SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “COMPANY LEVEL ORGANIZATIONS”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

33 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2014

Biomaterials Out of Thin Air: In Situ, On-Demand Printing of Advanced Biocomposites: A New Materials Design and Production Technique Using 3D-Printed Arrays of Bioengineered Cells

We have completed the proof of concept described in our Phase I proposal, a two-material array of nonstructural proteins. We created an implementation of each step in our technology concept and demonstrated its critical functionality. The biological chassis and printing hardware we created as part of this work can be re-used for future work by inserting a material coding region upstream of the fluorescent tag. Overall, we showed that our technology concept is sound. The mission benefit analyses, as described in our Phase I proposal, are complete and contained in this report. These calculations show that our technology can save hundreds of kilograms of upmass for a potential planetary human habit construction mission: the mass per habitat module can be reduced by approximately one third if the biomaterials are manufactured on Earth and included in the mission upmass, and the full 240 kg per module can be saved if the materials are derived entirely from in situ resources. Mass savings between these two extremes is expected for an actual mission, depending on the level of in situ resource extraction technology. We have shown that continued advancement of this technology concept for use in a space mission environment is justified. Our survey of future development pathways proved extremely informative in light of the lessons learned from our proof of concept work and mission scenario analyses. For example, we were able for the first time to distinguish between the levels of functionality provided by production of structural proteins, other polymers such as polysaccharides, and true organic-inorganic composites such as bone and mineralized shell. This new information represents a significant advance in formulating specific applications, and key enabling technologies, for our proposed concept. We surveyed potential collaborations with other projects and synergies with enabling technologies that are developing. We have received requests for collaboration from other institutions, including labs at Stanford University and Drexel University. We have also received visits from industry, including Organovo, a tissue engineering company, and Autodesk, a major 3D and materials design software company. Finally, we have been in touch with the team behind the 2013 NIAC Phase ll 'Super Ball Bot-Structures for Planetary Landing and Exploration' and are planning to develop our biomaterial printing technology with the goal of enabling tensegrity-based rovers such as theirs to use lighter, more robust materials. A smooth transition from TRL 2 to TRL 3 assumes that the implementations of the technology concept which demonstrate critical functionality are also pathways for future development; while this is the case for most hardware or software projects, the multidisciplinary nature of our project, particularly the biological aspect of it, means that this is not always true. For example, as part of this work we showed that although there are large number of known genetic parts that correspond to non-structural materials, this is not true for sequences for structural organic proteins, let alone biominerals. These realizations allowed us to further subdivide our concept into more detailed development areas, some of which are clearly established at TRL 3, others of which were newly identified sub-technologies moved from TRL 1 to TRL 2. Similarly, although a single feasibility /benefit analysis is sufficient for advancement from TRL 2 to TRL 3, not all potential benefits to a technology concept as broad in scope as ours are apparent at TRL 2. Both our future pathways survey and our proof of concept work highlighted that the true mass savings potential of our technology concept cannot be quantified without modification of existing materials modelling tools to take into account the possibility of positional materials properties customization. Therefore, we have simultaneously both advanced one potential set of applications of our technology concept from TRL 2 to TRL 3 and also identified a previously unknown set of applications and advanced it from TRL 1 to TRL 2. Overall, we have moved the original formulation of our concept forward from TRL 2 to TRL 3, and the expanded formulation of it presented in this document has been advanced from a combination of TRL 1 and early 1RL 2 to an overall late TRL 2. We have also identified the key areas necessary for both short-term and long-term advancement, and made recommendations for specific future work in the most promising directions. With future work on a 1-2 year timeframe to continue advancement to overall TRL 3, we will be well positioned to begin work on a specific space mission technology insertion path.

