has over 19 years of experience in performing aerodynamic, hydrodynamic, and engine system design and analysis of rocket propulsion.

Oscar Gonzalez

NASA Technical Fellow

Mr. Oscar Gonzalez is the NASA Technical Fellow 

for Avionics and is resident at Goddard Space Flight 

Center (GSFC). Mr. Gonzalez came to the NESC 

from GSFC where he served as the International 

Space Station/Express Logistic Carrier (ELC) Avionics Systems Manager. Mr. Gonzalez has over 32 years of NASA 

and private industry experience where he has held a variety of critical leadership roles in power electronics, electrical systems, instrument systems, and avionics systems. 

Denney J. Keys

NASA Technical Fellow

Mr. Denney J. Keys is the NASA Technical Fellow 

for Electrical Power and is resident at Goddard 

Space Flight Center (GSFC). Mr. Keys served as 

the Lead Power Systems Engineer in the Power 

Systems Branch at GSFC before joining the NESC. 

Mr. Keys has over 30 years of private industry and NASA experience with electrical power systems.

BIOGRAPHIES
Dr. Curtis E. Larsen

NASA Technical Fellow

Dr. Curtis E. Larsen is the NASA Technical Fellow 

for Loads and Dynamics and is resident at Johnson 

Space Center (JSC). Prior to joining the NESC, Dr. 

Larsen was the Technical Discipline Manager for 

Cargo Integration Structures in the Space Shuttle Program’s Flight 

Operations and Integration Office. Dr. Larsen has over 30 years of 

engineering experience with expertise in stochastic structural dynamics, structural safety, and probabilistic engineering applications.

Daniel G. Murri

NASA Technical Fellow

Mr. Daniel G. Murri is the NASA Technical Fellow for 

Flight Mechanics and is resident at Langley Research 

Center (LaRC). Mr. Murri served as Head of the Flight 

Dynamics Branch at LaRC before joining the NESC. 

He has over 29 years of engineering experience conducting numerous wind-tunnel, simulation, flight-test, and theoretical studies in 

the exploration of new technology concepts and in support of aircraft development programs.

Dr. Cynthia H. Null

NASA Technical Fellow

Dr. Cynthia H. Null is the NASA Technical Fellow for 

Human Factors and is resident at Ames Research 

Center (ARC). Before joining the NESC, Dr. Null was 

a scientist in the Human Factors Division and Deputy 

Program Manager of the Space Human Factors Engineering Project. Dr. Null has 24 years of experience lecturing on Human Factors, 

and another 18 years of experience in Human Factors applied to 

NASA programs.

Joseph W. Pellicciotti

NASA Technical Fellow

Mr. Joseph W. Pellicciotti is the NASA Technical Fellow for Mechanical Systems and is resident at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). Mr. Pellicciotti 

served as the Chief Engineer for the GSFC Mechanical Systems Division before joining the NESC. Mr. Pellicciotti has 

over 22 years of combined private industry and NASA experience 

designing structure and mechanisms for commercial, military, and 

civil spacecraft.

Dr. Robert S. Piascik

NASA Technical Fellow

Dr. Robert S. Piascik is the NASA Technical Fellow for 

Materials and is resident at Langley Research Center 

(LaRC). Dr. Piascik joined the NESC from the LaRC 

Mechanics of Materials Branch and the Metals and 

Thermal Structures Branch, where he served as a Senior Materials 

Scientist. Dr. Piascik has over 26 years of experience in the commercial nuclear power industry and over 17 years of experience in 

basic and applied materials research for several NASA programs.

Dr. William H. Prosser

NASA Technical Fellow

Dr. William H. Prosser is the NASA Technical Fellow for Nondestructive Evaluation and is resident at 

Langley Research Center (LaRC). Dr. Prosser joined 

the NESC from the Nondestructive Evaluation Sciences Branch at LaRC. Dr. Prosser has over 23 years of experience 

in the field of ultrasonic and acoustic emission sensing techniques.

Dr. Ivatury S. Raju

NASA Technical Fellow

Dr. Ivatury S. Raju is the NASA Technical Fellow 

for Structures and is resident at Langley Research 

Center (LaRC). Dr. Raju was the Senior Technologist in the LaRC Structures and Materials Competency prior to joining the NESC. Dr. Raju has over 

35 years of experience in structures, structural mechanics, and 

structural integrity. 

