Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “PROCUREMENT”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 775 records · Page 43

The Evolution of CubeSat Spacecraft Platforms

The maturity of small spacecraft technology is indicated by the continued growth in the number of missions, mission complexity, and the expansion of smallsat subsystem capability. The inception of the CubeSat platform has incentivized the space industry to achieve a broad collection of science for less cost, and there is an evolving trend in the overall utilization of the CubeSat platform seen in the last decade. CubeSats’ initial purpose was to serve as a platform to demonstrate specific technologies while also serving as an educational platform for students and professional engineers alike. In the ten years since, CubeSats are being designed for more complex science missions around the Moon, Sun, or to deep space, and the projection for 10 years from now is that CubeSats will be performing more complex deep space missions. The progress of overall small spacecraft technology development is captured in the most recent 2020 Small Spacecraft Technology State-of-the-Art (SoA) report, the objective of which is to assess and provide an overview on the current development status across all subsystem architectures. The SoA report summarizes the results of a variety of surveys covering device performance, capabilities, and flight history, as presented in publicly available literature. The focus of these surveys is on devices or systems that can be commercially procured or appear on a path towards being commercial availability.

Small Spacecraft Technology↗

The Evolution of CubeSat Spacecraft Platforms

The maturity of small spacecraft technology is indicated by the continued growth in the number of missions, mission complexity, and the expansion of smallsat subsystem capability. The inception of the CubeSat platform has incentivized the space industry to achieve a broad collection of science for less cost, and there is an evolving trend in the overall utilization of the CubeSat platform seen in the last decade. The initial purpose of CubeSats’ was to serve as a platform to demonstrate specific technologies while also serving as an educational platform for students and professional engineers alike. In the ten years since, CubeSats have been designed for more complex science missions around the Moon, Sun, or to deep space, and the projection for ten years from now is that CubeSats will be performing more complex deep space missions. The progress of overall small spacecraft technology development is captured in the most recent 2021 Small Spacecraft Technology State-of-the-Art (SoA) report, the objective of which is to assess and provide an overview on the current development status across all subsystem architectures. The SoA report summarizes the results of a variety of surveys covering device performance, capabilities, and flight history, as presented in publicly available literature. The focus of these surveys is on devices or systems that can be commercially procured or appear on a path toward becoming commercially available.

Small Spacecraft Technology↗

Advanced Electric Propulsion System (AEPS) Enabling a Sustainable Return to the Lunar Surface through NASA Gateway

NASA continues to evolve a human exploration approach for beyond low-Earth orbit. The center of this approach is NASA’s Gateway that is envisioned to provide a maneuverable outpost in lunar orbit to extend human presence in deep space and expand on NASA exploration goals. The Gateway represents the initial step in NASA’s architecture for human cislunar operations, lunar surface access and missions to Mars. NASA announced at the May 2020 NASA Advisory Council’s Human Explorations and Operations Committee a new plan that calls for launching the first two elements of Gateway as a co-manifested mission in the late 2023 timeframe [2]. Launching the Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) and the Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO) together reduces mission risk, utilizes the PPE high-powered Electric Propulsion (EP) system to transport both elements to the lunar orbit, and reduces overall cost. NASA and Maxar Technologies have a commercial partnership to develop and demonstration a high-powered Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) spacecraft [3, 4]. The PPE is baselined to include three 12.5-kW Advanced Electric Propulsion Systems (AEPS) and four 6-kW Hall thrusters, currently under development by Maxar, for a total beginning of life propulsion power of over 48-kW [5]. High-power solar electric propulsion is one of the key technologies that has been prioritized because of its significant exploration benefits, specifically, for missions beyond low Earth orbit. Spacecraft size and mass are currently dominated by onboard chemical propulsion systems and propellants that may constitute more than 50 percent of spacecraft mass. This impact can be substantially reduced through the utilization of SEP, due to its higher specific impulse and lower propellant load required to meet the equivalent mission delta-V. Studies performed for NASA’s HEOMD and Science Mission Directorate (SMD) have demonstrated that 40-kW-class SEP provides the necessary capabilities that would enable near term and future architectures, and science missions [6]. Accordingly, NASA has been developing a 12 kW Hall thruster electric propulsion thruster that can serve as the building block for a 40-kW-class SEP capability. The AEPS development, led by the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), began with the maturation of the high-power Hall thruster. The technology development work has transitioned to AR via a competitive procurement selection for the AEPS contract in May 2016. Management of the AEPS contract is being led by NASA GRC with funding from NASA’s Science Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) under the Technology Demonstration Missions (TDM) program. NASA continues to support the AEPS development leveraging in-house expertise, plasma modeling capability, and world-class test facilities.