Biology↗

NASA NTRS1989

ECUT (Energy Conversion and Utilization Technologies) program: Biocatalysis project

The Annual Report presents the fiscal year (FY) 1988 research activities and accomplishments, for the Biocatalysis Project of the U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Conversion and Utilization Technologies (ECUT) Division. The ECUT Biocatalysis Project is managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology. The Biocatalysis Project is a mission-oriented, applied research and exploratory development activity directed toward resolution of the major generic technical barriers that impede the development of biologically catalyzed commercial chemical production. The approach toward achieving project objectives involves an integrated participation of universities, industrial companies and government research laboratories. The Project's technical activities were organized into three work elements: (1) The Molecular Modeling and Applied Genetics work element includes research on modeling of biological systems, developing rigorous methods for the prediction of three-dimensional (tertiary) protein structure from the amino acid sequence (primary structure) for designing new biocatalysis, defining kinetic models of biocatalyst reactivity, and developing genetically engineered solutions to the generic technical barriers that preclude widespread application of biocatalysis. (2) The Bioprocess Engineering work element supports efforts in novel bioreactor concepts that are likely to lead to substantially higher levels of reactor productivity, product yields and lower separation energetics. Results of work within this work element will be used to establish the technical feasibility of critical bioprocess monitoring and control subsystems. (3) The Bioprocess Design and Assessment work element attempts to develop procedures (via user-friendly computer software) for assessing the energy-economics of biocatalyzed chemical production processes, and initiation of technology transfer for advanced bioprocesses.

Baresi, Larry↗

NASA NTRS1999

An Acoustic Charge Transport Imager for High Definition Television

This project, over its term, included funding to a variety of companies and organizations. In addition to Georgia Tech these included Florida Atlantic University with Dr. William E. Glenn as the P.I., Kodak with Mr. Mike Richardson as the P.I. and M.I.T./Polaroid with Dr. Richard Solomon as the P.I. The focus of the work conducted by these organizations was the development of camera hardware for High Definition Television (HDTV). The focus of the research at Georgia Tech was the development of new semiconductor technology to achieve a next generation solid state imager chip that would operate at a high frame rate (I 70 frames per second), operate at low light levels (via the use of avalanche photodiodes as the detector element) and contain 2 million pixels. The actual cost required to create this new semiconductor technology was probably at least 5 or 6 times the investment made under this program and hence we fell short of achieving this rather grand goal. We did, however, produce a number of spin-off technologies as a result of our efforts. These include, among others, improved avalanche photodiode structures, significant advancement of the state of understanding of ZnO/GaAs structures and significant contributions to the analysis of general GaAs semiconductor devices and the design of Surface Acoustic Wave resonator filters for wireless communication. More of these will be described in the report. The work conducted at the partner sites resulted in the development of 4 prototype HDTV cameras. The HDTV camera developed by Kodak uses the Kodak KAI-2091M high- definition monochrome image sensor. This progressively-scanned charge-coupled device (CCD) can operate at video frame rates and has 9 gm square pixels. The photosensitive area has a 16:9 aspect ratio and is consistent with the "Common Image Format" (CIF). It features an active image area of 1928 horizontal by 1084 vertical pixels and has a 55% fill factor. The camera is designed to operate in continuous mode with an output data rate of 5MHz, which gives a maximum frame rate of 4 frames per second. The MIT/Polaroid group developed two cameras under this program. The cameras have effectively four times the current video spatial resolution and at 60 frames per second are double the normal video frame rate.

Hunt, William D.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Managing a Safe and Successful Multi-User Spaceport

Encouraged by the creation of the Office of Commercial Space Transportation within the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in 1984 and the Commercial Space Act of 1998, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) now relies on an extensive network of support from commercial companies and organizations. At NASA's Kennedy Space Center (KSC), this collaboration opens competitive opportunities for launch providers, including repurposing underutilized Shuttle Program resources, constructing new facilities, and utilizing center services and laboratories. The resulting multi-user spaceport fosters diverse activity, though it engenders risk from hazards associated with various spaceflight processing activities. The KSC Safety & Mission Assurance (S&MA) Directorate, in coordination with the center's Spaceport Integration and Center Planning & Development organizations, has developed a novel approach to protect NASA's workforce, critical assets, and the public from hazardous, space-related activity associated with KSC's multi-user spaceport. For NASA KSC S&MA, the transformation to a multi-user spaceport required implementing methods to foster safe and successful commercial activity while resolving challenges involving: Retirement of the Space Shuttle program; Co-location of multiple NASA programs; Relationships between the NASA programs; Complex relationships between NASA programs and commercial partner operations in exclusive-use facilities; Complex relationships between NASA programs and commercial partner operations in shared-use facilities. NASA KSC S&MA challenges were met with long-term planning and solutions involving cooperation with the Spaceport Integration and Services Directorate. This directorate is responsible for managing active commercial partnerships with customer advocacy and services management, providing a dedicated and consistent level of support to a wide array of commercial operations. This paper explores these solutions, their relevance to the current commercial space industry, and the challenges that continue to drive improvement with a focus on areas of safety management and risk assessment that have been crucial in KSC's evolution into a multi-user spaceport. These solutions may be useful to government entities and private companies looking to partner with the commercial space industry.

