Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “TRL”

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 55 records · Page 3

Raising Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) Technology Readiness Above 3

NTP development is currently supported by the NASA program office "Advanced Exploration Systems". The concept is a main propulsion option being considered for human missions to Mars in the 2030's. Major NTP development took place in the 1960's and 1970's under the Rover/NERVA program. The technology had matured to TRL 6 and was preparing to go to TRL 7 with a prototype flight engine before the program was cancelled. Over the last 40 years, a variety of continuations started, but only lasted a few years each. The Rover/NERVA infrastructure is almost all gone. The only remains are a few pieces of hardware, final reports and a few who worked the Rover/NERVA. Two types of nuclear fuel are being investigated to meet the current engine design specific impulse of 900 seconds compared to approximately 850 seconds demonstrated during Rover/NERVA. One is a continuation of composite fuel with new coatings to better control mid-band corrosion. The other type is a CERMET fuel made of Tungsten and UO2. Both fuels are being made from Rover/NERVA lessons learned, but with slightly different recipes to increase fuel endurance at higher operating temperatures. The technology readiness level (TRL) of these current modified reactor fuels is approximately TRL 3. To keep the development cost low and help mature the TRL level past 4 quickly, a few special non-nuclear test facilities have been made to test surrogate fuel, with depleted uranium, as coupons and full length elements. Both facilities utilize inductive heating and are licensed to handle depleted uranium. TRL 5 requires exposing the fuel to a nuclear environment and TRL 6 requires a prototype ground or flight engine system test. Currently, three different NTP ground test facility options are being investigated: exhaust scrubber, bore hole, and total exhaust containment. In parallel, a prototype flight demonstration test is also being studied. The first human mission to Mars in the 2030's is currently 2033. For an advanced propulsion concept to be seriously considered for use, the engine development plans need to show it is feasible and affordable to reach TRL 8 by 2027 and can be qualified for human mission use.

Gerrish, Harold P., Jr.↗

Technology Readiness Level as the Foundation of Human Readiness Level

Communication of the maturity of technology through the program/product life cycles helps enhance risk management from the beginning and support decision-making strategies for research, development, and allocation of resources. Currently, many organizations use the technology readiness level (TRL) as a simple metric to indicate the maturity of the technology. This article will discuss the TRL history, define the TRL levels, show how the TRL relates to the technology life cycle, and how the TRL framework contributes to the human readiness level (HRL) structure. Through the TRL advantages and disadvantages, this article will show how the TRL falls short in numerous areas of engineering, including the integration readiness of system/subsystem components and assessment of the readiness of the technology to operate within the human capabilities and limitations. Yet the article also shows how the TRL serves as the foundation for HRL.

George Salazar↗

State-of-the-Art: Small Spacecraft Technology

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

Bruce Yost↗

Hybrid Thermally Efficient Core (HyTEC) HyTEC Phase 1 – Advanced Aerodynamics Final Report

