Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “#nasa”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2002

NASA New England Outreach Center

The NASA New England Outreach Center in Nashua, New Hampshire was established to serve as a catalyst for heightening regional business awareness of NASA procurement, technology and commercialization opportunities. Emphasis is placed on small business participation, with the highest priority given to small disadvantaged businesses, women-owned businesses, HUBZone businesses, service disabled veteran owned businesses, and historically black colleges and universities and minority institutions. The Center assists firms and organizations to understand NASA requirements and to develop strategies to capture NASA related procurement and technology opportunities. The establishment of the NASA Outreach Center serves to stimulate business in a historically underserved area. NASA direct business awards have traditionally been highly present in the West, Midwest, South, and Southeast areas of the United States. The Center guides and assists businesses and organizations in the northeast to target opportunities within NASA and its prime contractors and capture business and technology opportunities. The Center employs an array of technology access, one-on-one meetings, seminars, site visits, and targeted conferences to acquaint Northeast firms and organizations with representatives from NASA and its prime contractors to learn about and discuss opportunities to do business and access the inventory of NASA technology. This stimulus of interaction also provides firms and organizations the opportunity to propose the use of their developed technology and ideas for current and future requirements at NASA. The Center provides a complement to the NASA Northeast Regional Technology Transfer Center in developing prospects for commercialization of NASA technology. In addition, the Center responds to local requests for assistance and NASA material and documents, and is available to address immediate concerns and needs in assessing opportunities, timely support to interact with NASA Centers on a local level, and develop easy access to information. The Center acts in the manner of a "NASA Center or Field Office" with direction from NASA Headquarters, Code K.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2013

NASA Software Engineering Benchmarking Study

To identify best practices for the improvement of software engineering on projects, NASA's Offices of Chief Engineer (OCE) and Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) formed a team led by Heather Rarick and Sally Godfrey to conduct this benchmarking study. The primary goals of the study are to identify best practices that: Improve the management and technical development of software intensive systems; Have a track record of successful deployment by aerospace industries, universities [including research and development (R&D) laboratories], and defense services, as well as NASA's own component Centers; and Identify candidate solutions for NASA's software issues. Beginning in the late fall of 2010, focus topics were chosen and interview questions were developed, based on the NASA top software challenges. Between February 2011 and November 2011, the Benchmark Team interviewed a total of 18 organizations, consisting of five NASA Centers, five industry organizations, four defense services organizations, and four university or university R and D laboratory organizations. A software assurance representative also participated in each of the interviews to focus on assurance and software safety best practices. Interviewees provided a wealth of information on each topic area that included: software policy, software acquisition, software assurance, testing, training, maintaining rigor in small projects, metrics, and use of the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) framework, as well as a number of special topics that came up in the discussions. NASA's software engineering practices compared favorably with the external organizations in most benchmark areas, but in every topic, there were ways in which NASA could improve its practices. Compared to defense services organizations and some of the industry organizations, one of NASA's notable weaknesses involved communication with contractors regarding its policies and requirements for acquired software. One of NASA's strengths was its software assurance practices, which seemed to rate well in comparison to the other organizational groups and also seemed to include a larger scope of activities. An unexpected benefit of the software benchmarking study was the identification of many opportunities for collaboration in areas including metrics, training, sharing of CMMI experiences and resources such as instructors and CMMI Lead Appraisers, and even sharing of assets such as documented processes. A further unexpected benefit of the study was the feedback on NASA practices that was received from some of the organizations interviewed. From that feedback, other potential areas where NASA could improve were highlighted, such as accuracy of software cost estimation and budgetary practices. The detailed report contains discussion of the practices noted in each of the topic areas, as well as a summary of observations and recommendations from each of the topic areas. The resulting 24 recommendations from the topic areas were then consolidated to eliminate duplication and culled into a set of 14 suggested actionable recommendations. This final set of actionable recommendations, listed below, are items that can be implemented to improve NASA's software engineering practices and to help address many of the items that were listed in the NASA top software engineering issues. 1. Develop and implement standard contract language for software procurements. 2. Advance accurate and trusted software cost estimates for both procured and in-house software and improve the capture of actual cost data to facilitate further improvements. 3. Establish a consistent set of objectives and expectations, specifically types of metrics at the Agency level, so key trends and models can be identified and used to continuously improve software processes and each software development effort. 4. Maintain the CMMI Maturity Level requirement for critical NASA projects and use CMMI to measure organizations developing software for NASA. 5.onsolidate, collect and, if needed, develop common processes principles and other assets across the Agency in order to provide more consistency in software development and acquisition practices and to reduce the overall cost of maintaining or increasing current NASA CMMI maturity levels. 6. Provide additional support for small projects that includes: (a) guidance for appropriate tailoring of requirements for small projects, (b) availability of suitable tools, including support tool set-up and training, and (c) training for small project personnel, assurance personnel and technical authorities on the acceptable options for tailoring requirements and performing assurance on small projects. 7. Develop software training classes for the more experienced software engineers using on-line training, videos, or small separate modules of training that can be accommodated as needed throughout a project. 8. Create guidelines to structure non-classroom training opportunities such as mentoring, peer reviews, lessons learned sessions, and on-the-job training. 9. Develop a set of predictive software defect data and a process for assessing software testing metric data against it. 10. Assess Agency-wide licenses for commonly used software tools. 11. Fill the knowledge gap in common software engineering practices for new hires and co-ops.12. Work through the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) program with universities in strengthening education in the use of common software engineering practices and standards. 13. Follow up this benchmark study with a deeper look into what both internal and external organizations perceive as the scope of software assurance, the value they expect to obtain from it, and the shortcomings they experience in the current practice. 14. Continue interactions with external software engineering environment through collaborations, knowledge sharing, and benchmarking.

