Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “#technology”

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 433 records · Page 24

Electric Power System Technology Options for Lunar Surface Missions

In 2004, the President announced a 'Vision for Space Exploration' that is bold and forward-thinking, yet practical and responsible. The vision explores answers to longstanding questions of importance to science and society and will develop revolutionary technologies and capabilities for the future, while maintaining good stewardship of taxpayer dollars. One crucial technology area enabling all space exploration is electric power systems. In this paper, the author evaluates surface power technology options in order to identify leading candidate technologies that will accomplish lunar design reference mission three (LDRM-3). LDRM-3 mission consists of multiple, 90-day missions to the lunar South Pole with 4-person crews starting in the year 2020. Top-level power requirements included a nominal 50 kW continuous habitat power over a 5-year lifetime with back-up or redundant emergency power provisions and a nominal 2-kW, 2-person unpressurized rover. To help direct NASA's technology investment strategy, this lunar surface power technology evaluation assessed many figures of merit including: current technology readiness levels (TRLs), potential to advance to TRL 6 by 2014, effectiveness of the technology to meet the mission requirements in the specified time, mass, stowed volume, deployed area, complexity, required special ground facilities, safety, reliability/redundancy, strength of industrial base, applicability to other LDRM-3 elements, extensibility to Mars missions, costs, and risks. For the 50-kW habitat module, dozens of nuclear, radioisotope and solar power technologies were down-selected to a nuclear fission heat source with Brayton, Stirling or thermoelectric power conversion options. Preferred energy storage technologies included lithium-ion battery and Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) Regenerative Fuel Cells (RFC). Several AC and DC power management and distribution architectures and component technologies were defined consistent with the preferred habitat power generation technology option and the overall lunar surface mission. For rover power, more than 20 technology options were down-selected to radioisotope Stirling, liquid lithium-ion battery, PEM RFC, or primary fuel cell options. The author discusses various conclusions that can be drawn from the findings of this surface power technologies evaluation.

Kerslake, Thomas W.↗

Emerging Propulsion Technologies

The Emerging Propulsion Technologies (EPT) investment area is the newest area within the In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) Project and strives to bridge technologies in the lower Technology Readiness Level (TRL) range (2 to 3) to the mid TRL range (4 to 6). A prioritization process, the Integrated In-Space Transportation Planning (IISTP), was developed and applied in FY01 to establish initial program priorities. The EPT investment area emerged for technologies that scored well in the IISTP but had a low technical maturity level. One particular technology, the Momentum-eXchange Electrodynamic-Reboost (MXER) tether, scored extraordinarily high and had broad applicability in the IISTP. However, its technical maturity was too low for ranking alongside technologies like the ion engine or aerocapture. Thus MXER tethers assumed top priority at EPT startup in FY03 with an aggressive schedule and adequate budget. It was originally envisioned that future technologies would enter the ISP portfolio through EPT, and EPT developed an EPT/ISP Entrance Process for future candidate ISP technologies. EPT has funded the following secondary, candidate ISP technologies at a low level: ultra-lightweight solar sails, general space/near-earth tether development, electrodynamic tether development, advanced electric propulsion, and in-space mechanism development. However, the scope of the ISPT program has focused over time to more closely match SMD needs and technology advancement successes. As a result, the funding for MXER and other EPT technologies is not currently available. Consequently, the MXER tether tasks and other EPT tasks were expected to phased out by November 2006. Presentation slides are presented which provide activity overviews for the aerocapture technology and emerging propulsion technology projects.

