SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Investments”

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.

At least 415 records · Page 23

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2012

NASA InterCenter Collaboration Increases ROI

Funding for National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) space mission operations is tighter than ever in the current environment of federal government deficit reductions. Conventional wisdom would expect this environment to drive increasing competition between NASA centers for the limited available funds. However, recent inter-center activities at the Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center emphasize collaboration rather than competition and demonstrate the value of partnerships to increase the return on shrinking investments. These efforts cover a variety of activities and potential returns. To facilitate sharing data from test and verification through operations without levying requirements on data format or software tools, the HOSC is working with multiple centers on an evolutionary path toward a distributed data architecture and archive. The approach reduces the required investment by allowing the partners to reuse their existing formats and tools, while facilitating gone ]stop h user visibility into and controlled access to the full complement of data regardless of user or data location. The HOSC is also working on two activities to promote sharing operations implementations and leveraging the experts and expertise across multiple NASA sites. In one, the use of Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) standards for the message abstraction layer provides an interoperability layer on top of existing ground data system communication architectures. This allows missions to select the most appropriate solutions for their requirements with a minimal investment in rehosting the components in a coherent operational environment. The other emphasizes shared tools and increased remote access to minimize travel for tests and critical activities and reduce the floor space required for a dedicated operations center. This paper summarizes these and other inter-center collaboration activities at the HOSC and the benefits that each can bring, not just to the participants, but to the broader operations community.

Lankford, Kimberly↗

NASA NTRS2009

Status and Mission Applicability of NASA's In-Space Propulsion Technology Project

The In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) project develops propulsion technologies that will enable or enhance NASA robotic science missions. Since 2001, the ISPT project developed and delivered products to assist technology infusion and quantify mission applicability and benefits through mission analysis and tools. These in-space propulsion technologies are applicable, and potentially enabling for flagship destinations currently under evaluation, as well as having broad applicability to future Discovery and New Frontiers mission solicitations. This paper provides status of the technology development, near-term mission benefits, applicability, and availability of in-space propulsion technologies in the areas of advanced chemical thrusters, electric propulsion, aerocapture, and systems analysis tools. The current chemical propulsion investment is on the high-temperature Advanced Material Bipropellant Rocket (AMBR) engine providing higher performance for lower cost. Investments in electric propulsion technologies focused on completing NASA's Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion propulsion system, a 0.6-7 kW throttle-able gridded ion system, and the High Voltage Hall Accelerator (HiVHAC) thruster, which is a mid-term product specifically designed for a low-cost electric propulsion option. Aerocapture investments developed a family of thermal protections system materials and structures; guidance, navigation, and control models of blunt-body rigid aeroshells; atmospheric models for Earth, Titan, Mars and Venus; and models for aerothermal effects. In 2009 ISPT started the development of propulsion technologies that would enable future sample return missions. The paper describes the ISPT project's future focus on propulsion for sample return missions. The future technology development areas for ISPT is: Planetary Ascent Vehicles (PAV), with a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) being the initial development focus; multi-mission technologies for Earth Entry Vehicles (MMEEV) needed for sample return missions from many different destinations; propulsion for Earth Return Vehicles (ERV), transfer stages to the destination, and Electric Propulsion for sample return and low cost missions; and Systems/Mission Analysis focused on sample return propulsion. The ISPT project is funded by NASA's Science Mission Directorate (SMD).

Anderson, David J.↗

NASA NTRS2013

IMPaCT - Integration of Missions, Programs, and Core Technologies

IMPaCT enables comprehensive information on current NASA missions, prospective future missions, and the technologies that NASA is investing in, or considering investing in, to be accessed from a common Web-based interface. It allows dependencies to be established between missions and technology, and from this, the benefits of investing in individual technologies can be determined. The software also allows various scenarios for future missions to be explored against resource constraints, and the nominal cost and schedule of each mission to be modified in an effort to fit within a prescribed budget.