Range↗

NASA NTRS1986

GSFC Ada programming guidelines

A significant Ada effort has been under way at Goddard for the last two years. To ease the center's transition toward Ada (notably for future space station projects), a cooperative effort of half a dozen companies and NASA personnel was started in 1985 to produce programming standards and guidelines for the Ada language. The great richness of the Ada language and the need of programmers for good style examples makes Ada programming guidelines an important tool to smooth the Ada transition. Because of the natural divergence of technical opinions, the great diversity of our government and private organizations and the novelty of the Ada technology, the creation of an Ada programming guidelines document is a difficult and time consuming task. It is also a vital one. Steps must now be taken to ensure that the guide is refined in an organized but timely manner to reflect the growing level of expertise of the Ada community.

Roy, Daniel M.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Supporting Technology at GRC to Mitigate Risk as Stirling Power Conversion Transitions to Flight

Stirling power conversion technology has been reaching more advanced levels of maturity during its development for space power applications. The current effort is in support of the Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator (ASRG), which is being developed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company (LMSSC), Sunpower Inc., and the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC). This generator would use two high-efficiency Advanced Stirling Convertors (ASCs) to convert thermal energy from a radioisotope heat source into electricity. Of paramount importance is the reliability of the power system and as a part of this, the Stirling power convertors. GRC has established a supporting technology effort with tasks in the areas of reliability, convertor testing, high-temperature materials, structures, advanced analysis, organics, and permanent magnets. The project utilizes the matrix system at GRC to make use of resident experts in each of the aforementioned fields. Each task is intended to reduce risk and enhance reliability of the convertor as this technology transitions toward flight status. This paper will provide an overview of each task, outline the recent efforts and accomplishments, and show how they mitigate risk and impact the reliability of the ASC s and ultimately, the ASRG.

Schreiber, Jeffrey G.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Supporting Technology at GRC to Mitigate Risk as Stirling Power Conversion Transitions to Flight

Schreiber, Jeffrey G.↗

NASA NTRS2001

Performance of Li-Ion Cells Under Battery Voltage Charge Control

A study consisting of electrochemical characterization and Low-Earth-Orbit (LEO) cycling of Li-Ion cells from three vendors was initiated in 1999 to determine the cycling performance and to infuse the new technology in the future NASA missions. The 8-cell batteries included in this evaluation are prismatic cells manufactured by Mine Safety Appliances Company (MSA), cylindrical cells manufactured by SAFT and prismatic cells manufactured by Yardney Technical Products, Inc. (YTP). The three batteries were cycle tested in the LEO regime at 40% depth of discharge, and under a charge control technique that consists of battery voltage clamp with a current taper. The initial testing was conducted at 20 C; however, the batteries were cycled also intermittently at low temperatures. YTP 20 Ah cells consisted of mixed-oxide (Co and Ni) positive, graphitic carbon negative, LIPF6 salt mixed with organic carbonate solvents. The battery voltage clamp was 32 V. The low temperature cycling tests started after 4575 cycles at 20 C. The cells were not capable of cycling. at low temperature since the charge acceptance at battery level was poor. There was a cell in the battery that showed too high an end-of-charge (EOC) voltage thereby limiting the ability to charge the rest of the cells in the battery. The battery has completed 6714 cycles. SAFT 12 Ah cells consisted of mixed-oxide (Co and NO positive, graphitic carbon negative, LiPF6 salt mixed with organic carbonate solvents. The battery voltage clamp was for 30.8 V. The low temperature cycling tests started after 4594 cycles at 20 C. A cell that showed low end of discharge (EOD) and EOC voltages and three other cells that showed higher EOC voltages limited the charge acceptance at the selected voltage limit during charge. The cells were capable of cycling at 10 C and 0 C but the charge voltage limit had to be increased to 34.3 V (4.3 V per cell). The low temperature cycling may have induced poor chargeability since the voltage had to be increased to achieve the required charge input. The battery has completed 6226 cycles. MSA 10 Ah cells consisted of Co oxide positive, graphitic carbon negative, LiPF6 salt mixed with organic carbonate solvents. The battery voltage clamp was 30.8 V. The low temperature cycling tests were started after 2182 cycles at 20 C. The cells were capable of cycling at 10 C and 0 C. Like SAFT, the voltage limit on charge had to be increased to 36 V (4.5 V per cell). There was a cell (cell S/N 13) in the battery that showed poor performance features such as low EOD voltage and high EOC voltage. The battery has completed 3441 cycles. A reconditioning procedure that consisted of C15 charge to a taper current of C/100 and C/20 discharge improved the voltage behavior of SAFT and MSA cells with no significant effect on YTP cells. We have demonstrated that the charge operation with VT clamp at battery rather than at cell level is feasible for onboard Li-Ion battery operation.