AEPS↗

Genesis Solar Wind Sample Curation Documentation

Introduction: A scientist with experience as a sample science analyst, provider of flight hardware for multiple missions, and senior engineer in an ISO 2000-rated manufacturing plant has described the timeline of key participants in any PI-led sample return mission, the breadth of the organizations involved [1,2], and, of interest to this meeting, choosing the types of data to preserve and issues of future data accessibility. This work broadens that perspective by giving similar lessons from Genesis sample curation point-of-view. Curation participation regarding data gathering was part of the mission review process from the beginning. Genesis’ story illustrates outcome of several choices about types of data to record and preserve. Precision analysis of solar wind atoms captured in pure, ultraclean substrates is the driving science goal; therefore, detailed documentation was captured from all mission and curation phases and from investigator laboratories because these processes affect the final analytical results [3]. Pre-flight: Design and fabrication of the spacecraft. Like many modern small sample return missions, Genesis was a tightly managed team integrated across science, engineering and curation. Communication across the team was excellent, and, for the most part, the hands-on engineering technicians understood the impacts of “small choices” they routinely make, and the eyes-on oversight of manufacturing processes by scientists was mindful of details. The payload was designed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the spacecraft by Lockheed Martin. Solar wind collectors and instruments were fabricated by multiple vendors and laboratories. The main portion of the payload was assembled at JSC. Fabrication procedures and contamination-control data (with witness coupons) were stored primarily at JSC. The original composition, dimensions and configuration of components, results of thermal testing, etc. are still needed for interpretation of analytical data. At times, these must be estimated from secondary information acquired pre-flight. Moreover, some files (e.g., original 3-D models and early Powerpoint) cannot be opened using software. Archived curation data includes 2-D drawings, material usage lists, QA documentation and analyses of consumables used during fabrication. Important chemical information still resides in archived hardware, paints and lubricants, material coupons, cleaning coupons, environmental witness plates and reference materials from manufacturing facilities. Purity and cleanliness of collector substrates. Semi-conductor vendors provided surface cleanliness data and some purity data. Purity for specific elements of interest was verified by science team members in their laboratories [4]. Curation archived procurement and shipping records, analysis reports, and non-proprietary fabrication data. A physical archive of flight collector reference materials is maintained for future use so additional data can be collected as analytical techniques improve. These are of increased value due to the hard landing upon re-entry. Cleaning and cleanliness assessments of flight hardware. Cleaning of the science canister payload was performed at JSC in a dedicated ISO 4 cleanroom using ultrapure water (UPW). The cleanliness of this UPW was monitored throughout processing. The archive for the clean lab also includes airborne particle counts, airborne molecular and inorganic contamination measurements as well as cleanroom construction material coupons and witness coupons. Hardware cleanliness was assessed by particle counts in rinse water batches. This information is recorded in batch cleaning forms and logbooks, and are, perhaps, of decreased value due to the hard landing. Post-flight: Curation-generated data. The curation handling history of each Genesis sample is documented in a typical astromaterials sample database which captures sample location, physical description and characterization data. Samples have a “shelf life”. Crucial to the preservation of samples is ongoing documentation of the sample environment, initially under curatorial control but is now a separate facility function with requires coordination. PI-generated data. Data on sample characterization and cleaning techniques continues to be generated by sample users [5]. These are often captured in LPSC abstracts, but these “engineering” results often are not publishable as stand-alone papers. We are actively looking for ways to make this information more accessible to users. Ion implants into samples have aided science return and can be shared among investigators. These (and similar) materials should be added to the curatorial collection with appropriate process and characterization data generated externally. Summary: Complete data archives for returned astromaterial samples must be broad in types and formats, and inclusive of environmental monitoring.