Keys, Andrew S.↗

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↗

ExMC Technology Watch

The Technology Watch (Tech Watch) project is a NASA endeavor conducted under the Human Research Program's (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element, and focusing on ExMC technology gaps. The project involves several NASA centers, including the Johnson Space Center (JSC), Glenn Research Center (GRC), Ames Research Center (ARC), and the Langley Research Center (LaRC). The objective of Tech Watch is to identify emerging, high-impact technologies that augment current NASA HRP technology development efforts. Identifying such technologies accelerates the development of medical care and research capabilities for the mitigation of potential health issues encountered during human space exploration missions. The aim of this process is to leverage technologies developed by academia, industry and other government agencies and to identify the effective utilization of NASA resources to maximize the HRP return on investment. The establishment of collaborations with these entities is beneficial to technology development, assessment and/or insertion and further NASA's goal to provide a safe and healthy environment for human exploration. In 2011, the major focus areas for Tech Watch included information dissemination, education outreach and public accessibility to technology gaps and gap reports. The dissemination of information was accomplished through site visits to research laboratories and/or companies, and participation at select conferences where Tech Watch objectives and technology gaps were presented. Presentation of such material provided researchers with insights on NASA ExMC needs for space exploration and an opportunity to discuss potential areas of common interest. The second focus area, education outreach, was accomplished via two mechanisms. First, several senior student projects, each related to an ExMC technology gap, were sponsored by the various NASA centers. These projects presented ExMC related technology problems firsthand to collegiate laboratories. Second, a RASC-AL (Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concepts - Academic Linkage) topic for FY12 was developed for medical systems and astronaut health under the Human-Focused Mars Mission Systems and Technologies theme. Announcement of the competition was made to the public in August 2011. Finally, critical Tech Watch information was prepared for public release in the form of gap reports. Complementing the ExMC technology gaps in the public domain, gap reports were generated, reviewed and revised through a series of technical, medical and subject matter expert reviews before approval for public release. An important vehicle for the public release of such documents was development of the ExMC wiki website, which will continue to be populated with gap reports and relevant documents throughout the upcoming year.

Exploration medical capability↗

The Residuum-Those Who Technology Leaves Behind

The introduction of new technologies has direct and indirect advantages and disadvantages on societies. As the relentless pace of technology increases, societies have to adjust, accommodate, integrate or reject the latest invention or innovation. Many people even experience the unintended consequences associated with these technologies. Some technologies appear to have a stabilizing effect on society (where the technology lifts all of society) while other technologies appear disruptive with unsettling effects(benefits are shared by a few with previously established firms being displaced). In this latter case, companies with the most disruptive technologies provide benefits but also gain market share by decimating their competitors. Those in society who have the means or the opportunity to seize the benefits of advanced technologies undoubtedly gain efficiencies of time and effectiveness while those who cannot afford or those who chose not to adopt these same technologies unfortunately fall behind. During the present worldwide pandemic, schools have physically closed their doors causing the mto pursue virtual classrooms. How will the teachers and children without internet access in their homes compare to those who do? In the near future, increased automation will lead to some reduction in the full-time workforce. A co-worker recently improved her skills in a fortuitous technical discipline. Others did not. Who should be held responsible for reskilling? Stated another way, who should be held responsible for finding new employment opportunities?In the distant future, parents who incorporated genetically enhanced benefits during childbirth will have offspring who will probably advance beyond those who cannot afford the technology. In these various ways, who should be held responsible for those who technology leaves behind?Are those left behind simply those who suffer inequality or is there something more?Should the semi-transparent hand of technology be allowed to roam freely through society selecting the survival of the fittest as it chooses? Should the invisible hand of the financial market make the decisions? Or, should governments and companies bear some responsibility by crafting policies to mitigate the consequences to those cast aside by the technology? This paper will endeavor to address some of the underlying issues of this question while attempting to find a set of sensible solutions to this problem.

Residuum↗

NASA Lunar Surface Innovation Initiative: Ensuring a Cohesive, Executable Strategy for Technology Development