Rarick, Heather L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Habitation Development Status: Current Concepts and ISRU Opportunities

Introduction: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a bold journey to return humankind to the Moon and onward to Mars with innovative commercial, international, and academic partnerships [1]. Under the Artemis series of missions, NASA seeks to establish sustained human exploration of deep space through an objectives-based approach [2]. This approach drives the identification of needed system functionality and the current and future capabilities which will eventually allow humanity to sustainably live beyond Earth. Providing evolvable and scalable habitation is a cornerstone function that calls for the collection and integration of current, developmental, and future technologies that can meet near-term exploration needs while growing into long-term sustained presence. NASA is advancing in-space habitation through its Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) model while designing lunar, Mars transit, and Mars surface habitat government reference concepts for Artemis missions. These efforts have unveiled possible near-term opportunities for the in-space resource utilization community if human habitation is considered a future customer of space resources. NextSTEP Habitation Development: NASA is closely working with commercial partners under its NextSTEP Appendix A model to advance habitation systems in the arena of inflatable and composite habitation structures. Such efforts promise efficiencies in volumetric packaging and overall spacecraft mass respectively. Recent testing by commercial partners have helped to quantify possible failure mechanisms for inflatable structures while advancing their technology towards eventual flight certification. The advancement of such Class II habitation structures, in which the habitat is only fully deployed once in-space or on a planetary surface [3], is critical to providing increased habitable volume for long-duration missions with no additional mass penalties. The progression of such technology is infused into NASA’s government reference concepts for notional deep space habitation concepts. Current Government Reference Concepts: To best inform the formulation of future collaborative solicitations, NASA employs the practice of internally developing reference concepts for future exploration elements. These concepts aid in identifying the functions and capabilities needed to complete NASA missions as well as feasible solutions within the timeframe needed. Government reference concepts for a lunar Surface Habitat, Mars Transit Habitat, and Mars Sur-face Habitat are continuously being developed and updated to better guide the Agency’s overall exploration architecture. Lunar Surface Habitat. As NASA returns to the Moon, it is evaluating possible lunar surface habitation concepts. The Surface Habitat (SH) reference concept entails a hybrid metallic-inflatable structure capable of initially housing two crew for surface stays of up to 30 days in duration [4]. While initial missions may span ~7 days in duration, consideration is being given to expanding SH’s capability to support a crew of four for up to 60 days over its 15-year design life [5]. Functionally, the SH serves as a ‘hub’ for all Artemis crewed surface operations, providing internal volume for maintenance, medical, logistics, science utilization, and extravehicular activity (EVA) support in addition to core habitation functionality such as environmental control and life support (ECLS) and power generation and distribution among many others. Additionally, NASA has entered a study agreement with the Italian Space Agency (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana – ASI) to investigation a possible Multi-Purpose Habitat (MPH) as an additional or augmenting habit-able element for the lunar surface [6]. Mars Transit Habitat. NASA’s current architectural concept for initial human missions to Mars entails the utilization of a transit habitat (TH) to transport a four-person crew to and from Mars orbit, departing from and returning to a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO), over the course of a ~1,200-day mission [5]. While holding a similar 15-year design lifetime, TH will also support a series of analog mission activities in NRHO to gradually test the systems and interaction with lunar surface elements, some of which may be adapted for Mars surface exploration. Holding similar functional capabilities as SH, TH is sized to support much longer durations in space and greater logistical independence. Mars Surface Habitat. NASA is still exploring the concept of operations for initial crewed missions to Mars. As such, the Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept is still in its infancy as options for mobile, pressurized habitation and stationary habitats are being explored. It is expected MSH will leverage heavily from the lunar SH and possible lunar pressurized rover, however the very different Martian environment will likely necessitate modifications. ISRU Opportunities: Despite the advancements under NASA’s NextSTEP habitation work and continually optimized reference concepts, NASA is facing near-term mass and power challenges that may create opportunities to the ISRU community by providing yet another possible customer for space resources. While NASA desires to use regenerative ECLS systems (ECLSS) for all habitation concepts, their operation comes with initial mass penalties and maintenance overheads when compared to simpler open-loop architectures. Because of this, NASA is currently pro-posing an open-loop, consumables-based architecture for its surface habitats to achieve initial launch and delivery lander mass targets while scarring for the in-corporation of regenerative ECLSS to meet longer mission durations and sustained presence. With such an architecture, oxygen and potable water are needed consumables, which initial ISRU systems may be able to provide in a pilot capacity. Although the TH is expecting to utilize regenerative ECLSS, advancements in lunar surface-based ISRU and possible re-supply of spacecraft in lunar or Mars orbit could significantly reduce the logistical need for ECLSS related spares on TH and possibly allow a similar open-loop and consumables-based architecture. Table 1 Notional ECLSS consumables per mission use for SH and TH [5]. SH (28-day) Open Loop: Water (kg) 288 | Oxygen (kg) 30 TH (1110-day) Closed-Loop: Water (kg) 182 | Oxygen (kg) 123 In addition to ECLSS mass concerns, the SH is facing challenges with energy storage to support operations over periods of darkness exceeding 100 hours. Both battery and fuel cell-based power architectures are being traded, opening options for external power generation and energy storage. One possibility is ISRU-produced H2 and O2 feeding external primary fuel cell systems which could supplement habitation power generation while reducing initial mass and volume until much more powerful fission power systems might be deployed. Conclusion: Significant advancements are being made in evolvable habitation concepts that span from near-term technologies, such as inflatable structures under NextSTEP, to potentially revolutionary capabilities like the lunar surface construction as funded through the Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies (MMPACT) project [7]. As NASA investigates both heritage capabilities and rap-idly advancing, disruptive technologies, there are likely many near-term opportunities for initial ISRU capabilities to significantly aid human habitation and increase self-sufficiency beyond Earth.

habitation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Habitation Development Status: Current Concepts and ISRU Opportunities