Balacuit, Carlos P.↗

NASA NTRS2013

High Speed Mobility Through On-Demand Aviation

Game changing advances come about by the introduction of new technologies at a time when societal needs create the opportunity for new market solutions. A unique opportunity exists for NASA to bring about such a mobility revolution in General Aviation, extendable to other aviation markets, to maintain leadership in aviation by the United States. This report outlines the research carried out so far under NASA's leadership towards developing a new mobility choice, called Zip Aviation1,2,3. The feasibility, technology and system gaps that need to be addressed, and pathways for successful implementation have been investigated to guide future investment. The past decade indicates exciting trends in transportation technologies, which are quickly evolving. Automobiles are embracing automation to ease driver tasks as well as to completely control the vehicle with added safety (Figure 1). Electric propulsion is providing zero tail-pipe emission vehicles with dramatically lower energy and maintenance costs. These technologies have not yet been applied to aviation, yet offer compelling potential benefits across all aviation markets, and in particular to General Aviation (GA) as an early adopter market. The benefits of such an adoption are applicable in the following areas: 􀁸 Safety: The GA market experiences accident rates that are substantially higher than automobiles or commercial airlines, with 7.5 fatal accidents per 100 million vehicle miles compared to 1.3 for automobiles and.068 for airlines. Approximately 80% of these accidents are caused by some form of pilot error, with another 13% caused by single point propulsion system failure. 􀁸 Emissions: Environmental constraints are pushing for the elimination of 100Low Lead (LL) fuel used in most GA aircraft, with aviation fuel the #1 source of lead emissions into the environment. Aircraft also have no emission control systems (i.e. no catalytic converters etc.), so they are gross hydrocarbon polluters compared to automobiles. 􀁸 Community Noise: Hub and smaller GA airports are facing increasing noise restrictions, and while commercial airliners have dramatically decreased their community noise footprint over the past 30 years, GA aircraft noise has essentially remained same, and moreover, is located in closer proximity to neighborhoods and businesses. 􀁸 Operating Costs: GA operating costs have risen dramatically due to average fuel costs of over $6 per gallon, which has constrained the market over the past decade and resulted in more than 50% lower sales and 35% less yearly operations. Infusion of autonomy and electric propulsion technologies can accomplish not only a transformation of the GA market, but also provide a technology enablement bridge for both larger aircraft and the emerging civil Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) markets. The NASA Advanced General Aviation Transport Experiments (AGATE) project successfully used a similar approach to enable the introduction of primary composite structures and flat panel displays in the 1990s, establishing both the technology and certification standardization to permit quick adoption through partnerships with industry, academia, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Regional and airliner markets are experiencing constant pressure to achieve decreasing levels of community emissions and noise, while lowering operating costs and improving safety. But to what degree can these new technology frontiers impact aircraft safety, the environment, operations, cost, and performance? Are the benefits transformational enough to fundamentally alter aircraft competiveness and productivity to permit much greater aviation use for high speed and On-Demand Mobility (ODM)? These questions were asked in a Zip aviation system study named after the Zip Car, an emerging car-sharing business model. Zip Aviation investigates the potential to enable new emergent markets for aviation that offer "more flexibility than the existing transportation solutions." These studies indicate that autonomy and electric propulsion technology infusions offer a unique opportunity to provide breakthrough capabilities for new high speed, on-demand travel alternatives that can leapfrog the need for future expensive ground-based infrastructure investment. At the same time, such investments offer a method of laying the foundation for these technologies to be incubated for commercial aviation at lower cost, and with lower initial certification thresholds due to the relatively poor capabilities of GA aircraft to permit early adoption and private market capitalization by rapid technology accelerations, as depicted in Figure 2.

Moore, Mark D.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Model Based Systems Engineering on the Europa Mission Concept Study

At the start of 2011, the proposed Jupiter Europa Orbiter (JEO) mission was staffing up in expectation of becoming an official project later in the year for a launch in 2020. A unique aspect of the pre-project work was a strong emphasis and investment on the foundations of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE). As so often happens in this business, plans changed: NASA's budget and science priorities were released and together fundamentally changed the course of JEO. As a result, it returned to being a study task whose objective is to propose more affordable ways to accomplish the science. As part of this transition, the question arose as to whether it could continue to afford the investment in MBSE. In short, the MBSE infusion has survived and is providing clear value to the study effort. By leveraging the existing infrastructure and a modest additional investment, striking advances in the capture and analysis of designs using MBSE were achieved. In the process, the need to remain relevant in the new environment has brought about a wave of innovation and progress. The effort has reaffirmed the importance of architecting. It has successfully harnessed the synergistic relationship of architecting to system modeling. We have found that MBSE can provide greater agility than traditional methods. We have also found that a diverse 'ecosystem' of modeling tools and languages (SysML, Mathematica, even Excel) is not only viable, but an important enabler of agility and adaptability. This paper will describe the successful application of MBSE in the dynamic environment of early mission formulation, the significant results produced and lessons learned in the process.