Establishing a sustainable human presence on the Moon allows NASA to develop and test new approaches, technologies, and systems that will enable us to function in other, more challenging environments. The Lunar Surface Innovation Initiative (LSII) was established in 2019 and has evolved into a key agency asset to spur technology development and provide risk reduction for lunar surface system development and flight demonstrations. LSII coordinates activities implemented through a combination of in-house activities, competitive programs, and public-private partnerships to create transformative technologies needed for lunar surface exploration. This paper will outline the LSII model used to develop a technology pipeline that will retire the primary technology hurdles in six capability areas. In-situ resource utilization technologies for collecting, processing, storing, and using material found or manufactured on the Moon. Surface power technologies that provide the capability for sustainable, continuous power throughout the day and night for lunar missions. Dust mitigation strategies that diminish lunar dust hazards on lunar surface systems such as cameras, solar panels, space suits, habitats, and instrumentation. Extreme environments technologies that enable systems to operate throughout the full range of lunar surface conditions, including lunar noon (up to 150 at the equator), night (down to - 180 at the equator), multiple day/night cycles, and in permanently shadowed regions (down to -250). Extreme access technologies that enable humans or robotic systems to access, navigate, and explore previously inaccessible lunar surface or subsurface areas. Excavation and construction technologies that will allow affordable, autonomous manufacturing or construction. We outline key results, including milestones and achievements related to the capability areas and outcomes from partnerships with the commercial sector. A key tenet of the LSII is the Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC), a collaboration across industry, academia, and government to successfully develop the transformative capabilities for lunar surface exploration. LSIC provides a forum for NASA to communicate technological requirements, needs, and opportunities and for the community to share existing capabilities and identify critical gaps with NASA. By working side by side with commercial enterprises and our international partners, NASA is able to combine the knowledge and expertise needed to explore the lunar surface and make technical advances that will feed technological and economic growth. Since its inception, LSII has engaged over 600 organizations across the United States and 46 countries to shape the technologies and systems needed to explore the lunar surface and stimulate a lunar surface economy.

lunar, lunar surface, technology development, ISRU↗

NASA Lunar Surface Innovation Initiative: Ensuring a Cohesive, Executable Strategy for Technology

Establishing a sustainable human presence on the Moon allows NASA to develop and test new approaches, technologies, and systems that will enable us to function in other, more challenging environments. The Lunar Surface Innovation Initiative (LSII) was established in 2019 and has evolved into a key agency asset to spur technology development and provide risk reduction for lunar surface system development and flight demonstrations. LSII coordinates activities implemented through a combination of in-house activities, competitive programs, and public-private partnerships to create transformative technologies needed for lunar surface exploration. This paper will outline the LSII model used to develop a technology pipeline that will retire the primary technology hurdles in six capability areas. In-situ resource utilization technologies for collecting, processing, storing, and using material found or manufactured on the Moon. Surface power technologies that provide the capability for sustainable, continuous power throughout the day and night for lunar missions. Dust mitigation strategies that diminish lunar dust hazards on lunar surface systems such as cameras, solar panels, space suits, habitats, and instrumentation. Extreme environments technologies that enable systems to operate throughout the full range of lunar surface conditions, including lunar noon (up to 150 at the equator), night (down to - 180 at the equator), multiple day/night cycles, and in permanently shadowed regions (down to -250). Extreme access technologies that enable humans or robotic systems to access, navigate, and explore previously inaccessible lunar surface or subsurface areas. Excavation and construction technologies that will allow affordable, autonomous manufacturing or construction. We outline key results, including milestones and achievements related to the capability areas and outcomes from partnerships with the commercial sector. A key tenet of the LSII is the Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC), a collaboration across industry, academia, and government to successfully develop the transformative capabilities for lunar surface exploration. LSIC provides a forum for NASA to communicate technological requirements, needs, and opportunities and for the community to share existing capabilities and identify critical gaps with NASA. By working side by side with commercial enterprises and our international partners, NASA is able to combine the knowledge and expertise needed to explore the lunar surface and make technical advances that will feed technological and economic growth. Since its inception, LSII has engaged over 600 organizations across the United States and 46 countries to shape the technologies and systems needed to explore the lunar surface and stimulate a lunar surface economy.

Lunar↗

Using bibliographic databases in technology transfer

When technology developed for a specific purpose is used in another application, the process is called technology transfer--the application of an existing technology to a new use or user for purposes other than those for which the technology was originally intended. Using Bibliographical Databases in Technology Transfer deals with demand-pull transfer, technology transfer that arises from need recognition, and is a guide for conducting demand-pull technology transfer studies. It can be used by a researcher as a self-teaching manual or by an instructor as a classroom text. A major problem of technology transfer is finding applicable technology to transfer. Described in detail is the solution to this problem, the use of computerized, bibliographic databases, which currently contain virtually all documented technology of the past 15 years. A general framework for locating technology is described. NASA technology organizations and private technology transfer firms are listed for consultation.