Introduction: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a bold journey to return humankind to the Moon and onward to Mars with innovative commercial, international, and academic partnerships. Under the Artemis series of missions, NASA seeks to establish sustained human exploration of deep space through an objectives-based approach. This approach drives the identification of needed system functionality and the current and future capabilities which will eventually allow humanity to sustainably live beyond Earth. Providing evolvable and scalable habitation is a cornerstone function that calls for the collection and integration of current, developmental, and future technologies that can meet near-term exploration needs while growing into long-term sustained presence. NASA is advancing in-space habitation through its Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) model while designing lunar, Mars transit, and Mars surface habitat government reference concepts for Artemis missions. These efforts have unveiled possible near-term opportunities for the in-space resource utilization community if human habitation is considered a future customer of space resources. NextSTEP Habitation Development: NASA is closely working with commercial partners under its NextSTEP Appendix A model to advance habitation systems in the arena of inflatable and composite habitation structures. Such efforts promise efficiencies in volumetric packaging and overall spacecraft mass respectively. Recent testing by commercial partners have helped to quantify possible failure mechanisms for inflatable structures while advancing their technology towards eventual flight certification. The advancement of such Class II habitation structures, in which the habitat is only fully deployed once in-space or on a planetary surface, is critical to providing increased habitable volume for long-duration missions with no additional mass penalties. The progression of such technology is infused into NASA’s government reference concepts for notional deep space habitation concepts. Current Government Reference Concepts: To best inform the formulation of future collaborative solicitations, NASA employs the practice of internally developing reference concepts for future exploration elements. These concepts aid in identifying the functions and capabilities needed to complete NASA missions as well as feasible solutions within the timeframe needed. Government reference concepts for a lunar Surface Habitat, Mars Transit Habitat, and Mars Sur-face Habitat are continuously being developed and updated to better guide the Agency’s overall exploration architecture. Lunar Surface Habitat. As NASA returns to the Moon, it is evaluating possible lunar surface habitation concepts. The Surface Habitat (SH) reference concept entails a hybrid metallic-inflatable structure capable of initially housing two crew for surface stays of up to 30 days in duration. While initial missions may span ~7 days in duration, consideration is being given to expanding SH’s capability to support a crew of four for up to 60 days over its 15-year design life. Functionally, the SH serves as a ‘hub’ for all Artemis crewed surface operations, providing internal volume for maintenance, medical, logistics, science utilization, and extravehicular activity (EVA) support in addition to core habitation functionality such as environmental control and life support (ECLS) and power generation and distribution among many others. Additionally, NASA has entered a study agreement with the Italian Space Agency (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana – ASI) to investigation a possible Multi-Purpose Habitat (MPH) as an additional or augmenting habit-able element for the lunar surface. Mars Transit Habitat. NASA’s current architectural concept for initial human missions to Mars entails the utilization of a transit habitat (TH) to transport a four-person crew to and from Mars orbit, departing from and returning to a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO), over the course of a ~1,200-day mission. While holding a similar 15-year design lifetime, TH will also support a series of analog mission activities in NRHO to gradually test the systems and interaction with lunar surface elements, some of which may be adapted for Mars surface exploration. Holding similar functional capabilities as SH, TH is sized to support much longer durations in space and greater logistical independence. Mars Surface Habitat. NASA is still exploring the concept of operations for initial crewed missions to Mars. As such, the Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept is still in its infancy as options for mobile, pressurized habitation and stationary habitats are being explored. It is expected MSH will leverage heavily from the lunar SH and possible lunar pressurized rover, however the very different Martian environment will likely necessitate modifications. ISRU Opportunities: Despite the advancements under NASA’s NextSTEP habitation work and continually optimized reference concepts, NASA is facing near-term mass and power challenges that may create opportunities to the ISRU community by providing yet another possible customer for space resources. While NASA desires to use regenerative ECLS systems (ECLSS) for all habitation concepts, their operation comes with initial mass penalties and maintenance overheads when compared to simpler open-loop architectures. Because of this, NASA is currently pro-posing an open-loop, consumables-based architecture for its surface habitats to achieve initial launch and delivery lander mass targets while scarring for the in-corporation of regenerative ECLSS to meet longer mission durations and sustained presence. With such an architecture, oxygen and potable water are needed consumables, which initial ISRU systems may be able to provide in a pilot capacity. Although the TH is expecting to utilize regenerative ECLSS, advancements in lunar surface-based ISRU and possible re-supply of spacecraft in lunar or Mars orbit could significantly reduce the logistical need for ECLSS related spares on TH and possibly allow a similar open-loop and consumables-based architecture. In addition to ECLSS mass concerns, the SH is facing challenges with energy storage to support operations over periods of darkness exceeding 100 hours. Both battery and fuel cell-based power architectures are being traded, opening options for external power generation and energy storage. One possibility is ISRU-produced H2 and O2 feeding external primary fuel cell systems which could supplement habitation power generation while reducing initial mass and volume until much more powerful fission power systems might be deployed. Conclusion: Significant advancements are being made in evolvable habitation concepts that span from near-term technologies, such as inflatable structures under NextSTEP, to potentially revolutionary capabilities like the lunar surface construction as funded through the Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies (MMPACT) project. As NASA investigates both heritage capabilities and rap-idly advancing, disruptive technologies, there are likely many near-term opportunities for initial ISRU capabilities to significantly aid human habitation and increase self-sufficiency beyond Earth.

habitation↗
NASA NTRS2019

NASA's Role in Gas Turbine Technology Development: Accelerating Technical Progress via Collaboration Between Academia, Industry, and Government Agencies

Given the maturity of the gas turbine engine since its invention and also considering the limited and flattened level of resources expected to be allocated for NASA aeronautics research and development, we ask the question are NASA technology investments still needed to enable future turbine engine-based propulsion systems? If so, what is NASA’s unique role to justify NASA’s investment? To address this topic, we will first review the accomplishments and the impact that NASA Glenn Research Center has made on turbine engine technologies over the last 78 years. Specifically, this paper discusses NASA’s role and contributions to turbine engine development, specific to both 1) NASA’s role in conducting experiments to understand flow physics and provide relevant benchmark validation experiments for Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) code development, validation, and assessment; and 2) the impact of technologies resulting from NASA collaborations with industry, academia, and other government agencies. Note that the scope of the discussion is limited to the NASA technology contributions with which the author was intimately associated, and does not represent the entirety of the NASA contributions to turbine engine technology. The specific research, development, and demonstrations discussed herein were selected to both 1) provide a comprehensive review and reference list of the technology and its impact, and 2) identify NASA’s unique role and highlight how NASA’s involvement resulted in additional benefit to the gas turbine engine community. Secondly, we will discuss current NASA collaborations that are in progress and provide a status of the results. Finally, we discuss the challenges anticipated for future turbine engine-based propulsion systems for civil aviation and identify potential opportunities for collaboration where NASA involvement would be beneficial. Ultimately, the gas turbine engine community will decide if NASA involvement is needed to contribute to the development of the design and analysis tools, databases, and technology demonstration programs to meet these challenges for future turbine engine-based propulsion systems.

