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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 631 records · Page 35

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2009

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

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

Anderson, David J.↗

NASA NTRS2009

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.↗

NASA NTRS2014

NextGen Technologies on the FAA's Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System

This paper describes the integration, evaluation, and results from a high-fidelity human-in-the-loop (HITL) simulation of key NASA Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration - 1 (ATD- 1) technologies implemented in an enhanced version of the FAA's Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS) platform. These ATD-1 technologies include: (1) a NASA enhanced version of the FAA's Time-Based Flow Management, (2) a NASA ground-based automation technology known as controller-managed spacing (CMS), and (3) a NASA advanced avionics airborne technology known as flight-deck interval management (FIM). These ATD-1 technologies have been extensively tested in large-scale HITL simulations using general-purpose workstations to study air transportation technologies. These general purpose workstations perform multiple functions and are collectively referred to as the Multi-Aircraft Control System (MACS). Researchers at NASA Ames Research Center and Raytheon collaborated to augment the STARS platform by including CMS and FIM advisory tools to validate the feasibility of integrating these automation enhancements into the current FAA automation infrastructure. NASA Ames acquired three STARS terminal controller workstations, and then integrated the ATD-1 technologies. HITL simulations were conducted to evaluate the ATD-1 technologies when using the STARS platform. These results were compared with the results obtained when the ATD-1 technologies were tested in the MACS environment. Results collected from the numerical data show acceptably minor differences, and, together with the subjective controller questionnaires showing a trend towards preferring STARS, validate the ATD-1/STARS integration.

air traffic management↗

NASA NTRS2017

Cryogenic Fluid Management Technology Development Roadmaps

Advancement in Cryogenic Fluid Management (CFM) Technologies is essential for achieving NASA's future long duration missions. Propulsion systems utilizing cryogens are necessary to achieve mission success. Current State Of the Art (SOA) CFM technologies enable cryogenic propellants to be stored for several hours. However, some envisioned mission architectures require 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, 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 perform 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 mission to the Martian surface, a total of seventeen CFM technologies have been identified to support an In-Space Stage and a Lander/Ascent Vehicle. Recognizing that FY2020 includes a Decision Point regarding the In-Space Stage Architecture, 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 in FY2023, hence maturing CFM technologies to TRL 7 for infusion into the In-Space Stage Preliminary Design.

Stephens, J. R.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Preliminary Investigation of Impact of Technological Impairment on Trajectory-Based Operations

The Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) incorporates collaborative air traffic management and Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) in order to significantly increase the capacity, efficiency, and predictability of operations in the National Airspace System (NAS), without decreasing safety. This is enabled by airspace users and service providers sharing knowledge about operations that allows prediction of the complete 4D flight trajectory with as little uncertainty as possible. Additionally, new software and hardware technology is critical to reaching NextGen goals, especially with regard to TBO. What if the technologies that are critical for TBO were to be impaired or fail completely? Should there be a malfunction of a piece of the technology, it must be ensured that the whole system does not break down completely or suffer severe impairment. Instead, operations need to be maintained proportionally to the problem and safety needs to be ensured (graceful degradation). This paper proposes a systematic framework to investigate the vulnerability of TBO to technology disruption, and determine the impact of technological impairment on TBO. Two representative technologies are chosen for detailed investigation and the impact of their impairment on the degradation of TBO is illustrated using a weather-related scenario. XXXX There are several possible directions of future work. We believe it is desirable to develop methods to quantitatively assess the impact of technological disruption on TBO and to have the simulation tools to validate the impact. The availability of prognostics and health management methods could be leveraged to predict technological failure/disruption, thus predicting how TBO will be a ected, and possibly pro-actively mitigating the impact. It is important to develop large-scale scenarios where the e ect of technological impairment is prominent, and identify methods to quantitatively assess the extent of TBO degradation. An important goal of such an investigation is the development of failure-resistant resilient trajectory-based oper- ations. Resilience14, 15 is the property of a system to \bounce back" and resume at least a signi cant portion of its functionalities after degradation due to technological impairment(s). A systems resilience includes properties such as \bu ering capacity" (quantifying disruptions the system can absorb or adapt to without a fundamental breakdown in performance or in the systems structure), \ exibility" (ability to restructure itself in response to external changes or pressures), "margin" (how closely the system is currently operating rela- tive to one or another kind of performance boundary), \tolerance" (whether the system gracefully degrades as stress/pressure increase, or collapses quickly when pressure exceeds adaptive capacity), etc. Future work needs to focus on quantifying and improving the resilience of TBO, and identifying resilient design solutions for aviation.

