Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Technical Program Elements”

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 379 records · Page 21

Progress report on the ATMOS sensor - Design description and development status

The Atmospheric Trace Molecule Spectroscopy program is a multiflight shuttle borne investigation designed to determine, on a global scale, the compositional structure and spatial variability of the upper atmosphere using the technique of high resolution infrared absorption spectroscopy. The measurement approach is based on an advanced Fourier Transform Spectrometer capable of obtaining high sensitivity spectral measurements of the atmosphere over a wide spectral region (625-5000 kaysers; 2-16 microns) at high spectral resolution (0.01 kaysers) and vertical height spatial resolution (2 km). Additional elements of the sensor system include a suntracker, a telescope, a mechanically cooled (Hg,Cd)Te detector, and a data handling subsystem with a 16 Mbit/s PCM output. A description is given of the sensor design, including performance predictions, followed by a brief summary of the current technical status of the development effort.

Morse, P. G.↗

Using the ISS as a Testbed to Prepare for the Next Generation of Space-Based Telescopes

The ISS provides a unique opportunity to develop the technologies and operational capabilities necessary to assemble future large space telescopes that may be used to investigate planetary systems around neighboring stars. Assembling telescopes in space is a paradigm-shifting approach to space astronomy. Using the ISS as a testbed will reduce the technical risks of implementing this major scientific facility, such as laser metrology and wavefront sensing and control (WFSC). The Optical Testbed and Integration on ISS eXperiment (OpTIIX) will demonstrate the robotic assembly of major components, including the primary and secondary mirrors, to mechanical tolerances using existing ISS infrastructure, and the alignment of the optical elements to a diffraction-limited optical system in space. Assembling the optical system and removing and replacing components via existing ISS capabilities, such as the Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (SPDM) or the ISS flight crew, allows for future experimentation and repair, if necessary. First flight on ISS for OpTIIX, a small 1.5 meter optical telescope, is planned for 2015. In addition to demonstration of key risk-retiring technologies, the OpTIIX program includes a public outreach program to show the broad value of ISS utilization.

Ess, Kim↗

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↗

Designing the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle Upper Stage Element and Integrating the Stack at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center

Fielding an integrated launch vehicle system entails many challenges, not the least of which is the fact that it has been over 30 years since the United States has developed a human-rated vehicle - the venerable Space Shuttle. Over time, whole generations of rocket scientists have passed through the aerospace community without the opportunity to perform such exacting, demanding, and rewarding work. However, with almost 50 years of experience leading the design, development, and end-to-end systems engineering and integration of complex launch vehicles, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Marshall Space Flight Center offers the in-house talent - both junior- and senior-level personnel - to shape a new national asset to meet the requirements for safe, reliable, and affordable space exploration solutions. The technical personnel are housed primarily in Marshall's Engineering Directorate and are matrixed into the programs and projects that reside at the rocket center. Fortunately, many Apollo-era and Shuttle engineers, as well as those who gained valuable hands-on experience in the 1990s by conducting technology demonstrator projects such as the Delta-Clipper Experimental Advanced, X-33, X-34, and X-37, as well as the short-lived Orbital Space Plane, work closely with industry partners to advance the nation's strategic capability for human access to space. The Ares Projects Office, resident at Marshall, is managing the design and development of America's new space fleet, including the Ares I, which will loft the Orion crew capsule for its first test flight in the 2013 timeframe, as well as the heavy-lift Ares V, which will round out the capability to leave low-Earth orbit once again, when it delivers the Altair lunar lander to orbit late next decade. This paper provides information about the approach to integrating the Ares I stack and designing the upper stage in house, using unique facilities and an expert workforce to revitalize the nation's space exploration resources.