Suder, Kenneth L.↗
NASA NTRS2019

A Summary of NASA Rotary Wing Research: Circa 2008–2018

The general public may not know that the first “A” in NASA stands for Aeronautics. If they do know, they will very likely be surprised that in addition to airplanes, the “A” includes research in helicopters, tiltrotors, and other vehicles adorned with rotors. There is, arguably, no subsonic air vehicle more difficult to accurately analyze than a vehicle with lift-producing rotors. No wonder that NASA has conducted rotary wing research since the days of the NACA and has partnered, since 1965, with the U.S. Army in order to overcome some of the most challenging obstacles to understanding the behavior of these vehicles. Since 2006, NASA rotary wing research has been performed under several different project names [Gorton et al., 2015]: Subsonic Rotary Wing (SRW) (2006–2012), Rotary Wing (RW) (2012–2014), and Revolutionary Vertical Lift Technology (RVLT) (2014–present). In 2009, the SRW Project published a report that assessed the status of NASA rotorcraft research; in particular, the predictive capability of NASA rotorcraft tools was addressed for a number of technical disciplines. A brief history of NASA rotorcraft research through 2009 was also provided [Yamauchi and Young, 2009]. Gorton et al. [2015] describes the system studies during 2009–2011 that informed the SRW/RW/RVLT project investment prioritization and organization. The authors also provided the status of research in the RW Project in engines, drive systems, aeromechanics, and impact dynamics as related to structural dynamics of vertical lift vehicles. Since 2009, the focus of research has shifted from large civil VTOL transports, to environmentally clean aircraft, to electrified VTOL aircraft for the urban air mobility (UAM) market. The changing focus of rotorcraft research has been a reflection of the evolving strategic direction of the NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD). By 2014, the project had been renamed the Revolutionary Vertical Lift Technology Project. In response to the 2014 NASA Strategic Plan, ARMD developed six Strategic Thrusts. Strategic Thrust 3B was defined as the “Ultra-Efficient Commercial Vehicles—Vertical Lift Aircraft.” Hochstetler et al. [2017] uses Thrust 3B as an example for developing metrics usable by ARMD to measure the effectiveness of each of the Strategic Thrusts. The authors provide near-, mid-, and long-term outcomes for Thrust 3B with corresponding benefits and capabilities. The importance of VTOL research, especially with the rapidly expanding UAM market, eventually resulted in a new Strategic Thrust (to begin in 2020): Thrust 4—Safe, Quiet, and Affordable Vertical Lift Air Vehicles. The underlying rotary wing analysis tools used by NASA are still applicable to traditional rotorcraft and have been expanded in capability to accommodate the growing number of VTOL configurations designed for UAM. The top-level goal of the RVLT Project remains unchanged since 2006: Develop and validate tools, technologies and concepts to overcome key barriers for vertical lift vehicles. In 2019, NASA rotary wing/VTOL research has never been more important for supporting new aircraft and advancements in technology. 2 A decade is a reasonable interval to pause and take stock of progress and accomplishments. In 10 years, digital technology has propelled progress in computational efficiency by orders of magnitude and expanded capabilities in measurement techniques. The purpose of this report is to provide a compilation of the NASA rotary wing research from ~2008 to ~2018. Brief summaries of publications from NASA, NASA-funded, and NASA-supported research are provided in 12 chapters: Acoustics, Aeromechanics, Computational Fluid Dynamics (External Flow), Experimental Methods, Flight Dynamics and Control, Drive Systems, Engines, Crashworthiness, Icing, Structures and Materials, Conceptual Design and System Analysis, and Mars Helicopter. We hope this report serves as a useful reference for future NASA vertical lift researchers.

Yamauchi, Gloria K.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Workshop on Advances in NASA-Relevant, Minimally Invasive Instrumentation

The purpose of this meeting is to highlight those advances in instrumentation and methodology that can be applied to the medical problems that will be encountered as the duration of manned space missions is extended. Information on work that is presently being done by NASA as well as other approaches in which NASA is not participating will be exchanged. The NASA-sponsored efforts that will be discussed are part of the overall Space Medicine Program that has been undertaken by NASA to address the medical problems of manned spaceflight. These problems include those that have been observed in the past as well as those which are anticipated as missions become longer, traverse different orbits, or are in any way different. This conference is arranged in order to address the types of instrumentation that might be used in several major medical problem areas. Instrumentation that will help in the cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, and psychological areas, among others will be presented. Interest lies in identifying instrumentation which will help in learning more about ourselves through experiments performed directly on humans. Great emphasis is placed on non-invasive approaches, although every substantial program basic to animal research will be needed in the foreseeable future. Space Medicine is a rather small affair in what is primarily an engineering organization. Space Medicine is conducted throughout NASA by a very small skeleton staff at the headquarters office in Washington and by our various field centers. These centers include the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, the Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, and the Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia. Throughout these various centers, work is conducted in-house by NASA's own staff scientists, physicians, and engineers. In addition, various universities, industries, and other government laboratories perform research that cannot be effectively carried out in-house. At the moment, approximately 50% of the work is performed in-house and 50% is extramural. The area of bioinstrumentation pervades every one of our problem areas. In each, equipment or procedures are being developed that will allow more clinical work to be done in a ground-based or spacecraft setting. Although work of this kind goes on throughout the NASA organization and through its grants and contracts in the community at large, the major thrust of it is concentrated at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory which plays a lead role in this type of research and acts as the lead center in bioinstrumentation for NASA. It is recognized that there is much additional research being pursued in this area which would be potentially valuable to NASA and could, with some stimulation from, be made more applicable to NASA's needs. It is hoped, therefore, that the proceedings of this conference will be used as the basis for developing research strategies to be used as a road map to point the way in which NASA's own sponsored program should proceed over the course of the next three years. Additionally, it is hoped that the conference will highlight additional areas in which NASA should be involved either in-house or through the sponsorship of non-NASA scientists. NASA would also like to get an idea of which areas should be emphasized or perhaps de-emphasized among those that it is currently pursuing. In considering these questions, the discussion should concern itself not so much with whether a particular procedure or piece of equipment would work in a spacecraft, but rather, with whether the procedures that are advocated are at the state-of-the-art or beyond the state-of-the-art and whether they hold promise of giving additional insight into the problems to be confronted as humans venture into space for longer and longer periods of time.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2010