TBO↗

NASA NTRS2019

NASA Goddard Thermal Technology Overview 2019

This presentation summarizes the current plans and efforts at NASA/Goddard to develop new thermal control technology for anticipated future missions. It will also address some of the programmatic developments currently underway at NASA, especially with respect to the NASA Technology Development Program and will highlight some of the latest flight project activities at GSFC. While funding for basic technology development is still scarce, significant efforts are being made in direct support of flight programs. New technology development continues to be driven by the needs of future missions, and applications of these technologies to current Goddard programs will be addressed. Many of these technologies also have broad applicability to DOD, DOE, and commercial programs. Partnerships have been developed with the Air Force, Navy, and various universities to promote technology development. Technology development activities supported by the internal research and development (IRAD) program, the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) program, and other technology development programs are reviewed in this presentation. Specific technologies addressed include; micro-channel heat transfer, latest developments of electro-hydro-dynamically pumped systems, Atomic Layer Deposition (ALD), thermal control coatings, and various other research activities.

Butler, Dan↗

NASA NTRS2019

Technologies to Enable the Next Great Observatory

The Large Ultraviolet/Optical/Infrared Surveyor (LUVOIR) is one of four mission concepts being studied by NASA for the 2020 Decadal Survey in Astronomy and Astrophysics. Enabling a mission as ambitious as LUVOIR requires an array of technologies. Critically, a systems-level approach must be taken to developing these technologies, guided by architecture studies to place each technology in the appropriate system context. Three technology systems enable the LUVOIR science objectives: the system, the system, and the system. Each of the technology systems comprise the individual technology components that must be developed and demonstrated as a system. Supporting engineering manufacturing development efforts are also identified for early risk reduction. It is important to note that the high-contrast coronagraph instrument and ultra-stable segmented telescope technology systems are tightly coupled; the performance capabilities of one system drive the requirements of the other. Similarly, the ultraviolet instrumentation technology system is loosely coupled to the other two; while the relative performance affects each system, they do not necessarily drive one another. This coupling between systems requires continuous cross-validation between the technology development paths. It is therefore critical that the technology development plan be executed in parallel with a detailed Pre-Phase A Architecture Study to provide the necessary systems-level perspective and cross-validation.

Bolcar, Matthew R.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Earth Science Technology Office (ESTO) New Observing Strategies (NOS) and NOS-Testbed (NOS-T)

