Results for “Focusing” — Page 63

NASA NTRS2018

2.5/3D Daisy Chain Reliability Evaluation

The objective of this task is to evaluate thermal cycle behavior of advanced 2.5/3D electronics — commercial-off the-shelf (COTS) —packages of different configurations assembled onto printed circuit boards (PCBs). Three key approaches were considered for evaluation. The first approach focused on the through-mold via (TMV™) technology at assembly level. The second approach focused on evaluation of 2.5D (also known as, System in Package (SiP)) in fine pitch ball grid array (FPGA). The third approach focused on evaluation of through-silicone-via (TSV) technologies. This report presents the test results for TMV™ and SiP packaging technologies and reliability, and it also provides lessons learned on quality assurance methods. Specifically, the report presents the test matrix for various 3D TMV™ packaging assembly configurations and reliability characterizations performed under two accelerated thermal cycling (ATC) and accelerated thermal shock cycling (ATSC) conditions. The ATC and ATSC were performed in the range of –55°C to 125°C and –100°C to 100°C, respectively. The report also includes assembly of a SiP— a 60-mm fine-pitch ball-grid array (FPGA) interposer with an IC at the center and six chip-scale package (CSP) daisy chains at the periphery—with package assembly characterizations. After assembly, the daisy chains were subjected to ATCs in the range of –40°C to 125°C for reliability evaluation. Finally, for both TMV™ and SiP packaging configurations, characterizations results by X-ray, optical imaging, and daisy-chain resistance evaluations were also presented.

Ghaffarian, Reza↗

NASA NTRS2016

Exploring the Science Trade Space with the JPL Innovation Foundry A-Team

The JPL Innovation Foundry has established a new approach for exploring, developing, and evaluating early concepts with a group called the Architecture Team (A-Team). The A-Team combines innovative collaborative methods and facilitated sessions with subject matter experts and analysis tools to help mature mission concepts. Science, implementation, and programmatic elements are all considered during an ATeam study. In these studies, Concept Maturity Levels (CML) are used to group methods. These levels include idea generation and capture (CML 1), initial feasibility assessment (CML 2), and trade space exploration (CML 3). Methods used for exploring the science objectives, feasibility, and scope will be described including use of a new technique for understanding the most compelling science, called a Science Return Diagram (SRD). In the process of developing the SRD, gradients in the science trade space are uncovered along with their implications for implementation and mission architecture. Special attention is paid towards developing complete investigations, establishing a series of logical claims that lead to the natural selection of a measurement approach. Over 20 science-focused A-Team studies have used these techniques to help science teams refine their mission objectives, make implementation decisions and reveal the mission concept’s most compelling science. This paper will describe the A-Team process for exploring the mission concept's science trade space and the Science Return Diagram technique.In June of 2011 a new collaborative engineering approach forearly concept formulation began in the JPL InnovationFoundry [1], six months later becoming the “A-Team” [2].Responding to a need for exploring mission architecturelevel trades [3], the A-Team precedes Team X [4,5] in asequence of concurrent engineering teams at JPL that can beused to mature a concept from a “cocktail napkin” level ideato a complete mission point design. The A-Team efficientlyexplores the science, implementation, and programmatictrade space in early concept formulation. Small, facilitatedgroups of experts generate innovative ideas, quantitativelyassess feasibility, and discover key sensitivities in the tradespace through collaborative analysis and use of advancedmethods and tools. The A-Team process builds off theexperience within JPL and other recent approaches to earlyconcept formulation [6] including best practices of the JPLInnovation Foundry, Project Systems Engineering &Formulation Section, Team Eureka and the Rapid MissionArchitecture Team[7].The A-Team is a focal point for innovative formulationapproaches and people within JPL. It relies on a largebackground of study resources, creative thinkers and “greybeard” scrutinizers, advanced tools, and subject matterexperts with both breadth and depth in experience andexpertise that are all available at JPL. The A-Team isdesigned to be a rapid and efficient process takingapproximately 6 weeks (the entire process can be as short asjust a few days or as long as up to three months) and costingthe equivalent of a work-month of a full-time employee orless. Studies begin with detailed planning and client reviewfollowed by study sessions, analysis work, and reporting.The staffing on each study is customized to the study goalsand objectives, and it is addressed early in the A-Teamprocess. Sessions are generally half-day or whole-day eventsand conducted over a series of days with focused agendas thatare moderated by a trained facilitator. Preliminary results andknowledge capture are available within hours of each session,and a final report is generally available two weeks later.One of the biggest challenges facing early conceptdevelopment is understanding the gradient in science returnversus various available mission scenarios and payload options. Often times, major areas of scientific inquiry havealready been prioritized by science groups, including throughthe National Research Council’s Decadal Studies inAstronomy, Planetary, and Earth Science. Yet science teamscontinue to struggle, especially in competitive missionsolicitations, to capture the right amount of scope that’sachievable within the cost constraints of the opportunity.Often the desire to completely and comprehensively study ascience area in just one mission (after all, true missionopportunities are rare) drives teams to take on too much,providing requirements that are unachievable within theresources of the opportunity without inducing unacceptableimplementation risk. Alternatively, science teams can seekto reduce risk by using an established instrument, but havenot thought through the traceability and key aspects of thescience question to justify its use. Both scenarios lead to badassumptions at the beginning of the concept development thatcan then ripple through implementation option choices,potentially preventing what would have been a good scienceinvestigation from being selected.The purpose of this paper is first to provide some additionalbackground and summary of the A-Team process, tools,people, and facilities. We then focus on the A-Teammethodology for overcoming the barriers of defining thescience scope well at the early concept development stage.This includes understanding the science story andtraceability, and then examining the gradient in science returnversus key characteristics of observables, developing theright payload and mission requirement specification throughexamining the science and implementation trade space.

