Historical mass, power, schedule, and cost growth for NASA science instruments
In the early stages of NASA instrument development, science instruments are typically the most nascent part of any NASA mission development. As the building of spacecraft become less challenging for a mature industry, NASA's continual need to push the cutting edge of science requires the revolutionary and evolutionary development of instruments to meet science requirements. Instruments then face substantial issues that can result in significant increases in mass, power, cost, and schedule. Although previous studies have identified such issues, there are few industry standard reserve/contingency design and programmatic guidelines for instruments. This paper compares historical mass, power, cost, and schedule growth to industry reserve guidelines while offering potential recommendations to minimize instrument mass, power, cost, and schedule growth for future missions.
Using Historical NASA Cost and Schedule Growth to Set Future Program and Project Reserve Guidelines
By looking at historical schedule and cost growth, the past can be used to established reserve guidelines for future missions. This paper looks at recent NASA cost and schedule growth history, categorizes the reasons for growth, isolates growth due to external programmatic reasons versus internal technical reasons, assesses relationships for causality and provides guidance for the proper cost and schedule reserves to be carried at both the Program and Project levels. Mission cost and schedule growth history from both planetary and Earth-orbiting programs, such as Mars Exploration, Discovery, Medium and Small Explorer, Earth System Science Pathfinder, New Millennium and others, are investigated. The reserve guidelines developed are compared to industry standard guidelines and rules of thumb to determine if these standard practices continue to be valid.
Outside the box.
Purpose: To provide nursing personnel with ideas for alternatives for the least restrictive protective measures that work in acute care settings. Objectives: 1. Use a decision-making process to assess for the least restrictive alternative to maintain patient safety 2. Assess for altered thought processes, developing a trajectory, using a reliable and valid clinical assessment instrument 3. Describe three interventions for people with confusion 4. List four interventions to prevent falls 5. Describe pain management to prevent picking at wounds 6. Discuss 3 methods for managing tubes 7. Describe how to prevent scratching 8. Discuss fears about restraint reduction and liability