With the advancement of space hardware technologies such as smaller spacecraft, component and instrument miniaturization and high performance space processors, and with the advancement of software technologies in artificial intelligence, big data analysis and autonomous decision making, Earth Science is looking at novel ways to observe phenomena that previously could not have been studied or would have been too expensive to study with traditional missions. In particular, the New Observing Strategies (NOS) component of the NASA Earth Science Technology Office (ESTO) Advanced Information Systems Technology (AIST) Program aims at leveraging these novel technologies as well as low cost and easy access to space to acquire multi-temporal or simultaneous multi-angular, multi-locations, multi-resolution and multi-spectral observations that will provide better multi-source measurements and will build a more dynamic and comprehensive picture of Earth Science phenomena that need to be studied and analyzed. For applications such as water resources management, air quality monitoring, biodiversity studies or disaster management, NOS will integrate the use of small instruments, small spacecraft, constellations of spacecraft and networks of sensors to design new missions that will provide the necessary measurements to improve future forecast and science modeling systems.Measurement acquisition will therefore be approached as a system of systems rather than on a mission basis, and a system of this complexity should not be expected to work without full integration and experimental characterization. Although most of the individual technologies enabling to link and coordinate multi-source observations are more or less mature, a few technologies need to be developed and all of them need to be integrated and tested as a system. In order for this validation to occur, the AIST Program is developing the NOS Testbed that includes 3 main goals:1.Validate novel NOS technologies, independently and as a system2.Demonstrate novel distributed operations concepts3.Socialize new Distributed Spacecraft Mission (DSM) and SensorWeb (SW) technologies and concepts to the science community by significantly retiring the risk of integrating these new technologies.The NOS Testbed will consist of multiple sensing nodes, simulated or actual, representing space, air and/or ground measurements, that are interconnected by a communications fabric (infrastructure that permits nodes to transmit and receive data between one another and interact with each other). Each node will be supported by hardware capabilities required to perform nodes monitoring and command & control, as well as intelligent "onboard" computing. The nodes will work together in a collaborative manner to demonstrate optimal science capabilities. The testbed will enable to validate technologies such as inter-node communication models, techniques and protocols; inter-node coordination; real-time data fusion and understanding; planning; sensor re-targeting; etc. Additionally, the testbed will have the capability to interact with various mission design tools, OSSEs and one or several forecast models. More details about the NOS Testbed will be presented at the confererence.

Earth Science missions; Advanced information Syste↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dust Solution Testing Initiative (DuSTI): Infusing Commercial Off the Shelf Dust Mitigation Technologies with NASA Practices

Dust is one of the most significant hazards to human lunar exploration. However, since the Apollo program concluded, limited research has been performed on lunar dust mitigation technologies. The safety of the crew members and sustainability of habitats, science, and supporting hardware depend on effective dust mitigation techniques and technologies. As NASA pursues a new generation of lunar missions with the Artemis program, the project team will pursue dust mitigation solutions with the Dust Solution Testing Initiative (DuSTI). DuSTI is a lunar dust mitigation effort that involves performing tests on commercial off the shelf (COTS) technologies over FY21. DuSTI will preform component and subsystem tests in dusty environments for up to five technologies with high potential. The specific technologies identified for study were selected based on several factors, including a market analysis of current terrestrial dust mitigation applications, availability of the technology, accessibility of various testing facilities, and cost of procurement. These technologies support the active and passive dust mitigation requirements of filtration systems, electro-mechanical systems, electro-static systems, surface coatings, textiles, and silicone polymers. Technology Readiness Level (TRL) will be increased by validating components in relevant environments. For example, if the COTS technology is at a TRL 9 for terrestrial use but at a 4-5 TRL for use in the lunar environment, we will test that technology in a lunar dust environment to increase the TRL for use on the Moon.

lunar dust↗

DOE OSTI2024

Life-Cycle Assessment Integration into Scalable Open-Source Numerical Models (LiAISON) for Analyzing Emerging Low-Carbon Technologies