Otte, Neil E.↗

Laboratory for Hydrospheric Processes 1997 Publications

This document is a compilation of publications of the Goddard Space Flight Center Laboratory for Hydrospheric Processes for calendar year 1997. Each two-page entry is a cut-and-pasted extraction from a 1997 published journal article, book chapter, symposium or conference proceedings, or technical memorandum. This provides a quick, inexpensive way to communicate our research. If you wish further information, or a reprint, please contact the author of the article or the publisher. There are two sections, the first consisting of 76 journal articles and book chapters which are arranged according to the science priorities of NASA's Earth Science Enterprise: Land-Cover Change and Global Productivity Seasonal-to-Interannual Climate Prediction Natural Hazards Long-Term Climate Variability Atmospheric Ozone, and an additional category Sensor/Algorithm Development. * Each of these sections is preceded by a foreword. A second section, consisting of 52 other contributions (e.g. conference/symposium proceedings and technical memoranda), provides additional scientific information to the outside community. This document was initiated within the Earth Sciences Directorate at the NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center to provide internal communication. We anticipate it will prove useful to visitors and other people interested in our research. This is our fifth annual document. The Laboratory for Hydrospheric Processes is one of the major elements of the Earth Sciences Directorate at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. Scientific investigations within the Division range from theoretical to experimental research dealing with oceanic/physical oceanography, hydrologic, and cryospheric sciences. The Laboratory currently has a staff of 60 civil servants and approximately 138 visiting scientists, postdoctoral fellows, and contractors. At various times throughout the year, the Laboratory hosts additional personnel through NASA and Goddard sponsored enrichment programs for high school, undergraduate and graduate students, and high school and university faculty. For further information see our web site at http://neptune.gsfc.nasa.gov.

Busalacchi, Antonio J.↗

Visit from JAXA to NASA MSFC: The Engines Element & Ideas for Collaboration

System Design, Development, and Fabrication: Design, develop, and fabricate or procure MB-60 component hardware compliant with the imposed technical requirements and in sufficient quantities to fulfill the overall MB-60 development effort. System Development, Assembly, and Test: Manage the scope of the development, assembly, and test-related activities for MB-60 development. This scope includes engine-level development planning, engine assembly and disassembly, test planning, engine testing, inspection, anomaly resolution, and development of necessary ground support equipment and special test equipment. System Integration: Provide coordinated integration in the realms of engineering, safety, quality, and manufacturing disciplines across the scope of the MB-60 design and associated products development Safety and Mission Assurance, structural design, fracture control, materials and processes, thermal analysis. Systems Engineering and Analysis: Manage and perform Systems Engineering and Analysis to provide rigor and structure to the overall design and development effort for the MB-60. Milestone reviews, requirements management, system analysis, program management support Program Management: Manage, plan, and coordinate the activities across all portions of the MB-60 work scope by providing direction for program administration, business management, and supplier management.

Greene, William D.↗

Exploring Mission Concepts with the JPL Innovation Foundry A-Team

The JPL Innovation Foundry has established a new approach for exploring, developing, and evaluating early concepts called the A-Team. The A-Team combines innovative collaborative methods with subject matter expertise and analysis tools to help mature mission concepts. Science, implementation, and programmatic elements are all considered during an A-Team study. Methods are grouped by Concept Maturity Level (CML), from 1 through 3, including idea generation and capture (CML 1), initial feasibility assessment (CML 2), and trade space exploration (CML 3). Methods used for each CML are presented, and the key team roles are described from two points of view: innovative methods and technical expertise. A-Team roles for providing innovative methods include the facilitator, study lead, and assistant study lead. A-Team roles for providing technical expertise include the architect, lead systems engineer, and integration engineer. In addition to these key roles, each A-Team study is uniquely staffed to match the study topic and scope including subject matter experts, scientists, technologists, flight and instrument systems engineers, and program managers as needed. Advanced analysis and collaborative engineering tools (e.g. cost, science traceability, mission design, knowledge capture, study and analysis support infrastructure) are also under development for use in A-Team studies and will be discussed briefly. The A-Team facilities provide a constructive environment for innovative ideas from all aspects of mission formulation to eliminate isolated studies and come together early in the development cycle when they can provide the biggest impact. This paper provides an overview of the A-Team, its study processes, roles, methods, tools and facilities.