NASA Education: Yesterday's Dream...Today's Vision...Tomorrow's Hope

For 50 years, NASA's journeys into air and space have developed humankind's understanding of the universe, advanced technology breakthroughs, enhanced air travel safety and security, and expanded the frontiers of scientific research. These accomplishments share a common genesis: education. Education is a fundamental element of NASA's activities, reflecting a balanced and diverse portfolio of: Elementary and Secondary Education, Higher Education, e-Education, Informal Education, and Minority University Research and Education Programs (MUREP). Previous experience has shown that implementing exciting and compelling NASA missions are critical to inspiring the next generation of explorers, innovators, and leaders. Through partnerships with the Agency's Mission Directorates, other federal agencies, private industries, scientific research, and education/academic organizations, NASA's unique mission and education initiatives (content, people, and facilities) are helping to spark student interest and to guide them toward careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). NASA continues to inspire the next generation of explorers, innovators, and future leaders through its educational investments, which are designed to: (1) Strengthen NASA and the Nation's future workforce -- NASA will identify and develop the critical skills and capabilities needed to ensure achievement of exploration, science, and aeronautics. (2) Attract and retain students in STEM disciplines through a progression of educational opportunities for students, teachers, and faculty -- To compete effectively for the minds, imaginations, and career ambitions of America's young people, NASA will focus on engaging and retaining students in STEM education programs to encourage their pursuit of educational disciplines critical to NASA's future engineering, scientific, and technical missions. 3. Engage Americans in NASA's mission -- NASA will build strategic partnerships and links between formal and informal STEM education providers. Through hands-on, interactive, educational activities, NASA will engage students, educators, families, the general public, and all agency stakeholders in increasing America's science and technology literacy. NASA Education uses multiple methods to assess and evaluate the success of its programs and projects. Methods include strategic planning, management and control, expert evaluations and assessments, competitive acquisition, and analysis of performance measurement data and metrics. Additional control measures are in development. These measures will further improve data collection, assist in assessing return on investments, and provide information for accountability in project and program management. In 2009, NASA directly reached over one million students and over 115,000 educators.

Winterton, Joyce L.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Educational NASA Computational and Scientific Studies (enCOMPASS)

Educational NASA Computational and Scientific Studies (enCOMPASS) is an educational project of NASA Goddard Space Flight Center aimed at bridging the gap between computational objectives and needs of NASA's scientific research, missions, and projects, and academia's latest advances in applied mathematics and computer science. enCOMPASS achieves this goal via bidirectional collaboration and communication between NASA and academia. Using developed NASA Computational Case Studies in university computer science/engineering and applied mathematics classes is a way of addressing NASA's goals of contributing to the Science, Technology, Education, and Math (STEM) National Objective. The enCOMPASS Web site at http://encompass.gsfc.nasa.gov provides additional information. There are currently nine enCOMPASS case studies developed in areas of earth sciences, planetary sciences, and astrophysics. Some of these case studies have been published in AIP and IEEE's Computing in Science and Engineering magazines. A few university professors have used enCOMPASS case studies in their computational classes and contributed their findings to NASA scientists. In these case studies, after introducing the science area, the specific problem, and related NASA missions, students are first asked to solve a known problem using NASA data and past approaches used and often published in a scientific/research paper. Then, after learning about the NASA application and related computational tools and approaches for solving the proposed problem, students are given a harder problem as a challenge for them to research and develop solutions for. This project provides a model for NASA scientists and engineers on one side, and university students, faculty, and researchers in computer science and applied mathematics on the other side, to learn from each other's areas of work, computational needs and solutions, and the latest advances in research and development. This innovation takes NASA science and engineering applications to computer science and applied mathematics university classes, and makes NASA objectives part of the university curricula. There is great potential for growth and return on investment of this program to the point where every major university in the U.S. would use at least one of these case studies in one of their computational courses, and where every NASA scientist and engineer facing a computational challenge (without having resources or expertise to solve it) would use enCOMPASS to formulate the problem as a case study, provide it to a university, and get back their solutions and ideas.

Memarsadeghi, Nargess↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA LSII Lunar Simulant Project

Introduction: America has entered a new era of exploration. NASA’s Artemis program will lead humanity forward to the Moon and prepare us for the next giant leap, the exploration of Mars [1]. To champion technologies needed to live on and explore the Moon, NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) established the Lunar Surface Innovation Initiative (LSII)[2].LSII's technology development portfolio includes: Utilizing the Moon’s resources; Establishing sustainable surface power; Building machinery and electronics that work in extreme environments, like super-chilly permanently shadowed craters; Mitigating lunar dust; Carrying out surface excavation, manufacturing and construction duties; and Extreme access which includes navigating and exploring the surface/subsurface. To support the development and testing of these technologies, LSII created the lunar simulant project, to create and/or acquire low-, medium-and high-fidelity lunar simulants to match the needs of STMD projects at all levels of technology readiness levels (TRL), as well as other NASA programs. There is not one bulk lunar simulant that will satisfy the needs of all projects. NASA's Approach to Simulants: Just as LSII's activities are being implemented through a combination of unique NASA work and public-private partnerships, NASA will work with commercial simulant providers to acquire simulants that meet NASA's needs. If warranted, NASA will develop simulants using government agencies, as was done with the NASA/USGS Lunar Highlands Type (NU-LHT)series of lunar simulants [3].NASA is also collaborating with the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory(JHUAPL) Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC) in the development and characterization of lunar simulants [4]. Within NASA, a small team (< 10 people) is coordinating simulant activities across the agency, with team members located at several NASA centers. The overall objective of the project is to procure lunar simulants in sufficient amounts for earth-based testing of subsystems and systems in a variety of environments (i.e., laboratory, high-bay, thermal-vacuum chambers), required for Artemis missions to the Moon, as well as other missions carrying NASA lunar payloads, such as the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS)program [5]. Lunar Highlands Simulant: NASA's Artemis Program is targeting the lunar south pole region for initial human missions and the Artemis Base Camp. Hence, the LSII lunar simulant project is currently focusing on the mineralogy and properties of lunar highlands regolith [6 and 7]. Plagioclase-rich rocks (e.g., anorthosite, norite) are the dominant constituent in highlands simulants, with Shawmere, Stillwater, and White Mountain anorthosites being used in commercially available simulants. However, because these feedstocks are terrestrial in nature, they include hydrated minerals, carbon-bearing minerals, and other chemical signatures that are not present on the Moon, and these minor mineral assemblages need to be taken into account when trying to understand test procedures and results. Glass Component: While much attention has been placed on the rock/mineral component of lunar simulants, glass is just as important when creating simulants. The glass component in lunar regoliths is often greater than 50% by volume [8]. This component includes impact melt glass, dark matrix breccias, and agglutinates. However, this component is difficult, time-consuming and expensive to make. Most lunar simulants, past and current, have relied on basaltic cinder as a feedstock for glass. Getting better glass components at a lower cost, particularly agglutinates and glass with an anorthositic composition is a near-term objective that the NASA simulant project is trying to address . Characterization: It is extremely important for lunar simulants to be characterized by several analytical methods. Gruener et al. [9] and JHUAPL LSIC [10] conducted initial assessments of some of the commercially available simulants in 2019 and early 2020, before the global pandemic. Further analyses are needed to better quantify important parameters such as, modal mineralogy and glass content, particle shape, and particle size distribution. These quantified results can then be used in determining figures of merit (FOM) that show how well simulants compare to lunar regolith [11 and 12].

