SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Technologies”

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 667 records · Page 37

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2022

Life-Cycle and Techno-Economic Assessment of Early-Stage Carbon Capture and Utilization Technologies—A Discussion of Current Challenges and Best Practices

The mitigation of climate change requires research, development, and deployment of new technologies that are not only economically viable but also environmentally benign. Systematic and continuous technology assessment from early technology maturity onwards allows assessment practitioners to identify economic and environmental characteristics. With this information, decision-makers can focus time and resources on the most promising technologies. A broad toolset for technology assessment exists—stretching from the well-established life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology to more loosely defined techno-economic analysis (TEA) methods and the increasingly popular principles of technology maturity assessment such as the concept of technology readiness levels (TRL). However, current technology assessment practice faces various challenges at early stages, resulting in a potential mismatch of study results and stakeholders' needs and an escalation of assessment effort. In this practice review, we outline current challenges in the interplay of LCA, TEA, and TRL and present best practices for assessing early-stage climate change mitigation technologies in the field of carbon capture and utilization (CCU). The findings help practitioners systematically identify the TRL of a technology and adapt technology assessment methodologies accordingly. We highlight the methodological challenges for practitioners when adapting the goal and scope, identifying benchmark technologies, creating a comprehensive inventory, comparing early stage to commercial stage, ensuring clarity of recommendations for decision-making under high uncertainty, and streamlining conventional LCA and TEA assessment approaches and provide actionable recommendations. Overall, this work contributes to identifying promising technologies faster and more systematically, accelerating the development of new technologies for climate change mitigation and beyond.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Energy Consumption and Cost Reduction of Future Light-Duty Vehicles through Advanced Vehicle Technologies: A Modeling Simulation Study Through 2050

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Vehicle Technologies Office (VTO) and Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office (HFTO) aim to develop sustainable, affordable and efficient technologies for transportation of goods and people. Translating investments in advanced transportation component technologies and powertrains to estimate vehicle-level fuel savings potential is critical for understanding DOE’s impact. In this work, we simulated technologies funded by VTO and HFTO for light duty vehicles. The simulations were performed across: Multiple powertrain configurations (i.e., conventional, power-split, extended-range electric vehicle, battery electric drive, and fuel-cell vehicles), Vehicle classes (i.e., compact car, midsize car, small sport utility vehicle [SUV], midsize SUV, and pickup trucks); and Fuels (i.e., gasoline, diesel, hydrogen, and battery electricity). These various technologies are assessed for six different timeframes: laboratory years 2015, 2020, 2025, 2030, and 2045. A delay of 5 years is assumed between laboratory year and model year (year technology is introduced into production). Finally, uncertainties are included for both technology performance and cost aspects by considering two cases: Low case, aligned with DOE technology manager estimates of expected original equipment manufacturer (OEM) improvements based on regulations, business as usual; and High case, aligned with aggressive technology advancements based on R&D targets developed through support by VTO & HFTO. These scenarios are not intended as predictions of future performances. The energy and cost impact of different technologies were estimated using Autonomie (www.autonomie.net), Argonne vehicle system simulation tool. Autonomie is a state-of-the-art vehicle system simulation tool used to assess the energy consumption, performance and cost of multiple advanced vehicle technologies across classes (from light to heavy duty), powertrains (from conventional to HEVs, FCEVs, PHEVs and BEVs), components and control strategies. Autonomie is packaged with a complete set of vehicle models for a wide range of vehicle classes, powertrain configurations and component technologies, including vehicle level and component level controls. These controls were developed and calibrated using dynamometer test data. Autonomie has been used to support a wide range of studies including analyzing various component technologies, sizing powertrains components for different vehicle requirements, comparing the benefits of powertrain configurations, optimizing both heuristic and route based vehicle energy control and predicting transportation energy use when paired with a traffic modeling tool such as POLARIS. This report documents the assumptions and estimates the vehicle-level energy consumption benefits and associated technology costs for the various types of light duty vehicles. All details of vehicle assumptions and simulation results are available in the spreadsheets accompanying this report.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