Rao, Gopalakrishna M.↗

NASA NTRS2023

Technology Scouting Phase 1 Report

Identifying emerging technologies is critical to a mission-oriented agency such as NASA that is always endeavoring to achieve first-of-a-kind human and scientific exploration goals. While NASA attempts to embrace faster and novel development approaches, there have been several recent examples where the Agency has been outpaced in technology research and development, especially by emerging companies. This is in part due to the democratization of space, as seen in the flood of new space companies and capital, and because capabilities and performance levels that used to be almost exclusively demanded by space missions are now scattered across many industries. Also, NASA tends to focus on technologies and techniques developed internally, within the space sector, or in clearly related disciplines. In this context, the overall goal of the Technology Scouting project is to develop an approach to conduct effective technology scouting within NASA by first assessing the need for such a capability, evaluating current and recommended approaches, and then developing a strategy to address any weaknesses in the current approach. The study was designed to be conducted in three phases, each with its own goals and objectives: - Phase 1: Validate whether NASA’s technology scouting capability is consistent with best practices from industry, academia, and other government organizations, and identify whether there is the appetite for adopting a more rigorous technology scouting capability across the Agency. - Phase 2: Identify specific opportunities and challenges to adopting a more comprehensive technology scouting program through a pilot effort. - Phase 3: Define the implementation approach for the more comprehensive technology scouting program that is in response to the information learned during the earlier phases of the study.

Ellen Gertsen↗

NASA NTRS2015

Space in Space: Designing for Privacy in the Workplace

Privacy is cultural, socially embedded in the spatial, temporal, and material aspects of the lived experience. Definitions of privacy are as varied among scholars as they are among those who fight for their personal rights in the home and the workplace. Privacy in the workplace has become a topic of interest in recent years, as evident in discussions on Big Data as well as the shrinking office spaces in which people work. An article in The New York Times published in February of this year noted that "many companies are looking to cut costs, and one way to do that is by trimming personal space". Increasingly, organizations ranging from tech start-ups to large corporations are downsizing square footage and opting for open-office floorplans hoping to trim the budget and spark creative, productive communication among their employees. The question of how much is too much to trim when it comes to privacy, is one that is being actively addressed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) as they explore habitat designs for future space missions. NASA recognizes privacy as a design-related stressor impacting human health and performance. Given the challenges of sustaining life in an isolated, confined, and extreme environment such as Mars, NASA deems it necessary to determine the acceptable minimal amount for habitable volume for activities requiring at least some level of privacy in order to support optimal crew performance. Ethnographic research was conducted in 2013 to explore perceptions of privacy and privacy needs among astronauts living and working in space as part of a long-distance, long-duration mission. The allocation of space, or habitable volume, becomes an increasingly complex issue in outer space due to the costs associated with maintaining an artificial, confined environment bounded by limitations of mass while located in an extreme environment. Privacy in space, or space in space, provides a unique case study of the complex notions of privacy, the impact of design and others on achieving it, and the sensemaking that occurs when privacy is less than expected. The findings show that privacy is not just a personal, individual need but is also a need that is shared among teams and groups. Moreover, the case of space in space reveals the influence the design of the built and social environments have on privacy needs and on achieving privacy. When the level of privacy is less than expected, sensemaking occurs and the lack of privacy is dealt with by means of absencing the present. creating new social norms, and "making space" by manipulating the spatial, temporal, material aspects of the lived experience. Although the Mars habitat study represents an extreme case of privacy in the workplace, lessons learned from outer space are applicable to life in the Earth-bound workplace. A mini-case study was conducted to evaluate office space at the headquarters of a major American airline that illustrates the usefulness of building unexpected bridges between the unknown, unfamiliar Mars habitat and the everyday workplace. The comparative studies reveal insight into the interconnected, social nature of the spatial, temporal, and material aspects of the lived experience and how users of the habitat and office workspace view privacy, self, and others through an embodied, design interaction.