Bayer, Todd J.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Technology Infusion Challenges from a Decision Support Perspective

In a restricted science budget environment and increasingly numerous required technology developments, the technology investment decisions within NASA are objectively more and more difficult to make such that the end results are satisfying the technical objectives and all the organizational constraints. Under these conditions it is rationally desirable to build an investment portfolio, which has the highest possible technology infusion rate. Arguably the path to infusion is subject to many influencing factors, but here only the challenges associated with the very initial stages are addressed: defining the needs and the subsequent investment decision-support process. It is conceivable that decision consistency and possibly its quality suffer when the decision-making process has limited or no traceability. This paper presents a structured decision-support framework aiming to provide traceable, auditable, infusion- driven recommendations towards a selection process in which these recommendations are used as reference points in further discussions among stakeholders. In this framework addressing well-defined requirements, different measures of success can be defined based on traceability to specific selection criteria. As a direct result, even by using simplified decision models the likelihood of infusion can be probed and consequently improved.

Adumitroaie, V.↗

NASA NTRS2015

In-Space Transportation for NASA's Evolvable Mars Campaign

As the nation embarks on a new and bold journey to Mars, significant work is being done to determine what that mission and those architectural elements will look like. The Evolvable Mars Campaign, or EMC, is being evaluated as a potential approach to getting humans to Mars. Built on the premise of leveraging current technology investments and maximizing element commonality to reduce cost and development schedule, the EMC transportation architecture is focused on developing the elements required to move crew and equipment to Mars as efficiently and effectively as possible both from a performance and a programmatic standpoint. Over the last 18 months the team has been evaluating potential options for those transportation elements. One of the key aspects of the EMC is leveraging investments being made today in missions like the Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM) mission using derived versions of the Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) propulsion systems and coupling them with other chemical propulsion elements that maximize commonality across the architecture between both transportation and Mars operations elements. This paper outlines the broad trade space being evaluated including the different technologies being assessed for transportation elements and how those elements are assembled into an architecture. Impacts to potential operational scenarios at Mars are also investigated. Trades are being made on the size and power level of the SEP vehicle for delivering cargo as well as the size of the chemical propulsion systems and various mission aspects including Inspace assembly and sequencing. Maximizing payload delivery to Mars with the SEP vehicle will better support the operational scenarios at Mars by enabling the delivery of landers and habitation elements that are appropriately sized for the mission. The purpose of this investigation is not to find the solution but rather a suite of solutions with potential application to the challenge of sending cargo and crew to Mars. The goal is that, by building an architecture intelligently with all aspects considered, the sustainable Mars program wisely invests limited resources enabling a long-term human Mars exploration program.

Percy, Thomas K.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Iodine Satellite

This project is a collaborative effort to mature an iodine propulsion system while reducing risk and increasing fidelity of a technology demonstration mission concept. 1 The FY 2014 tasks include investments leveraged throughout NASA, from multiple mission directorates, as a partnership with NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC), a NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Technology Investment Project, and an Air Force partnership. Propulsion technology is often a critical enabling technology for space missions. NASA is investing in technologies to enable high value missions with very small and low-cost spacecraft, even CubeSats. However, these small spacecraft currently lack any appreciable propulsion capability. CubeSats are typically deployed and drift without any ability to transfer to higher value orbits, perform orbit maintenance, or deorbit. However, the iodine Hall system can allow the spacecraft to transfer into a higher value science orbit. The iodine satellite (iSAT) will be able to achieve a (Delta)V of >500 m/s with <1 kg of solid iodine propellant, which can be stored in an unpressurized benign state prior to launch. The iSAT propulsion system consists of the 200 W Hall thruster, solid iodine propellant tank, a power processing unit, and the necessary valves and tubing to route the iodine vapor. The propulsion system is led by GRC, with critical hardware provided by the Busek Co. The propellant tank begins with solid iodine unpressurized on the ground and in-flight before operations, which is then heated via tank heaters to a temperature at which solid iodine sublimates to iodine vapor. The vapor is then routed through tubing and custom valves to control mass flow to the thruster and cathode assembly. 2 The thruster then ionizes the vapor and accelerates it via magnetic and electrostatic fields, resulting in thrust with a specific impulse >1,300 s. The iSAT spacecraft, illustrated in figure 1, is currently a 12U CubeSat. The spacecraft chassis will be constructed from aluminum with a finish to prevent iodine-driven corrosion. The iSAT spacecraft includes full three-axis control using wheels, magnetic torque rods, inertial management unit, and a suite of sensors and optics. The spacecraft will leverage heat generated by spacecraft components and radiators for a passive thermal control system.