NASA NTRS2012

Innovative Technologies for Global Space Exploration

Under the direction of NASA's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD), Directorate Integration Office (DIO), The Tauri Group with NASA's Technology Assessment and Integration Team (TAIT) completed several studies and white papers that identify novel technologies for human exploration. These studies provide technical inputs to space exploration roadmaps, identify potential organizations for exploration partnerships, and detail crosscutting technologies that may meet some of NASA's critical needs. These studies are supported by a relational database of more than 400 externally funded technologies relevant to current exploration challenges. The identified technologies can be integrated into existing and developing roadmaps to leverage external resources, thereby reducing the cost of space exploration. This approach to identifying potential spin-in technologies and partnerships could apply to other national space programs, as well as international and multi-government activities. This paper highlights innovative technologies and potential partnerships from economic sectors that historically are less connected to space exploration. It includes breakthrough concepts that could have a significant impact on space exploration and discusses the role of breakthrough concepts in technology planning. Technologies and partnerships are from NASA's Technology Horizons and Technology Frontiers game-changing and breakthrough technology reports as well as the External Government Technology Dataset, briefly described in the paper. The paper highlights example novel technologies that could be spun-in from government and commercial sources, including virtual worlds, synthetic biology, and human augmentation. It will consider how these technologies can impact space exploration and will discuss ongoing activities for planning and preparing them.

Hay, Jason↗

NASA NTRS2012

Decision Gate Process for Assessment of a Technology Development Portfolio

The NASA Dust Management Project (DMP) was established to provide technologies (to TRL 6 development level) required to address adverse effects of lunar dust to humans and to exploration systems and equipment, which will reduce life cycle cost and risk, and will increase the probability of sustainable and successful lunar missions. The technology portfolio of DMP consisted of different categories of technologies whose final product is either a technology solution in itself, or one that contributes toward a dust mitigation strategy for a particular application. A Decision Gate Process (DGP) was developed to assess and validate the achievement and priority of the dust mitigation technologies as the technologies progress through the development cycle. The DGP was part of continuous technology assessment and was a critical element of DMP risk management. At the core of the process were technology-specific criteria developed to measure the success of each DMP technology in attaining the technology readiness levels assigned to each decision gate. The DGP accounts for both categories of technologies and qualifies the technology progression from technology development tasks to application areas. The process provided opportunities to validate performance, as well as to identify non-performance in time to adjust resources and direction. This paper describes the overall philosophy of the DGP and the methodology for implementation for DMP, and describes the method for defining the technology evaluation criteria. The process is illustrated by example of an application to a specific DMP technology.

Kohli, Rajiv↗

NASA NTRS2015

Bridging the Technology Readiness "Valley of Death" Utilizing Nanosats

Incorporating new technology is a hallmark of space missions. Missions demand ever-improving tools and techniques to allow them to meet the mission science requirements. In Earth Science, these technologies are normally expressed in new instrument capabilities that can enable new measurement concepts, extended capabilities of existing measurement techniques, or totally new detection capabilities, and also, information systems technologies that can enhance data analysis or enable new data analyses to advance modeling and prediction capabilities. Incorporating new technologies has never been easy. There is a large development step beyond demonstration in a laboratory or on an airborne platform to the eventual space environment that is sometimes referred to as the "technology valley of death." Studies have shown that non-validated technology is a primary cause of NASA and DoD mission delays and cost overruns. With the demise of the New Millennium Program within NASA, opportunities for demonstrating technologies in space have been rare. Many technologies are suitable for a flight project after only ground testing. However, some require validation in a relevant or a space flight environment, which cannot be fully tested on the ground or in airborne systems. NASA's Earth Science Technology Program has initiated a nimble program to provide a fairly rapid turn-around of space validated technologies, and thereby reducing future mission risk in incorporating new technologies. The program, called In-Space Validation of Earth Science Technology (InVEST), now has five tasks in development. Each are 3U CubeSats and they are targeted for launch opportunities in the 2016 time period. Prior to formalizing an InVEST program, the technology program office was asked to demonstrate how the program would work and what sort of technologies could benefit from space validation. Three projects were developed and launched, and have demonstrated the technologies that they set out to validate. This paper will provide a brief status of the pre-InVEST CubeSats, and discuss the development and status of the InVEST program. Figure

Earth Science↗

NASA NTRS2021

NASA Strategy for Technology Development

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

Erica Rodgers↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Small Spacecraft and Distributed Systems: Development and Demonstration of Technologies Enabling Swarms and New Spacecraft Platforms with AI and Edge Computing