Genesis↗

Modular Composite Damage Detection System (MCDDS)

The 2020 CIF funded Modular Composite Damage Detection System (MCDDS) aims to advance the technology of damage detection in composites in the areas of thin, flexible damage detection panel construction, encapsulation techniques in composite matrixes, innovative integration and interfacing techniques with flexible embedded sensory panels, repair methods of composite materials, and improved packaging of the MCDDS. Custom thin, flexible polyimide printed circuit boards (PCBs) were designed and procured for fabrication of test specimens. A custom interface PCB was designed and fabricated to monitor the newly developed damage detection test specimens. Test specimens were fabricated using the novel flexible circuitry that were either fully or partially encapsulated. The fully encapsulated specimens were used to demonstrate embedded damage detection concepts and the partially encapsulated specimens were used to demonstrate surface-mounted (laminate) damage detection concepts. The new composite damage detection test specimens were tested and evaluated to determine if the novel damage detection sensory panels could withstand low-cycle threshold fatigue loading per a modified version of American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D 7264 for up to 50 cycles without void formation. The data for multiple sensory panels indicates that the newly fabricated sensory panels are robust and do indeed withstand three-point bend flexural loading for more than 50 cycles. Additionally, testing was performed to determine if damage could be detected in damage detection test specimens subjected to failure using a 3-point bend test per a modified version of ASTM D 7264. Again, multiple sensory panels (both fully and partially encapsulated) showed the ability to detect damage to specimens subjected to failure per a modified version of ASTM D 7264. Additionally, a novel concept for tracking and monitoring of cracking (and potentially delamination) in composites was designed and developed that utilizes painted-on conductors.

Christopher Forney↗

Blue Origin De-orbit Descent and Landing Tipping Point: Program Final Report

The purpose of this document is to provide a final report on the Deorbit, Descent, and Landing (DDL) Tipping Point program, a public-private partnership between Blue Origin and NASA that is partially funded by NASA contract 80LARC19C0005. In this report we summarize the results of the entire contract, including recommendations and conclusions based on the experience and results obtained. Only the portions funded by the government with associated unlimited rights are documented in detail in this report. For the work funded by Blue Origin, summaries with unlimited rights are provided for context and completeness. The Blue Origin funded work exceeded 25% of the originally proposed total program cost and included a mixture of hardware procurement and critical technology maturation. The scope of this document is a discussion of all the major tasks performed under the contract including the sensor flight demonstrations on New Shepard, the hardware in the loop lunar landing navigator demonstration, and the ground testing of the Flash LiDAR hazard sensor. The contributions from the multiple NASA teams – Johnson Space Center, Langley Research Center, Goddard Space Flight Center, and Jet Propulsion Laboratory – are described along with the contributions from Blue Origin. This document is the Final Report for statement of work item 4.1.2.10 as Deliverable 5.8.

Stefan Bieniawski↗

Landing Humans and Human-Class Cargo on the Moon and Mars

For more than a decade, efforts have been ongoing at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, Alabama, to land humans and large, human-rated cargo on planetary bodies like the Moon and Mars. This work continues today under the Center’s Lander Programs (LP) office. Recognizing MSFC’s heritage, NASA stood up the Human Landing System program at the Center in August 2019 to be responsible for spacecrafts that will land the next American astronauts on the Moon under Artemis. With work well underway for the historic Artemis III mission to land the first woman and first person of color on the lunar surface through the Appendix H Option A contract with SpaceX, LP is focused on the development of landers that will support the Agency’s long-term Artemis efforts at the Moon and NASA’s future at Mars. In March 2022, NASA announced its plan to solicit a second industry provider in addition to SpaceX to develop and demonstrate a lander that meets the program’s extended set of requirements for missions beyond Artemis III. Under the umbrella of Sustaining Lunar Development, these requirements will meet NASA’s needs for recurring, long-term access to the lunar surface, such as accommodating an increased crew size and delivering more mass to the surface. Additionally, NASA plans to leverage crewed lander development activities to procure and certify the design of landers capable of human-class cargo delivery. This paper will examine how the Lander Program office at MSFC is bridging from the initial demonstration phase of development for the Human Landing System program to the Sustaining Lunar Development phase and feeding forward to Mars. The requirements and lines of effort for landing humans and human class cargo will be discussed, as well as near-term and future milestones for the program.