Decarbonizing the industrial sector is a significant challenge in achieving a net-zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions economy by 2050 and the Paris Agreement, i.e., a global climate change mitigation target of achieving a maximum average temperature change potential of 1.5 degrees Celsius or less by 2100 with respect to pre-industrial levels. In the United States (US), the industrial sector accounts for 23% of total GHG emissions and is home to a number of hard-to-electrify activities. The chemicals subsector has the single largest subsector emissions profile after direct emissions from fossil fuel combustion and leakage from fossil fuel distribution systems. Within the chemicals subsector, many processes depend on hydrogen or ammonia precursors. Decarbonizing these two commodities would contribute significantly to decarbonizing the industrial sector as hydrogen could also be used for low carbon steel production (e.g., hydrogen-based direct reduction of iron) and other industrial applications. Emerging technologies require the application of prospective life cycle assessment (LCA), which can account for technology (foreground) scaling and process improvements via learning-by-doing, among others. In many cases, the future system context (background) in which the technologies are assumed to operate in is equally relevant. Background scenarios generated by integrated assessment models (IAM) can coherently incorporate potential future dynamics of the energy-climate-human-land system. Further, IAM scenarios are harmonized across socioeconomic and climate change mitigation pathways, which facilitates the comparability of prospective LCAs using different IAMs. We introduce an open source prospective LCA framework, the Life-cycle Assessment Integration into Scalable Open-source Numerical models (LiAISON), to analyze the non-linear relationships between technology foreground and the future energy system background across a series of midpoint and resource use metrics. The integration of LCA and IAM data is achieved using prospective environmental Impact assessment (PREMISE). We showcase it by assessing two Power-to-Hydrogen (PtH2) processes, namely Solid Oxide Electrolysis (SOE) and Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Electrolysis (PEME). We compare the technologies to a baseline of hydrogen production via natural gas-based Steam Methane Reforming (SMR) in a US context of multiple energy system and climate change mitigation futures. Besides providing an analysis that specifies the LCA results ranges with temporal and geospatial explicitness across the two technologies, metrics, and impact assessment methods, this research also aims to establish a base framework that can be expanded to use other IAM generated scenarios and US open-source life cycle inventory (LCI) databases. We find that the temporal environmental performance of either technology or their difference to SMR is directly influenced by the underlying background dynamics. Under baseline projections (i.e., no decarbonization goals), neither process reaches parity with the incumbent technology across several environmental metrics. Under the decarbonization scenarios, the underlying sectoral shifts result in declining impacts over time, compared to 2020 levels, except for metal depletion levels, which increase. The background shifts postulate a heavily decarbonized economy and energy system, which help technologies reach parity with SMR between 2040-2050 (RCP2.6) and 2030-2040 (RCP1.9) for global warming. Despite declines across several other metrics over time, neither PtH2 technology break even with SMR by 2100 besides for global warming.

decarbonizing↗

DOE OSTI2024

Life-Cycle Assessment Integration into Scalable Open-Source Numerical Models (LiAISON) for Analyzing Emerging Low-Carbon Technologies

Decarbonizing the industrial sector is a significant challenge in achieving a net-zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions economy by 2050 and the Paris Agreement, i.e., a global climate change mitigation target of achieving a maximum average temperature change potential of 1.5 degrees C or less by 2100 with respect to pre-industrial levels. In the United States (US), the industrial sector accounts for 23% of total GHG emissions and is home to a number of hard-to-electrify activities. The chemicals subsector has the single largest subsector emissions profile after direct emissions from fossil fuel combustion and leakage from fossil fuel distribution systems. Within the chemicals subsector, many processes depend on hydrogen or ammonia precursors. Decarbonizing these two commodities would contribute significantly to decarbonizing the industrial sector as hydrogen could also be used for low carbon steel production (e.g., hydrogen-based direct reduction of iron) and other industrial applications. Emerging technologies require the application of prospective life cycle assessment (LCA), which can account for technology (foreground) scaling and process improvements via learning-by-doing, among others. In many cases, the future system context (background) in which the technologies are assumed to operate in is equally relevant. Background scenarios generated by integrated assessment models (IAM) can coherently incorporate potential future dynamics of the energy-climate-human-land system. Further, IAM scenarios are harmonized across socioeconomic and climate change mitigation pathways, which facilitates the comparability of prospective LCAs using different IAMs. We introduce an open source prospective LCA framework, the Life-cycle Assessment Integration into Scalable Open-source Numerical models (LiAISON), to analyze the non-linear relationships between technology foreground and the future energy system background across a series of midpoint and resource use metrics The integration of LCA and IAM data is achieved using prospective environmental Impact assessment (PREMISE). We showcase it by assessing two Power-to-Hydrogen (PtH2) processes, namely Solid Oxide Electrolysis (SOE) and Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Electrolysis (PEME). We compare the technologies to a baseline of hydrogen production via natural gas-based Steam Methane Reforming (SMR) in a US context of multiple energy system and climate change mitigation futures. Besides providing an analysis that specifies the LCA results ranges with temporal and geospatial explicitness across the two technologies, metrics, and impact assessment methods, this research also aims to establish a base framework that can be expanded to use other IAM generated scenarios and US open-source life cycle inventory (LCI) databases. We find that the temporal environmental performance of either technology or their difference to SMR is directly influenced by the underlying background dynamics. Under baseline projections (i.e., no decarbonization goals), neither process reaches parity with the incumbent technology across several environmental metrics. Under the decarbonization scenarios, the underlying sectoral shifts result in declining impacts over time, compared to 2020 levels, except for metal depletion levels, which increase. The background shifts postulate a heavily decarbonized economy and energy system, which help technologies reach parity with SMR between 2040-2050 (RCP2.6) and 2030-2040 (RCP1.9) for global warming. Despite declines across several other metrics over time, neither PtH2 technology break even with SMR by 2100 besides for global warming.