NASA’s Small Spacecraft & Distributed Systems (SSDS) within the Research and Technology Mission Directorate (RTMD) expands U.S. capability to execute unique missions through targeted investment, rapid development, and flight demonstration of small spacecraft technologies applicable to exploration, science and the commercial space sector. SSDS strategically invests in technology development and on-orbit demonstrations executed across NASA, other government agencies, industry, and academia. The program’s University SmallSat Technology Partnerships initiative awards academic researchers with the opportunity to collaborate with NASA to mature innovative technology. Capabilities aligned with RTMD’s technology shortfalls and interests - power, processing, propulsion, sensors, communications, autonomous navigation, architectures, and advanced applications like artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, and edge computing - are prioritized in SSDS investments. These investments enable distributed, autonomous, and cooperative small spacecraft systems that support swarm missions extending beyond low Earth orbit into cislunar and deep space. This paper highlights representative SSDS flight demonstrations that mature these capabilities to enable a future operational infrastructure needed to support sustained exploration of the Moon and beyond. SSDS’s investment strategy emphasizes rapid development and on-orbit demonstration to validate spacecraft technologies required for swarms and distributed mission architectures. The Starling swarm technology demonstration mission exemplifies this approach by advancing distributed spacecraft autonomy, cooperative operations, and space situational awareness. Extended flight testing and ongoing studies of next generation swarm configurations and on-orbit space traffic monitoring and management continue to inform future swarm designs. DiskSat’s four-spacecraft demonstration mission represents SSDS’s strategic vision to expand the design space for future small spacecraft through its commitment to advance novel platform concepts that can impact how science is performed on orbit. Continuing to invest in future platforms, the notional PY12 concept is a 12-spacecraft swarm hosting neuromorphic processors and is envisioned as an on-orbit testbed for AI, edge computing, and positioning, navigation and timing technologies. SSDS also invests in single-spacecraft technology demonstrations that underpin the success of future swarm missions and accelerate the availability of validated technologies across the small spacecraft ecosystem. Examples of such demonstrations include Pathfinder Technology Demonstrator-3 (PTD-3), which performed high-rate optical communications; PTD-R, which demonstrated a camera capable of simultaneous ultraviolet and short-wave infrared optical sensing; and CAPSTONE, the Cislunar Autonomous Positioning System Technology and Operations Navigation Experiment, which validated autonomous navigation in cislunar space. Collectively, SSDS-funded demonstrations advance capabilities across swarms and illustrate a coordinated investment strategy to mature high-impact technologies required for autonomous, distributed, and cooperative small spacecraft systems for low Earth orbit, cislunar, and deep space applications. Technology demonstrations strengthen SSDS partnerships with industry, academia, and other government agencies, and promote small spacecraft community adoption of capabilities required to close technical gaps for swarm missions.

Jan Stupl↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Small Spacecraft and Distributed Systems: Development and Demonstration of Technologies Enabling Swarms and New Spacecraft Platforms with AI and Edge Computing

Jan Stupl↗

DOE OSTI2012

Remediation Technologies Screening Report for the Deep Vadose Zone, Hanford's Central Plateau - 12414

Deep Vadose Zone contamination is a significant issue because it represents a potential source for continued release of contamination to the groundwater and associated receptors. This contamination, which is the result of past waste disposal practices on the Hanford Site Central Plateau, occurs deep in the subsurface and is not easily remediated by typical surface remedies. The Deep Vadose Zone is defined as the sediment below the limit of typical surface-based remedies (such as, excavation or caps), but above the water table. The Central Plateau Deep Vadose Zone begins at a depth of approximately 15 m (50 ft) below ground surface and extends to a depth of approximately 76 m (250 ft) below ground surface. Cleanup of the Deep Vadose Zone is challenging because contamination is difficult to access and expensive to characterize; contaminants occur at different depths and soil types; conventional, surface-based remedies have limited effectiveness; and remedy performance is difficult to predict, test, and monitor. Typically, remedial technologies for Deep Vadose Zone contamination are less developed than for the shallow soil contamination or saturated groundwater contaminants. In addition, few remediation technologies have been tested in the field, and fewer still have been successfully implemented as full remedial actions. These challenges, along with the limited number of potentially applicable remediation technologies, complicate the decision-making process for evaluating and selecting Deep Vadose Zone remedial alternatives. The Deep Vadose Zone remediation technologies pre-screening involved a comprehensive review of potentially applicable technologies for remediating Deep Vadose Zone contamination in the Hanford Site's Central Plateau. The list of remediation technologies was developed from previous Hanford Site studies, science and technology databases, as well as other cleanup projects across the country that have similar conditions. The list of remediation technologies was shared with the public and stakeholders to provide an opportunity to identify additional technologies. From these efforts, 59 technologies that may support future remediation of the Deep Vadose Zone were identified. The initial list of 59 potential technologies were then screened in order to identify viable or potentially viable technologies whose implementation would benefit from further investigation and evaluation during the remedial investigation/feasibility study activities. This approach eliminated five technologies from further consideration because they either would not be ready to support remediation within the next 3 to 5 years or were not applicable for Deep Vadose Zone remediation. Eleven (11) technologies were identified as viable, requiring no further testing or investigation during the RCRA Facility Investigation/Remedial Investigation activities. The remaining 43 potentially applicable technologies were identified as requiring additional testing or investigation to determine whether they should be considered further in the selection of a remedial alternative for the 200-DV-1 Operable Unit. The results of this pre-screening effort will be used to plan and scope the appropriate field investigation, treatability study, and feasibility study tasks during development of the 200-DV-1 Operable Unit Work Plan. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