Akin, Jonie↗

NASA NTRS2024

Terrestrial Proving Ground Capabilities Needed for Lunar In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) & Construction Concepts of Operation

Incorporating any new technology or system into a human exploration mission or architecture requires development well in advance of the mission to eliminate technology, cost, and schedule risk concerns. It is often stated that technologies need to be at a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 6, i.e. ‘system/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in a relevant environment (ground or space)’, by Authority To Proceed (ATP) or by the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) for the mission at the latest. There are two game changing capabilities for sustained human exploration of space that can have a significant effect on the overall exploration architecture and the technologies and systems included in the architecture. The first game changing capability, known as In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), involves the search for, acquisition, and processing of resources on the Moon and Mars into mission consumables and usable products, and the second is the ability to utilize space resources in the construction of roads, structures, and surface infrastructure. ISRU and surface construction capabilities have the potential to greatly reduce the cost and risk of human exploration while enabling sustained lunar surface and commercial operations. However, ISRU and surface construction systems are complex and must operate in extremely harsh environments, with abrasive regolith and pervasive dust, for long-periods of time, with potentially limited opportunities for maintenance and repair by humans. The complexity of these capabilities and operations also means that there are a limited number of companies that can design, build, and operate end-to-end systems on their own. The majority of the technologies being developed for these systems are by small companies and at the component or subsystem level. With the overarching strategy of the United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) to enable industry to implement ISRU and surface infrastructure for Artemis and space commercialization, it is therefore important to establish processes and capabilities to promote and foster collaborations among large and small companies involved in ISRU and surface infrastructure development. For ISRU and infrastructure systems and capabilities to be used in Artemis missions and future commercial lunar surface operations, a coordinated framework with virtual/physical integration and testing locations, or ‘Proving Grounds’, needs to be established and operated on a regular basis and open to all. This paper will discuss the ISRU and surface construction near and long-term concepts of operations, and review operations and lessons-learned from the previous ISRU analog field tests. From this information, requirements and capabilities will be proposed to support and enable the integration and testing of ISRU and construction systems with industry, academia, and international agencies, as well as what facilities and organizations could help establish these Proving Grounds.