Steven L. Rickman

NASA Technical Fellow

Mr. Steven L. Rickman is the NASA Technical Fellow for Passive Thermal and is resident at Johnson 

Space Center (JSC). Mr. Rickman joined the NESC 

from JSC’s Thermal Design Branch where he served 

as the Chief. Mr. Rickman has over 25 years of management and 

technical experience in passive thermal control.

Henry A. Rotter

NASA Technical Fellow

Mr. Henry (Hank) A. Rotter is the NASA Technical 

Fellow for Life Support/Active Thermal and is resident at Johnson Space Center (JSC). Mr. Rotter 

joined the NESC from the JSC Crew and Thermal 

Systems Division and the Space Launch Initiative Program, where 

he was Engineering Manager and the Orbital Space Plane Team 

Leader for life support and active thermal control teams. Mr. Rotter 

has over 43 years of life support and active thermal control systems 

experience during the Apollo, Space Shuttle, and Orbital Space 

Plane Programs.

Dr. David M. Schuster

NASA Technical Fellow

Dr. David M. Schuster is the NASA Technical 

Fellow for Aerosciences and is resident at Langley Research Center (LaRC). Prior to joining the 

NESC, Dr. Schuster was the Branch Head for the 

Structural and Thermal Systems Branch in the 

Systems Engineering Directorate. Dr. Schuster has over 32 years of 

experience in the aerospace industry with expertise in aeroelasticity 

and integrated aerodynamic analysis.

NASA Technical Fellows Continued

BIOGRAPHIES
Frank H. Bauer

NESC Discipline Expert for Guidance Navigation and Control (2003 

– 2004) Currently serving as the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate Chief Engineer at NASA HQ

J. Larry Crawford

NESC Deputy Director for Safety 

(2003 – 2004) Left the NESC to become Director of Safety and Mission 

Assurance at the Kennedy Space 

Center (KSC) and has since retired

Dr. Charles J. Camarda

NESC Deputy Director for Advanced 

Projects (2006 – 2009) Left the 

NESC to become Senior Advisor for 

Innovation in the Office of the Chief 

Engineer at NASA Headquarters

Kenneth D. Cameron

NESC Deputy Director for Safety 

(2005 – 2008) Left the NESC to accept a position with Northrop Grumman

Steven F. Cash

NESC Chief Engineer at Marshall 

Space Flight Center (MSFC) (2005) 

Left the NESC to become the Manager, Shuttle Propulsion Office at 

MSFC

Derrick J. Cheston

NESC Chief Engineer at Glenn Research Center (GRC) (2003 – 2007) 

Left the NESC to participate in the 

Senior Executive Service Candidate 

Development Program (SESCDP) 

and then returned to GRC as the 

Chief of the Mechanical and Fluid 

Systems Division

Mitchell L. Davis

NASA Technical Fellow for Avionics (2007 – 2009) Left the NESC to 

become the Chief Avionics Systems 

Engineer in the Electrical Engineering Division at Goddard Space Flight 

Center

Dennis B. Dillman

NESC Chief Engineer at NASA 

Headquarters (HQ) (2005 – 2008) 

Left the NESC to become an Engineer in the Science Mission Directorate at NASA HQ

Freddie Douglas, III

NESC Chief Engineer at Stennis 

Space Center (SSC) (2007 – 2008) 

Left the NESC to become Manager, 

Office of Safety and Mission Assurance at SSC

Patricia L. Dunnington

Manager, Management and Technical Support Office (2006 – 2008) 

Retired

Dr. Michael S. Freeman

NESC Chief Engineer at Ames Research Center (2003 – 2004) Retired

T. Randy Galloway

NESC Chief Engineer at Stennis 

Space Center (SSC) (2003 – 2004) 

Currently the Director of the Engineering and Test Directorate at SSC

Dr. Edward R. Generazio

NESC Discipline Expert for Nondestructive Evaluation (2003 – 2005) 

Left the NESC to become a Senior 

Research Engineer, Research Directorate, Langley Research Center

Dr. Richard J. Gilbrech

NESC Deputy Director (2003 – 2005) 