decarbonizing↗

DOE OSTI2022

Clean energy technology pathways from research to commercialization: Policy and practice case studies

Clean energy research and development (R and D) leading to commercial technologies is vital to economic development, technology competitiveness, and reduced environmental impact. Over the past 30 years, such efforts have advanced technology performance and reduced cost by leveraging network effects and economies of scale. After demonstrating promise in applied R and D, successful clean energy and energy efficiency technologies are incorporated into an initial product sold by the private sector. Despite its importance, processes by which first commercialization occurs are difficult to generalize while capturing specific insights from practitioners in markets and technologies. This paper presents a policy-focused qualitative assessment of the first commercialization of four diverse energy technologies: thin film photovoltaics, wind turbine blades, dual-stage refrigeration evaporators, and fuel cells for material handling equipment. Each technology presents distinct value propositions, markets, and regulatory drivers. The case studies indicate three common characteristics of successful first commercialization for new energy technologies: 1) good fit between the technology, R&D infrastructure, and public-private partnership models; 2) high degree of alignment of government regulations and R&D priorities with market forces; and 3) compatibility between time scales required for R&D, product development, and opportunities. These findings may inform energy investment decision-making, maximize benefits from R&D, and advance the transition to a low-emission future.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

NASA NTRS1996

Medical and surgical applications of space biosensor technology

Researchers in space life sciences are rapidly approaching a technology impasse. Many of the critical questions on the impact of spaceflight on living systems simply cannot be answered with the limited available technologies. Research subjects, particularly small animal models like the rat, must be allowed to function relatively untended and unrestrained for long periods to fully reflect the impact of microgravity and spaceflight on their behavior and physiology. These requirements preclude the use of present hard-wired instrumentation techniques and limited data acquisition systems. Implantable sensors and miniaturized biotelemetry are the only means of capturing the fundamental and critical data. This same biosensor and biotelemetry technology has direct application to Earth-based medicine and surgery. Continuous, on-line data acquisition and improved measurement capabilities combined with the ease and flexibility offered by automated, wireless, and portable instruments and data systems, should provide a boon to the health care industry. Playing a key role in this technology revolution is the Sensors 2000! (S2K!) Program at NASA Ames Research Center. S2K!, in collaboration with space life sciences researchers and managers, provides an integrated capability for sensor technology development and applications, including advanced biosensor technology development, spaceflight hardware development, and technology transfer and commercialization. S2K! is presently collaborating on several spaceflight projects with dual-use medical applications. One prime example is a collaboration with the Fetal Treatment Center (FTC) at the University of California at San Francisco. The goal is to develop and apply implantable chemical sensor and biotelemetry technology to continuously monitor fetal patients during extra-uterine surgery, replacement into the womb, through birth and beyond. Once validated for ground use, the method will be transitioned to spaceflight applications to remotely monitor key biochemical parameters in flight animals. Successful application of NASA implantable biosensor and biotelemetry technologies should accelerate the advancement of this and other modern medical procedures while furthering the exploration of life in space.

