Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “technology roadmap”

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 415 records · Page 23
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2005

Solar Sail Roadmap Mission GN and C Challenges

The NASA In-Space Propulsion program is funding development work for solar sails to enhance future scientific opportunities. Key to this effort are scientific solar sail roadmap missions identified by peer review. The two near-term missions of interest are L1 Diamond and Solar Polar Imager. Additionally, the New Millennium Program is sponsoring the Space Technology 9 (ST9) demonstration mission. Solar sails are one of five technologies competing for the ST9 flight demonstration. Two candidate solar sail missions have been identified for a potential ST9 flight. All the roadmap missions and candidate flight demonstration missions face various GN&C challenges. A variety of efforts are underway to address these challenges. These include control actuator design and testing, low thrust optimization studies, attitude control system design and modeling, control-structure interaction studies, trajectory control design, and solar radiation pressure model development. Here we survey the various efforts underway and identify a few of specific recent interest and focus.

Heaton, Andrew F.↗
NASA NTRS1998

NASA's Deep Space Telecommunications Roadmap

This paper will present this roadmap, describe how it will support an increasing mission set while also providing significantly increased science data return, summarize the current state of key Ka-band and optical communications technologies, and identify critical path items in terms of technology developments, demonstrations, and mission users.

roadmap↗
NASA NTRS2008

Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle Upper Stage Element Overview

This viewgraph presentation gives an overview of NASA's Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle Upper Stage Element. The topics include: 1) What is NASA s Mission?; 2) NASA s Exploration Roadmap What is our time line?; 3) Building on a Foundation of Proven Technologies Launch Vehicle Comparisons; 4) Ares I Upper Stage; 5) Upper Stage Primary Products; 6) Ares I Upper Stage Development Approach; 7) What progress have we made?; 8) Upper Stage Subsystem Highlights; 9) Structural Testing; 10) Common Bulkhead Processing; 11) Stage Installation at Stennis Space Center; 12) Boeing Producibility Team; 13) Upper Stage Low Cost Strategy; 14) Ares I and V Production at Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF); 15) Merged Manufacturing Flow; and 16) Manufacturing and Assembly Weld Tools.

McArthur, J. Craig↗
NASA NTRS2012

Establishment of a Spaceport Network Architecture

Since the beginning of the space age, the main actors in space exploration have been governmental agencies, enabling a privileged access to space, but with very restricted and rare missions. The last decade has seen the rise of space tourism, and the founding of ambitious private space mining companies, showing the beginnings of a new exploration era, that is based on a more generalized and regular access to space and which is not limited to the Earth's vicinity. However, the cost of launching sufficient mass into orbit to sustain these inspiring challenges is prohibitive, and the necessary infrastructures to support these missions is still lacking. To provide easy and affordable access into orbital and deep space destinations, there is the need to create a network of spaceports via specific waypoint locations coupled with the use of natural resources, or In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), to provide a more economical solution. As part of the International Space University Space Studies Program 2012, the international and intercultural team of Operations and Service Infrastructure for Space (OASIS) proposes an interdisciplinary answer to the problem of economical space access and transportation. This paper presents a summary of a detailed report [1] of the different phases of a project for developing a network of spaceports throughout the Solar System in a timeframe of 50 years. The requirements, functions, critical technologies and mission architecture of this network of spaceports are outlined in a roadmap of the important steps and phases. The economic and financial aspects are emphasized in order to allow a sustainable development of the network in a public-private partnership via the formation of an International Spaceport Authority (ISPA). The approach includes engineering, scientific, financial, legal, policy, and societal aspects. Team OASIS intends to provide guidelines to make the development of space transportation via a spaceports logistics network feasible, and believes that this pioneering effort will revolutionize space exploration, science and commerce, ultimately contributing to permanently expand humanity into space.

Larson, Wiley J.↗
NASA NTRS2017

DDR Memories

This presentation will include information about Double Data Rate (DDR) technology, NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) tasks and their purpose, collaborations, a roadmap, NEPP partners, results to date, and future plans.

Double Data Rate (DDR)↗
NASA NTRS2018

Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) Devices

This presentation will include information about Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) technology, NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) tasks and their purpose, collaborations, a roadmap, NEPP partners, results to date, and future plans.