The objective of the Hybrid Thermally Efficient Core (HyTEC) – Advanced High Pressure Turbine (HPT) Aerodynamics project is to develop technology for a compact core that contributes to significant fuel burn reductions of 5-10% over current generation technologies. To accomplish this, the HPT is incorporating a range of aerodynamic features and technologies to improve component efficiency and provide favorable systems level trades. In particular, this project explored low solidity airfoils, advanced tip treatments, platform contouring, and advanced ceramic matrix composite (CMC) Stage 2 Nozzle (S2N) airfoils to eliminate the need for post throat cooling in a compact core environment. The maturation of these technology areas is expected to provide a significant improvement in component efficiencies, and consequently reductions in fuel burn, over the current state of the art (SoA). To mature these technologies to Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 4, a test campaign was performed that consisted of four tests at three facilities. TRL 3 testing was performed in the CW22 linear cascade at NASA Glenn for blade and nozzle technologies, TRL 4 nozzle testing was performed at GE Aerospace (GEA) Test Cell A8, and TRL 4 blade testing was performed at the Notre Dame Turbomachinery Laboratory (NDTL) using the Transonic Research Turbine (TRT) rig. Low solidity was successfully demonstrated to a TRL 4 level. Low solidity nozzles showed benefits in line with pre-project expectations, while low solidity blades were shown to have an aerodynamic penalty. Crucially, this program only considered the aerodynamic losses, and systems trades such as reductions in cooling flows are expected to continue to make low solidity blades a net positive. By successfully quantifying the aerodynamic performance in this project, these trades can be conducted to determine where in the engine architecture low solidity blades will contribute positively to system operation. Platform contouring was demonstrated to a TRL 4 level, with performance in line with the lower end of the pre-project expected range. Advanced tip treatments performance levels were indeterminate, showing the expected improvements to flow physics but with a performance level confounded by several rig issues including whirl mode induced variation in tip clearance. The elimination of post-throat cooling on the S2N was successfully demonstrated to provide a performance benefit, however that benefit was approximately half the level that was expected in pre-project predictions. Overall, the technology maturation plan for HyTEC Phase 1 was successful, bringing the suite of technologies to TRL 4.

High pressure turbine↗

The Importance of Technology Readiness in NASA Earth Venture Missions

The first set of Venture-class investigations share the characteristic that the technology should be mature and all investigations must use mature technology that has been modeled or demonstrated in a relevant environment (Technology Readiness Level (TRL) >5). Technology Readiness Levels are a systematic metric/measurement system that supports assessments of the maturity of a particular technology and the consistent comparison of maturity between different types of technology. The TRL is used in NASA technology planning. A major step in the level of fidelity of the technology demonstration follows the completion of TRL 5. At TRL 6, a system or subsystem model or prototype must be demonstrated in a relevant environment (ground or space) representative model or prototype system or system, which would go well beyond ad hoc, "patch-cord," or discrete component level breadboarding. These TRL levels are chosen as target objectives for the Program. The challenge for offerors is that they must identify key aspects (uncertainty, multi subsystem complexity, etc) of the TRL estimate that should be properly explained in a submitted proposal. Risk minimization is a key component of the Earth Venture missions. Experiences of prior airborne missions will be shared. The discussion will address aspects of uncertainty and issues surrounding three areas of airborne earth science missions: (1) Aircraft or proposed flight platform -- Expressing the capability of the aircraft in terms of the supporting mission requirements. These issues include airplane performance characteristics (duration, range, altitude, among others) and multiship complexities. (2) Instruments -- Establishing that the instruments have been demonstrated in a relevant environment. Instruments with heritage in prior space missions meet this requirement, as do instruments tested on the ground. Evidence that the instruments have demonstrated the ability to collect data as advertised will be described. The complexity of the integration of multiple subsystems will also be addressed. Issues associated with tailoring the instrument to meet the specific Venture mission objectives must be thoroughly explained and justified. (3) Aircraft/Instrument Integration -- Explicitly defining what development may be required to harden the instrument and integrate the instrument. The challenges associated with this key aspect of major airborne earth science investigations will be presented.

Wells, James E.↗

A Technology Development Roadmap for a Near-Term Probe-Class X-ray Astrophysics Mission