Huffman, G. David↗

Excursions in technology policy

This technical report presents a summary of three distinct projects: (1) Measuring economic benefits; (2) Evaluating the SBIR program; and (3) A model for evaluating changes in support for science and technology. the first project deals with the Technology Applications Group (TAG) at NASA Langley Research Center. The mission of TAG is to assist firms interested in commercializing technologies. TAG is a relatively new group as is the emphasis on technology commercialization for NASA. One problem faced by TAG and similar groups at other centers is measuring their effectiveness. The first project this summer, a paper entitled, 'Measuring the Economic Benefits of Technology Transfer from a National Laboratory: A Primer,' focused on this measurement problem. We found that the existing studies of the impact of technology transfer on the economy were conceptually flawed. The 'primer' outlines the appropriate theoretical framework for measuring the economic benefits of technology transfer. The second project discusses, one of the programs of TAG, the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program. This program has led to over 400 contracts with Small Business since its inception in 1985. The program has never been evaluated. Crucial questions such as those about the extent of commercial successes from the contracts need to be answered. This summer we designed and implemented a performance evaluation survey instrument. The analysis of the data will take place in the fall. The discussion of the third project focuses on a model for evaluating changes in support for science and technology. At present several powerful forces are combining to change the environment for science and technology policy. The end of the cold war eliminated the rationale for federal support for many projects. The new- found Congressional conviction to balance the budget without tax increases combined with demographic changes which automatically increase spending for some politically popular programs will make it difficult to find funding for science and technology. Also, the two political parties have very different conceptions of the appropriate future for research and development spending. All these changes create the potential for serious, perhaps unintended, consequences for the economic future of the country. In a paper entitled, 'A Conceptual Framework for Evaluating the Impact of Changes in Federal Support for Science and Technology,' we introduce a model to evaluate the effects of changes in federal spending for science and technology. This paper both provides a way of organizing informed discussions and points out important research topics for science and technology policy.

Archibald, Robert B.↗

Commercializing Defense Technologies and Helping Defense Firms Succeed in Commercial Markets: A Report on the Objectives, Activities, and Accomplishments of the TAP-IN Program

Technology Access for Product Innovation (TAP-IN), the largest technology deployment project funded by TRP, was competitively selected through a national solicitation for proposals. TAP-IN was created to help companies access and apply defense technologies and help defense-dependent companies enter new commercial markets. Defense technologies included technologies developed by DoD, DOE, NASA, and their contractors. TAP-IN was structured to provide region-based technology access services that were able to draw on technology resources nationwide. TAP-IN provided expert assistance in all stages of the commercialization process from concept through prototype design to capital sourcing and marketing strategy. TAP-IN helped companies locate new technology, identify business partners, secure financing, develop ideas for new products, identify new markets, license technology, solve technical problems, and develop company-specific applications of federal technology. TAP-IN leveraged NASA's existing commercial technology network to create an integrated national network of organizations that assisted companies in every state. In addition to NASA's six regional technology transfer centers (RTTCs), TAP-IN included business and technology development organizations in every state, the Industrial Designers Society of America, and the Federal Laboratory Consortium (FLC).