Ziemer, John K.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Powering OSCAR

Recycling waste has been an issue on Earth for decades. The OSCAR project seeks to find ways to make sure that it does not become an issue in space. The main focus of OSCAR is the combustion of waste and reclamation of gaseous products in microgravity. The first phase of testing relies on a ground rig that operates both under normal (Earth) gravity and in drop tower tests that briefly simulate a microgravity environment. In the second phase, a test will be performed during a suborbital flight were the experiment will be carried out in microgravity. Throughout the spring term, interns have played an integral part in continuing the progress made by the project. They performed work in upgrading the electrical and mechanical systems that make up OSCAR. They made multiple improvements to the test rig's operating software to improve readability and usability. They prepared and edited documents that were vital to the engineering process. And, they were responsible for performing lab tests and refining the lab operations document and procedure. The interns were a big help in maintaining the rigorous test schedule. OSCAR, which stands for Orbital Syngas Commodity Augmentation Reactor, is to find a way to turn astronaut waste into chemical energy. The two parts of this are important: finding a way to dispose of waste generated in space, and seeing if there is a way to recycle that waste into chemical energy. The importance of the disposal aspect is that there is currently no way to dispose of, or recycle, waste that is created in space other than jettisoning it (which is what the ISS does via empty supply capsules). As manned missions go deeper into space, that method will no longer be viable, as a craft would essentially be littering the space and planets that they visit. Energy reclamation is also important because of the high monetary and spatial costs of sending supplies on space missions. Every little bit extra that can be reused out of what is sent can save room and funds for other supplies. The facet of this problem that the OSCAR project is focusing on is how to combust waste in zero gravity. Combustion in the presence of gravity is one of those things that is taken for granted. When something burns on Earth, the flames rise above the fuel as oxygen flows from underneath. In microgravity, the flames surround the object completely, which restricts the amount of oxygen that can reach the fuel, and retards the combustion. OSCAR uses a vortex reaction chamber to counter this phenomenon. The OSCAR test rig will eventually be tested on a suborbital flight to see if it is an effective solution to the issue in real-world conditions. Currently, there is a prototype test rig that is fully functional. This rig has been previously tested in a 2 second drop test at Glenn Research Center’s (GRC) Zero Gravity Facility (ZGF). (The free-fall conditions of the drop mimic microgravity, if only for a brief period of time). This session’s focus was on upgrading the test rig and software, updating the paperwork, performing additional lab tests, and readying the rig for the five second drop test, again at GRC. II. Upgrades The state of the testing rig at the start of the session was in between its configurations for the two second drop tower and the five second drop tower. The rig needed upgrades to address various insufficiencies that either were discovered during the two second campaign or were a direct result of the differences between the two drop tower setups. The main differences that had to be handled were the increase in shock loads from 30g to 65g, a difference in drop indicating signal (on the falling edge of a pulse instead of a change from high to low), and the ambient pressure of the test apparatus (the two second tower dropped the rig in atmosphere, while the five second tower drops in vacuum).