This document presents a roadmap, including proposed budget and schedule, for maturing the instrumentation needed for an X-ray astrophysics Probe-class mission. The Physics of the Cosmos (PCOS) Program Office was directed to create this roadmap following the December 2012 NASA Astrophysics Implementation Plan (AIP). Definition of this mission is called for in the AIP, with the possibility of selection in 2015 for a start in 2017. The overall mission capabilities and instrument performance requirements were defined in the 2010 Astronomy and Astrophysics Decadal Survey report, New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics (NWNH), in connection with the highly ranked International X-ray Observatory (IXO). In NWNH, recommendations were provided regarding the size of, and instrumentation needed by, the next large X-ray observatory. Specifically, the key instrumental capability would be an X-ray calorimeter spectrometer at the focus of a large mirror with angular resolution of 10 arc seconds (arcsec) or better. If possible, a grating spectrometer should also be incorporated into the instrument complement. In response to these recommendations, four instrumentation technologies are included in this roadmap. Three of these are critical for an X-ray mission designed to address NWNH questions: segmented X-ray mirrors, transition edge sensor calorimeters, and gratings. Two approaches are described for gratings, which represent the least mature technology and thus most in need of a parallel path for risk reduction. Also, while current CCD detectors would likely meet the mission needs for grating spectrum readout, specific improvements are included as an additional approach for achieving the grating system effective area requirement. The technical steps needed for these technologies to attain technology readiness levels (TRL) of 5 and 6 are described, as well as desirable modest risk reduction steps beyond TRL-6. All of the technology development efforts are currently funded through the NASA Physics of the Cosmos (PCOS) Strategic Astrophysics Technology (SAT) program; some through the end of FY13, others though FY14. These technology needs are those identified as critical for a near-term mission and briefly described in the 2012 NASA X-ray Mission Concepts Study. This Technology Development Roadmap (TDR) provides a more complete description of each, updates the status, and describes the steps to mature them. For each technology, a roadmap is presented for attaining TRL-6 by 2020 at the latest, and 2018 for most. The funding required for each technology to attain TRL-5 and TRL-6 is presented and justified through a description of the steps needing completion. The total funding required for these technologies to reach TRL-6 is relatively modest, and is consistent with the planned PCOS SAT funding over the next several years. The approximate annual cost through 2018 is $8M. The total cost for all technologies to be matured is $62M (including funding already awarded for FY13 and FY14). This can be contrasted to the $180M recommended by NWNH for technology development for IXO, primarily for the maturation of the mirror technology. The technology described in Section 3 of this document is exclusively that needed for a near-term Probe-class mission, to start in 2017, or for a mission that can be recommended by the next Decadal survey committee for an immediate start. It is important to note that there are other critical X-ray instrumentation technologies under development that are less mature than the ones discussed here, but are essential for a major X-ray mission that might start in the late 2020s. These technologies, described briefly in Section 4, are more appropriately funded through the Astronomy and Physics Research and Analysis (APRA) program.

Development↗

Oxide_Oxide Ceramic Matrix Composite (CMC) Exhaust Mixer Development in the NASA Environmentally Responsible Aviation (ERA) Project

LibertyWorks®, a subsidiary of Rolls-Royce Corporation, first studied CMC (ceramic matrix composite) exhaust mixers for potential weight benefits in 2008. Oxide CMC potentially offered weight reduction, higher temperature capability, and the ability to fabricate complex-shapes for increased mixing and noise suppression. In 2010, NASA was pursuing the reduction of NOx emissions, fuel burn, and noise from turbine engines in Phase I of the Environmentally Responsible Aviation (ERA) Project (within the Integrated Systems Research Program). ERA subtasks, including those focused on CMC components, were being formulated with the goal of maturing technology from Proof of Concept Validation (Technology Readiness Level 3 (TRL 3)) to System/Subsystem or Prototype Demonstration in a Relevant Environment (TRL 6). LibertyWorks®, a subsidiary of Rolls-Royce Corporation, first studied CMC (ceramic matrix composite) exhaust mixers for potential weight benefits in 2008. Oxide CMC potentially offered weight reduction, higher temperature capability, and the ability to fabricate complex-shapes for increased mixing and noise suppression. In 2010, NASA was pursuing the reduction of NOx emissions, fuel burn, and noise from turbine engines in Phase I of the Environmentally Responsible Aviation (ERA) Project (within the Integrated Systems Research Program). ERA subtasks, including those focused on CMC components, were being formulated with the goal of maturing technology from Proof of Concept Validation (Technology Readiness Level 3 (TRL 3)) to System/Subsystem or Prototype Demonstration in a Relevant Environment (TRL 6). Oxide CMC component at both room and elevated temperatures. A TRL≈5 (Component Validation in a Relevant Environment) was attained and the CMC mixer was cleared for ground testing on a Rolls-Royce AE3007 engine for performance evaluation to achieve TRL 6.