NASA Discipline General Space Life Sciences↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Moon to Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technology (MMPACT) Lunar Surface Construction Activity at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center

Introduction: The goal of the Moon to Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technology (MMPACT) Project at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) is to develop, deliver, and demonstrate on-demand capabilities to protect astronauts and create infrastructure elements on the lunar surface via construction of landing pads, habitats, shelters, roadways, berms, and blast shields using lunar regolith-based materials. MSFC has strong collaborations with industry, academia, and other NASA Centers to accomplish this goal. The MMPACT project consists of three elements. The first focuses on the development of an autonomous construction system. The second focuses on construction feedstock materials development. The third element focuses on the development of a microwave sintering construction capability. The team plans to demonstrate construction on a small Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) lander in the 2025 timeframe, with a future goal of constructing a subscale landing pad in 2028-2029.The MMPACT project is funded through the Lunar Surface Innovation Initiative, which is part of the Space Technology Mission Directorate. Technology Development: The MMPACT team will evaluate multiple autonomous construction and microwave construction technologies, materials, and construction element forms. Selected technologies will be matured; processes and operations will be defined for the two flight missions. Evaluations of materials, as well as the technology itself, will be demonstrated in simulated lunar environments as part of the technology maturation process. The team is keenly aware of the properties of the lunar environment. Its temperature swings, negligible exosphere, and unprepared site foundations factor into the materials for both construction and hardware, the concept of operations, and the technology’s interdependencies. Materials: The team is looking at materials that can be produced from in-situ resources in an effort to make lunar construction cost-effective. The particular focus of the materials team is cementitious materials, metals, and sintered and melted regolith. These materials will be studied for tensile, compressive, and flexural strength. They will also be tested for their ability to handle thermal swings and vacuum. They will be fully characterized using various microscopy techniques to examine micro-structures, chemistry, and crystal formation. Interdependencies: There are many interdependencies that MMPACT has already identified. These include: •Excavation interface •Regolith feedstock beneficiation •Regolith feedstock storage and provision •Requirements for structures •Site-to-site mobility systems •Availability of lunar simulant •Lander off-loading capabilities •Navigation systems •Power •Regolith composition and mineralogy •Lander specifications •Communication protocols Technology developments in these additional areas would be beneficial to MMPACT.

Moon to Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Tec↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Pathfinder Technology Demonstrator (PTD) Status

This paper will provide the status of the NASA Small Spacecraft Technology (SST) program’s Pathfinder Technology Demonstrator (PTD) series. Details on the development, launch, and operations of the recently completed PTD-1, as well as the planned operations of the upcoming PTD-3 and PTD-4 flights will be presented. Significant advances in the capabilities of nano-spacecraft over the past 15 years, coupled with improved access to space for CubeSats, have created new opportunities for scientific exploration using these high-value platforms. Continued development and demonstration of key technologies are improving the performance of the 1-unit (U) and 3U class CubeSats while expanding the reach of nano-spacecraft technologies into larger platforms, such as the 12-kilogram class “6U” buses. NASA’s PTD series is demonstrating a variety of new technologies on-orbit, providing proof of the maturity of these significant new technologies, and enhancing the performance of future CubeSats. Each of the four PTD flights consists of one 6U CubeSat weighing approximately 12 kilograms and measuring approximately 36 centimeters x 25 centimeters x 10 centimeters. Each flight is planned to characterize its payload within 90 days of insertion into low-Earth orbit. The PTD flights will demonstrate key technologies such as novel nano-spacecraft compatible propulsion systems, which enable deep space and maneuverable CubeSat flights; optical communications systems to facilitate high data rate collection and communications; and highly integrated systems that combine power and communication system elements to enable high power generation and novel integrated communication systems. The first PTD spacecraft, PTD-1, was placed in orbit by a SpaceX Falcon 9 launch in January of 2021 and demonstrated the functionality of the HYDROS propulsion system, developed by Tethers Unlimited of Bothell, Washington, over a period of six months. The PTD-3 flight, scheduled for launch in summer 2022, will demonstrate the TeraByte InfraRed Delivery, or TBIRD, optical communications payload developed by Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Laboratory in Lexington. The PTD-4 flight will demonstrate the Lightweight Integrated Solar Array and anTenna, or LISA-T, a payload that consists of an integrated solar array and transceiver developed by NASA’s Marshall Spaceflight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. The PTD spacecraft bus, integration and test, and flight operations services are provided by Tyvak Nano-Satellite Systems, Inc. (“Tyvak”) of Irvine, California. NASA’s SST program within the agency’s Space Technology Mission Directorate funds the PTD demonstration flights. The SST program rapidly develops and demonstrates capabilities for small spacecraft applicable to exploration, science, and the commercial sector. The program is based at NASA’s Ames Research Center.