Cauvel, Thomas↗

NASA NTRS2019

A Streamlined Approach to Spatial Mapping of Complex 3D Thermal Boundary Condition Data

Spatial mapping of 1D, 2D, and particularly 3D thermal boundary condition data is essential for accurate thermal simulation of spacecraft and launch vehicles. This information typically is available in simple ASCII file format but can be problematic to use for thermal simulations. Difficulties that can be encountered include the ability to directly use the available file format, transformation of the data into the desired reference coordinate system in 3D space, and accurate interpolation of the data onto the thermal calculation domain. This paper presents a streamlined approach to spatial mapping of complex unsymmetrical 3D cold wall heat flux data using the fields’ capability in Simcenter3D. A recent example of 3D thermal plume simulation at MSFC will be employed to illustrate the use of text, csv, and Excel files, specifying coordinate systems for transformation of data in 3D space, and use of the various interpolation schemes available for spatial mapping. Spatial boundary condition verification is also very important, and the spacecraft thermal analyst needs effective visualization tools to develop confidence in the boundary condition definitions. Visualization of the spacecraft plume raw field data, the calculated field data, and the interpolated field data onto the thermal calculation domain will be discussed, with a particular focus on real-time viewing of the interpolated data for available interpolation schemes. The objective of this paper is to outline the modeling techniques used with the integrated thermal analysis of a terrestrial lunar lander demonstrator. Specifically, the techniques outlined herein focus on spatial mapping of convective and radiative exhaust plume results from a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis. Two cases were investigated, however, the modeling techniques that were utilized translate to both cases seamlessly. Those two cases were as follows: • Lunar lander demonstrator firing on-pad (worst case). • Lunar lander demonstrator hovering at an elevated position above the launch pad. For the purposes of information control, this paper will focus on the modeling techniques only, using altered or dimensionless data where necessary. BACKGROUND The thermal model examined in this paper is of the lunar lander demonstrator known as XL-1T (terrestrial), born from a collaborative effort between Masten Space Systems (MSS) and NASA, under NASA’s Lunar CATALYST (also known as Lunar Cargo Transportation and Landing by Soft Touchdown) initiative. The lander is a reusable vertical takeoff/vertical landing (VTVL) test bed which is controlled by four throttleable main engines utilizing green hypergolic propellants.

Hawkins, Robert F.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Evaluation of Matthews-WLR-CH4: A New Wetland, Lake, and Reservoir Methane Emissions Data Set

Methane (CH4) is emitted from a variety of sources, both natural and anthropogenic, and is the second most important greenhouse gas contributing to climate change. Natural wetlands are the largest single contributor to annual global CH4 emissions and other inland water sources, such as lakes and reservoirs, produce CH4 but have received less attention. These emission sources are among the most uncertain components of the global CH4 cycle. These uncertainties stem from numerous issues, including the vast variability in these ecosystems and the sensitivity of CH4 emissions to interannual climate variations. Existing CH4 emission models display large differences in wetland spatial extent and include simplified, or lack all together, wetland-type classifications. Furthermore, CH4 emissions from lakes and reservoirs are typically combined with wetlands, or ignored, on a regional and global scale. Our NASA Interdisciplinary Research in Earth Science (IDS) study is focused on developing a suite of data sets on wetlands, lakes, and reservoirs (WLR) including global distributions of types, CH4-centric classifications, and daily CH4 emission rates (hereafter Matthews-WLR-CH4). This project is unique in that it comprises source-independent emission data for WLR, the first spatially-explicit data set of lake and reservoir CH4 emissions, and wetland emissions comprising numerous different wetland-type classifications.The focus of this study is to perform the initial evaluation of the wetland and lake CH4 emissions data from Matthews-WLR-CH4. This evaluation will focus on the domain of North America and include: 1) estimates of the contribution of wetland and lake sources to total CH4 emissions and atmospheric mixing ratios, 2) comparisons of wetland fraction and CH4 emissions to a suite of existing models (e.g., Wetland and Wetland CH4 Inter-comparison of Models Project (WETCHIMP), Global Carbon Project (GCP)), and 3) an accuracy assessment with in situ airborne and tower-based atmospheric CH4 observations when the Matthews-WLR-CH4 emissions are implemented in forward and inverse CarbonTracker-Lagrange (CT-L) CH4 model simulations. Here we will present the new Matthews-WLR-CH4 wetland and lake CH4 emissions data, the initial evaluation of these products, and the path forward for our project.