Team Eureka↗

Thermal and Mechanical Performance of a Carbon/Carbon Composite Spacecraft Radiator

Carbon-carbon composite materials offer greater thermal efficiency, stiffness to weight ratio, tailorability, and dimensional stability than aluminum. These lightweight thermal materials could significantly reduce the overall costs associated with satellite thermal control and weight. However, the high cost and long lead-time for carbon-carbon manufacture have limited their widespread usage. Consequently, an informal partnership between government and industrial personnel called the Carbon-Carbon Spacecraft Radiator Partnership (CSRP) was created to foster carbon-carbon composite use for thermally and structurally demanding space radiator applications. The first CSRP flight opportunity is on the New Millennium Program (NMP) Earth Orbiter-1 (EO-1) spacecraft, scheduled for launch in late 1999. For EO-1, the CSRP designed and fabricated a Carbon-Carbon Radiator (CCR) with carbon-carbon facesheets and aluminum honeycomb core, which will also serve as a structural shear panel. While carbon-carbon is an ideal thermal candidate for spacecraft radiators, in practice there are technical challenges that may compromise performance. In this work, the thermal and mechanical performance of the EO-1 CCR is assessed by analysis and testing. Both then-nal and mechanical analyses were conducted to predict the radiator response to anticipated launch and on-orbit loads. The thermal model developed was based on thermal balance test conditions. The thermal analysis was performed using SINDA version 4.0. Structural finite element modeling and analysis were performed using SDRC/1-DEAS and UAI/NASTRAN, respectively. In addition, the CCR was subjected to flight qualification thermal/vacuum and vibration tests. The panel meets or exceeds the requirements for space flight and demonstrates promise for future satellite missions.

Kuhn, Jonathan↗

Definition and Development of Habitation Readiness Levels (HRLs) for Planetary Surface Habitats

One could argue that NASA has never developed a true habitat for a planetary surface, with only the Lunar Module from the 1960's-era Apollo Program providing for a sparse 2 person, 3 day capability. An integral part of NASA's current National Vision for Space Exploration is missions back to the moon and eventually to Mars. One of the largest leaps i11 lunar surface exploration beyond the Apollo lunar missions will be the conduct of these extended duration human missions. These missions could range from 30 to 90 days in length initially and may eventually range up to 500 days in length. To enable these extended duration human missions, probably the single-most important lunar surface element is the Surface Habitat. The requirements that must be met by the Surface Habitat will go far beyond the safety, performance and operational requirements of the Lunar Module, and NASA needs to develop a basis for making intelligent, technically correct habitat design decisions. This paper will discuss the possibilities of the definition and development of a Habitation Readiness Level (HRL) scale that might be mapped to current Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) for technology development. HRLs could help measure how well a particular technology thrust is advanced by a proposed planetary habitat concept. The readiness level would have to be measured differently than TRLs, and may include such milestones as habitat design performance under simulated mission operations and constraints (including relevant field testing), functional allocation demonstrations, crew interface evaluation and post-occupancy evaluation. With many concepts for planetary habitats proposed over the past 20 years, there are many strategic technical challenges facing designers of planetary habitats that will support NASA's exploration of the moon and Mars. The systematic assessment of a variety of planetary habitat options will be an important approach and will influence the associated requirements for human design, volumetrics, functionality, systems hardware and operations.

Connolly, Janis H.↗

The role of scientists in developing Hubble Space Telescope

The objective of the Hubble Space Telescope Program is to build and operate a high-performance, fully-instrumented and long-lived optical observatory in earth orbit. Key Program elements are (1) a logistic strategy of Shuttle launch/maintenance and TDRSS communications, (2) overall responsibility at the MSFC Project for developing both the flight and ground systems, and (3) scientific participation in ST development and responsibility after launch for conducting the observing program. The ST Project is a management structure with a budget and schedule for delivering an ST system capable of achieving its established scientific objectives. The Project distributes through contracts the responsibility for supplying particular components, but retains the responsibility for system-level integrity. Scientists have set the performance objectives and now support the Project during the development stage by providing (1) PI management of the five Science Instruments, (2) continuing translations of scientific requirements into engineering specifications, (3) oversight of designs and performance tests, and (4) specific expertise on technical concerns.