propulsion↗

Progress on LISA Colloid Microthruster Technology Development

Colloid microthrusters have been operated successfully in flight, providing drag-free and precision control for spacecraft that can be used for future applications such as gravity wave and exoplanet observatories. The Space Technology 7 Disturbance Reduction System (ST7- DRS) technology demonstration payload included eight Busek Colloid Micro-Newton Thrusters (CMNTs) as part of the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) Pathfinder mission that launched in December of 2015. The CMNTs provided full attitude and precision drag-free control of the spacecraft with <10 nm/√Hz stability along the most sensitive axis during commissioning, nominal, and extended mission phases through April of 2017. Performance requirements (≤0.1 μN/√Hz) were met and models were validated based on on- orbit measurements of test mass motion and actuation during the 60-day nominal and 30-day extended missions. In 2018, the European Space Agency (ESA) selected LISA to be the agency’s next “large-class” mission, currently in Phase A, with a launch scheduled for 2034 and a 12.5-year duration, including the transfer (1.5 years), commissioning (1 year), nominal (4 or 6 years), and extended (6 or 4 years) phases of the mission, which sets the lifetime and consumables requirement. NASA is considering a significant contribution of hardware to the ESA-led mission, potentially including colloid microthrusters. In preparation, NASA is developing five technologies to TRL 5 and 6, including the colloid microthrusters, to be ready for infusion into LISA by the mission adoption review (MAR), currently scheduled for 2024. While ST7-DRS effectively brought the CMNTs to TRL 7, additional lower-TRL flow control components must be developed for full redundancy, reducing the system-level TRL back to 4. Key to the future of the colloid microthruster technology will be to use lessons learned and keep as much of the heritage from the ST7 design as possible while updating the system to support redundancy and lifetime requirements of a flagship-class mission. This paper describes the technology plan and progress to reach TRL 6 by the MAR, focusing on near- term plans to reach TRL 5 by the end of March 2022 for the LISA Colloid Microthrusters (CMTs). Work includes requirements development and sizing studies, breadboard and brassboard hardware developments at Busek, including relevant lifetime and environment testing, and lifetime modeling, verification and validation efforts at JPL, UCLA, and UCI.

Gamero-Castaño, Manuel↗

Performance Testing of TRL4-6 LISA Laser System

The Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) is an ESA-led future mission to measure gravitational waves from astronomical sources in space. LISA has been adopted as a formal mission by ESA in January 2024, and is expected to become a formal project at NASA within 2024. The laser system (LS), which includes four laser heads (LH) each containing a laser optical module (LOM) and laser electronics module (LEM), a frequency reference system (FRS, optical frequency reference) and four power monitor detectors (PMON), is one of the three U.S. contributions to LISA from NASA. The Lasers and Electro-Optics Branch at NASA GSFC has been developing and managing the design of the LISA LS. Currently, the TRL (technology readiness level) of the NASA LISA laser system is transitioning from 4 to 6. TRL 4/5 LISA LOM was sent to ESA in early 2023 and has undergone optical performance testing. [1] By late summer of 2024, NASA plans to deliver the TRL 6 LOM to ESA for performance evaluation. Since the delivery of the TRL4/5 LOM to ESA, we have taken steps to advance the TRL of the overall LS and have also started end-to-end system level testing involving other subsystems. They include 1) optical performance test of TRL6 LOM and TRL 5 LEM under thermal cycling, 2) end-to-end test of the laser head (LH) and the GSE (ground support equipment) FRS, driven by TRL 4 FRS electronics (FRS-E) provided by Ball Aerospace, 3) end-to-end test of the laser head (LH) with the GSE phase meter system (PMS) provided by Albert Einstein Institute, and 4) optical performance test of the LH with the PMON subsystem developed by NASA. The FRS, PMS, and PMON provide necessary frequency stability, relative phase stability between lasers, and output power stability, respectively. Since they are all vital for the sensitive laser interferometry performed in LISA, it is necessary to perform these system level testing by combining the LH and other subsystems, and to prove the optical performance at an early stage during the LS development. Our recent work has successfully demonstrated the intra-connectivity of the LS, as well as critical external interface with the PMS to meet the LISA’s performance requirements. In this talk, we will report on the latest status of the LH testing and system level test. We will also discuss the paths to bring each subsystem to TRL6+ and plans for future system level testing.