Dankanich, John↗

NASA NTRS2016

Design and Development of a Methane Cryogenic Propulsion Stage for Human Mars Exploration

NASA is currently working on the Evolvabe Mars Campaign (EMC) study to outline transportation and mission options for human exploration of Mars. One of the key aspects of the EMC is leveraging current and planned near-term technology investments to build an affordable and evolvable approach to Mars exploration. This leveraging of investments includes the use of high-power Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) systems evolved from those currently under development in support of the Asteroid Redirect Mission to deliver payloads to Mars. The EMC is considering several transportation options that combine solar electric and chemical propulsion technologies to deliver crew and cargo to Mars. In one primary architecture option, the SEP propulsion system is used to pre-deploy mission elements to Mars while a high-thrust chemical propulsion system is used to send crew on faster ballistic transfers between Earth and Mars. This high-thrust chemical system uses liquid oxygen - liquid methane main propulsion and reaction control systems integrated into the Methane Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (MCPS). Over the past year, there have been several studies completed to provide critical design and development information related to the MCPS. This paper is intended to provide a summary of these efforts. A summary of the current point of departure design for the MCPS is provided as well as an overview of the mission architecture and concept of operations that the MCPS is intended to support. To leverage the capabilities of solar electric propulsion to the greatest extent possible, the EMC architecture pre-deploys the required stages for returning crew from Mars. While this changes the risk posture of the architecture, it provides mass savings by using higher-efficiency systems for interplanetary transfer. However, this does introduce significantly longer flight times to Mars which, in turn, increases the overall lifetime of the stages to as long as 3000 days. This unique aspect to the concept of operations introduces several challenges, specifically related to propellant storage and engine reliability. These challenges and some potential solutions are discussed. Specific focus is provided on two key technology areas; propulsion and cryogenic fluid management. In the area of propulsion development, the development of an integrated methane propulsion system that combines both main propulsion and reaction control is discussed. This includes an overview of potential development paths, areas where development for Mars applications are complementary to development efforts underway in other parts of the aerospace industry, and commonality between the MCPS methane propulsion applications and other Mars elements, including the Mars lander systems. This commonality is a key affordability aspect of the Evolvable Mars Campaign. A similar discussion is provided for cryogenic fluid management technologies including a discussion of how using cryo-propulsion in the Mars transportation application not only provides performance benefits but also leverages decades of technology development investments made by NASA and its aerospace contractor community.

Percy, Thomas K.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Design and Development of a Methane Cryogenic Propulsion Stage for Human Mars Exploration

NASA is currently working on the Evolvabe Mars Campaign (EMC) study to outline transportation and mission options for human exploration of Mars. One of the key aspects of the EMC is leveraging current and planned near-term technology investments to build an affordable and evolvable approach to Mars exploration. This leveraging of investments includes the use of high-power Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) systems, evolved from those currently under development in support of the Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM), to deliver payloads to Mars. The EMC is considering several transportation options that combine solar electric and chemical propulsion technologies to deliver crew and cargo to Mars. In one primary architecture option, the SEP propulsion system is used to pre-deploy mission elements to Mars while a high-thrust chemical propulsion system is used to send crew on faster ballistic transfers between Earth and Mars. This high-thrust chemical system uses liquid oxygen - liquid methane main propulsion and reaction control systems integrated into the Methane Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (MCPS). Over the past year, there have been several studies completed to provide critical design and development information related to the MCPS. This paper is intended to provide a summary of these efforts. A summary of the current point of departure design for the MCPS is provided as well as an overview of the mission architecture and concept of operations that the MCPS is intended to support. To leverage the capabilities of solar electric propulsion to the greatest extent possible, the EMC architecture pre-deploys to Mars orbit the stages required for returning crew from Mars. While this changes the risk posture of the architecture, it can provide some mass savings by using higher-efficiency systems for interplanetary transfer. However, this does introduce significantly longer flight times to Mars which, in turn, increases the overall lifetime of the stages to as long as 2500 days. This unique aspect to the concept of operations introduces several challenges, specifically related to propellant storage and engine reliability. These challenges and some potential solutions are discussed. Specific focus is provided on two key technology areas; propulsion and cryogenic fluid management. In the area of propulsion development, the development of an integrated methane propulsion system that combines both main propulsion and reaction control is discussed. This includes an overview of potential development paths, areas where development for Mars applications are complementary to development efforts underway in other parts of the aerospace industry, and commonality between the MCPS methane propulsion applications and other Mars elements, including the Mars lander systems. This commonality is a key affordability aspect of the Evolvable Mars Campaign. A similar discussion is provided for cryogenic fluid management technologies including a discussion of how using cryo propulsion in the Mars transportation application not only provides performance benefits but also leverages decades of technology development investments made by NASA and its aerospace contractor community.