Lemuel Carpenter↗

LunaNet Governance: Organizing and Planning for LunaNet Operations

LunaNet is proposed to be the lunar internet, providing services for communications, networking, position, navigation, and timing for missions in transit to and from the moon, in orbit around the moon, in transit to and from the surface, and on the surface. It is envisioned to be an open, international architecture with contributions from multiple organizations including international civil space agencies, commercial service providers, academic institutions, and other organizations. Using a combination of conventional and emerging technologies, LunaNet will create a lunar-centric network-of-networks that inherits some features of the terrestrial internet but has unique characteristics that will drive substantially different operations. Government acquisition efforts have already begun to procure commercial lunar communications and navigation services. A multi-stakeholder approach to developing the community-wide concepts of operation has been initiated by the Interagency Operations Advisory Group (IOAG), which is formed of international government space agencies, that includes other international organizations such as the Internet Society, Internet Engineering Task Force, International Committee on Global Navigation Satellite Systems, and Space Frequency Coordination Group as well as industry and academic participants. Products of the Interim Committee on LunaNet Governance will include the recommendation and definition of an initial international organizational governance structure; associated roles, responsibilities, and processes; and recommended steps to implement the governance approach. This paper will describe the progress made in developing these concepts and coordinating them among the participating organizations.

LunaNet↗

NASA Engineering and Safety Center Technical Bulletin No. 22-08; Contaminant Reduction in High Purity Hydrazine

Hydrazine and its derivatives are used ubiquitously in liquid propulsion systems. In smaller thruster systems, contaminant build up has historically caused flow decay and consequently performance losses. Many of these contaminants are not controlled by the current revision of MIL-PRF-26536 [1], the High Purity Hydrazine (HPH) procurement specification, yet have been observed to be present in HPH at variable concentration and, often exceed potentially problematic levels for small thrusters. This technical bulletin outlines recent work aimed at identifying appropriate separation processes to remove specific target elemental and carbonaceous contamination in HPH.

Technical Bulletin No. 22-08↗

Recommending Low-Cost Compact Space Environment and Space Weather Effects Sensor Suites for NASA Missions

As miniaturized spacecraft (e.g., cubesats and smallsats) and instrumentation become an increasingly indispensable part of space exploration and scientific investigations, it is important to understand their potential susceptibility to space weather impacts resulting from the sometimes volatile space environment. There are a multitude of complexities involved in how space environment interacts with different space hardware/electronics. Measurements of such impacts, however, have been lacking. Therefore, we recommend developing and/or procuring low-cost, low-power consumption, and compact sensor suites (mainly for space weather and impact purposes) and flying them on all future NASA (and, more generally, U.S) missions in order to measure and quantify space weather impacts, in addition to the main instrumentation.

Yihua Zheng↗

Increasing Cognitive Ability/Reserve Using Software – Pilot (ICARUS-Pilot)

BACKGROUND This research study was competitively awarded under the 2022 JSC Innovation Charge Account (ICA) program administered by NASA Johnson Space Center’s Joint Technology Working Group. Study period of performance was May through September 2022, with a maximum allowed procurement budget of $10K. The study sought to quantify and assess the potential benefit of using commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) cognitive training software to improve cognitive performance in an astronaut-like terrestrial population. METHODS Five volunteer research participants were recruited from the JSC employee population to mimic certain demographic characteristics of the NASA astronaut population (age, education/discipline). Participant cognitive performance was assessed before and after executing eighteen sessions of remote cognitive training executed nominally three times per week using six exercises within an adaptive app-based COTS software package (BrainHQ, Posit Science) on study-provided tablets. Pre- and post-training cognitive performance was measured using internal assessments in BrainHQ as well as Cognition Test Battery (CTB) version ISS B01 v3 (3.0.9-201710021500), an independent software test developed specifically for NASA and used currently in research studies on astronauts. BrainHQ exercises were posited to map well or partially to several CTB sub-tests. Participants provided feedback on their study experience formally via semi-structured interview at the conclusion of testing and informally throughout the study if they encountered issues. RESULTS The enrolled ICARUS-Pilot study participants generally matched Artemis crew demographic characteristics. Four of five participants have completed study training and assessment activities as of the writing of this abstract. These test participants complied well with desired training session frequency and duration yielding an average cumulative active training duration of 15 hours over an average of 45 days; participants showed 78% average improvement in metric performance for the six trained exercises, with an associated overall 33%ile ranking increase against performance of the entire BrainHQ subscribing population for internal pre/post assessment, agreeing with post-study survey self-reported performance increases. CTB overall feedback scoring, not corrected for learning effects, showed an average of 19% performance improvement across its 10 performance measures over the training period for the completed participants. Detailed analyses will be conducted once participant data collection for the study is complete and the resulting dataset is fully populated. DISCUSSION These preliminary results provide a positive trend for the effectiveness of the training approach, but further analysis will be needed to establish significance, investigate far transfer, and suggest the needed participant pool size for subsequent efforts to achieve statistically significant outcomes given similar results. The pilot study has already been helpful by allowing the study team to learn a great deal about the capabilities and limitations of the COTS software package that will be reflected in future proposals along with revised timelines for study execution and test participant management. From participant feedback, one common thread regarding the COTS training was that it felt overly repetitive – future proposals should reassess overall training duration, available levels for each trained exercise, and the behavior of the BrainHQ internal scheduler in determining which exercises should be trained and for how long. If the final analysis of this feasibility study ultimately supports it, the study team will recommend further investigation to fully evaluate this potential countermeasure and optimize its implementation. Future proposals would cite this feasibility study’s outcome and would seek to refine the training protocol and obtain statistically significant results for cognitive performance increases as well as retention data.