Source record↗

A Lunar Surface System Supportability Technology Development Roadmap

This paper discusses the establishment of a Supportability Technology Development Roadmap as a guide for developing capabilities intended to allow NASA's Constellation program to enable a supportable, sustainable and affordable exploration of the Moon and Mars. Presented is a discussion of "supportability", in terms of space facility maintenance, repair and related logistics and a comparison of how lunar outpost supportability differs from the International Space Station. Supportability lessons learned from NASA and Department of Defense experience and their impact on a future lunar outpost is discussed. A supportability concept for future missions to the Moon and Mars that involves a transition from a highly logistics dependent to a logistically independent operation is discussed. Lunar outpost supportability capability needs are summarized and a supportability technology development strategy is established. The resulting Lunar Surface Systems Supportability Strategy defines general criteria that will be used to select technologies that will enable future flight crews to act effectively to respond to problems and exploit opportunities in a environment of extreme resource scarcity and isolation. This strategy also introduces the concept of exploiting flight hardware as a supportability resource. The technology roadmap involves development of three mutually supporting technology categories, Diagnostics Test & Verification, Maintenance & Repair, and Scavenging & Recycling. The technology roadmap establishes two distinct technology types, "Embedded" and "Process" technologies, with different implementation and thus different criteria and development approaches. The supportability technology roadmap addresses the technology readiness level, and estimated development schedule for technology groups that includes down-selection decision gates that correlate with the lunar program milestones. The resulting supportability technology roadmap is intended to develop a set of technologies with widest possible capability and utility with a minimum impact on crew time and training and remain within the time and cost constraints of the Constellation program

Oeftering, Richard C.↗

A Lunar Surface System Supportability Technology Development Roadmap

This paper discusses the establishment of a Supportability Technology Development Roadmap as a guide for developing capabilities intended to allow NASA s Constellation program to enable a supportable, sustainable and affordable exploration of the Moon and Mars. Presented is a discussion of supportability, in terms of space facility maintenance, repair and related logistics and a comparison of how lunar outpost supportability differs from the International Space Station. Supportability lessons learned from NASA and Department of Defense experience and their impact on a future lunar outpost is discussed. A supportability concept for future missions to the Moon and Mars that involves a transition from a highly logistics dependent to a logistically independent operation is discussed. Lunar outpost supportability capability needs are summarized and a supportability technology development strategy is established. The resulting Lunar Surface Systems Supportability Strategy defines general criteria that will be used to select technologies that will enable future flight crews to act effectively to respond to problems and exploit opportunities in an environment of extreme resource scarcity and isolation. This strategy also introduces the concept of exploiting flight hardware as a supportability resource. The technology roadmap involves development of three mutually supporting technology categories, Diagnostics Test and Verification, Maintenance and Repair, and Scavenging and Recycling. The technology roadmap establishes two distinct technology types, "Embedded" and "Process" technologies, with different implementation and thus different criteria and development approaches. The supportability technology roadmap addresses the technology readiness level, and estimated development schedule for technology groups that includes down-selection decision gates that correlate with the lunar program milestones. The resulting supportability technology roadmap is intended to develop a set of technologies with widest possible capability and utility with a minimum impact on crew time and training and remain within the time and cost constraints of the Constellation program.

Oeftering, Richard C.↗

Status of NASA In-Space Propulsion Technologies and Their Infusion Potential

Since 2001, the In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) program has been developing in-space propulsion technologies that will enable or enhance NASA robotic science missions. These in-space propulsion technologies have broad applicability to future competed Discovery and New Frontiers mission solicitations, and are potentially enabling for future NASA flagship and sample return missions currently being considered. This paper provides status of the technology development of several in-space propulsion technologies that are ready for infusion into future missions. The technologies that are ready for flight infusion are: 1) the high-temperature Advanced Material Bipropellant Rocket (AMBR) engine providing higher performance; 2) NASA s Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion propulsion system, a 0.6-7 kW throttle-able gridded ion system; and 3) Aerocapture technology development with investments in a family of thermal protection system (TPS) materials and structures; guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) models of blunt-body rigid aeroshells; and aerothermal effect models. Two component technologies that will be ready for flight infusion in FY12/13 are 1) Advanced Xenon Flow Control System, and 2) ultra-lightweight propellant tank technology advancements and their infusion potential will be also discussed. The paper will also describe the ISPT project s future focus on propulsion for sample return missions: 1) Mars Ascent Vehicles (MAV); 2) multi-mission technologies for Earth Entry Vehicles (MMEEV) needed for sample return missions from many different destinations; and 3) electric propulsion for sample return and low cost missions. These technologies are more vehicle-focused, and present a different set of technology infusion challenges. Systems/Mission Analysis focused on developing tools and assessing the application of propulsion technologies to a wide variety of mission concepts.