Single Event Effects (SEE)↗
NASA NTRS2018

Double Data Rate (DDR) Memory Devices

This presentation will include information about Double Data Rate (DDR) technology, NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) tasks and their purpose, collaborations, a roadmap, NEPP partners, results to date, and future plans.

NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Gaps and Performance Measures to Inform NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Systems and Crew Health and Performance 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 may be closed 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 very important. KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are hard to define but critical. Outside of technical considerations, the programmatic factors of the estimated time to develop the technology and how the technology validation objectives are matured are strong considerations in which technologies should be pursued and how they should leverage earlier mission elements. The Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) and Crew Health and Performance (CHP) capability areas are decomposed to high level gaps. While KPPs should be technology agnostic, they can be used to both compare technologies and measure progress of technology development over time. KPPs help define when the gap is closed, and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Proposed technology improvements to enhance a capability should balance improved KPPs and against investments in other capabilities that are not yet closed. A selection of gaps, KPPs, and validation objectives and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed.

Life Support↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Gaps and Key Performance Parameters to Inform NASA Environmental Control and Life Support 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 may be closed 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 very important. KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are hard to define but critical. Outside of technical considerations, the programmatic factors of the estimated time to develop the technology vs when a mission element is also a strong consideration in which technologies should be pursued. The Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) capability areas include: life support, environmental monitoring, fire safety, and logistics. These capability areas are decomposed to high level gaps. While KPPs should be technology agnostic, they can be used to both compare technologies and measure progress of technology development over time. KPPs help define when the gap is closed, and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Proposed technology improvements to enhance a capability should balance improved KPPs and against investments in other capabilities that are not yet closed. A selection of ECLSS gaps and KPPs and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed.

Life Support↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Gaps and Performance Measures to Inform NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Systems 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 may be closed 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 very important. KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are hard to define but critical. Outside of technical considerations, the programmatic factors of the estimated time to develop the technology and how the technology validation objectives are matured are strong considerations in which technologies should be pursued and how they should leverage earlier mission elements. The Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) and Crew Health and Performance (CHP) capability areas are decomposed to high level gaps. While KPPs should be technology agnostic, they can be used to both compare technologies and measure progress of technology development over time. KPPs help define when the gap is closed, and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Proposed technology improvements to enhance a capability should balance improved KPPs and against investments in other capabilities that are not yet closed. A selection of gaps, KPPs, and validation objectives and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed.

Life Support↗
NASA NTRS2016

A Vision and Roadmap for Increasing User Autonomy in Flight Operations in the National Airspace

The purpose of Air Transportation is to move people and cargo safely, efficiently and swiftly to their destinations. The companies and individuals who use aircraft for this purpose, the airspace users, desire to operate their aircraft according to a dynamically optimized business trajectory for their specific mission and operational business model. In current operations, the dynamic optimization of business trajectories is limited by constraints built into operations in the National Airspace System (NAS) for reasons of safety and operational needs of the air navigation service providers. NASA has been developing and testing means to overcome many of these constraints and permit operations to be conducted closer to the airspace user's changing business trajectory as conditions unfold before and during the flight. A roadmap of logical steps progressing toward increased user autonomy is proposed, beginning with NASA's Traffic Aware Strategic Aircrew Requests (TASAR) concept that enables flight crews to make informed, deconflicted flight-optimization requests to air traffic control. These steps include the use of data communications for route change requests and approvals, integration with time-based arrival flow management processes under development by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), increased user authority for defining and modifying downstream, strategic portions of the trajectory, and ultimately application of self-separation. This progression takes advantage of existing FAA NextGen programs and RTCA standards development, and it is designed to minimize the number of hardware upgrades required of airspace users to take advantage of these advanced capabilities to achieve dynamically optimized business trajectories in NAS operations. The roadmap is designed to provide operational benefits to first adopters so that investment decisions do not depend upon a large segment of the user community becoming equipped before benefits can be realized. The issues of equipment certification and operational approval of new procedures are addressed in a way that minimizes their impact on the transition by deferring a change in the assignment of separation responsibility until a large body of operational data is available to support the safety case for this change in the last roadmap step.This paper will relate the roadmap steps to ongoing activities to clarify the economics-based transition to these technologies for operational use.