Reservoir↗

NASA NTRS2019

Experimental Demonstration and System Analysis for Plasmonic Force Propulsion

This project developed a higher-fidelity model of a recently envisioned small spacecraft propulsion system for precision pointing and proximity control. Plasmonic force propulsion harnesses solar light focused onto plasmon reactive subwavelength nanostructures to accelerate and expel nanoparticle propellant via strong optical forces. The goal of the project was to show that plasmonic space propulsion can provide the level of proximity and attitude control envisioned for future NASA nano/picosatellite missions, a level that is better than state-of-the-art approaches. We achieved this goal by showing that plasmonic force thrusters are feasible for a range of advanced mission concepts requiring swarm formations in a deep space environment. We performed three case studies that evaluated the performance of the plasmonic force propulsion thruster in a deep space, microsatellite swarm formation. These case studies assumed the propulsion system could generate thrust at the level predicted from our Phase 1 study (1.6 μN). Through these cases we were able to analyze the concept within a mission specific context through detailed orbital dynamics calculations. Results indicate that, with the Phase 1 estimated thrust level, the approach is promising for providing attitude control to swarm formation spacecraft. Further, we achieved goals related to technology development. Specifically, we experimentally demonstrated nanoparticle acceleration due to plasmonic forces with asymmetric nanostructures excited by focused laser light. Additionally, we investigated the thrust sensitivity and nanoparticle propellant injection dependencies upon thermal effects. As a result of our study, plasmonic force propulsion is at an early TRL 3. Active research and design has been conducted analytically and in the laboratory. Furthermore, practical applications such as the three case studies have been identified for the scientific basic principles that were observed. Future efforts related to fundamental understanding of these techniques should focus on 1) developing a standalone array of asymmetric nanostructures that can effectively interact with a stream or reservoir of particles or 2) experimentally evaluate a dielectrophoretic injector for nanoparticle propellant. The main limitation discovered about plasmonic propulsion regards performance estimates significantly below the Phase 1 estimations. Specifically, original assumptions in the Phase 1 project (notably, a linear array of asymmetric nanostructures) is not a viable approach to achieving significant acceleration, high exhaust velocity, of nanoparticles. More specifically, we assumed in Phase 1 that nanoparticles would be accelerated in series by a long linear array of asymmetric nanostructures. That is, the acceleration of the nanoparticle would build and increase with the kick received by each subsequent nanostructure. This is fundamentally flawed. The potential profile of a single nanostructure is such that it prohibits this phenomenon. The potential energy associated with the plasmon-generated dielectrophoretic force is a potential well, which is good for trapping nanoparticles, but cannot provide significant acceleration of particles to expel them out and away from the nanostructure. Further, a nanoparticle expelled from the first nanostructure would need to overcome the potential barrier for entry into the next nanostructure accelerating stage. Fundamentally, this effect means that a linear array of nanostructures is not a viable accelerating structure. Correspondingly then, acceleration can, or should, only be provided by one nanostructure, and the net acceleration and thrust force of a single nanostructure is small (~cm/s exhaust velocities, sub-nN level thrust vs. the 100’s m/s, μN originally envisioned). While our experiments demonstrated acceleration and manipulation of a nanoparticle using laser light in aqueous environment, the achievable energy and momentum addition to the nanoparticle from a single nanostructure stage is too low for useful propulsion. In terms of thrust prediction, the estimated thrust of 1.6 μN in Phase 1 is reduced to a few nN of thrust with this new insight and understanding of the concept. This thrust level is too small to achieve attitude control of swarms as originally envisioned.

Plasmonic Force↗

NASA NTRS2019

NASA Centennial Challenge: 3D Printed Habitat, Phase 3 Final Results

NASA's Centennial Challenges program uses prize competitions with the goal of accelerating innovation in the aerospace industry. Competitions in the Centennial Challenges portfolio have previously focused on advancements in space robotics, regolith excavation, bio-printing, astronaut suit design, small satellites, and solar-powered vehicles. NASA's Three Dimensional (3D) Printed Habitat Centennial Challenge represents a partnership between NASA and the non-profit partner: Bradley University, with co-sponsors Caterpillar, Bechtel, Brick and Mortar Ventures, the American Concrete Institute, and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) to spur development in automated additive construction technologies. The challenge asks teams to design and construct a scaled and simulated Martian habitat using indigenous materials and large scale 3D automated printing systems. Phase 1 of the competition, held in 2015, was an architectural design competition for habitat concepts that could be 3D printed. Phase 2, completed in 2017, asked teams to develop feedstocks from indigenous materials and hydrocarbon polymer recyclables, and demonstrate automated printing systems to manufacture these feedstocks into test specimens to assess mechanical strength. This paper will discuss the Phase 3 competition, focusing on technology outcomes that can potentially be infused into both terrestrial and planetary construction applications. The Phase 3 competition was divided into two sub-competitions: 1) virtual construction, where teams created a high fidelity building information model (BIM) of their 3D-printed habitat design and 2) the construction competition, which required teams to 3D print a structural foundation and subject materials samples to freeze/thaw testing and impact testing (level 1), produce a habitat element and complete a hydrostatic test (level 2), and additively manufacture a 1:3 scale habitat onsite in a head to head competition at Caterpillar, inc.'s Edwards Demonstration & Learning Center near Peoria, Illinois over the course of three days (level 3). While the Phase 2 competition focused primarily on the development of novel feedstocks and robotic printing systems, Phase 3 emphasized the scale-up of these systems and autonomous operation (demonstrating the capability to operate systems on precursor missions prior to the arrival of crew, or terrestrially in field operation settings where human tending of a manufacturing system may be limited). The Phase 3 virtual construction levels yielded a number of novel habitat designs, including both modular habitats and vertically-oriented habitat concepts. The Phase 3 construction competition also challenged teams to autonomously place penetrations and interfacing elements in additively manufactured structures. The paper will emphasize potential applications for the new materials and technologies developed under the umbrella of the competition within NASA's portfolio and in Earth-based applications such as disaster response and infrastructure improvement.