cognitive training↗

Heatshield for Extreme Entry Environment Technology (Heeet) and 3D Woven TPS Readiness for Outer Planet Probe Missions

Recent mission studies have shown entry at Uranus or at Neptune will require 3-D Woven TPS, either the two-layer HEEET or the single layer 3MDCP, with 3MDCP being more mass efficient. The 3MDCP capability being developed to support MSR EES is sufficient for the Ice Giants if the probe size is 1.25 m or less. [The Uranus Orbiter Probe (UOP) Flagship study for the Decadal used a 1.26m diameter probe.] For larger diameters, dual layer HEEET is easily scalable and is already at TRL 6. It is possible to develop a seam approach that would allow the use of 3MDCP; the resultant mass savings could warrant such a development. Ames is already working on a concept towards this. If aerocapture becomes part of the mission design for Uranus, delivery of the probe from orbit will be easier. Whether or not the probe is delivered from orbit, 3-D Woven (HEEET or 3MDCP) is the only TPS qualified to enable Ice Giant in situ probes. In addition to UOP, Saturn probe mission concepts will be enabled by 3-D Woven, either HEEET or 3MDCP. Launch periods for the UOP flagship or a Saturn probe mission in the early to mid 2030s requires the community to ensure that the 3D woven capability does not atrophy. Currently other than MSR EES, no other mission requires 3-D wovens, and the manufacturing for MSR will be completed by 2023. A gap in production of 5 or more years requires careful monitoring of the industrial base. In addition, manufacturing of 3-D woven TPS, from procurement and weaving to molding and infusion, is a minimum 2-year activity. In response to the threat of atrophy and the time critical and intensive nature of restarting weaving, advocacy from OPAG to NASA SMD for a sustainability effort would ensure in situ exploration of the outer planets in the decades to come.

M Gasch↗

Space Shuttle Orbiter Fracture Control Plan

The criteria are presented for preventing space shuttle structural failure associated with crack initiation or propagation during fabrication, test, handling, and the operational life of the vehicle. The criteria discussed include: engineering responsibilities, assurance management, production, operation and test, procurement, critical parts selection, design, and structural analysis.

Fracture control↗

State-of-the-Art: Small Spacecraft Technology

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

Bruce Yost↗

Increasing Cognitive Ability/Reserve Using Software – Pilot (ICARUS-Pilot)