Currently the Associate Director at 

Stennis Space Center

Michael Hagopian

NESC Chief Engineer at Goddard 

Space Flight Center (GSFC) (2003 

– 2007) Left the NESC to become 

the Chief Engineer in the Engineering 

Directorate at GSFC

David A. Hamilton

NESC Chief Engineer at Johnson 

Space Center (2003 – 2007) Retired

Dr. Charles E. Harris

NESC Principal Engineer (2003 

– 2006) Currently the Director, 

Research Directorate, Langley Research Center

Dr. Steven A. Hawley

NESC Chief Astronaut (2003 – 2004) 

Left the NESC to become the Director of Astromaterials Research and 

Exploration Science at Johnson 

Space Center and has since retired

Marc S. Hollander

Manager, Management and Technical Support Office (2005 – 2006) Left 

the NESC to accept a position as the 

Associate Director for Management, 

National Institutes of Health

George D. Hopson

NASA Technical Fellow for Propulsion (2003 – 2007) Retired

Keith L. Hudkins

NASA Headquarters Office of the 

Chief Engineer Representative (2003 

– 2007) Retired

Danny D. Johnston

NESC Chief Engineer at Marshall 

Space Flight Center (MSFC) (2003 

– 2004) Left the NESC to work a 

detailed assignment at MSFC in the 

NASA Chief Engineer’s Office and 

has since retired

Michael W. Kehoe

NESC Chief Engineer at Dryden 

Flight Research Center (DFRC) (2003 

– 2005) Left the NESC to become 

the DFRC Liaison in the Crew Exploration Vehicle Flight Test Office 

at Johnson Space Center and has 

since retired

Robert A. Kichak

NESC Discipline Expert for Power 

and Avionics (2003 – 2007) Retired

Dr. Dean A. Kontinos

NESC Chief Engineer at Ames Research Center (ARC) (2006 – 2007) 

Left the NESC to work a detailed 

assignment as the Technical Integration Manager of the Fundamental 

Aeronautics Program in the Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate at 

NASA HQ and has since returned to 

ARC in the Office of the Chief Engineer

Julie A. Kramer White

NESC Discipline Expert for Mechanical 

Analysis (2003 – 2006) Currently the 

Chief Engineer, Crew Exploration Vehicle Office at Johnson Space Center

Steven G. Labbe

NESC Discipline Expert for Flight 

Sciences (2003 – 2006) Currently 

the Chief Engineer, Constellation 

Program Office at Johnson Space 

Center

Matthew R. Landano

NESC Chief Engineer at NASA’s Jet 

Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) (2003 – 

2004) Returned to his assignment 

at JPL as the Director of Office of 

Safety and Mission Success

David S. Leckrone

NESC Chief Scientist (2003 – 2006) 

Left the NESC to become the Senior Project Scientist for the Hubble 

Space Telescope at Goddard Space 

Flight Center

John P. McManamen

NASA Technical Fellow for Mechanical Systems (2003 – 2007) Currently 

the Chief Engineer, Shuttle Program 

Office at Johnson Space Center

Brian K. Muirhead

NESC Chief Engineer at NASA’s Jet 

Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) (2005 – 

2007) Returned to his assignment 

as the Chief Engineer, Jet Propulsion 

Laboratory

Dr. Paul M. Munafo

NESC Deputy Director (2003 – 2004) 

Left the NESC to become the Assistant Director for Safety and Engineering at Marshall Space Flight 

Center (MSFC) and has since retired

Stan C. Newberry

Manager of NESC’s Management 

and Technical Support Office (2003 

– 2004) Left the NESC to become 

the Deputy Center Director at Ames

Research Center and has since left 

NASA to accept a position at DoD

Dr. Tina L. Panontin

NESC Chief Engineer at Ames Research Center (2008 – 2009) Returned to her assignment as the 

Ames Research Center Chief Engineer

Dr. Shamim A. Rahman

NESC Chief Engineer at Stennis 

Space Center (SSC) (2005 – 2006) 

Left the NESC to become the Deputy Director of the Engineering and 

Test Directorate at SSC

Jerry L. Ross

NESC Chief Astronaut (2004 – 2006) 

Returned to his assignment as Chief 

of the Vehicle Integration Test Office 

at Johnson Space Center

Dr. Charles F. Schafer

NESC Chief Engineer at Marshall 

Space Flight Center (2006 – 2010) 

Retired

Steven S. Scott

NESC Chief Engineer at Goddard 

Space Flight Center (2008 – 2009) 