LISA↗

Multi-Evaporator Miniature Loop Heat Pipe for Small Spacecraft Thermal Control: Validation Results - Part 2

Under NASA s New Millennium Program Space Technology 8 (ST 8) Project, Goddard Space Fight Center has conducted a Thermal Loop experiment to advance the maturity of the Thermal Loop technology from proof of concept to prototype demonstration in a relevant environment , i.e. from a technology readiness level (TRL) of 3 to a level of 6. The thermal Loop is an advanced thermal control system consisting of a miniature loop heat pipe (MLHP) with multiple evaporators and multiple condensers designed for future small system applications requiring low mass, low power, and compactness. The MLHP retains all features of state-of-the-art loop heat pipes (LHPs) and offers additional advantages to enhance the functionality, performance, versatility, and reliability of the system. An MLHP breadboard was built and tested in the laboratory and thermal vacuum environments for the TRL 4 and TRL 5 validations, respectively, and an MLHP proto-flight unit was built and tested in a thermal vacuum chamber for the TRL 6 validation. In addition, an analytical model was developed to simulate the steady state and transient behaviors of the MLHP during various validation tests. The MLHP demonstrated excellent performance during experimental tests and the analytical model predictions agreed very well with experimental data. All success criteria at various TRLs were met. Hence, the Thermal Loop technology has reached a TRL of 6. This paper presents the validation results, both experimental and analytical, of such a technology development effort.

Ku, Jentung↗

CHARM: A CubeSat Water Vapor Radiometer for Earth Science

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and Ames Research Center (ARC) are partnering in the CubeSat Hydrometric Atmospheric Radiometer Mission (CHARM), a water vapor radiometer integrated on a 3U CubeSat platform, selected for implementation under NASA Hands-On Project Experience (HOPE-3). CHARM will measure 4 channels at 183 GHz water vapor line, subsets of measurements currently performed by larger and more costly spacecraft (e.g. ATMS, AMSU-B and SSMI/S). While flying a payload that supports SMD science objectives, CHARM provides a hands-on opportunity to develop technical, leadership, and project skills. CHARM will furthermore advance the technology readiness level (TRL) of the 183 GHz receiver subsystem from TRL 4 to TRL 6 and the CubeSat 183 GHz radiometer system from TRL 4 to TRL 7.

Monolithic microwave integrated circuits (MMICs)↗

The Need for Technology Maturity of Any Advanced Capability to Achieve Better Life Cycle Cost (LCC)

Programs such as space transportation systems are developed and deployed only rarely, and they have long development schedules and large development and life cycle costs (LCC). They have not historically had their LCC predicted well and have only had an effort to control the DDT&E phase of the programs. One of the factors driving the predictability, and thus control, of the LCC of a program is the maturity of the technologies incorporated in the program. If the technologies incorporated are less mature (as measured by their Technology Readiness Level - TRL), then the LCC not only increases but the degree of increase is difficult to predict. Consequently, new programs avoid incorporating technologies unless they are quite mature, generally TRL greater than or equal to 7 (system prototype demonstrated in a space environment) to allow better predictability of the DDT&E phase costs unless there is no alternative. On the other hand, technology development programs rarely develop technologies beyond TRL 6 (system/subsystem model or prototype demonstrated in a relevant environment). Currently the lack of development funds beyond TRL 6 and the major funding required for full scale development leave little or no funding available to prototype TRL 6 concepts so that hardware would be in the ready mode for safe, reliable and cost effective incorporation. The net effect is that each new program either incorporates little new technology or has longer development schedules and costs, and higher LCC, than planned. This paper presents methods to ensure that advanced technologies are incorporated into future programs while providing a greater accuracy of predicting their LCC. One method is having a dedicated organization to develop X-series vehicles or separate prototypes carried on other vehicles. The question of whether such an organization should be independent of NASA and/or have an independent funding source is discussed. Other methods are also discussed. How to make the choice of which technologies to pursue to the prototype level is also discussed since, to achieve better LCC, first the selection of the appropriate technologies.