J E Gruener↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Evening with NASA Scientists and Engineers: A Senior Living Community Outreach Program

Introduction: An Evening with NASA Scientists and Engineers is an outreach program for senior living communities, where participants learn from and interact with a scientist or engineer in a virtual setting. Participants learn about NASA science and engineering through a behind-the-scenes look from the people who work at NASA. The program focuses on both the stories behind the discoveries and the stories behind the people. The audience tunes in to the events via the NASA Zoom Webinar platform, where they have the opportunity to ask questions throughout the approximately 30-minute program. By bringing the audience into the conversation, we build rapport and thus improve their connection with NASA. Overview: An Evening with NASA Scientists and Engineers began in September 2020 when we identified a need for outreach to this particular demographic, as senior living communities had been hit especially hard by the COVID-19 pandemic. The program covers a wide range of topics, including heliophysics, astrophysics, planetary science, Earth science, planetary defense, and more, depending on what is topically appropriate at the time, and occurs on a roughly monthly basis. Each interactive presentation is between 20-25 minutes with 5-10 minutes of dedicated Q&A. Future dates and topics may change depending on new developments to NASA missions and stories. Audience: As of December 2021, we have four regularly attending senior living communities, spanning the East Coast from New Hampshire to Florida, with each joining the overall program at various stages of its development. The ability to reach many different senior living communities is crucial so that a diversity of people may benefit from this program. The audience consists of seniors with varying experience and comprehension levels – some are very familiar with the sciences while others are simply curious to learn more. Residents tune in to each event from their individual rooms or from their larger community rooms. RiverWoods Exeter. The RiverWoods Exeter community was our initial audience who acted as our “guinea pig” to see how this program might be implemented and to work out any major issues. They are located in Exeter, NH but also have two additional campuses in Durham, NH and Manchester, NH, that joined us a few months into the program. Culpepper Garden. Our second community to join the program was Culpepper Garden, a senior living community in Arlington, VA that provides both independent and assisted living housing to low-income seniors. Edinburgh Square. Our third community, Edinburgh Square, connected with us after hearing about the program through Culpepper Garden. Edinburgh Square is an HUD-subsidized retirement community in Roanoke, VA that houses both seniors and those living with disabilities. Moonstruck Astronomy Club. The Moonstruck Astronomy Club consists of residents from the On Top of the World retirement community in Ocala, FL and was the latest senior living community to join us. NASA Zoom Webinar: An Evening with NASA Scientists and Engineers reaches numerous senior living communities through live presentations that we host using the NASA Zoom Webinar virtual platform. Participants are typically already familiar with the Zoom platform which enables a lower barrier to entry. A recording of each talk is added to a designated video playlist on the NASA STEM YouTube channel so that audiences worldwide may view them [1]. These recordings began with our April 1, 2021 presentation, as this was when NASA Zoom Webinar was implemented, thus enabling us to record each talk. Metrics: We record attendance numbers from the senior living communities for each event as well as those from YouTube views after the presentation recording is posted online. Depending on which communities tune in, typical attendance numbers are between 60-100 people. RiverWoods Exeter has the most regularly attending residents, with an average of 55 attendees per event. As of December 2021, we have hosted fourteen events, nine of which were recorded and posted to our designated NASA STEM YouTube Channel playlist. The nine recordings combined have roughly 4,000 YouTube views thus far, with specific videos seeing higher view counts around launch dates (e.g. NASA’s DART mission) and trending topics (e.g. JWST). A list of speakers, topics, and links to presentation recordings is shown in Table 1. Future Program Expansion: Thus far, we have been adding communities on an individual basis. To make this process more streamlined, we are looking into working with senior living community networks and organizations such as LeadingAge [2]. In this manner, we will be able to reach more communities while also making it easier to send and receive relevant information.

S L Tiedeken↗
NASA NTRS2005

Use of New Communication Technologies to Change NASA Safety Culture: Incorporating the Use of Blogs as a Fundamental Communications Tool

The purpose of this paper is to explore an innovative approach to culture change at NASA that goes beyond reorganizations, management training, and a renewed emphasis on safety. Over the last five years, a technological social revolution has been emerging from the internet. Blogs (aka web logs) are transforming traditional communication and information sharing outlets away from established information sources such as the media. The Blogosphere has grown from zero blogs in 1999 to approximately 4.5 million as of November 2004 and is expected to double in 2005. Blogs have demonstrated incredible effectiveness and efficiency with regards to affecting major military and political events. Consequently, NASA should embrace the new information paradigm presented by blogging. NASA can derive exceptional benefits from the new technology as follows: 1) Personal blogs can overcome the silent safety culture by giving voice to concerns or questions that are not well understood or seemingly inconsequential to the NASA community at-large without the pressure of formally raising a potential false alarm. Since blogs can be open to Agency-wide participation, an incredible amount of resources from an extensive pool of experience can focus on a single issue, concern, or problem and quickly vetted, discussed and assessed for feasibility, significance, and criticality. The speed for which this could be obtained cannot be matched through any other process or procedure currently in use. 2) Through official NASA established blogs, lessons learned can be a real-time two way process that is formed and implemented from the ground level. Data mining of official NASA blogs and personal blogs of NASA personnel can identify hot button issues and concerns to senior management. 3) NASA blogs could function as a natural ombudsman for the NASA community. Through the recognition of issues being voiced by the community and taking a proactive stance on those issues, credibility within NASA Management can be restored. For NASA to harness the capabilities of blogs, NASA must develop an Agency-wide policy on blogging to encourage use and provide guidance. This policy should describe basic rules of conduct and content as well as a policy of non-retribution and/or anonymity. The Agency must provide sever space within their firewalls, provide appropriate software tools, and promote blogs in newsletters and official websites. By embracing the use of blogs, a potential pool of 19,000 experts could be available to address each posted safety issue, concern, problem, or question. Blogs could result in real NASA culture change.