Brown, R. A.↗

From LDEF to a national Space Environment and Effects (SEE) program: A natural progression

As the LDEF program draws to a close, it leaves in place the fundamental building blocks for a Space Environment and Effects (SEE) program. Results from LDEF data analyses and investigations now form a substantial core of knowledge on the long term effects of the space environment on materials, system and structures. In addition, these investigations form the basic structure of a critically-needed SEE archive and database system. An agency-wide effort is required to capture all elements of a SEE program to provide a more comprehensive and focused approach to understanding the space environment, determining the best techniques for both flight and ground-based experimentation, updating the models which predict both the environments and those effects on subsystems and spacecraft, and, finally, ensuring that this multitudinous information is properly maintained, and inserted into spacecraft design programs. Many parts and pieces of a SEE program already exist at various locations to fulfill specific needs. The primary purpose of this program, under the direction of the Office of Advanced Concepts and Technology (OACT) in NASA Headquarters, is to take advantage of these parts; apply synergisms where possible; identify and when possible fill-in gaps; coordinate and advocate a comprehensive SEE program. The SEE program must coordinate and support the efforts of well-established technical communities wherein the bulk of the work will continue to be done. The SEE program will consist of a NASA-led SEE Steering Committee, consisting of government and industry users, with the responsibility for coordination between technology developers and NASA customers; and Technical Working Groups with primary responsibility for program technical content in response to user needs. The Technical Working Groups are as follows: Materials and Processes; Plasma and Fields; Ionizing Radiation; Meteoroids and Orbital Debris; Neutral External Contamination; Thermosphere, Thermal, and Solar Conditions; Electromagnetic Effects; Integrated Assessments and Databases. Specific technology development tasks will be solicited through a NASA Research Announcement to be released in May of 1994. The areas in which tasks are solicited include: (1) engineering environment definitions, (2) environments and effects design guidelines, (3) environments and effects assessment models and databases, and (4) flight/ground simulation/technology assessment data.

Bowles, David E.↗

Using Dynamic Interface Modeling and Simulation to Develop a Launch and Recovery Flight Simulation for a UH-60A Blackhawk

Joint Shipboard Helicopter Integration Process (JSHIP) is a Joint Test and Evaluation (JT&E) program sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). Under the JSHDP program is a simulation effort referred to as the Dynamic Interface Modeling and Simulation System (DIMSS). The purpose of DIMSS is to develop and test the processes and mechanisms that facilitate ship-helicopter interface testing via man-in-the-loop ground-based flight simulators. Specifically, the DIMSS charter is to develop an accredited process for using a flight simulator to determine the wind-over-the-deck (WOD) launch and recovery flight envelope for the UH-60A ship/helicopter combination. DIMSS is a collaborative effort between the NASA Ames Research Center and OSD. OSD determines the T&E and warfighter training requirements, provides the programmatics and dynamic interface T&E experience, and conducts ship/aircraft interface tests for validating the simulation. NASA provides the research and development element, simulation facility, and simulation technical experience. This paper will highlight the benefits of the NASA/JSHIP collaboration and detail achievements of the project in terms of modeling and simulation. The Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS) at NASA Ames Research Center offers the capability to simulate a wide range of simulation cueing configurations, which include visual, aural, and body-force cueing devices. The system flexibility enables switching configurations io allow back-to-back evaluation and comparison of different levels of cueing fidelity in determining minimum training requirements. The investigation required development and integration of several major simulation system at the VMS. A new UH-60A BlackHawk interchangeable cab that provides an out-the-window (OTW) field-of-view (FOV) of 220 degrees in azimuth and 70 degrees in elevation was built. Modeling efforts involved integrating Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) generated data of an LHA ship airwake and integrating a real-time ship motion model developed based on a batch model from Naval Surface Warfare Center. Engineering development and integration of a three degrees-of-freedom (DOF) dynamic seat to simulate high frequency rotor-dynamics dependent motion cues for use in conjunction with the large motion system was accomplished. The development of an LHA visual model in several different levels of resolution and an aural cueing system in which three separate fidelity levels could be selected were developed. VMS also integrated a PC-based E&S simFUSION system to investigate cost effective IG alternatives. The DIMSS project consists of three phases that follow an approved Validation, Verification and accreditation (VV&A) process. The first phase will support the accreditation of the individual subsystems and models. The second will follow the verification and validation of the integrated subsystems and models, and will address fidelity requirements of the integrated models and subsystems. The third and final phase will allow the verification and validation of the full system integration. This VV&A process will address the utility of the simulated WOD launch and recovery envelope. Simulations supporting the first two stages have been completed and the data is currently being reviewed and analyzed.