Background: This research study was competitively awarded under the 2022 JSC Innovation Charge Account (ICA) program administered by NASA Johnson Space Center’s Joint Technology Working Group. Study period of performance was May through September 2022, with a maximum allowed procurement budget of $10K. The study sought to quantify and assess the potential benefit of using commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) cognitive training software to improve cognitive performance in an astronaut-like terrestrial population. Methods: Five volunteer research participants were recruited from the JSC employee population to mimic certain demographic characteristics of the NASA astronaut population (age, education/discipline). Participant cognitive performance was assessed before and after executing eighteen sessions of remote cognitive training executed nominally three times per week using six exercises within an adaptive app-based COTS software package (BrainHQ, Posit Science) on study-provided tablets. Pre- and post-training cognitive performance was measured using internal assessments in BrainHQ as well as Cognition Test Battery (CTB) version ISS B01 v3 (3.0.9-201710021500), an independent software test developed specifically for NASA and used currently in research studies on astronauts. BrainHQ exercises were posited to map well or partially to several CTB sub-tests. Participants provided feedback on their study experience formally via semi-structured interview at the conclusion of testing and informally throughout the study if they encountered issues. Results: The enrolled ICARUS-Pilot study participants generally matched Artemis crew demographic characteristics. Four of five participants have completed study training and assessment activities as of the writing of this abstract. These test participants complied well with desired training session frequency and duration yielding an average cumulative active training duration of 15 hours over an average of 45 days; participants showed 78% average improvement in metric performance for the six trained exercises, with an associated overall 33%ile ranking increase against performance of the entire BrainHQ subscribing population for internal pre/post assessment, agreeing with post-study survey self-reported performance increases. CTB overall feedback scoring, not corrected for learning effects, showed an average of 19% performance improvement across its 10 performance measures over the training period for the completed participants. Detailed analyses will be conducted once participant data collection for the study is complete and the resulting dataset is fully populated. Discussion: These preliminary results provide a positive trend for the effectiveness of the training approach, but further analysis will be needed to establish significance, investigate far transfer, and suggest the needed participant pool size for subsequent efforts to achieve statistically significant outcomes given similar results. The pilot study has already been helpful by allowing the study team to learn a great deal about the capabilities and limitations of the COTS software package that will be reflected in future proposals along with revised timelines for study execution and test participant management. From participant feedback, one common thread regarding the COTS training was that it felt overly repetitive – future proposals should reassess overall training duration, available levels for each trained exercise, and the behavior of the BrainHQ internal scheduler in determining which exercises should be trained and for how long. If the final analysis of this feasibility study ultimately supports it, the study team will recommend further investigation to fully evaluate this potential countermeasure and optimize its implementation. Future proposals would cite this feasibility study’s outcome and would seek to refine the training protocol and obtain statistically significant results for cognitive performance increases as well as retention data.

cognitive training↗

Development of a Ground Multi-Mission Low-Cost Optical Terminal (LCOT) for Free-Space Optical Communications

Once confined to the realm of laboratory experiments and theoretical papers, space-based laser communications (lasercomm) are on the verge of achieving mainstream status. Organizations from Facebook to NASA, and missions from cubesats to Orion are employing lasercomm to achieve gigabit communication speeds at mass and power requirements lower than that of traditional radio frequency (RF) methods. Since first demonstrating free-space optical communications services with Lunar Laser Communications Demonstration (LLCD) in 2013, NASA has invested in developing optical communications technologies and capabilities to enhancing its space communications networks. Along with evolving optical space terminals, NASA is also developing lasercomm grounds stations capable of meeting the rapidly increasing data volume demands of upcoming missions, from low-earth to lunar orbits and beyond and integrating these advanced capabilities into its Near-Space and Deep Space Networks. To meet this emerging need, the Low-Cost Optical Terminal (LCOT) project at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) is designing, building and validating a prototype for a flexible, multi-mission, and economical optical ground terminal that could be used as a blueprint for a global network of optical ground stations, capable of supporting a wide variety of missions. To date