Small Spacecraft↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dust Mitigation Technology to Enable Survive the Night Capabilities

Introduction: As we return to the Moon, the lunar regolith (i.e. lunar dust) covering the surface will be an obstacle to nominal operations. Accounts from Apollo astronauts and analysis of hardware returned from the surface illustrate just how deleterious the dust can be [1]. During Apollo missions, the lunar dust adhered to hardware mechanically and electrostatically [2]. Surviving the Night: Mitigating the lunar dust will be critical to surviving the night. Going hand-in-hand with other extreme environment considerations, dust mitigation is critical to mission success. Dust Impacts on Other Systems: The lunar dust can have negative implications for power, thermal, mechanisms, and several other systems or sub-systems. For example, Apollo encountered marked degradation of performance in heat rejection systems for the lunar roving vehicle, science packages, and other components because of the lunar dust [1]. For power alone, dust can cause internal clogging for power connectors, heat rejection issues, excessive dust on reflective surfaces, reduced power output for solar arrays, and so on. Dust Mitigation Strategy: In addition to considering technology solutions, it is important for hardware, systems, and or components to have a dust mitigation strategy. At a high level, hardware that will encounter the lunar dust should consider these things when defining a dust mitigation strategy: • Understand Natural Environment • Understand Induced Environment • Understand Tolerance to Dust • Write Dust Requirements • Select Dust Mitigation Solutions • Test Hardware in Dusty Environment More information on each of these can be provided to hardware owners. Dust Mitigation Technology Development: NASA has a series of technologies that may be available for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night. Many of these solutions are leveraging dust mitigation technology development efforts from NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), as well as efforts from ESDMD programs, industry, and academia. Through a series of STMD programs (both internal to NASA and through partnerships), there are several technologies in development as considerations as dust mitigation solutions for hardware. Within STMD, the Game Changing Development Program (GCD) has funded several internal dust mitigation projects including low to mid TRL development, demonstrations on CLPS landers of high TRL solutions, and creating standards and best practices for dust mitigation. STMD dust mitigation efforts also include a series of partnerships for developing technologies and advancing the state of dust mitigation at NASA. This includes the Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC), Small Business Innovation Research, Early Stage Innovations (ESI), Space Technology Research Grants (STRG), Announcement of Collaboration Opportunities (ACOs) and Tipping Points (TPs), and Challenges and Crowdsourcing, among others. There are also a series of dust mitigation solutions that have been widely used terrestrially, or during Apollo. In recent years, several studies have produced more data on the efficacy of these potential solutions in the lunar environment. Dust Mitigation Solutions: Dust mitigation solutions generally fall into four categories: • Dust Tolerant Mechanisms • Passive Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Active Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Dust Measurement Capabilities There are a series of solutions that may prove beneficial for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night, including new technology development as well as proven, terrestrial solutions. This presentation will discuss in more detail what some of these solutions are for payloads going to the surface. References: [1] J. R. Gaier, NASA/TM—2005-213610, The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions [2] T. J. Stubbs, et al. Impact of Dust on Lunar Exploration, 2005

dust mitigation↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Survive the Dust: Dust Mitigation Technology to Enable Survive the Night Capabilities

dust mitigation↗

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↗