NASA NTRS2014

NASA/Goddard Thermal Technology Overview 2014

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 Technology Development Program at NASA. 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. In addition, technology development activities supported by internal research and development (IRAD) program, the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) program, and the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC), are reviewed in this presentation. Specific technologies addressed include; two-phase systems applications and issues on NASA missions, latest developments of electro-hydrodynamically pumped systems, development of high electrical conductivity coatings, and various other research activities. New Technology program underway at NASA, although funding is limited center dot NASA/GSFC's primary mission of science satellite development is healthy and vibrant, although new missions are scarce - now have people on overhead working new missions and proposals center dot Future mission applications promise to be thermally challenging center dot Direct technology funding is still very restricted - Projects are the best source for direct application of technology - SBIR thermal subtopic resurrected in FY 14 - Limited Technology development underway via IRAD, NESC, other sources - Administrator pushing to revive technology and educational programs at NASA - new HQ directorate established

Cooling↗

DOE OSTI2018

Fundamental catalytic challenges to design improved biomass conversion technologies

During the past ten years, there has been significant interest and investment in the study of catalytic conversion of biomass-derived feedstocks into renewable fuels and chemicals. In the United States, an estimated $25 billion has been spent by venture capitalists, industry, and government agencies during this period of time to commercialize “renewable technologies” including solar energy, wind power, batteries, and biofuels (e.g., cellulosic ethanol). Four societal factors are driving these investments including: (1) the increased price of crude oil; (2) concerns about global warming; (3) the desire to improve rural economies where biomass is produced, and; (4) national goals to become energy self-sufficient. Furthermore, underlying these efforts is the realization that lignocellulosic biomass is the only realistic, near-term and non-food-competitive source of renewable organic carbon. To this end, legislative efforts, such as the US Renewable Fuel Standards, have been implemented to create subsidies, tax credits, mandates, and loan guarantees to help bring renewable fuel technologies to market. However, the representative body of industrial efforts to this end has faced significant challenges, with several startup companies having commercialized biomass conversion technologies but having struggled to reach commercial scale; in fact, many of these companies have filed for bankruptcy. This situation is likely due to the challenges associated with scaling up unproven pioneer processes, as well as neophyte investors not understanding the decade-long time frames and the sheer amount of funding that is often required to bring chemical process technologies to market. Nevertheless, several emerging catalytic technologies have either entered the market place, or are currently demonstrating their technologies in fully integrated pilot plants. Commercial and near commercial technologies for second generation biomass conversion technologies to-date include, among others: biomass-derived jet and diesel fuel from both waste vegetable oils and ethanol; small scale production of renewable jet and diesel from landfill gases via Fischer-Tropsch synthesis; catalytic conversion of carbohydrates into gasoline and aromatics; hydropyrolysis of biomass into gasoline and diesel, and; catalytic conversion of wood into aromatics. To be successful, biomass conversion technologies must ultimately be able to compete economically with petroleum technologies, which are already operating at large commercial scales and have been practiced for decades. To this end, various factors must be considered when evaluating the potential for new processes to compete with incumbent technologies; factors such as regional variations in feedstock quality and availability, government policy, subsidies and tax rates, and the proprietary positions of the ancillary technologies that might support the process. By any measure, however, a critical metric of the economic potential of a process is its efficiency with respect to the yield of products from raw materials, and this metric of performance is directly related to atom efficiency of the underlying chemical reactions. Therefore, while promising biomass conversion technologies continue to demonstrate progress towards commercialization, there remains an important need for the catalysis community to aid in this effort by: (1) designing more active, selective and stable catalysts, and (2) elucidating a more detailed understanding of the catalytic chemistries underlying these processes. Indeed, the study of catalytic biomass conversion has grown tremendously during the past decade; and new or emerging technologies that are in the laboratory stage have allowed for biomass to be converted into a wider variety of commodity chemicals and the full range of liquid fuels that are produced from petroleum. The objective of this perspective is to highlight some of the ongoing, fundamental challenges with respect to the catalytic conversion of biomass into renewable products, and to provide insight as to how the catalysis community can overcome several of these challenges. It is our belief that, as an international academic community of catalysis researchers, we can (and must) work together to address these challenges, and to drive progress toward the production of next-generation renewable chemicals and fuels from biomass.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2018