a major impediment to widespread adoption of laser communication has been the lack of an existing ground network infrastructure. A mission that wishes to take advantage of laser communication not only needs to invest in an optical space terminal, but it must also finance the creation of ground terminals to receive the downlink signal. This adds significant additional cost. Missions that do decide to incur the cost of financing a network of ground terminals end up building highly specialized optical receivers that are operable as receivers for that specific mission only. Significant Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) cost is invested to build highly specialized one-of-a-kind ground terminals that go into storage after that particular mission is over. This is not an economical approach and does nothing to grow the number of optical ground stations available to future missions. In essence each mission that wants to take advantage of the benefits of lasercom has to start from scratch to provide a ground terminal network to support it. As long as this is the case, the cost for using laser communications will be too high for most missions to consider. LCOT intends to close this gap in technology by designing and developing a standard optical ground terminal design that is flexible enough to serve as a receiver for a wide range of future missions – a ground terminal that can be quickly reconfigured to receive downlinks at different wavelengths using different signal formats. Not only does LCOT have the industry-building objectives of utilizing commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components to the maximum extent possible, but also spurs the commercial development of other necessary lasercomm components not currently offered by industry. Finally, LCOT will give NASA scientists and engineers a facility where they can gain real-world experience with optical communications. It will give engineers a cost-effective way to try out new concepts and processes by providing the infrastructure for such testing. In this way it is hoped LCOT will serve as a stimulus for innovation in optical communications and speed its widespread adoption by future missions. The LCOT is comprised of five subsystems: Free-Space Optical, Transceiver, Amplifier, Monitor and Control, and Observatory Infrastructure. In August 2021, the LCOT team installed a 70 cm telescope, developed by Planewave Instruments that was optimized for optical communications. Free-Space Optical subsystem comprises of the telescope and its associated hardware, including a transmitter optical assembly, wide field cameras, two optical benches, and an adaptive optics subsystem. The transmit optical assembly, a unique concept design, is a cluster of four functionally independent transmit subassemblies located on the receive telescope. In addition to receiving optical signals and directing the expanded beam with high precision to the space terminal, it also performs tracking functions. The transmit optical assembly will support operations from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) through lunar and will be used as a template for industry manufacturing. The Optical Infrastructure subsystem is responsible for providing environmentally controlled shelters for LCOT equipment and various other systems. To maintain the safety and proper functionality of the telescope, a 16 ft Astrohaven clamshell dome procured which provides all-sky coverage without the need to rotate the dome. Additionally, Atmospheric Monitoring Assembly (AMA) will be part of optical infrastructure subsystem to ensure accurate performance of the LCOT. Like existing optical ground stations, LCOT will measure standard weather station parameters, infrared all sky image of cloud cover, and cloud height. LCOT, however, adds requirements for measuring night time seeing and, in the future, daytime seeing. Unlike other optical ground terminals, the LCOT is transceiver agnostic; user transceivers may be duplex transceivers, standalone receivers, or standalone transmitters with or without acquisition beacon functionality. As such, the LCOT project accommodates testing with external customer transceivers in a flexible manor, further complimenting its intended multi-mission goals. Another unique component of LCOT is the use of a new amplifier technology – the Very Large Mode Area (VLMA) amplifiers. This new technology allows LCOT to avoid the issues faced by previous laser communications ground terminals, gives users more flexibility and modular capability, and is capable of reaching an order of magnitude higher peak power than traditional High Power Optical Amplifiers (HPOA). One drawback of the VLMA HPOA approach is that the amplified light is output into free-space. The solution developed by LCOT is an optics train that couples the output of the VLMA amplifier into a short fiber for transport to the transmit telescopes with high efficiency. Like many of the LCOT components, a set of detailed manufacturing drawings have been created for the optics train to allow any machine shop with a multi-axis Computer Numerical Control (CNC) machine to fabricate the piece parts from commonly available materials. In line with the goals of LCOT, the monitor and control functions are developed as a modular and flexible system with the ability to support future hardware or algorithm changes, minimizing disruptions. A main priority of development in the Monitor and Control Subsystem (MCS) is the safety monitor system.