Robinson, John W.↗

Molecular Composition Analysis of Distant Targets

This document is the Final Report for NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) Phase I Grant 15-NIAC16A-0145, titled Molecular Composition Analysis of Distant Targets. The research was focused on developing a system concept for probing the molecular composition of cold solar system targets, such as Asteroids, Comets, Planets and Moons from a distant vantage, for example from a spacecraft that is orbiting the target (Hughes et al., 2015). The orbiting spacecraft is equipped with a high-power laser, which is run by electricity from photovoltaic panels. The laser is directed at a spot on the target. Materials on the surface of the target are heated by the laser beam, and begin to melt and then evaporate, forming a plume of asteroid molecules in front of the heated spot. The heated spot glows, producing blackbody illumination that is visible from the spacecraft, via a path through the evaporated plume. As the blackbody radiation from the heated spot passes through the plume of evaporated material, molecules in the plume absorb radiation in a manner that is specific to the rotational and vibrational characteristics of the specific molecules. A spectrometer aboard the spacecraft is used to observe absorption lines in the blackbody signal. The pattern of absorption can be used to estimate the molecular composition of materials in the plume, which originated on the target. Focusing on a single spot produces a borehole, and shallow subsurface profiling of the targets bulk composition is possible. At the beginning of the Phase I research, the estimated Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of the system was TRL-1. During the Phase I research, an end-to-end theoretical model of the sensor system was developed from first principles. The model includes laser energy and optical propagation, target heating, melting and evaporation of target material, plume density, thermal radiation from the heated spot, molecular cross section of likely asteroid materials, and estimation of the absorption profile at a distant spectrometer. Results obtained by executing simulations based on the model provide compelling evidence that the concept of remote laser evaporative molecular absorption spectroscopy is feasible. In this document, technical details of the model are presented, and results of simulations are described that indicate the utility of the proposed sensor system. Additionally, an asteroid rendezvous mission is analyzed, with a survey of system requirements to accomplish molecular composition analysis of the asteroid. Based on positive theoretical results obtained during Phase I, the estimated TRL of the system is now TRL-2. This document also describes potential future research and experimentation that could push the system to TRL-4 within 2 years. Steps required for construction of a laboratory prototype are described. An experiment to test predictions of the theory is described, based on the laboratory prototype setup.

asteroid↗

Technology Development Roadmap for Habitable-Zone Exoplanet Observatory (HabEx) Baseline 4-M Primary Mirror

The Habitable Exoplanet Observatory (HabEx) is one of four mission concepts under study for the 2020 Astrophysics Decadal Survey. Its goal is to directly image and spectroscopically characterize planetary systems in the habitable zone around nearby sun-like stars. Additionally, HabEx will perform a broad range of general astrophysics science enabled by 115 to 2500 nm spectral range and 3 x 3 arc-minute FOV. Critical to achieving the HabEx science goals is a large, ultra-stable UV/Optical/Near-IR (UVOIR) telescope. The baseline HabEx telescope is 4-meter off-axis unobscured, diffraction limited at 400 nm with wavefront stability on the order of a few 10s of picometers. The technology readiness level (TRL) to manufacture and test the HabEx baseline primary mirror is assessed to be at TRL-6 for all but two TRL-4 technologies: 1) non-destructive process to quantify CTE homogeneity of a 4-m mirror substrate with a spatial sampling of at least 100 x 100 to better than +/- 1 ppb/K; and, 2) process to quantify self-weight gravity deflection to better than 4-nm rms over a 100 x 100 spatial sampling. This paper reviews the technology needs to manufacture the HabEx primary mirror, assesses their TRL and proposes a roadmap to mature the two remaining technologies to TRL-6.