End-of-Life Management of Photovoltaic Panels: Trends in PV Module Recycling Technologies

Photovoltaic (PV) technology is one of the most promising technologies for improving energy security and mitigating climate change. The PV market is growing rapidly, and further market expansion is expected all over the world. In addition to its positive impacts on energy security and climate change, PV technology is also among the most environmentally friendly technologies of all energy and electricity generation technologies, particularly when evaluated from a life-cycle viewpoint, including end-of-life management. This means that proper end-of-life management is an indispensable issue for 'clean' energy technologies. All technologies eventually degrade to where they enter their end-of-life stage, eventually requiring replacement. PV modules have a useful lifespan of approximately 30 years. With PV deployment increasing exponentially, the number of PV modules that reach the end of useful life will also greatly increase after the time lag of operation, accumulating proportionately as waste. A report published by International Energy Agency Photovoltaic Power Systems Programme (IEA PVPS) Task12 and the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) in 2016 projected waste PV modules globally to amount to 1,7-8,0 million tons cumulatively by 2030 and to 60-78 million tons cumulatively by 2050. Generally, sustainable waste management offers opportunities known as the 3Rs: reduce, reuse, and recycle. When a product cannot be repaired or reused, recycling is the next preferable option before disposing as waste. In anticipation of the large volume of waste PV modules, and to retain PV's position as a clean energy technology, PV module recycling has become an important emerging topic, and various discussions and activities have been conducted and developed by governments, organizations, and companies. (Discussions on the topic of PV module reuse are considered to be less mature.) The EU Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive revised in 2012 (2012/19/EU) addresses the waste management of all electronics, including waste PV modules, in the EU member states. It requires 75%/65% (recovery/recycling rate) of waste PV modules by mass to be recycled through 2016, then increases to 80%/75% through 2018 and to 85%/80% thereafter. In addition to such a regulatory scheme, it is obvious that recycling technologies must be available to meet the increasing requirements of WEEE. Available recycling facilities that treat PV modules can meet current WEEE requirements; additional research and development (R&D) is required to meet subsequent WEEE requirements at reasonable cost. This report aims to provide an international survey of trends related to the development of PV module recycling technology from the perspective of both the private and public sectors. For the private sector, we review patents, as patent filing has been increasing since 2011. For the public sector, we review R&D plans and investments made by many countries active in PV module recycling technology development. Because it takes a long time to develop and commercialize new technologies, we hope that this report will accelerate technology development through transparent sharing of status and insight pertaining to the development of PV module recycling technologies. Managing end-of-life PV modules to recover valuable materials that can displace virgin ones is an important step toward meeting the challenge of sustainabiliy.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