Percy, Thomas K.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Sizing Power Components of an Electrically Driven Tail Cone Thruster and a Range Extender

The aeronautics industry has been challenged on many fronts to increase efficiency, reduce emissions, and decrease dependency on carbon-based fuels. The NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate has identified a suite of investments to meet long term research demands beyond the purview of commercial investment. Electrification of aviation propulsion through turboelectric or hybrid electric propulsion is one of many exciting research areas which has the potential to revolutionize the aviation industry. This paper will provide an overview of the turboelectric and hybrid electric technologies being developed under NASAs Advanced Air Transportation Technology (AATT) Project, and how these technologies can impact vehicle design. An overview will be presented of vehicle system studies and the electric drive system assumptions for successful turboelectric and hybrid electric propulsion in single aisle size commercial aircraft. Key performance parameters for electric drive system technologies will be reviewed, and the technical investment made in materials, electric machines, power electronics, and integrated power systems will be discussed. Finally, power components for a single aisle turboelectric aircraft with an electrically driven tail cone thruster and a hybrid electric nine passenger aircraft with a range extender will be parametrically sized.

turbogenerator↗

NASA NTRS2006

Foundations of Supply Chain Management for Space Application

Supply Chain Management (SCM) is a key piece of the framework for America's space technology investment as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the aerospace industry, and international partners embark on a bold new vision of human and robotic space exploration beyond Low-Earth-Orbit (LEO). This type of investment is driven by the Agency's need for cost efficient operational support associated with, processing and operating space vehicles and address many of the biggest operational challenge including extremely tight funding profiles, seamless program-to-program transition activities and the reduction of the time gap with human spaceflight capabilities in the post-Shuttle era. An investment of this magnitude is a multiyear task and must include new patterns of thought within the engineering community to respect the importance of SCM and the integration of the material and information flow. Experience within the Department of Defense and commercial sectors which has shown that support cost reductions and or avoidances of upwards to 35% over business as usual are achievable. It is SCM that will ultimately bring the solar system within the economic sphere of our society.

supply chain managemen↗

NASA NTRS2019

Pterodactyl: An Uncoupled Range Control Approach to Fully Numerical Predictor-Corrector Entry Guidance

Entry, descent, and landing (EDL) has been identified as a core area of investment in NASA's Strategic Technology Investment Plan (NASA STIP). STIP lists the space technologies needed to help achieve NASA's science, technology, and exploration goals across the agency. Within the EDL core area, deployable hypersonic decelerators, also known as deployable entry vehicles (DEVs), have been identified as an area of investment, due to its potential to revolutionize payload delivery methods to Earth and other planets. These vehicles, which can deploy their heat shields or alter their shape before entry, exploit an increased and more effective drag ratio by using less mass than traditional blunt body vehicles with rigid aeroshells. DEVs like Adaptive Deployable Entry and Placement Technology (ADEPT) and Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator (HIAD) have demonstrated the capability of transporting the equivalent science payloads of blunt body rigid aeroshells, while using a significantly smaller diameter when stowed within a launch vehicle. While DEVs' increased energy dissipation for less mass is an attractive feature, their ability to contract and expand would require advancements in the current state-of-the-art guidance and control (G&C) architectures used by traditional rigid vehicles. Pterodactyl, a project funded by NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), aims to provide feasible integrated G&C solutions for DEVs, complete with optimized vehicle designs and packaging analyses. Structural and aerodynamic analyses for the explored control systems suggested a need for a bank angle guidance algorithm, a heritage guidance approach that has been used in many entry precision targeting vehicles, as well as an additional need for the development of a non-bank angle guidance. For this reason, Pterodactyl will consider four different G&C configurations during its design phase: i) a reaction control system for bank (sigma) control, ii) a mass movement system for angle of attack (alpha) sideslip (beta) control, iii) flaps for alpha - beta control, and iv) flaps for sigma control. To increase the applicability of each proposed integrated G&C architecture, an 11 km/s lunar return demonstration mission is selected to stress the developed technology capability. The Lifting Nano-ADEPT (LNA) vehicle is chosen as the DEV to demonstrate the integrated solutions. This paper will detail the trajectory design for a lunar return mission, using the validated bank control guidance algorithm Fully Numerical Predictor-Corrector Entry Guidance (FNPEG) and a newly developed guidance algorithm: FNPEG Uncoupled Range Control (URC). FNPEG-URC diverges from traditional bank angle guidances by producing alpha and beta commands to thereby decouple downrange and crossrange control. This presentation will discuss the development and overall performance of FNPEG and FNPEG-URC for each of the four G&C configurations. Successful G&C configurations are defined as those that can deliver payloads to the intended descent and landing site while abiding by trajectory constraints in the face of dispersions.