Huls, Dale thomas↗
NASA NTRS2008

NASA Aeronautics Research: An Assessment

The U.S. air transportation system is vital to the economic well-being and security of the United States. To support continued U.S. leadership in aviation, Congress and NASA requested that the National Research Council undertake a decadal survey of civil aeronautics research and technology (R&T) priorities that would help NASA fulfill its responsibility to preserve U.S. leadership in aeronautics technology. In 2006, the National Research Council published the Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics. That report presented a set of six strategic objectives for the next decade of aeronautics R&T, and it described 51 high-priority R&T challenges--characterized by five common themes--for both NASA and non-NASA researchers. The National Research Council produced the present report, which assesses NASA's Aeronautics Research Program, in response to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-155). This report focuses on three sets of questions: 1. How well does NASA's research portfolio implement appropriate recommendations and address relevant high-priority research and technology challenges identified in the Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics? If gaps are found, what steps should be taken by the federal government to eliminate them? 2. How well does NASA's aeronautics research portfolio address the aeronautics research requirements of NASA, particularly for robotic and human space exploration? How well does NASA's aeronautics research portfolio address other federal government department/agency non-civil aeronautics research needs? If gaps are found, what steps should be taken by NASA and/or other parts of the federal government to eliminate them? 3. Will the nation have a skilled research workforce and research facilities commensurate with the requirements in (1) and (2) above? What critical improvements in workforce expertise and research facilities, if any, should NASA and the nation make to achieve the goals of NASA's research program? This report continues the good work begun by the Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics, and it expands that work to consider in more depth NASA aeronautics research issues related to the space program, non-civil applications, workforce, and facilities.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2010

Advancing Innovation Through Collaboration: Implementation of the NASA Space Life Sciences Strategy

On October 18, 2010, the NASA Human Health and Performance center (NHHPC) was opened to enable collaboration among government, academic and industry members. Membership rapidly grew to 90 members (http://nhhpc.nasa.gov ) and members began identifying collaborative projects as detailed in this article. In addition, a first workshop in open collaboration and innovation was conducted on January 19, 2011 by the NHHPC resulting in additional challenges and projects for further development. This first workshop was a result of the SLSD successes in running open innovation challenges over the past two years. In 2008, the NASA Johnson Space Center, Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD) began pilot projects in open innovation (crowd sourcing) to determine if these new internet-based platforms could indeed find solutions to difficult technical problems. From 2008 to 2010, the SLSD issued 34 challenges, 14 externally and 20 internally. The 14 external challenges were conducted through three different vendors: InnoCentive, Yet2.com and TopCoder. The 20 internal challenges were conducted using the InnoCentive platform, customized to NASA use, and promoted as NASA@Work. The results from the 34 challenges involved not only technical solutions that were reported previously at the 61st IAC, but also the formation of new collaborative relationships. For example, the TopCoder pilot was expanded by the NASA Space Operations Mission Directorate to the NASA Tournament Lab in collaboration with Harvard Business School and TopCoder. Building on these initial successes, the NHHPC workshop in January of 2011, and ongoing NHHPC member discussions, several important collaborations have been developed: (1) Space Act Agreement between NASA and GE for collaborative projects (2) NASA and academia for a Visual Impairment / Intracranial Hypertension summit (February 2011) (3) NASA and the DoD through the Defense Venture Catalyst Initiative (DeVenCI) for a technical needs workshop (June 2011) (4) NASA and the San Diego Zoo for a joint challenge in biomimicry (5) NASA and the FAA Center of Excellence for Commercial Space Flight for five collaborative projects (6) NASA and ESA for a Space Medicine Workshop (July 2011) (7) NASA and Tufts University for an education pilot (8) Establishment of long-term contracts (August 2011) to enable future challenges (9) Establishment of a new Center of Excellence for Collaborative Innovation (July 2011) for all federal agencies in the US

Davis, Jeffrey R.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Probabilistic Risk Assessment Procedures Guide for NASA Managers and Practitioners (Second Edition)

Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) is a comprehensive, structured, and logical analysis method aimed at identifying and assessing risks in complex technological systems for the purpose of cost-effectively improving their safety and performance. NASA's objective is to better understand and effectively manage risk, and thus more effectively ensure mission and programmatic success, and to achieve and maintain high safety standards at NASA. NASA intends to use risk assessment in its programs and projects to support optimal management decision making for the improvement of safety and program performance. In addition to using quantitative/probabilistic risk assessment to improve safety and enhance the safety decision process, NASA has incorporated quantitative risk assessment into its system safety assessment process, which until now has relied primarily on a qualitative representation of risk. Also, NASA has recently adopted the Risk-Informed Decision Making (RIDM) process [1-1] as a valuable addition to supplement existing deterministic and experience-based engineering methods and tools. Over the years, NASA has been a leader in most of the technologies it has employed in its programs. One would think that PRA should be no exception. In fact, it would be natural for NASA to be a leader in PRA because, as a technology pioneer, NASA uses risk assessment and management implicitly or explicitly on a daily basis. NASA has probabilistic safety requirements (thresholds and goals) for crew transportation system missions to the International Space Station (ISS) [1-2]. NASA intends to have probabilistic requirements for any new human spaceflight transportation system acquisition. Methods to perform risk and reliability assessment in the early 1960s originated in U.S. aerospace and missile programs. Fault tree analysis (FTA) is an example. It would have been a reasonable extrapolation to expect that NASA would also become the world leader in the application of PRA. That was, however, not to happen. Early in the Apollo program, estimates of the probability for a successful roundtrip human mission to the moon yielded disappointingly low (and suspect) values and NASA became discouraged from further performing quantitative risk analyses until some two decades later when the methods were more refined, rigorous, and repeatable. Instead, NASA decided to rely primarily on the Hazard Analysis (HA) and Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) methods for system safety assessment.