Sweeney, Christopher↗

NASA Ares I Launch Vehicle Roll and Reaction Control Systems Lessons Learned

On April 15, 2010 President Barak Obama made the official announcement that the Constellation Program, which included the Ares I launch vehicle, would be canceled. NASA s Ares I launch vehicle was being designed to launch the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, returning humans to the moon, Mars, and beyond. It consisted of a First Stage (FS) five segment solid rocket booster and a liquid J-2X Upper Stage (US) engine. Roll control for the FS was planned to be handled by a dedicated Roll Control System (RoCS), located on the connecting interstage. Induced yaw or pitch moments experienced during FS ascent would have been handled by vectoring of the booster nozzle. After FS booster separation, the US Reaction Control System (ReCS) would have provided the US Element with three degrees of freedom control as needed. The lessons learned documented in this paper will be focused on the technical designs and producibility of both systems along with the partnership between NASA and Boeing, who was on contract to build the Ares I US Element, which included the FS RoCS and US ReCS. In regards to partnership, focus will be placed on integration along with technical work accomplished by Boeing with special emphasis on each task order. In summary, this paper attempts to capture key lessons learned that should be helpful in the development of future launch vehicle RCS designs.

Butt, Adam↗

Best Practices from the Design and Development of the Ares I Launch Vehicle Roll and Reaction Control Systems

On April 15, 2010 President Barak Obama made the official announcement that the Constellation Program, which included the Ares I launch vehicle, would be canceled. NASA s Ares I launch vehicle was being designed to launch the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, returning humans to the moon, Mars, and beyond. It consisted of a First Stage (FS) five segment solid rocket booster and a liquid J-2X Upper Stage (US) engine. Roll control for the FS was planned to be handled by a dedicated Roll Control System (RoCS), located on the connecting interstage. Induced yaw or pitch moments experienced during FS ascent would have been handled by vectoring of the booster nozzle. After FS booster separation, the US Reaction Control System (ReCS) would have provided the US Element with three degrees of freedom control as needed. The best practices documented in this paper will be focused on the technical designs and producibility of both systems along with the partnership between NASA and Boeing, who was on contract to build the Ares I US Element, which included the FS RoCS and US ReCS. In regards to partnership, focus will be placed on integration along with technical work accomplished by Boeing. This will include detailed emphasis on task orders developed between NASA and Boeing that were used to direct specific work that needed to be accomplished. In summary, this paper attempts to capture key best practices that should be helpful in the development of future launch vehicle and spacecraft RCS designs.

Butt, Adam↗

Effective Transition Management: The Seamless System

In this age of shrinking resources, cost avoidance has become as critical as direct cost savings. There is no doubt that Effective Transition Management (ETM) achieves this aim. What then, is ETM and how does it achieve its goal? It is the introduction and use of a hierarchical decision model and computerized tracking system which successfully integrates capital acquisition into the support base. You will discover that because this proven system is generic, compatible and flexible, its applications are virtually unlimited. It is this highly dynamic process which I would like to share with you. Skilled specialists are now rotated rapidly through acquisition programs on a requirements-driven basis. Managers continue their quest for inefficient areas to trim, slash or cut. However, there is one area of operations in every major corporation and government department that, as yet, has not received the attention it deserves. This essential element is Transition Management. Capital acquisitions, at some point, must be handed off to a support matrix for the 'in-service' phase of their life cycle. Most of us who have been on the receiving end can usually cite outrageous examples of adjustment, recovery or disaster. This means buying what amounts to a second initial sparing package, re-aligning the range and depth of inventory to match a changed maintenance concept, interpreting contractor-developed configuration control data or ensuring that the latest information is contained in the technical publications. This list is endless. For major purchases, this 'in-service' phase is often fifteen, twenty or more years. The least desirable, yet most common condition, is to suffer up to five years of recovering from errors or omissions after the transition to the support matrix occurs. Without ETM, making new equipment fully operational may thus become a long and costly process.