Johnson, Breanna↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Gaps and Key Performance Parameters to Inform NASA Environmental Control and Life Support and Human Health and Performance Capability Technology Decisions

Human spaceflight is a complex endeavor requiring a multitude of capabilities for transportation, crew health, scientific goals, and safe return to Earth. The difference between spaceflight proven capabilities and those needed for a particular mission is defined as a capability gap. Capability gaps are not technology specific. Each capability gap is approachable with a wide array of technologies that have unique benefits and challenges. Determining what a capability’s relevant and distinguishing key performance parameters (KPPs) are for a mission is critical. Mass, power, and volume are always constrained and important, but defining these in a way normalized by performance is challenging. Additionally, KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are very important and still evolving. This paper provides the approach of the Environmental Control and Life Support – Crew Health and Performance (ECLSS-CHP) System Capability Leadership Team (SCLT) to defining gaps and KPPs in support of the NASA’s Capabilities Integration Team data call objectives. The nine ECLSS-CHP capability areas are decomposed to capabilities, gaps, and KPPs. Rather than defining very detailed gaps, ECLSS-CHP defines high-level gaps to be technology agnostic. Within a gap, detailed KPPs are defined to both compare technologies and measure progress within a technology over time. Ideally, KPPs are clearly defined, widely communicated both internally and externally, and provide a common nomenclature to describe the state of the art and the degree of improvement required for exploration missions. KPPs help define when the gap is closed and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Further technology improvements to enhance the capability, as measured by improved KPPs, must then be weighed against investments in open capability gaps that prevent NASA from achieving its exploration missions. It is uncommon that a technology maturation to improve all the relevant KPPs simultaneously but using KPPs is a critical technology investment decision making component. In addition to traditional technology selections, KPPs are informing how investments in ground testing prior to and in parallel with ISS technology demonstrations are required to improve reliability KPPs. The collection of all major technology activities within a capability area are captured on technology roadmaps to communicate how diverse program activities are coordinated to close gaps and infuse into exploration mission needs. A selection of ECLSS-CHP gaps and KPPs and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed. The paper will contain a summary of the approximately 60 gaps. Gaps are classified as to their type (architecture, knowledge, technology, developmental, or engineering) depending on the magnitude of the gap. The paper will provide brief overviews of a few major technology challenges and the technologies being considered, but will reference detailed papers for a more thorough treatment of the challenges and state of the art. Data analysis of the gaps is in work and results are not currently available for this abstract. It is anticipated the paper will include examples of select KPPs with descriptions as to why these are the relevant measures. Additionally some KPPs will be graphically presented over time to show progress to date and when performance targets need to be achieved to support exploration missions. Graphical summaries of how gaps closures with near term mission elements support follow-on mission elements will be provided.

Life Support↗

NASA NTRS2021

NASA Strategy for Technology Development

At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), foresight is a coordinated, iterative, and continual process for making informed decisions. NASA faces diverse and relatively unique challenges and opportunities as the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration. To address these challenges and leverage opportunities, NASA uses foresight to strategically plan technology development across four mission directorates: Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, Space Technology Mission Directorate, Science Mission Directorate, and Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate. The mission directorates leverage a broad community of experts and partners to incorporate technology foresight into mission and program planning. Through this process NASA realizes tangible benefits to the agency’s science, technology, and exploration programs. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT) serves as a trusted authority to inform technology strategy and advocacy at the agency, enabling future missions and advancing U.S. economic competitiveness. Specifically, OCT coordinates and uses inputs from abroad community of experts, both internal and external to NASA, to inform decision making for technology plans, investments, and partnerships. OCT develops the NASA Technology Taxonomy to standardize communication across the agency’s diverse technology portfolio and the related Strategic Technology Investment Plan that integrates priorities and informs technology investment. Through these efforts, OCT has refined elements of foresight-informed strategic planning that may be applicable to other technology-driven industries where foresight is essential for resilience. This chapter describes the processes of foresight for technology development at NASA and provides insight into the value the agency derives from these processes. The chapter further describes the role of OCT as an independent advisory office that supports NASA’s efforts to capitalize on foresight and strategic technology planning. We present these examples with consideration for how organizations in defense, security, and other technology-driven industries can operationalize foresight in their own strategic technology development.