Anderson, David↗

ExMC Technology Watch

The Technology Watch (Tech Watch) project is a NASA endeavor conducted under the Human Research Programs (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element, and focusing on ExMC technology gaps. The project involves several NASA centers, including the Johnson Space Center (JSC), Glenn Research Center (GRC), Ames Research Center (ARC), and the Langley Research Center (LaRC). The objective of Tech Watch is to identify emerging, high-impact technologies that augment current NASA HRP technology development efforts. Identifying such technologies accelerates the development of medical care and research capabilities for the mitigation of potential health issues encountered during human space exploration missions. The aim of this process is to leverage technologies developed by academia, industry and other government agencies and to identify the effective utilization of NASA resources to maximize the HRP return on investment. The establishment of collaborations with these entities is beneficial to technology development, assessment and/or insertion and further NASAs goal to provide a safe and healthy environment for human exploration. In 2011, the major focus areas for Tech Watch included information dissemination, education outreach and public accessibility to technology gaps and gap reports. The dissemination of information was accomplished through site visits to research laboratories and/or companies, and participation at select conferences where Tech Watch objectives and technology gaps were presented. Presentation of such material provided researchers with insights on NASA ExMC needs for space exploration and an opportunity to discuss potential areas of common interest. The second focus area, education outreach, was accomplished via two mechanisms. First, several senior student projects, each related to an ExMC technology gap, were sponsored by the various NASA centers. These projects presented ExMC related technology problems firsthand to collegiate laboratories. Second, a RASC-AL (Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concepts Academic Linkage) topic for FY12 was developed for medical systems and astronaut health under the Human-Focused Mars Mission Systems and Technologies theme. Announcement of the competition was made to the public in August 2011. Finally, critical Tech Watch information was prepared for public release in the form of gap reports. Complementing the ExMC technology gaps in the public domain, gap reports were generated, reviewed and revised through a series of technical, medical and subject matter expert reviews before approval for public release. An important vehicle for the public release of such documents was development of the ExMC wiki website, which will continue to be populated with gap reports and relevant documents throughout the upcoming year.

Krihak, M.↗

The Habitable Worlds Observatory Technology Development Plan

The Habitable Worlds Observatory (HWO) is NASA’s next large space telescope, selected by the 2020 Decadal Survey in Astronomy and Astrophysics to search for and characterize habitable exoplanets while enabling a broad range of transformative astrophysics. In August 2024, the HWO Technology Maturation Project Office (TMPO) was formed to begin exploring the HWO science, technology, and mission architectures toward a Mission Concept Review (MCR) at the end of the decade. A primary deliverable of this effort is a technology development plan that identifies critical technologies that enable the mission, defines a process for assessing the readiness of those technologies, and outlines a strategy for developing those technologies to a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 5 before the MCR. In this paper we summarize the HWO technology development plan which comprises three “tracks”: Coronagraph System technologies, Ultra-stable Telescope System technologies, and High-sensitivity Ultraviolet and Visible Instrumentation technologies. Each track has completed an initial assessment of technology gaps, prioritized the gaps for investment, and laid out development roadmaps to mature candidate technologies to close those gaps.