NESC Discipline Expert (now called 

NASA Technical Fellow) for Software 

(2003 – 2005) Returned to his assignment as the Goddard Space 

Flight Center Chief Engineer 

Bryan K. Smith

NESC Chief Engineer at Glenn Research Center (2008 – 2010) Left 

the NESC to serve as Chief of the 

Systems Engineering and Systems 

Analysis Division at Glenn Research 

Center

John E. Tinsley

NASA Headquarters Senior Safety 

and Mission Assurance Manager 

for NESC (2003 – 2004) Left the 

NESC to become the Director of 

the Mission Support Division at 

NASA Headquarters and has since 

left NASA to accept a position with 

Northrop Grumman

Clayton P. Turner

NESC Chief Engineer at Langley 

Research Center (2008 – 2009) 

Returned to his assignment as the 

Langley Research Center Chief Engineer 

The NESC Alumni

ALUMNI
Publication Title .................................................................................................................................................................. TM NUMBER

1. Constellation Program (CxP) Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Project Integrated Landing System .................................. TM-2009-216165

2. Evaluation of Computational Nondestructive Evaluation (NDE) Methodologies for Constellation 

Program (CxP) Fracture-Critical Structural Design ............................................................................................................. TM-2009-216167/Volume I

3. Evaluation of Computational Nondestructive Evaluation (NDE) Methodologies for Constellation 

Program (CxP) Fracture-Critical Structural Design Appendices ........................................................................................ TM-2009-216167/Volume II

4. International Space Station Program (ISSP) Recurring Anomalies ...................................................................................... TM-2009-216179/Volume I

5. International Space Station Program (ISSP) Recurring Anomalies Volume II Part 1 Appendices A-I .................................. TM-2009-216179/Volume II/Part 1

6. International Space Station Program (ISSP) Recurring Anomalies Volume II Part 2 Appendix J......................................... TM-2009-216179/Volume II/Part 2

7. Flight Force Measurements (FFMs) of the Gamma-Ray Large Area Space Telescope (GLAST) / Delta II Flight................. TM-2010-216180

8. Assessment of International Space Station (ISS) Plasma Contactor Unit (PCU) Utilization ............................................... TM-2010-216683

9. Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) Phase VI Glove Thermal Micrometeoroid Garment (TMG) Damage

1 Mode Investigation .......................................................................................................................................................... TM-2010-216686/Volume I

10. Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) Phase VI Glove Thermal Micrometeoroid Garment (TMG) Damage

1 Mode Investigation Appendix A ....................................................................................................................................... TM-2010-216686/Volume II/Part 1

11. Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) Phase VI Glove Thermal Micrometeoroid Garment (TMG) Damage

1 Mode Investigation Appendix B ...................................................................................................................................... TM-2010-216686/Volume II/Part 2

12. International Space Station (ISS) Nitrogen/Oxygen Recharge System (NORS) Composite Overwrapped 

Pressure Vessel (COPV) Concept ....................................................................................................................................... TM-2010-216687

13. Development, Design, Test, and Evaluation (DDT&E) Process for Robustness of Space Flight Programmable

Logic Devices (PLDs) .......................................................................................................................................................... TM-2010-216688

14. Structures Peer Review for Constellation Program (CxP) Ares I-X Upper Stage Simulator (USS) Secondary 

Structures ........................................................................................................................................................................... TM-2010-216689

15. Distributed Impact Detector System (DIDS) Health Monitoring System Evaluation............................................................. TM-2010-216694

16. Problem Reporting Taxonomy and Data Preparation Tool Evaluation ............................................................................... TM-2010-216704

17. RTAX-S Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) Risk Reduction ...................................................................................... TM-2010-216705

18. Orbiter Boundary Layer Transition Testing for Development of Aeroheating Prediction Methodology – Phase A.............. TM-2010-216707

19. System Architectural Considerations on Reliable Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) for Constellation 

Program (CxP) Spacecraft .................................................................................................................................................. TM-2010-216716

20. Constellation Program (CxP) Orion Project 26-AA Wind Tunnel Model Independent Failure Review ................................. TM-2010-216717

21. Assess Qualification of the Taurus Fairing Frangible Joint System .................................................................................... TM-2010-216718

22. NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Program Generic Safety, Handling and Qualification Guidelines for 