Erica Rodgers↗

NASA NTRS2021

LMI Automated Air Cargo Operations Market Research and Forecast

Air cargo companies and aircraft manufacturers are making significant investments to enable the movement of cargo via various levels of automated aircraft, such as aircraft with simplified operations requiring a pilot, remotely monitored or piloted aircraft, and fully autonomous aircraft. These investments will enable greater utilization of aircraft while unlocking new air markets traditionally served by ground transportation only. Many cargo companies and aerospace experts envision an operating environment where a single pilot can remotely pilot numerous aircraft for significant increases in aircraft utilization. The future operating environment is also expected to include air cargo companies flying smaller aircraft from airports and distribution centers outside of major U.S. cities directly to city centers, avoiding congested roads and increasing the velocity of cargo shipments, particularly those that are high-value, time-sensitive, and security sensitive (e.g., pharmaceuticals). These are just a few benefits and use cases cargo companies and aerospace experts see with the advancement of automated aircraft. To better understand industry’s direction, NASA asked the LMI team to research the forecasted market, timeline, risks, and opportunities for integrating unmanned air cargo vehicles into the National Airspace System (NAS) for the development and prioritization of the NASA Air Traffic Management Exploration’s research portfolio. To begin the market assessment, we gathered data via numerous interviews with key stakeholders and subject matter experts and literature reviews. We then incorporated the data into a custom-developed systems dynamics model and visualization dashboard. The systems dynamics model classifies the size of the market (e.g., overall fleet size of automated aircraft) for four distinct use cases over the next 20 years. The model projects the year in which various types of automated aircraft will enter the commercial cargo market based on our team’s collective research on when the aircraft will become viable due to manufacturing and certification timelines and the lifespan of current, traditional aircraft in service, to name a few factors. While this report defines our team’s estimated timeline of entry and growth, the model is dynamic—it enables NASA users to change variables based on future-year events. If the necessary technology does not mature in accordance with our assumptions, then NASA can change the entry of service point to a future year to evaluate the changes in market size in the out years. This flexibility will be key to deciding when and how NASA should invest in various areas.

air traffic management↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Gaps and Key Performance Parameters to Inform NASA Environmental Control and Life Support and Human Health and Performance Capability Technology Decisions

Human spaceflight is a complex endeavor requiring multiple capabilities for transportation, crew health, scientific goals, and safe return to Earth. The difference between spaceflight proven capabilities and those needed for future exploration architectures is defined as a capability gap. Capability gaps are not technology specific. Each capability gap is approachable with a wide array of technologies that have unique benefits and challenges. Determining what a capability’s relevant and distinguishing key performance parameters (KPPs) are for a mission is critical. Mass, power, and volume are always constrained and important, but defining these in a way normalized by performance is challenging. Additionally, KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are very important and still evolving. This paper provides the approach of the Environmental Control and Life Support – Crew Health and Performance (ECLSS-CHP) System Capability Leadership Team (SCLT) has used to define gaps and KPPs in support of the NASA’s Capabilities Integration Team data call objectives. The nine ECLSS-CHP capability areas are decomposed to capabilities with ~76 gaps and supported with KPPs. Rather than defining very detailed gaps, ECLSS-CHP defines high-level gaps to be technology agnostic. Within a gap, detailed KPPs are defined to both compare technologies and measure progress within a technology over time. Ideally, KPPs are clearly defined, widely communicated both internally and externally, and provide a common nomenclature to describe the state of the art and the degree of improvement required for exploration missions. KPPs help define when the gap is closed, and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Further technology improvements to enhance the capability, as measured by improved KPPs, must then be weighed against investments in open capability gaps that prevent NASA from achieving its exploration missions. It is uncommon that a technology maturation to improve all the relevant KPPs simultaneously but using KPPs is a critical technology investment decision making component. In addition to traditional technology selections, KPPs are informing how investments in ground testing prior to and in parallel with ISS technology demonstrations are required to improve reliability KPPs. The collection of all major technology activities within a capability area are captured on technology roadmaps to communicate how diverse program activities are coordinated to close gaps and infuse into exploration mission needs. A selection of ECLSS-CHP gaps and KPPs and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed.