Space Telescope Technology↗

Development of LISA Laser System at NASA

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) is developing a master oscillator power amplifier (MOPA) laser transmitter for the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) mission. The laser transmitter is one of the potential contributions to the LISA mission from NASA. Our development effort has included a master oscillator (MO), a power amplifier (PA), a frequency reference system (FRS), a power monitor detector (PMON), and laser electronics module (LEM). We are working on their design, performance evaluation, environmental testing, and reliability testing for space flight. We have built TRL 4 laser optical modules based on the MO and PA, which meets most performance requirements. One of the TRL 4 laser optical modules has been delivered to ESA for independent evaluation. TRL 6 versions of MO and PA are being built and evaluated at GSFC. TRL 5 and 6 versions of laser electronics are under development. In this paper, we will describe our progress to date and plans to demonstrate and deliver a TRL 6 laser demonstrator system to ESA by 2024.

LISA, Space Lasers↗

3D Printed Materials Characterization for Rapid Prototyping and Plant Growth

Through KSC IRTD funding in 2022, this project brought a list of 18, 3D printed filaments into formal characterization testing to provide a reference for their behaviors under relevant applications. The project format set up a series of tests to expose 3D printed specimens. A total of 1,989 individual 3D printed test specimens were sent across KSC to be scrutinized by three laboratories to fulfill a multidisciplinary assessment of each material TRL. Testing started with 18 materials. Initially, seed germination assays in the PPA, sample materials were enclosed in petri dishes with lettuce seeds on damp germination paper. No significant impacts on lettuce seed germination were observed in this testing. Next, sample coupons were printed and sent for materials testing to the KSC Analysis/Mechanical and Environmental Testing Laboratory, where they were subjected to 14- and 30-day soak periods in solutions used to provide nutrients to plants or to sanitize hardware before and after use. Following a long soak typical of a 30-day plant growout in Hoagland’s solution, 14 materials gained more than 10% of their own mass. This indicated an increased potential for leaching or providing conditions that are not food safe. Materials that exceeded 15% absorption by mass were eliminated from further testing. Based off this result, the team continued with a core list of nine filaments to fulfill Tensile, Flexural, Biofilm formation, and plant growth testing. Those materials were PLA (Raise3D), ABS (Raise3D), PETG (PolyethyleneTerephthalate Glycol) (Raise3D), ASA (Acrylonitrile Styrene Acrylate) (Raise3D), PC (Polycarbonate) (Raise3D), TPU (Thermoplastic polyurethane)-95 (Raise3D), PLA Copper (Gizmodorks), PP (Polypropylene) (Braskem), and HIPS (High Impact Polystyrene) (Gizmodorks). Testing also quantified the spectral impact of using different color 3D printed surfaces in a growth chamber. The material used for spectral testing was PLA. Printing employed a standard surface texture representative of all materials. It was shown through Tensile Testing (ASTM D638-22) that the breaking force of a 3D printed part greatly varied depending on layer orientation. This is common through all materials, and demonstrates that the strength of a 3D printed component can be maximized by layering the material normal to the primary force on the part. Four-point flexural testing (ASTM D790) provided quantities of interest, Flexural modulus, Flexural strength, Flexural stress, and strain at break within a 5% strain limit from each of nine materials. Biofilm formation testing was conducted in the Molecular and Microbiological Laboratory. Testing completed on specimens from each material showed equal formation on the surface. Additional plant growth testing was conducted in the PPA beyond the initial germination testing. The final assessment documents that three materials (PLA, ABS, and PC) have reached TRL 6 through extensive testing, and ultimate end-to-end applied use in experimental or testing conditions (flight and ground). TRL 5 materials (ASA, TPU-95, PLA Copper, PP, PETG, and HIPS) have all been successfully applied in Research and Development for crop growth applications and are ready to be applied in formal testing. TRL 4 materials Nylon910, PLA Carbon Fiber, PPA CF, PPA Glass Fiber (GF), NinjaFlex, and P-filament 721 are materials that were able to be printed and tested, but have yet to show data meeting applied requirements. TRL 3 NylonX, Flex TPE-185, and Nylon were unable to be reliably printed to fulfill testing. These results provide researchers with reference for materials to use during plant growth experimentation, and also set a standard for future characterization work applying 3D printing and materials to testing, research, and experimentation.