Construction↗

NASA NTRS2019

Nasa Centennial Challenge: Three Dimensional (3d) Printed Habitat, Phase 3

NASA's Centennial Challenges program uses prize competitions with the goal of accelerating innovation in the aerospace industry. Competitions in the Centennial Challenges portfolio have previously focused on advancements in space robotics, regolith excavation, bio-printing, astronaut suit design, small satellites, and solar-powered vehicles. NASA's Three Dimensional (3D) Printed Habitat Centennial Challenge represents a partnership between NASA and the non-profit partner: Bradley University, with co-sponsors Caterpillar, Bechtel, Brick and Mortar Ventures, the American Concrete Institute, and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) to spur development in automated additive construction technologies. The challenge asks teams to design and construct a scaled and simulated Martian habitat using indigenous materials and large scale 3D automated printing systems. Phase 1 of the competition, held in 2015, was an architectural design competition for habitat concepts that could be 3D printed. Phase 2, completed in 2017, asked teams to develop feedstocks from indigenous materials and hydrocarbon polymer recyclables, and demonstrate automated printing systems to manufacture these feedstocks into test specimens to assess mechanical strength. This paper will discuss the Phase 3 competition, focusing on technology outcomes that can potentially be infused into both terrestrial and planetary construction applications. The Phase 3 competition was divided into two sub-competitions: 1) virtual construction, where teams created a high fidelity building information model (BIM) of their 3D-printed habitat design and 2) the construction competition, which required teams to 3D print a structural foundation and subject materials samples to freeze/thaw testing and impact testing (level 1), produce a habitat element and complete a hydrostatic test (level 2), and additively manufacture a 1:3 scale habitat onsite in a head to head competition at Caterpillar, inc.'s Edwards Demonstration & Learning Center near Peoria, Illinois over the course of three days (level 3). While the Phase 2 competition focused primarily on the development of novel feedstocks and robotic printing systems, Phase 3 emphasized the scale-up of these systems and autonomous operation (demonstrating the capability to operate systems on precursor missions prior to the arrival of crew, or terrestrially in field operation settings where human tending of a manufacturing system may be limited). The Phase 3 virtual construction levels yielded a number of novel habitat designs, including both modular habitats and vertically-oriented habitat concepts. The Phase 3 construction competition also challenged teams to autonomously place penetrations and interfacing elements in additively manufactured structures. The paper will emphasize potential applications for the new materials and technologies developed under the umbrella of the competition within NASA's portfolio and in Earth-based applications such as disaster response and infrastructure improvement.

Centennial challenge↗

NASA NTRS2019

Development of a Point of Care Technology for Military Medical Applications in Austere Environments

NASA, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and the Department of Defense (DoD) share a common interest in compact medical diagnostic technologies—also known as “point of care testing” (POCT) technologies. For NASA, the need is to take care of astronauts on deep space missions. For LLNL, the focus is on technologies needed to support homeland security applications. For DoD, the need is to support warfighters in military theaters of operation, especially for prolonged field care and en route care. A recently patented technology, “Portable Medical Diagnosis Instrument” (U.S. Patent 9824870), co-invented by NASA and LLNL, is being developed further in a partnership between NASA, LLNL and Travis Air Force Base, with a focus on military applications. This instrument, the NASA-LLNL Medical Tricorder, can be used for a wide range of clinical samples including breath, saliva and blood. One component of the Tricorder is the NASA E-Nose, a carbon nanotube-based chemical sensor, integrated into a hand-held smart phone, that can detect and measure “breath biomarkers” in the gas phase of exhaled breath. The response of the NASA E-Nose is rapid, which makes it possible to detect various gas-phase substances in real time. The NASA E-Nose, with modification, can also be used for breath condensate analysis. Another component of the Tricorder is a miniaturized microfluidic analyzer, under development by LLNL, that does not require any pumps. The microfluidic analyzer can detect and measure biomarkers in liquid samples, such as blood, saliva and breath condensate. This microfluidic system requires small quantities of liquid sample and can perform analysis very rapidly (seconds to minutes), which makes it possible to detect relevant biomarkers in near real time in the field. The Clinical Investigation Facility (CIF) at Travis Air Force Base is currently conducting research with the goal to develop improved field-able technologies and procedures for the emergency response to life threatening injuries soldiers may receive in theater. This work includes experimental large animal systems and comprehensive collection of clinical specimens and physiological data. NASA and LLNL are partnering with Travis to test and further develop the Tricorder technology for high priority military applications, initially focused on lung injury models and traumatic brain injury.