NASA NTRS1992

Space technology research plans

Development of new technologies is the primary purpose of the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST). OAST's mission includes the following two goals: (1) to conduct research to provide fundamental understanding, develop advanced technology and promote technology transfer to assure U.S. preeminence in aeronautics and to enhance and/or enable future civil space missions: and (2) to provide unique facilities and technical expertise to support national aerospace needs. OAST includes both NASA Headquarters operations as well as programmatic and institutional management of the Ames Research Center, the Langley Research Center and the Lewis Research Center. In addition. a considerable portion of OAST's Space R&T Program is conducted through the flight and science program field centers of NASA. Within OAST, the Space Technology Directorate is responsible for the planning and implementation of the NASA Space Research and Technology Program. The Space Technology Directorate's mission is 'to assure that OAST shall provide technology for future civil space missions and provide a base of research and technology capabilities to serve all national space goals.' Accomplishing this mission entails the following objectives: y Identify, develop, validate and transfer technology to: (1) increase mission safety and reliability; (2) reduce flight program development and operations costs; (3) enhance mission performance; and (4) enable new missions. Provide the capability to: (1) advance technology in critical disciplines; and (2) respond to unanticipated mission needs. In-space experiments are an integral part of OAST's program and provides for experimental studies, development and support for in-space flight research and validation of advanced space technologies. Conducting technology experiments in space is a valuable and cost effective way to introduce advanced technologies into flight programs. These flight experiments support both the R&T base and the focussed programs within OAST.

Hook, W. Ray↗

NASA NTRS2000

Applying Technology Ranking and Systems Engineering in Advanced Life Support

According to the Advanced Life Support (ALS) Program Plan, the Systems Modeling and Analysis Project (SMAP) has two important tasks: 1) prioritizing investments in ALS Research and Technology Development (R&TD), and 2) guiding the evolution of ALS systems. Investments could be prioritized simply by independently ranking different technologies, but we should also consider a technology's impact on system design. Guiding future ALS systems will require SMAP to consider many aspects of systems engineering. R&TD investments can be prioritized using familiar methods for ranking technology. The first step is gathering data on technology performance, safety, readiness level, and cost. Then the technologies are ranked using metrics or by decision analysis using net present economic value. The R&TD portfolio can be optimized to provide the maximum expected payoff in the face of uncertain future events. But more is needed. The optimum ALS system can not be designed simply by selecting the best technology for each predefined subsystem. Incorporating a new technology, such as food plants, can change the specifications of other subsystems, such as air regeneration. Systems must be designed top-down starting from system objectives, not bottom-up from selected technologies. The familiar top-down systems engineering process includes defining mission objectives, mission design, system specification, technology analysis, preliminary design, and detail design. Technology selection is only one part of systems analysis and engineering, and it is strongly related to the subsystem definitions. ALS systems should be designed using top-down systems engineering. R&TD technology selection should consider how the technology affects ALS system design. Technology ranking is useful but it is only a small part of systems engineering.

Jones, Harry↗

NASA NTRS2005

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.↗

NASA NTRS2006

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.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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

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

Kurt A Polzin↗

DOE OSTI2012

Technology Development: From Idea to Implementation - 12131

There are good ideas and new technologies proposed every day to solve problems within the DOE complex. A process to transition a new technology from inception to the decision to launch a project with baselines is described. Examples from active technology development projects within Savannah River Remediation (SRR) will be used to illustrate the points. The process includes decision points at key junctures leading to preliminary design. At that point, normal project management tools can be employed. The technology development steps include proof-of-principle testing, scaled testing and analysis, and conceptual design. Tools are used that define the scope necessary for each step of technology development. The tools include use of the DOE technology readiness guide, Consolidated Hazards Analysis (CHA) and internal checklists developed by Savannah River Remediation. Integration with operating or planned facilities is also included. The result is a roadmap and spreadsheet that identifies each open question and how it may be answered. Performance criteria are developed that enable simple decisions to be made after the completion of each step. Conceptual design tasks should begin as the technology development continues. The most important conceptual design tasks at this point in the process include process flow diagrams (PFDs), high level Process and Instrumentation Drawings (P and IDs), and general layout drawings. These should influence the design of the scaled simulant testing. Mechanical and electrical drawings that support cost and schedule development should also be developed. An early safety control strategy developed from the CHA will also influence the cost. The combination of test results, calculations and early design output with rough order of magnitude cost and schedule information provide input into the decisions to proceed with a project and data to establish the baseline. This process can be used to mature any new technology, especially those that must be integrated into complicated flow sheets. Then fully informed decisions can be made to usher technology development ideas through project implementation. Examples from active technology development projects, Tank 48 Treatment and Enhanced Chemical Cleaning, are presented. This model for technology development integrates several tools and activities to provide a logical method for maturing new ideas and technologies. It provides a framework to develop a good idea into a full up design/build project. This model defines a set of integrated tasks to mature the technology and define scope, cost and schedule necessary to make business decisions for implementing technology development. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