laser communication↗

Development of a Ground Multi-mission Low Cost Optical Terminal(LCOT) for Free-Space Optical Communication

Once confined to the realm of laboratory experiments and theoretical papers, space-based laser communications (lasercomm) are on the verge of achieving mainstream status. Organizations from Facebook to NASA, and missions from cubesats to Orion are employing lasercomm to achieve gigabit communication speeds at mass and power requirements lower than that of traditional radio frequency (RF) methods. Since first demonstrating free-space optical communications services with Lunar Laser Communications Demonstration (LLCD) in 2013, NASA has invested in developing optical communications technologies and capabilities to enhancing its space communications networks. Along with evolving optical space terminals, NASA is also developing lasercomm grounds stations capable of meeting the rapidly increasing data volume demands of upcoming missions, from low-earth to lunar orbits and beyond and integrating these advanced capabilities into its Near-Space and Deep Space Networks. To meet this emerging need, the Low-Cost Optical Terminal (LCOT) project at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) is designing, building and validating a prototype for a flexible, multi-mission, and economical optical ground terminal that could be used as a blueprint for a global network of optical ground stations, capable of supporting a wide variety of missions. To date a major impediment to widespread adoption of laser communication has been the lack of an existing ground network infrastructure. A mission that wishes to take advantage of laser communication not only needs to invest in an optical space terminal, but it must also finance the creation of ground terminals to receive the downlink signal. This adds significant additional cost. Missions that do decide to incur the cost of financing a network of ground terminals end up building highly specialized optical receivers that are operable as receivers for that specific mission only. Significant Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) cost is invested to build highly specialized one-of-a-kind ground terminals that go into storage after that particular mission is over. This is not an economical approach and does nothing to grow the number of optical ground stations available to future missions. In essence each mission that wants to take advantage of the benefits of lasercom has to start from scratch to provide a ground terminal network to support it. As long as this is the case, the cost for using laser communications will be too high for most missions to consider. LCOT intends to close this gap in technology by designing and developing a standard optical ground terminal design that is flexible enough to serve as a receiver for a wide range of future missions – a ground terminal that can be quickly reconfigured to receive downlinks at different wavelengths using different signal formats. Not only does LCOT have the industry-building objectives of utilizing commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components to the maximum extent possible, but also spurs the commercial development of other necessary lasercomm components not currently offered by industry. Finally, LCOT will give NASA scientists and engineers a facility where they can gain real-world experience with optical communications. It will give engineers a cost-effective way to try out new concepts and processes by providing the infrastructure for such testing. In this way it is hoped LCOT will serve as a stimulus for innovation in optical communications and speed its widespread adoption by future missions. The LCOT is comprised of five subsystems: Free-Space Optical, Transceiver, Amplifier, Monitor and Control, and Observatory Infrastructure. In August 2021, the LCOT team installed a 70 cm telescope, developed by Planewave Instruments that was optimized for optical communications. Free-Space Optical subsystem comprises of the telescope and its associated hardware, including a transmitter optical assembly, wide field cameras, two optical benches, and an adaptive optics subsystem. The transmit optical assembly, a unique concept design, is a cluster of four functionally independent transmit subassemblies located on the receive telescope. In addition to receiving optical signals and directing the expanded beam with high precision to the space terminal, it also performs tracking functions. The transmit optical assembly will support operations from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) through lunar and will be used as a template for industry manufacturing. The Optical Infrastructure subsystem is responsible for providing environmentally controlled shelters for LCOT equipment and various other systems. To maintain the safety and proper functionality of the telescope, a 16 ft Astrohaven clamshell dome procured which provides all-sky coverage without the need to rotate the dome. Additionally, Atmospheric Monitoring Assembly (AMA) will be part of optical infrastructure subsystem to ensure accurate performance of the LCOT. Like existing optical ground stations, LCOT will measure standard weather station parameters, infrared all sky image of cloud cover, and cloud height. LCOT, however, adds requirements for measuring night time seeing and, in the future, daytime seeing. Unlike other optical ground terminals, the LCOT is transceiver agnostic; user transceivers may be duplex transceivers, standalone receivers, or standalone transmitters with or without acquisition beacon functionality. As such, the LCOT project accommodates testing with external customer transceivers in a flexible manor, further complimenting its intended multi-mission goals. Another unique component of LCOT is the use of a new amplifier technology – the Very Large Mode Area (VLMA) amplifiers. This new technology allows LCOT to avoid the issues faced by previous laser communications ground terminals, gives users more flexibility and modular capability, and is capable of reaching an order of magnitude higher peak power than traditional High Power Optical Amplifiers (HPOA). One drawback of the VLMA HPOA approach is that the amplified light is output into free-space. The solution developed by LCOT is an optics train that couples the output of the VLMA amplifier into a short fiber for transport to the transmit telescopes with high efficiency. Like many of the LCOT components, a set of detailed manufacturing drawings have been created for the optics train to allow any machine shop with a multi-axis Computer Numerical Control (CNC) machine to fabricate the piece parts from commonly available materials. In line with the goals of LCOT, the monitor and control functions are developed as a modular and flexible system with the ability to support future hardware or algorithm changes, minimizing disruptions. A main priority of development in the Monitor and Control Subsystem (MCS) is the safety monitor system.

Haleh Safavi↗

Exep: Environmental Testing of High-Actuator-Count Mems Deformable Mirrors for Space-Based Applications

Coronagraph instruments on future space telescopes will rely on deformable mirrors to create high contrast images for the direct detection of exoplanets. As part of the NASA Exoplanet Explorations Program’s coronagraph technology development efforts, two sets of Micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) deformable mirrors manufactured by Boston Micromachines Corporation were exposed to vibration and thermal cycles representative of launch conditions. The first set were 952-actuator Kilo-DMs that successfully demonstrated 100% actuator survival and achieved ~1e-8 contrast after the environment test. The second round used an engineering-grade 2048-actuator deformable mirror on which few changes were identified after the environmental test. However, each actuator that changed behavior was flagged as anomalous beforehand or was directly adjacent to a defective actuator. From this result, we hypothesized that typical actuators on a science grade deformable mirror are robust to environmental testing. A third set of 2048-actuator deformable mirror have been procured for a planned test to characterize the deformable mirrors using interferometric measurements, contrast results on a new in-air coronagraph testbed, and infrared microscopy on the internal structure of the MEMS devices.

Lam, Charlie↗