Loftus, David J.↗

NASA NTRS2020

Capabilities Development: From International Space Station and the Moon to Mars

The President of the United States, in signing Space Policy Directive-1, directed the NASA Administrator “to lead an innovative and sustainable program of exploration with commercial and international partners to enable human expansion across the solar system and to bring back to Earth new knowledge and opportunities. Beginning with missions beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO), the United States will lead the return of humans to the Moon for long-term exploration and utilization, followed by human missions to Mars and other destinations.” NASA is charged to land American astronauts on the lunar South Pole in 2024 and to continue a campaign of sustainable lunar surface exploration in order to develop necessary technologies and capabilities to enable initial human missions to Mars. NASA’s lunar surface exploration plans are part of a continuum of activities utilizing platforms in low Earth orbit (LEO), cislunar space, and the lunar surface to demonstrate advanced technologies, advance operations concepts, and develop countermeasures to lessen the impacts of the space environment and long duration exposure on the crew working in space. NASA is using a capability-driven approach to identify critical gaps to be addressed as part of a focused program to reduce risk for future deep space exploration missions building to eventual human missions to the surface of Mars. Teams of discipline experts from across NASA identify capability gaps between the current state of the art and the needs of proposed exploration missions and develop integrated strategies and roadmaps for filling those gaps. These inputs include assessment of platform needs for demonstration and testing of new capabilities. Generally, the International Space Station (ISS) and Gateway are needed for demonstration of capabilities for Mars transit, while Lunar surface activities focus on development of capabilities and operational protocols for Mars surface. This paper discusses the activities required to advance critical exploration capabilities, focusing on selection of demonstration and test location based upon the unique environments and characteristics of the ISS, Gateway, and potential lunar surface assets. The optimal strategy will be a combination of ISS/LEO, Gateway, and lunar surface testing; however, not all capabilities require a deep space exploration missions.

Boggs, Kathleen Gallagher↗

NASA NTRS2020

A Review of Welding in Space and Related Technologies

Deployment of welding and additive manufacturing (AM) technologies in the space environment has the potential to revolutionize how orbiting platforms are designed, manufactured, and assembled. These technologies offer the option for repair of sustained damage to habitat structures on space missions, as astronauts would be able to manufacture new parts (using welding-derived AM processes suitable for use in the external space environment) and weld cracks. An added benefit is that required repairs can be achieved more economically, as new parts need not be shipped from Earth. With further maturation of in-space welding capabilities, astronauts could operate under given standards and weld damaged structures rather than rely on cargo resupply. This Technical Memorandum (TM) begins by reviewing the available literature relevant to welding in space, focusing on solidification, heat and mass transfer, and fluid flows in microgravity. This survey considers research on the effects of welding in microgravity on a material system. The various in-space welding devices that have been previously designed and tested are examined to determine their capabilities and shortcomings, with a focus on the results of their individual welding experiments. Safety measures are discussed to protect the orbiting International Space Station (ISS) and crew during welding operations. Finally, the state of the art is examined by focusing on current approaches to AM and on-orbit welding that are being developed by several companies in conjunction with NASA.

Naden, N.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Potential Advantages of Conducting Short Duration Visits to the Martian Surface

Recent NASA concepts for human missions to Mars, including the Evolvable Mars Campaign and Design Reference Architecture 5.0, have focused on the conduct of missions with long duration stays on the Martian surface. The decision to focus on long duration missions (typically to a single site) is driven by a desire to increase the perceived sustainability of the human Mars campaign, predicated on the assumption that sustainability is best achieved by maximizing the level of activity on the surface, providing for continuous growth in operations, and promoting pioneering of Mars. However, executing a series of long duration missions to a single site is not the only option for human exploration of Mars that has been proposed. Other architectures have been evaluated that focus on missions with short duration surface stays, with each mission visiting a separate site on the surface. This type of architecture is less efficient in that elements are not typically reused from one mission to the next but requires a far less complex surface architecture. There are potentially valid arguments to be made that a short duration, multiple site approach could result in different types of advantages when compared to the long duration, single site approach to Mars exploration, particularly for initial human missions to Mars. These arguments revolve around four areas: Achieved Value, Risk Mitigation, Developmental Affordability, and Operational Affordability & Flexibility. The question of Achieved Value relates to the prioritization of goals for Martian exploration. As discussed, goals related to pioneering and expanding human presence are often referenced as justifications for the long duration approach. However, there are other competing goals, including science and exploration. While there is not a clear consensus among planetary scientists, many have argued that the value of being able to visit multiple sites could outweigh the value of continually visiting a single site. Risk Mitigation is a major concern for initial human missions to Mars. There are a number of hazards related to operating on the Martian surface that are not well characterized. It may be desirable to conduct a series of short duration missions to better understand the nature of these risks prior to committing to a long duration mission. Developmental Affordability relates to the ability of NASA and its partners to develop and deploy the proposed architecture. Any human missions to Mars will be among the most complex endeavors ever undertaken. The capabilities that must be developed to enable any human Mars missions are extremely challenging. The total design, development, test, and evaluation (DDT&E) budget required to develop just the essential capabilities alone will be substantial. If additional surface capabilities are required to support long duration surface stays, the development effort could be unaffordable. Operational Affordability & Flexibility relates to the continued costs to execute the Mars campaign. Long duration missions, even with some amount of in-situ resource utilization, require a significant level of resupply for every mission. This requires additional launches and in-space transportation assets, increasing the operational complexity and total operational cost. This paper will explore each of the four potential advantages of short duration missions in detail. The authors will present comparisons between proposed long duration and short duration architectures through an evaluation of relevant performance, cost, and risk metrics.