Burke, Marty↗

Wing design for a civil tiltrotor transport aircraft

The goal of this research is the proper tailoring of the civil tiltrotor's composite wing-box structure leading to a minimum-weight wing design. With focus on the structural design, the wing's aerodynamic shape and the rotor-pylon system are held fixed. The initial design requirement on drag reduction set the airfoil maximum thickness-to-chord ratio to 18 percent. The airfoil section is the scaled down version of the 23 percent-thick airfoil used in V-22's wing. With the project goal in mind, the research activities began with an investigation of the structural dynamic and aeroelastic characteristics of the tiltrotor configuration, and the identification of proper procedures to analyze and account for these characteristics in the wing design. This investigation led to a collection of more than thirty technical papers on the subject, some of which have been referenced here. The review of literature on the tiltrotor revealed the complexity of the system in terms of wing-rotor-pylon interactions. The aeroelastic instability or whirl flutter stemming from wing-rotor-pylon interactions is found to be the most critical mode of instability demanding careful consideration in the preliminary wing design. The placement of wing fundamental natural frequencies in bending and torsion relative to each other and relative to the rotor 1/rev frequencies is found to have a strong influence on the whirl flutter. The frequency placement guide based on a Bell Helicopter Textron study is used in the formulation of frequency constraints. The analysis and design studies are based on two different finite-element computer codes: (1) MSC/NASATRAN and (2) WIDOWAC. These programs are used in parallel with the motivation to eventually, upon necessary modifications and validation, use the simpler WIDOWAC code in the structural tailoring of the tiltrotor wing. Several test cases were studied for the preliminary comparison of the two codes. The results obtained so far indicate a good overall agreement between the two codes.

Rais-Rohani, Masoud↗

Earth to space power beaming: A new NASA technology initiative

Laser power beaming from the Earth's surface is an innovative and potentially cost-effective option for reliably providing electrical power for applications such as space transportation, Earth-orbiting satellites, and lunar development. The maturation of laser power beaming technology can support low power applications such as upgraded conventional communications satellites in the present decade. Power beaming systems to support extensive lunar base operations that may consume extremely large amounts of power can be implemented early in the 21st century. The synergistic advantages of high-thrust, high specific-impulse electric propulsion may make enhanced, low cost space logistics an area of unique significance for laser power beaming. Economic forces will continue as a driving factor in the selection of major system elements for both commercial applications as well as the avant-garde national space missions envisioned for the 21st century. As a result, the implementation of laser power beaming systems will only take place if they can demonstrate clear economic benefits without sacrificing performance, personnel safety, or the environment. Similarly, the development activities that are a necessary precursor to any operational system will take place only if key industry and government leaders perceive laser power beaming systems as an achievable goal with realistic payoffs in comparison to competing energy options. This paper summarizes NASA's current research to evaluate laser power beaming systems as they apply to applications of greatest interest, and it includes a summary of the current laser power beaming program within the NASA Headquarters Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology. This research effort will quantify some key technical certainties and uncertainties pertaining to laser power beaming systems appropriate for space applications as well as establish a path of development that includes maturation of key technology components for reliable laser and millimeter wave power beaming systems during the 1990's. The program is known as 'SELENE', an acronym for Space Laser Energy.

Rather, John D. G.↗

Bibliography of NASA-related publications on wind turbine technology 1973-1995

A major program of research and development projects on wind turbines for generating electricity was conducted at the NASA Lewis Research Center from 1973 to 1988. Most of these projects were sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), as a major element of its Federal Wind Energy Program. One other large-scale wind turbine project was sponsored by the Bureau of Reclamation of the Department of Interior (DOI). The peak years for wind energy work at Lewis were 1979-80, when almost 100 engineers, technicians, and administrative personnel were involved. From 1988 their conclusion in 1995, NASA wind energy activities have been directed toward the transfer of technology to commercial and academic organizations. Wind energy activities at NASA can be divided into two broad categories which are closely related and often overlapping: (1) Designing, building, and testing a series of 12 large-scale, experimental, horizontal-axis wind turbines (HAWT's); and (2) conducting supporting research and technology (SR&T) projects. The purpose of this bibliography is to assist those active in the field of wind energy in locating the technical information they need on wind power planning, wind loads, turbine design and analysis, fabrication and installation, laboratory and field testing, and operations and maintenance. This bibliography contains approximately 620 citations of publications by over 520 authors and co-authors. Sources are: (1) NASA reports authored by government grantee, and contractor personnel, (2) papers presented by attendees at NASA-sponsored workshops and conferences, (3) papers presented by NASA personnel at outside workshops and conferences, and (4) outside publications related to research performed at NASA/ DOE wind turbine sites.

Spera, David A.↗