Matthew R Bolcar↗

Planetary Science Technology Infusion Study: Findings and Recommendations Status

The Planetary Science Division (PSD) within the National Aeronautics and Space Administrations (NASA) Science Mission Directorate (SMD) at NASA Headquarters sought to understand how to better realize a scientific return on spacecraft system technology investments currently being funded. In order to achieve this objective, a team at NASA Glenn Research Center was tasked with surveying the science and mission communities to collect their insight on technology infusion and additionally sought inputs from industry, universities, and other organizations involved with proposing for future PSD missions. This survey was undertaken by issuing a Request for Information (RFI) activity that requested input from the proposing community on present technology infusion efforts. The Technology Infusion Study was initiated in March 2013 with the release of the RFI request. The evaluation team compiled and assessed this input in order to provide PSD with recommendations on how to effectively infuse new spacecraft systems technologies that it develops into future competed missions enabling increased scientific discoveries, lower mission cost, or both. This team is comprised of personnel from the Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) Program and the In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) Program staff.The RFI survey covered two aspects of technology infusion: 1) General Insight, including: their assessment of barriers to technology infusion as related to infusion approach; technology readiness; information and documentation products; communication; integration considerations; interaction with technology development areas; cost-capped mission areas; risk considerations; system level impacts and implementation; and mission pull. 2) Specific technologies from the most recent PSD Announcements of Opportunities (AOs): The Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator (ASRG), aerocapture and aeroshell hardware technologies, the NASA Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion propulsion system, and the Advanced Materials Bi-propellant Rocket (AMBR) engine.This report will present the teams Findings from the RFI inputs and the recommendations that arose from these findings. Methodologies on the findings and recommendations development are discussed.

technology infusion↗

NASA's Cryogenic Fluid Management Technology Development Roadmaps

The maturation of Cryogenic Fluid Management (CFM) Technologies is essential for achieving NASA's future long duration missions. Propulsion systems utilizing cryogens are necessary to achieve NASA's exploration missions to the moon, Mars, and beyond. Current State Of the Art (SOA) CFM technologies enable cryogenic propellants to be stored for several hours prior to their use. However, some envisioned mission architectures require that cryogens to be stored for two years or longer. The fundamental roles of CFM technologies are long term storage of cryogens, propellant tank pressure control and propellant delivery. In the presence of heat, the cryogens will "boil-off" over time resulting in excessive pressure buildup, off-nominal propellant conditions for engine consumption, and propellant loss. To achieve long term storage and tank pressure control, the CFM elements will intercept and/or remove any heat from the propulsion system. All functions are required to be performed both with and without the presence of a gravitational field. Which CFM technologies are required is a function of the cryogens used, mission architecture, vehicle design and propellant tank size. To enable NASA's crewed missions beyond Low Earth Orbit, a total of twenty-seven CFM technologies have been identified to support various In-Space Stages and Lander/Ascent Vehicles. A set of CFM Technology Development Roadmaps have been created identifying the current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of each element, current technology "gaps", and existing technology development efforts. The roadmaps include a methodical approach and schedule to achieve a flight demonstration, hence maturing CFM technologies to TRL 6/7 for infusion into the NASA's exploration elements. Additionally, a survey of the aerospace industry was completed to understand their views on the various technologies and how they would be infused. This does not cover all possible technologies, but rather those that are of interest to NASA specifically.

Cryogenic fluid management↗

NASA Astrophysics Division Technology Heritage Study

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Astrophysics Division (APD) funds and manages missions and studies that seek to broaden our understanding of our place in the universe. These science missions are enabled by technologies developed through APD’s technology development programs. APD has funded approximately seven different technology development programs over the last ten years which support basic research and target varying Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs). The funding has targeted technology for future space flight experiments as well as suborbital science investigations. To understand the overall impact of APD’s investment on astrophysics technology advancement through their grants and contracts, APD engaged The Aerospace Corporation to conduct an independent, comprehensive Astrophysics Technology Heritage Study. The study was conducted in the 2021-2022 timeframe, first focusing priority on infusion of competed grants and general trends, followed by directed grants and further trend analysis and technology characterization. The study included three major components: a grants database, a missions database, and a survey of Principal Investigators (PIs). The study found that APD grants and contracts fund a healthy portfolio of technologies that resulted in an overall 62% infusion rate, as suborbital missions provide ample science and technology maturation and platform transition opportunities. Within the 62% of infused grants, 12% were infused into space missions and another 31% were suborbital. The study also looked at various other characteristics of the grant awards including the organizations they were awarded to and award trends by PI. Technology focus areas and detector types were also investigated, as well as technology platform transitions from on mission environment (e.g., suborbital to space). Additional feedback from PIs was also requested and evaluated including alternative benefits of grants and reasons development did, or did not, succeed.

NASA↗