Lithium-Ion (Li-Ion) Batteries; Availability of Source Materials for Lithium-Ion (Li-Ion) Batteries; Maintaining

Technical Communications Related to Aerospace Batteries (NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop) .................................. TM-2010-216727/Volume I

23. NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Program Generic Safety, Handling and Qualification Guidelines for Lithium-Ion

(Li-Ion) Batteries; Availability of Source Materials for Lithium-Ion (Li-Ion) Batteries; Maintaining Technical

 Communications Related to Aerospace Batteries (NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop).................................................. TM-2010-216727/Volume II

24. NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Program Recommendations for Technical Requirements for Inclusion in 

Aerospace Battery Procurements ........................................................................................................................................ TM-2010-216728/Volume I

25. NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Program Recommendations for Technical Requirements for Inclusion in 

Aerospace Battery Procurements ..................................................................................................................................... TM-2010-216728/Volume II

26. NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Program Wet Life of Nickel-Hydrogen (Ni-H2) Batteries ................................................. TM-2010-216729/Volume I

27. NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Program Wet Life of Nickel-Hydrogen (Ni-H2) Batteries ................................................. TM-2010-216729/Volume II

28. SpaceFibre High-Speed Serial Gigabit Data Link Technology Demonstration ................................................................. TM-2010-216730

29. Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Battery Operations Problem Resolution Team (PRT) ........................... TM-2010-216840

30. Fracture Mechanics Based Methods Development for Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessels (COPV)

with Metallic Liners ............................................................................................................................................................. TM-2010-216851

31. Multilayer Ceramic Capacitors (MLCC) –Low Voltage Failure (LVF) Phenomenon ............................................................ TM-2010-216852

32. Constellation Program (CxP) Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Parachute Assembly System (CPAS) 

Independent Design Reliability Assessment ........................................................................................................................ TM-2010-216868/Volume I

33. Constellation Program (CxP) Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Parachute Assembly System (CPAS)

Independent Design Reliability Assessment Appendices ................................................................................................. TM-2010-216868/Volume II

34. Independent Peer Review of Communications, Navigation, and Networking re-Configurable Testbed 

(CoNNeCT) Project Antenna Pointing Subsystem (APS) Integrated Gimbal Assembly (IGA) Structural Analysis ............... TM-2010-216870

35. Simulation Framework for Rapid Entry, Descent, and Landing (EDL) Analysis ................................................................... TM-2010-216867/Volume I

36. Simulation Framework for Rapid Entry, Descent, and Landing (EDL) Analysis ................................................................... TM-2010-216867/Volume II

NESC/NASA Technical Memoranda Published
Presented Papers

1. The NASA MLAS Flight Demonstration – A Review of a Highly Successful Test; AIAA SPACE 2010 Conference & Exposition;

08/31/2010 − 09/02/2010; Anaheim, CA

2. Composite Crew Module Primary Structure: A Case Study On Collaborative A Effort for the Design, Manufacture, and Test of a Full

Scale Composite Crew Module Test Article; AIAA SPACE 2010 Conference & Exposition; 08/31/2010 − 09/02/2010; Anaheim, CA

3. The NASA MLAS Flight Demonstration – A Review of a Highly Successful Test; International Planetary Probe Workshop 2010 (IPPW-7);

06/14/2010 − 06/18/2010; Barcelona, Spain

4. Recent On-Orbit Anomalies Affecting EOS Terra and Wilkinson-Microwave Anisotropy Probe (W-MAP) Missions; Aerospace

Space Power Workshop; 04/19/2010 − 04/22/2010; Manhattan Beach, CA

5. A Review of the NASA MLAS Flight Demonstration; 21st AIAA Aerodynamic Decelerator Systems Technology Conference and Seminar;

05/23/2011 − 05/26/2011; Dublin, Ireland

Journal Articles Published

Entry, Descent, and Landing Architecture and Technology Challenges for Human Exploration Mars Missions; Journal of Cosmology

Space Shuttle Atlantis (OV-104) 

on mission STS-132 lifted off 

from launch pad 39A on May 

14, 2010. Atlantis brought the 

Russian-built Mini Research 

Module-1 to the ISS. This 

was the 132nd overall Shuttle 

mission and the 34th mission 

dedicated to ISS assembly and 

maintenance. 

National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration

Langley Research Center

Hampton, VA 23681

www.nasa.gov

NP-2010-10-311-LaRCC