Cotton, William B.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Far Term Noise Reduction Roadmap for the NASA D8 and Single-Aisle Tube-And-Wing Aircraft Concepts

A portfolio of noise reduction technologies is applied to two advanced single-aisle class vehicle concepts in order to evaluate the prospects for these aircraft to meet the NASA Far Term noise goals, beyond 2035. TheNASAD8 (ND8) aircraft is an unconventional configuration with boundary-layer ingesting engines mounted in the aft dorsal location. The 160-passenger tube-and-wing (TW160) aircraft is a conventional configuration with podded engines located under the wing, which represents an incremental evolution of current design philosophies. The noise reduction technologies were chosen to be compatible with each aircraft’s specific configuration requirements. The acoustic effects were predicted based on experimental and numerical studies, andwere incorporated into the prediction of total system noise usingNASA’s research-level Aircraft NOise Prediction Program (ANOPP-Research). Results suggest that the unfavorable Propulsion Airframe Aeroacoustic (PAA) effects of the two aircraft considered here significantly limit their prospects of meeting NASA’s Far Term noise goal, and that further development of the technology portfolio is key to ensuring future success in addressing the noise challenges for single-aisle class vehicles.

Clark, Ian A.↗
NASA NTRS2006

BAE Systems Radiation Hardened SpaceWire ASIC and Roadmap

An Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) that implements the SpaceWire protocol has been developed in a radiation hardened 0.25 micron CMOS, technology. This effort began in March 2003 as a joint development between the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and BAE Systems. The BAE Systems SpaceWire ASlC is comprised entirely of reusable core elements, many of which are already flight-proven. It incorporates a 4-port SpaceWire router with two local ports, dual PC1 bus interfaces, a microcontroller, 32KB of internal memory, -and a memory controller for additional external memory use. The SpaceWire ASlC is planned for use on both the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites (GOES)-R and the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO). Engineering parts have already been delivered to both programs. This paper discusses the SpaceWire protocol and those elements of it that have been built into the current SpaceWire reusable core. There are features within the core that go beyond the current standard that can be enabled or disabled by the user and these will be described. The adaptation of SpaceWire to BAE Systems' On Chip Bus (OCB) for compatibility with the other reusable cores will be discussed. Optional configurations within user systems will be shown. The physical imp!ementation of the design will be described and test results from the hardware will be discussed. Finally, the BAE Systems roadmap for SpaceWire developments will be discussed, including some products already in design as well as longer term plans.

Berger, Richard↗
NASA NTRS2000

The Critical Path Roadmap Project: Biomedical Risk Reduction for Extended Spaceflight

Human exploration of space requires an understanding of the risks to which crews will be exposed during such missions, and the mitigation of those risks to the fullest extent practical. This becomes a greater imperative as we prepare for interplanetary expeditions involving long periods in weightlessness in transit to and then from the destination (a planet, such as Mars, or perhaps a point in space, such as the Lagrangian point L2), and exposure to the unique environment of the destination itself. We need to know, more definitively, what the risks are to human health, safety, and performance, and how to prevent or counteract them throughout all phases of a long duration mission. The Johnson Space Center's Space and Life Sciences Directorate and the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI) have implemented an effort to identify the most critical risks confronting humans on such mission and the types of research and technology efforts required to mitigate and otherwise reduce the probability and severity of those risks. This paper describes the "Critical Path Roadmap Project" to define, assess and prioritize the risks and present the results of the assessment with an emphasis on the research and technology priorities to meet the challenge of long duration human spaceflight mission.

Charles, John B.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Relay Telecommunications for the Coming Decade of Mars Exploration

Over the past decade, an evolving network of relay-equipped orbiters has advanced our capabilities for Mars exploration. NASA's Mars Global Surveyor, 2001 Mars Odyssey, and Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO), as well as ESA's Mars Express Orbiter, have provided telecommunications relay services to the 2003 Mars Exploration Rovers, Spirit and Opportunity, and to the 2007 Phoenix Lander. Based on these successes, a roadmap for continued Mars relay services is in place for the coming decade. MRO and Odyssey will provide key relay support to the 2011 Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) mission, including capture of critical event telemetry during entry, descent, and landing, as well as support for command and telemetry during surface operations, utilizing new capabilities of the Electra relay payload on MRO and the Electra-Lite payload on MSL to allow significant increase in data return relative to earlier missions. Over the remainder of the decade a number of additional orbiter and lander missions are planned, representing new orbital relay service providers and new landed relay users. In this paper we will outline this Mars relay roadmap, quantifying relay performance over time, illustrating planned support scenarios, and identifying key challenges and technology infusion opportunities.