Stromgren, Chel↗

NASA NTRS2018

A Persistent Simulation Environment for Autonomous Systems

The age of Autonomous Unmanned Aircraft Systems (AUAS) is creating new challenges for the accreditation and certification requiring new standards, policies and procedures that sanction whether a UAS is safe to fly. Establishing a basis for certification of autonomous systems via research into trust and trustworthiness is the focus of Autonomy Teaming and TRAjectories for Complex Trusted Operational Reliability (ATTRACTOR), a new NASA Convergent Aeronautics Solution (CAS) project. Simulation Environments to test and evaluate AUAS decision making may be a low-cost solution to help certify that various AUAS systems are trustworthy enough to be allowed to fly in current general and commercial aviation airspace. NASA is working to build a peer-to-peer persistent simulation (P3 Sim) environment. The P3 Sim will be a Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO) environment were AUAS avatars can interact with a complex dynamic environment and each other. The focus of the effort is to provide AUAS researchers a low-cost intuitive testing environment that will aid training for and assessment of decisions made by autonomous systems such as AUAS. This presentation focuses on the design approach and challenges faced in development of the P3 Sim Environment is support of investigating trustworthiness of autonomous systems.

Kelley, Benjamin N.↗

NASA NTRS2010

TPSAS-NF1676L-10863-DND

One important aspect of successful climate monitoring is satellite calibration. There is at least a 25-year of operational geostationary (GEO) record available for climate studies, if properly calibrated. The Global Space-based Inter-Calibration System (GSICS) project is another effort to provide the climate community consistent calibration across multiple platforms. Also, the Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) project, provides consistent GEO retrieved cloud properties and derived broadband fluxes across multiple platforms. This year GSICS is focusing on geostationary visible channel calibration. The GSICS strategy is to use multiple approaches, such as cross-calibrating the GEO radiances against MODIS as a reference, deep convective clouds as bright stable targets, deserts, sun-glint, stars, moon and other model based calibration methods. Each of these methods is independent of each other and can assess the stability of the GEO visible instrument with differing uncertainties. This study focuses on the inter-calibration of the GEO radiances against MODIS as a reference by using collocated, and coincident ray-matched radiances. The advantage of the ray-matching technique is that it provides a full dynamic range of radiances to check the linearity of the GEO visible instrument. This presentation will focus on the technique, some error analysis, comparisons with other methods, and an approach to inter-calibrate historical GEOs before MODIS.

D R Doelling↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Model Preparation Areas for Propulsion Airframe Integration Testing at NASA Langley Research Center

Currently there are three major NASA Langley facilities that perform PAI testing. These include the National Transonic Facility, the 14’x22’ Low Speed Wind tunnel, and the Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel. While each of these facilities have their own model preparation areas, the model preparation area located at the NTF complex that focuses on blowing systems with high mass flow requirements support all of the LaRC facilities. The application of a Propulsion Airframe Integration requires special attention to the air delivery system interaction with the model. These interactions typically focus on the tares across the balance associated with inlet and nozzle performance which are related to the mass flow through the system and the efficiency of the inlet and nozzle geometries. While this paper does not characterize any specific propulsion system, it does focus on the mass flow and pressures requirement needed for pretesting such systems prior to wind tunnel installation. Weight flow boundaries for the air delivery system were identified to range from 0.1 to 20 lbm/sec.