ISRU↗

NASA NTRS2020

UAM Vision Concept of Operations (ConOps) UAM Maturity Level (UML) 4

This Vision ConOps is intended as a foundation to engage members of the UAM community and provide a consensus on the future vision of UAM operations. It provides a concept for more detailed discussion and a basis for the exploration of ideas using a common framework to inform the continued development and integration of UAM as part of the broader transportation system. Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) encompasses a range of innovative aviation technologies (small drones, electric aircraft, automated air traffic management, etc.) that are transforming aviation’s role in everyday life, including the movement of goods and people. Urban Air Mobility (UAM) represents one of the most exciting and complex AAM concepts with highly automated aircraft, providing commercial services to the public over densely populated cities. This concept has generated tremendous interest and industry investment. UAM envisages a future in which advanced technologies and new operational procedures enable practical, cost-effective air travel as an integral mode of transportation in metropolitan areas. It represents one of the most exciting and complex AAM concepts with highly automated aircraft providing commercial services to the public over densely populated cities. For this reason, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) selected UAM as the initial goal of its AAM efforts and the focus of this Vision Concept of Operations (ConOps) document. UAM Community Vision ConOps: This Vision ConOps effort was led by experts from NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) in collaboration with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Deloitte’s Ecosystem Advisory Group (a cohort of advisers with aviation, aerospace, and regulatory expertise). To develop this Vision ConOps, NASA, FAA, and Deloitte built upon the current body of aeronautical research and consulted with more than 100 stakeholder organizations. This UAM community includes entities ranging from legacy aviation leaders to innovators and new market entrants. Stakeholders consulted included the federal government, state and local government, aerospace original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), local transportation organizations, prospective UAM operators, academia, industry standards-setting bodies, airports, service suppliers, and others (as described in Appendix G). This input was captured through the following methods: • A series of more than two dozen interviews with industry experts, federal regulators, state and local governments, and industry trade groups provided insight into the challenges of UAM integration into the National Airspace System (NAS), as well as technology developments and a variety of perspectives as to how UAM systems will integrate. • A series of two-day community workshops enabling active, detailed engagement of nearly 100 industry, academic, federal, and state stakeholder individuals. These workshops, hosted by NASA and Deloitte, explored UAM concepts in detail, and stakeholders were invited to collaboratively analyze and propose solutions to some of the greatest conceptual challenges behind UAM at an intermediate state. • A review of more than 160 sources of UAM literature from across government, industry, and academia, which are listed in Appendix H. • The public sharing of workshop input and document drafts for review and input across the UAM community. Feedback in the form of more than 1,000 comments and inputs on the document was received from industry groups, individual companies, academia, and government (federal, state, and local), among others. Although effort was made to incorporate inputs from across the UAM stakeholder group, not all comments could ultimately be incorporated in this version. The team resolved conflicting comments or ideas while maintaining consistency with the known direction of regulators and ensuring the document was coherent and consistent. It is recognized that this is a rapidly evolving area and that concepts will likely change over time; as such, this Vision ConOps is a living document and is expected to evolve as concepts mature. The ConOps does, however, provide a vision of UAM concepts and solutions based on the broad insights from across the UAM stakeholder community at the time of its publication and is intended to serve as a UAM North Star for continued research and development of UAM. As a broad Vision ConOps, is not a detailed engineering document; rather, it focuses primarily on outlining a broad, high-level vision across all aspects of a UAM transportation system.

Urban Air Mobility↗

NASA NTRS2020

SISO Space Reference FOM - Tools and Testing

The Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization (SISO) Space Reference Federation Object Model (SpaceFOM) version 1.0 is nearing completion. Earlier papers have described the use of the High Level Architecture (HLA) in Space simulation as well as technical aspects of the SpaceFOM. This paper takes a look at different SpaceFOM tools and how they were used during the development and testing of the standard.The first organizations to develop SpaceFOM-compliant federates for SpaceFOM development and testing were NASA's Johnson Space Center (JSC), the University of Calabria (UNICAL), and Pitch Technologies.JSC is one of NASA's lead centers for human space flight. Much of the core distributed simulation technology development, specifically associated with the SpaceFOM, is done by the NASA Exploration Systems Simulations (NExSyS) team. One of NASA's principal simulation development tools is the Trick Simulation Environment. NASA's NExSyS team has been modifying and using Trick and TrickHLA to help develop and test the SpaceFOM.The System Modeling And Simulation Hub Laboratory (SMASH-Lab) at UNICAL has developed the Simulation Exploration Experience (SEE) HLA Starter kit, that has been used by most SEE teams involved in the distributed simulation of a Moon base. It is particularly useful for the development of federates that are compatible with the SpaceFOM. The HLA Starter Kit is a Java based tool that provides a well-structured framework to simplify the formulation, generation, and execution of SpaceFOM-compliant federates.Pitch Technologies, a company specializing in distributed simulation, is utilizing a number of their existing HLA tools to support development and testing of the SpaceFOM. In addition to the existing tools, Pitch has developed a few SpaceFOM specific federates: Space Master for managing the initialization, execution and pacing of any SpaceFOM federation; EarthEnvironment, a simple Root Reference Publisher; and Space Monitor, a graphical tool for monitoring reference frames and physical entities.Early testing of the SpaceFOM was carried out in the SEE university outreach program, initiated in SISO. Students were given a subset of the FOM, that was later extended. Sample federates were developed and frameworks were developed or adapted to the early FOM versions.As drafts of the standard matured, testing was performed using federates from government, industry, and academia. By mixing federates developed by different teams the standard could be tested with respect to functional correctness, robustness and clarity.These frameworks and federates have been useful when testing and verifying the design of the standard. In addition to this, they have since formed a starting point for developing SpaceFOM-compliant federations in several projects, for example for NASA, ESA as well as SEE.