Gioia Massa↗

Scalable Electrolytic Systems for Renewable Hydrogen Production (Cooperative Research and Development Final Report, CRADA Number CRD-18-747)

The project focuses on offshore wind energy which is an emergent renewable energy source in the United States. Onsite hydrogen production for this sector is not available. The overall goal of GTA's work is development of scalable multi-megawatt water electrolysis systems that exclude platinum group metals, are constructed from readily available commodity materials and are mass produced using advanced manufacturing and robotics. They fabricated and successfully tested a scalable TRL 4 laboratory prototype that demonstrated promising results for achieving the goal. They further performed calculations and prepared scale drawings for an envisioned onsite TRL 8 electrolytic hydrogen production system at an offshore 8 MW wind turbine. The work plan of the CRADA proposal between NREL and GTA focuses on validation of the current TRL 4 prototype with potential development and refinement for advancement to a TRL 5 system. GTA, Inc. proposes joining the H2@Scale consortium to leverage DOE funds, benefit from and contribute to the common knowledge-base and work with NREL as a CRADA partner.

30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗

Advanced Sensors and Instrumentation (ASI) Program Plan. Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies (NEET)

The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) sponsors a crosscutting technology development (CTD) program addressing common instrumentation & controls (I&C) needs in all DOE-NE sponsored programs. In 2012, DOE-NE initiated the Nuclear Energy Enabling Technology (NEET) Program to conduct research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) in crosscutting technologies that directly support and enable the development of existing, new and advanced reactor designs, and fuel cycle technologies. These technologies will advance the state of nuclear technology, improve its competitiveness, and promote continued contribution to meeting our Nation’s energy and environmental challenges. The NEET Program has spurred innovation in the field of sensors and instrumentation, advanced methods for manufacturing, and cyber security. The Advanced Sensors and Instrumentation (ASI) program is one element of the NEET CTD that has spurred innovation in the measurement science field by funding research on sensors, instrumentation and controls, communication, and advanced analytics that measure system parameters, gauge component control input, and provide power plant owners and operators critical awareness so they can plan and safely manage operational evolutions. The NEET ASI Program has carried out research and development (R&D) required to develop and deploy innovative and advanced sensors, and instrumentation and control capabilities for current and future nuclear energy systems, and to enable the advanced technologies essential to NE’s R&D efforts needed to realize mission goals. The concept of technology readiness assessment is helpful for the classification of instrumentation technology as part of the program strategy. A technology readiness assessment evaluates technology maturity using the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale and was pioneered by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in the 1980s for space technology. It has recently been adopted to advance fuels and materials. The NEET ASI program objective is to mature instruments technology to TRL 6, which is “demonstration of the technology in relevant environment.” While there may be instances in which a different strategy is justified, the aim of the program is to respond to DOE program and stakeholder needs for nuclear instrumentation then hand off the technology after demonstration for integration in a more complex system, for example an irradiation test, experimental loop or a plant component such as the core, primary system or heat exchanger. A mechanism to continue some level of support from NEET ASI during and after the adoption (for example, to maintain fabrication and calibration capabilities) will be defined as the first example of technology hand off comes to fruition. In addition, several paths exist within DOE to complement NEET ASI activities to extend the maturity beyond TRL, for example through GAIN, technology commercialization funding, and small-business programs. Role of NEET ASI CINR projects in the TRL space, and integration with direct funded demonstration.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