Model Preparation Area↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Automated Management of Small Unmanned Aircraft System Communications and Navigation Contingency

The number of small Unmanned Aircraft System (sUAS) operating in the low-altitude of the National Airspace System (NAS) has been rapidly increasing in the past few years and this number is expected to grow in the future. However, aside from a few special cases, all sUAS must fly within visual line-of-sight (VLOS) of their operators and this limitation is blocking highly anticipated beyond visual line-of-sight (BVLOS) sUAS applications such as package delivery from practice. To enable routine low-altitude BVLOS operations, there needs to be a traffic management ecosystem that complements the FAA’s Air Traffic Management (ATM) system, which does not provide air traffic services under 400 feet above ground level (AGL). NASA has been pioneering research and development of this ecosystem under UAS Traffic Management (UTM) project since 2015 in a series of Technical Capability Levels (TCL) activities that are increasingly complex. In TCL1, completed in 2015, visual line-of-sight operations such as agriculture, firefighting, and infrastructure monitoring were addressed with a focus on geofencing and operations scheduling. Technologies and requirements needed for BVLOS operations in sparsely populated areas were examined in TCL2 in 2016, and those for operations over moderately populated areas in TCL3 in 2017 and 2018. TCL4 is building on the earlier TCLs and focuses on technologies and requirements for operations in higher-density urban areas for tasks such as newsgathering and package delivery and for managing large-scale contingencies. To coordinate and facilitate the incremental implementation of the UTM ecosystem in the NAS, a Research Transition Team (RTT) has been formed between the FAA, NASA, and industry. The RTT is divided into four subgroups, concept and use case development, data exchange and information architecture, sense and avoid, and communications and navigation (C&N). This paper focuses on C&N subgroup activities, in particular about the development of automated sUAS communications and navigation contingency management. The goal of this development is to prepare sUAS to display predictable behavior while handling C&N off-nominal events. It is expected that the adoption of the presented automated contingency management by the sUAS community will accommodate and inform rulemaking towards governing low-altitude BVLOS operations.

Unmanned Aviation System (UAS) Traffic Management↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Automated Management of Small Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Communications and Navigation Contingency

The number of small Unmanned Aircraft System (sUAS) operating in the low-altitude of the National Airspace System (NAS) has been rapidly increasing in the past few years and this number is expected to grow in the future. However, aside from a few special cases, all sUAS must fly within visual line-of-sight (VLOS) of their operators and this limitation is blocking highly anticipated beyond visual line-of-sight (BVLOS) sUAS applications such as package delivery from practice. To enable routine low-altitude BVLOS operations, there needs to be a traffic management ecosystem that complements the FAA’s Air Traffic Management (ATM) system, which does not provide air traffic services under 400 feet above ground level (AGL). NASA has been pioneering research and development of this ecosystem under UAS Traffic Management (UTM) project since 2015 in a series of Technical Capability Levels (TCL) activities that are increasingly complex. In TCL1, completed in 2015, visual line-of-sight operations such as agriculture, firefighting, and infrastructure monitoring were addressed with a focus on geofencing and operations scheduling. Technologies and requirements needed for BVLOS operations in sparsely populated areas were examined in TCL2 in 2016, and those for operations over moderately populated areas in TCL3 in 2017 and 2018. TCL4 is building on the earlier TCLs and focuses on technologies and requirements for operations in higher-density urban areas for tasks such as newsgathering and package delivery and for managing large-scale contingencies. To coordinate and facilitate the incremental implementation of the UTM ecosystem in the NAS, a Research Transition Team (RTT) has been formed between the FAA, NASA, and industry. The RTT is divided into four subgroups, concept and use case development, data exchange and information architecture, sense and avoid, and communications and navigation (C&N). This paper focuses on C&N subgroup activities, in particular about the development of automated sUAS communications and navigation contingency management. The goal of this development is to prepare sUAS to display predictable behavior while handling C&N off-nominal events. It is expected that the adoption of the presented automated contingency management by the sUAS community will accommodate and inform rulemaking towards governing low-altitude BVLOS operations.

Unmanned Aviation Systems (UAS) Traffic Management↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Model Preparation Areas for Propulsion Airframe Integration Testing at the NASA Langley Research Center

Currently, there are three major NASA Langley facilities that perform Propulsion Airframe Integration (PAI) testing. These include the National Transonic Facility (NTF), the 14- by 22-Foot Subsonic Tunnel, and the 4-Foot Supersonic Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel. While each of these facilities have their respective model preparation areas, one model preparation area, located at the NTF complex, focuses on high mass flow blowing systems in support of other Langley Research Center facilities. The application of PAI requires special attention to the air delivery system interaction with the model. These interactions focus on the tares across the force and moment balance. The interactions are a result of the mass flow and pressure of the air through the system and the efficiency of the inlet and nozzle geometries. While this paper does not characterize any specific propulsion system, it does focus on the mass flow and pressure requirements for risk-reduction planning of such systems prior to installation in a designated wind tunnel. An example of model and nozzle sizing will be presented for the Tail Cone Thruster (TCT) variant of the Common Research Model (CRM).

PAI↗