Life Support↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Strategy for Developing Technologies for Megawatt-class Nuclear Electric Propulsion Systems

In late fiscal year 2020, the Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) project began the process of formulating an investment strategy to support development of the technologies required for a high-power (megawatt-class) nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) system capable of performing human-scale missions. This activity was initiated concurrent with several high-level studies and assessments were either under way or had just concluded. Studies of human-scale Mars missions have been performed several times over the past two decades. One of the most recent studies examined opposition-class human Mars missions to occur in the late 2030s timeframe [1,2]. The mission architecture assumed a hybrid NEP/chem-propelled vehicle that used a high specific impulse (Isp) NEP-system and a liquid oxygen (LOx)-liquid methane high thrust chemical stage (two 110 kN (25 klbf) thrust, 365 s Isp engines) for maneuvers performed to enter and exit gravity wells. Trajectory analyses performed in this study showed that such a mission could be performed with 2-4 MWe directed into the electric propulsion system (operating for 20,000+ hours), with the large range representing different opposition-class Mars mission opportunities and permutations on the trajectory design, concept of operations, and technology choices. In 2020, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) performed a study to evaluate the maturity of the different technologies required for nuclear propulsion systems [3]. The executive summary of this report provided the following top-level conclusions: • “The majority of critical technologies for… NEP/Chem… systems are relatively immature” • “TRLs [technology readiness levels] in the literature are often overestimated” • “The majority of critical technologies… for NEP/Chem… systems are at a relatively high level of advancement degree of difficulty (AD2 > 4) for maturation, requiring a dual development approach” • “The proper assessment of baseline TRL and AD2 values and the estimation of requirements and resources required for advancement have been consistent issues for NEP,” • “Non-advocate reviews should occur at the start of a technology program and at all key milestones.” In 2021, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) issued a separate report [4] identifying the “primary technical and programmatic challenges, merits, and risks for maturing space nuclear propulsion technologies of interest to a future human Mars exploration mission.” That work contained several important findings, including: • “Developing a MWe-class NEP system for the baseline mission would require increasing power by orders of magnitude relative to NEP system flight- or ground-based technology demonstrations completed to date.” • “Subscale in-space flight testing of NEP systems cannot address many of the risks and potential failure modes associated with the baseline mission NEP system. With sufficient M&S [modeling & simulation] and ground testing, including modular subsystem tests at full scale and power, flight qualification requirements can be met by the cargo missions that will precede the first crewed mission to Mars. Fully integrated ground testing may not be required.” • “As a result of low and intermittent investment over the past several decades, it is unclear if even an aggressive program would be able to develop an NEP system capable of executing the baseline mission in 2039.” These efforts motivated the SNP project to investigate the technologies available for a megawatt-class high power nuclear electric propulsion system. That system is illustrated schematically in Figure 1 and is comprised of five separate top-level critical technology elements (CTEs). 1. Nuclear Reactor – Thermal power source for the system, utilizing high-assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) as the nuclear fuel. Reactor radiation shielding is also included in this CTE. 2. Power Conversion – Operates as a thermodynamic cycle, accepting nuclear reactor thermal power as an input and converting it to mechanical power. 3. Power Management and Distribution (PMAD) – Accepts as an input mechanical power from the power conversion system, which is used to generate electrical power. The PMAD system also distributes the generated electrical power to all other parts of the spacecraft, including the high-power EP system. The PMAD system may also perform duties such as isolation, fault detection, and power transformation/rectification for different spacecraft systems, including the thrusters. 4. Electric Propulsion (EP) – Accepts as an input electrical power, which is used to accelerate a propellant to high speeds to produce thrust. This system includes the power processing unit (PPU), which converts the power it receives to the correct current and voltage required by the thrusters, and the propellant storage and feed systems, which contain and meter the flow of propellant to the thrusters. 5. Thermal Management (Radiators/Heat Rejection) – The cold side of the thermodynamic power conversion cycle, accepts thermal power from the power conversion system and radiatively rejects that heat to space. In this paper, we describe the SNP project formulation and investment strategy that aims to accomplish the research and development required to advance the technology readiness for each CTE. The strategy relies heavily upon experimental testing supported by modeling and simulation to yield realistic assessments of the technologies, which in turn will be used to inform future NEP system-level design decisions and any potential technology downselects.

Kurt A Polzin↗