Stamatelatos,Michael↗
NASA NTRS2013

Identity Federation and Its Importance for NASA's Future: The SharePoint Extranet Pilot

My project at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) during the spring 2013 Project Management and Systems Engineering Internship was to functionalJy test and deploy the SharePoint Extranet system and ensure successful completion of the project's various lifecycle milestones as described by NASA Procedural Requirement (NPR) 7 120.7. I worked alongside NASA Project Managers, Systems Integration Engineers, and Information Technology (IT) Professionals to pilot this collaboration capability between NASA and its External Partners. The use of identity federation allows NASA to leverage externally-issued credentials of other federal agencies and private aerospace and defense companies, versus the traditional process of granting and maintaining full NASA identities for these individuals. This is the first system of its kind at NASA and it will serve as a pilot for the Federal Government. Recognizing the novelty of this service, NASA's initial approach for deployment included a pilot period where nearby employees of Patrick Air Force Base would assist in testing and deployment. By utilizing a credential registration process, Air Force users mapped their Air Force-issued Common Access Cards (CAC) to a NASA identity for access to the External SharePoint. Once the Air Force stands up an Active Directory Federation Services (ADFS) instance within their Data Center and establishes a direct trust with NASA, true identity federation can be established. The next partner NASA is targeting for collaboration is Lockheed Martin (LMCO), since they collaborate frequently for the ORION Program. Through the use of Exostar as an identity hub, LMCO employees will be able to access NASA data on a need to know basis, with NASA ultimately managing access. In a time when every dollar and resource is being scrutinized, this capability is an exciting new way for NASA to continue its collaboration efforts in a cost and resource effective manner.

Baturin, Rebecca R.↗
NASA NTRS2018

How Public Private Partnerships Enable NASA Future Space Communication Needs

The NASA Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) Program is responsible for providing communication and navigation services to scientific and human space exploration missions. SCaN's current Space Network provides radio frequency (RF) relay services to near Earth space missions via Tracking and Data Relay Satellites (TDRS). SCaN plans to offer a new generation of relay services beginning in 2025, including the addition of optical communications capabilities and enhanced RF capabilities. The primary drivers behind the development of these next generation relay network services are to enhance communication and navigation services with significantly reduced development and operational costs. Several approaches being considered for implementation of these services are through government owned capabilities, through commercial service providers, or a combination of the two. One approach receiving a great deal of attention is the use of Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) to develop and provide capabilities or services. Utilizing Public-Private Partnerships allows NASA and commercial entities to share the investment, standards, and risks of developing and testing new or enhanced capabilities which can benefit both NASA and the commercial space communication industry. The capabilities developed under the PPP can then be used to support the growth of the commercial satellite communications industry while simultaneously being introduced into NASA operations to provide service to future NASA missions as part of the NASA Next Generation Architecture. Partnerships formed for this purpose can also serve as the basis for further NASA acquisition activities where government and industry can continue to share the cost, risk, and benefits of space communications capability development and operations. This objective is consistent with the 2010 National Space Policy stated principles: "The United States is committed to encouraging and facilitating the growth of a U.S. commercial space sector that supports U.S. needs, is globally competitive, and advances U.S. leadership in the generation of new markets and innovation-driven entrepreneurship." [1]NASA has conducted several internal studies as well as externally funded studies with industry to define the next generation space communication architecture. NASA has approached the commercial industry through a Request for Information (RFI) to define further the next generation architecture and has conducted numerous internal and external studies. The results are promising and are shaping the approach to utilize Public Private Partnership to achieve NASA's objectives while reducing costs. The commercial satellite industry has begun to deploy high performance, high throughput global satellite constellations which have the potential to provide communication services to NASA Missions. Commercial satellite manufacturers have advanced their processes to rapidly design, build, and deliver, reliable communication satellites using minimum government oversight. In this paper, we will 1) describe the NASA Next Generation Architecture, Concept of Operations (ConOps), and salient characteristics; 2) Discuss the rational of Public-Private Partnerships to achieve NASA’s next generation communication architecture; and 3) Summarize the preliminary analysis performed to date and describe the path forward.

Stegeman, James↗
NASA NTRS2021

NASA Strategy for Technology Development

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT) provides the strategy and leadership that integrates NASA’s technology development and open innovation activities to advance American aeronautic, science, and space exploration objectives. OCT performs an agency-level technology coordination role, coordinating with the NASA Mission Directorates, field centers, and other government agencies to align the agency’s technology investments to meet mission requirements while filling gaps, anticipating future needs, and minimizing duplication of effort. OCT provides the strategy and coordination that guide NASA's technology and innovation activities through Strategic Technology Integration, Digital Transformation, the Science and Technology Partnership Forum, and Innovation. The Strategic Technology Integration team informs policy, requirements, and strategy for NASA’s technology development activities in support of the Chief Technologist by coordinating with NASA mission directorates, other government agencies, and external organizations. As part of these efforts, OCT develops the NASA Technology Taxonomy and the NASA Strategic Space Technology Investment Plan. Digital Transformation will increasingly change the way NASA operates and will enable the agency’s missions to be completed more efficiently and effectively. It will allow current and future employees to use their talents in more innovative ways. The Science and Technology Partnership Forum is a strategic forum, with principal partners at the United States Space Force and the National Reconnaissance Office. It was established to identify synergistic efforts and technologies in order to leverage those synergies and influence portfolios across space agencies in areas deemed pervasive and ready for collaboration. NASA's Innovation efforts are designed to transform diverse ideas into value and are guided by a framework that is focused on the agency’s people, processes, partnerships and portfolio. The innovation framework is used to connect the workforce to tools, strategies and activities to increase the pace of innovation. OCT translates National space policies into NASA technology strategies and coordination across the agency and interagency communities to guide NASA's technology and innovation activities to achieve capabilities needed for future missions. This chapter provides insight into the value of analyzing future states to inform technology developments to plot the strategic direction of NASA’s space technology program.

Erica Rodgers↗