Edwards, C.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Technology Development for the Advanced Technology Large Aperture Space Telescope (ATLAST) as a Candidate Large UV-Optical-Infrared (LUVOIR) Surveyor

The Advanced Technology Large Aperture Space Telescope (ATLAST) team has identified five key technologies to enable candidate architectures for the future large-aperture ultraviolet/optical/infrared (LUVOIR) space observatory envisioned by the NASA Astrophysics 30-year roadmap, Enduring Quests, Daring Visions. The science goals of ATLAST address a broad range of astrophysical questions from early galaxy and star formation to the processes that contributed to the formation of life on Earth, combining general astrophysics with direct-imaging and spectroscopy of habitable exoplanets. The key technologies are: internal coronagraphs, starshades (or external occulters), ultra-stable large-aperture telescopes, detectors, and mirror coatings. Selected technology performance goals include: 1x1010 raw contrast at an inner working angle of 35 milli-arcseconds, wavefront error stability on the order of 10 pm RMS per wavefront control step, autonomous on-board sensing & control, and zero-read-noise single-photon detectors spanning the exoplanet science bandpass between 400 nm and 1.8 μm. Development of these technologies will provide significant advances over current and planned observatories in terms of sensitivity, angular resolution, stability, and high-contrast imaging. The science goals of ATLAST are presented and flowed down to top-level telescope and instrument performance requirements in the context of a reference architecture: a 10-meter-class, segmented aperture telescope operating at room temperature (~290 K) at the sun-Earth Lagrange-2 point. For each technology area, we define best estimates of required capabilities, current state-of-the-art performance, and current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) - thus identifying the current technology gap. We report on current, planned, or recommended efforts to develop each technology to TRL 5.

Technology Development↗
NASA NTRS2004

The Vision for Space Exploration

With last year's budget, NASA released a new Strategic Plan outlining a new approach to space exploration using a 'building block' strategy to explore scientifically valuable destinations across our solar system. At the same time that we released the Strategic Plan, our Nation and the NASA family also suffered the loss of the seven brave astronauts aboard the Space Shuttle Columbia. The report of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board emphasized the need for a clearer direction from which to drive NASA's human exploration agenda. On January 14, 2004, the President articulated a new vision for space exploration. You hold in your hands a new, bolder framework for exploring our solar system that builds upon the policy that was announced by the President after months of careful deliberations within the Administration. This plan does not undertake exploration merely for the sake of adventure, however exciting that may be, but seeks answers to profound scientific and philosophical questions, responds to recent discoveries, will put in place revolutionary technologies and capabilities for the future, and will genuinely inspire our Nation, the world, and the next generation. Our aim is to explore in a sustainable, affordable, and flexible manner. We believe the principles and roadmap set down in this document will stand the test of time. Its details will be subject to revision and expansion as new discoveries are made, new technologies are applied, and new challenges are met and overcome. This plan is guided by the Administration's new space exploration policy, 'A Renewed Spirit of Discovery: The President's Vision for U.S. Space Exploration,' a copy of which is provided on the following pages. NASA is releasing this plan simultaneously with NASA's FY 2005 Budget Justification. This plan is fiscally responsible, consistent with the Administration s goal of cutting the budget deficit in half within the next five years. I cannot overstate how much NASA will change in the coming years as this plan is implemented. I also cannot overstate how profound the rewards will be on this new course. With the support of Congress, the science community, the NASA civil and contractor workforce, and most importantly, the American public, we will embark on this very exciting future. When Christopher Columbus made his voyages across the Atlantic in the 15th and 16th centuries, his ships carried the inscription 'Following the light of the sun, we left the Old World.' I look forward to joining you as we follow the light of the planets and the stars into the new worlds of the 21st century.

Source record↗