Möller, Björn↗

NASA NTRS2023

State-of-the-Art: Small Spacecraft Technology

When the first edition of NASA’s Small Spacecraft Technology State-of-the-art report was published in 2013, 247 CubeSats and 105 other non-CubeSat small spacecraft under 50 kilograms (kg) had been launched worldwide, representing less than 2% of launched mass into orbit over multiple years. In 2013 alone, around 60% of the total spacecraft launched had a mass under 600 kg, and of those under 600 kg, 83% were under 200 kg and 37% were nanosatellites (1). Of the total 1,849 spacecraft launched in 2021, 94% were small spacecraft with an overall mass under 600 kg, and of those under 600 kg, 40% were under 200 kg, and 11% were nanosatellites (1). Since 2013, the fight heritage for small spacecraft has increased by over 30% and has become the primary source to space access for commercial, government, private, and academic institutions. The total number of spacecraft launched in the past 10 years is 5,681 and 45% of those had a mass. As with all previous editions of this report, the 2022 edition captures and distills a wealth of new information available on small spacecraft systems from NASA and other publicly available sources. This report is limited to publicly available information and cannot reflect major advances in development that are not publicly disclosed. We encourage any opportunity to publish mission outcomes and technology development milestones (e.g., via conference papers, press releases, company website) so they can be reflected in this report. Overall, this report is a survey of small spacecraft technologies sourced from open literature; it does not endeavor to be an original source, and only considers literature in the public domain to identify and classify devices. Commonly used sources for data include manufacturer datasheets, press releases, conference papers, journal papers, public filings with government agencies, news articles, presentations, the compendium of databases accessed via NASA’s Small Spacecraft Systems Virtual Institute (S3VI) Information Search, and engagement with companies. Data not appropriate for public dissemination, such as proprietary, export controlled, or otherwise restricted data, are not considered. As a result, this report includes many dedicated hours of desk research performed by subject matter experts reviewing resources noted above. Content in this 2022 edition is based on data available by October 2022. This report should not be considered as a comprehensive overview of all the technologies but a great reference for the current state-of-the-art SmallSat technologies. The organizational approach for each chapter is relatively consistent with previous editions and includes an introduction of the technology, current development status of the technology’s procurable systems, and summary tables of technologies surveyed. The content in each chapter is uniquely organized to present a mini-stand-alone report on spacecraft subsystems. As in previous years, chapters include information from previous editions but are updated with new and maturating technologies and reference missions. Tables in each section provide a convenient summary of the technologies discussed, with explanations and references in the body text. The authors have attempted to isolate trends in the small spacecraft industry to point out which technologies have been adopted after successful demonstration missions. Lastly, the authors tried to use the terms “SmallSat,” “microsatellite,” “nanosatellite,” and “CubeSat” in a consistent manner, even as these terms are often used interchangeably in the space industry. Every subsystem chapter contains updated information to reflect the growth in the small spacecraft market. Significant changes are included in several chapters. The “Complete Spacecraft Platforms” chapter now includes information on the two main market options, hosted payload services and dedicated buses. The “Power” chapter provides information on the development of solid-state batteries with significantly higher energy than the current state-of-theart lithium-ion batteries. A large effort was made to update the “Communications” chapter to appropriately capture the recent technology maturation of optical communications for SmallSats. The “Ground Data Systems and Mission Operations” chapter was updated to reflect the recent establishment of the Near Space Network and influx of SmallSat Optical Ground Stations. The “Guidance, Navigation and Control” chapter was updated to include Lidar sensor technology. The “Deorbit Systems” chapter includes a discussion of recently proposed changes by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to limit a spacecraft’s lifetime to no longer than 5 years after end-of-mission. The “Identification and Tracking” Chapter includes updated information on the progress of SmallSat tracking. Finally, this report now encompasses technology funded by NASA’s Small Spacecraft Technology (SST) program’s SmallSat Technology Partnerships (STP) initiative which is described further in this Introduction. The reader can find the included SST technology in the “On the Horizon” section of the “Thermal Systems”, “Communications”, and “Guidance, Navigation, and Control” chapters. A central element of this report is to list state-of-the-art technologies by NASA standard Technology Readiness Level (TRL) as defined by the 2020 NASA Engineering Handbook, found in NASA NPR 7123.1C NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements. The authors have endeavored to independently verify the TRL value of each technology by reviewing and citing published test results or publicly available data to the best of their ability. Where test results and data disagree with vendors’ own advertised TRL, the authors have attempted to engage the vendors to discuss the discrepancy. Readers are strongly encouraged to follow the references cited in the literature describing the full performance range and capabilities of each technology. Readers of this report should reach out to individual companies to further clarify information. It is important to note that this report takes a broad system-level view. To attain a high TRL, the subsystem must be in a flight-ready configuration with all supporting infrastructure—such as mounting points, power conversion, and control algorithms—in an integrated unit. An accurate TRL assessment requires a high degree of technical knowledge on a subject device, and an in-depth understanding of the mission (including interfaces and environment) on which the device was flown. There is variability in TRL values depending on design factors for a specific technology. For example, differences in TRL assessment based on the operating environment may result from the thermal environment, mechanical loads, mission duration, or radiation exposure. If a technology has flown on a mission without success, or without providing valid confirmation to the operator, such claimed “flight heritage” was discounted. The authors believe TRLs are most accurately determined when assessed within the context of a program’s unique requirements. While the overall capability of small spacecraft has matured since the 2021 edition of this report, technologies are still being developed to make deep space SmallSat missions more routine and more cost effective. Future editions of this report may include content dedicated to the rapidly growing fields of assembly, integration, and testing services, and mission modeling and simulation–all of which are now extensively represented at small spacecraft conferences. Many of these subsystems and services are still in their infancy, but as they evolve and reliable conventions and standards emerge, the next iteration of this report may also evolve to include additional chapters.

Bruce Yost↗

NASA NTRS1996

Monolithic Microwave Integrated Circuit (MMIC) Phased Array Demonstrated With ACTS

Monolithic Microwave Integrated Circuit (MMIC) arrays developed by the NASA Lewis Research Center and the Air Force Rome Laboratory were demonstrated in aeronautical terminals and in mobile or fixed Earth terminals linked with NASA's Advanced Communications Technology Satellite (ACTS). Four K/Ka-band experimental arrays were demonstrated between May 1994 and May 1995. Each array had GaAs MMIC devices at each radiating element for electronic beam steering and distributed power amplification. The 30-GHz transmit array used in uplinks to ACTS was developed by Lewis and Texas Instruments. The three 20-GHz receive arrays used in downlinks from ACTS were developed in cooperation with the Air Force Rome Laboratory, taking advantage of existing Air Force integrated-circuit, active-phased-array development contracts with the Boeing Company and Lockheed Martin Corporation. Four demonstrations, each related to an application of high interest to both commercial and Department of Defense organizations, were conducted. The location, type of link, and the data rate achieved for each of the applications is shown. In one demonstration-- an aeronautical terminal experiment called AERO-X--a duplex voice link between an aeronautical terminal on the Lewis Learjet and ACTS was achieved. Two others demonstrated duplex voice links (and in one case, interactive video links as well) between ACTS and an Army high-mobility, multipurpose wheeled vehicle (HMMWV, or "humvee"). In the fourth demonstration, the array was on a fixed mount and was electronically steered toward ACTS. Lewis served as project manager for all demonstrations and as overall system integrator. Lewis engineers developed the array system including a controller for open-loop tracking of ACTS during flight and HMMWV motion, as well as a laptop data display and recording system used in all demonstrations. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory supported the AERO-X program, providing elements of the ACTS Mobile Terminal. The successful performance of experimental, proof-of-concept MMIC K/Ka-band arrays developed with U.S. industry in field demonstrations with ACTS indicates that high density MMIC integration at 20 and 30 GHz is indeed feasible. The successful development and demonstration of the MMIC array systems was possible only because of significant intergovernmental and Government/industry cooperation and the high level of teamwork within Lewis. The results provide a strong incentive for continuing the focused development of MMIC-array technology for satellite communications applications, with emphasis on packaging and cost issues, and for continuing the planning and conducting of other appropriate demonstrations or experiments of phased-array technology with ACTS. Given the present pressures on reducing funding for research and development in Government and industry, the extent to which this can be continued in a cooperative manner will determine whether MMIC array technology will make the transition from the proof-of-concept level to the operational system level.

Source record↗