SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “technological readiness”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 145 records · Page 8

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2010

Heritage Systems Engineering Lessons from NASA Deep Space Missions

In the design and development of complex spacecraft missions, project teams frequently assume the use of advanced technology systems or heritage systems to enable a mission or reduce the overall mission risk and cost. As projects proceed through the development life cycle, increasingly detailed knowledge of the advanced and heritage systems within the spacecraft and mission environment identifies unanticipated technical issues. Resolving these issues often results in cost overruns and schedule impacts. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Discovery & New Frontiers (D&NF) Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for 5 missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that optimistic hardware/software inheritance and technology readiness assumptions caused cost and schedule growth for all five missions studied. The cost and schedule growth was not found to be the result of technical hurdles requiring significant technology development. The projects institutional inheritance and technology readiness processes appear to adequately assess technology viability and prevent technical issues from impacting the final mission success. However, the processes do not appear to identify critical issues early enough in the design cycle to ensure project schedules and estimated costs address the inherent risks. In general, the overruns were traceable to: an inadequate understanding of the heritage system s behavior within the proposed spacecraft design and mission environment; an insufficient level of development experience with the heritage system; or an inadequate scoping of the systemwide impacts necessary to implement an advanced technology for space flight applications. The paper summarizes the study s lessons learned in more detail and offers suggestions for improving the project s ability to identify and manage the technology and heritage risks inherent in the design solution.

Barley, Bryan↗

DOE OSTI2022

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

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

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2007

Technology Maturation and Flight Validation Experience for NASA's ST8 Mission

Background: a) Introduction to ST8 Project; b) ST8 Project timeline; c) ST8 technology payloads. Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) as interpreted by NASA's New Millennium Program (NMP). Role of Technology Review Boards (TRBs) in the evaluation of technology maturity for the NMP ST8 Project. Lessons learned from the ST8 TRB experience.

New Millennium Program (NMP)↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Radsetta Stone – Establishing a Common Environment Taxonomy Across Space Nuclear Technologies

Qualitative descriptions, such as “high temperature” or “long exposure” vary substantially according to the context and can obfuscate messaging. A quantitative taxonomy for describing space nuclear environments - encompassing fission, radioisotope, and natural - has been established to enable clear communication across technology applications. Zones have been defined to partition environments with an intent to achieve a useful level of granularity. These zones enable a more detailed assessment than the Technology Readiness Level and can also be used to identify gaps and overlaps spanning space nuclear technologies. This framework has been named the Radsetta Stone – a paronomasia of the Rosetta Stone. There are two directions in which the Radsetta Stone can be used. The user may be a technology developer or a technology customer. The developer would use the Radsetta Stone to communicate the current state of the technology they are developing. The maximum zone for each parameter would then be used to state the current limit of their technology. The customer could use the Radsetta Stone to communicate the environmental conditions of their system. Zones would be associated with different locations within the system. The Radsetta Stone is intended to enable clear communication regarding space nuclear technology. The following legend and tables show the levels of the Radsetta Stone. These levels show success criteria gates in a similar manner as Technology Readiness Levels.

taxonomy↗

NASA NTRS2010

A Comparison of Flow-Through Versus Non-Flow-Through Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Systems for NASA's Exploration Missions

As part of the Exploration Technology Development Program (ETDP) under the auspices of the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD), NASA is developing both primary fuel cell power systems and regenerative fuel cell (RFC) energy storage systems within the fuel cell portion of the Energy Storage Project. This effort is being led by the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in partnership with the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC), Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC), and industrial partners. The development goals are to improve fuel cell and electrolysis stack electrical performance, reduce system mass, volume, and parasitic power requirements, and increase system life and reliability. A major focus of this effort has been the parallel development of both flow-through and non-flow-through proton exchange membrane (PEM) primary fuel cell power systems. The plan has been, at the appropriate time, to select a single primary fuel cell technology for eventual flight hardware development. Ideally, that appropriate time would occur after both technologies have achieved a technology readiness level (TRL) of six, which represents an engineering model fidelity PEM fuel cell system being successfully tested in a relevant environment. Budget constraints in fiscal year 2009 and beyond have prevented NASA from continuing to pursue the parallel development of both primary fuel cell options. Because very limited data exists for either system, a toplevel, qualitative assessment based on engineering judgement was performed expeditiously to provide guidance for a selection. At that time, the non-flow-through technology was selected for continued development because of potentially major advantages in terms of weight, volume, parasitic power, reliability, and life. This author believes that the advantages are significant enough, and the potential benefits great enough, to offset the higher state of technology readiness of flow-through technology. This paper summarizes the technical considerations which helped form the engineering judgement that led to the final decision.

Hoberecht, Mark A.↗

NASA NTRS1980

Technology requirements and readiness for very large aircraft

The technology requirements for designing, manufacturing and operating any vehicle depend largely on the configuration of that vehicle. Under the general heading of Very Large Aircraft (VLA), configurations are many and varied, so, therefore, are the technology requirements. The present work is limited to technology requirements of particular interest to VLA. While many are of common interest, a few technology requirements critical to specific VLA types are also covered. Addressed in turn are common VLA concerns and how they influence configurations and technology; the methodology followed in selecting requirements and assessing readiness; the resultant technology requirements and readiness; and some overall observations regarding technology areas judged to be particularly critical. Over 50 technology requirements are identified as unique or particularly critical to VLA. However, none of the requirements is considered to have an excellent state of technology readiness.

Conner, D. W.↗

NASA NTRS1980

Thermal management for high power space platform systems

With future spacecraft power requirements expected to be in the order of 100 to 250 kilowatts and orbital lifetimes in the order of five to ten years, new approaches and concepts will be required that can efficiently and cost effectively provide the required heat rejection and temperature control capabilities. A plan was established to develop the commensurate technologies necessary for the thermal management of a high power space platform representative of future requirements and to achieve technology readiness by 1987. The approach taken in developing the program was to view the thermal requirements of the spacecraft as a spacecraft system rather than each as an isolated thermal problem. The program plan proposes 45 technology tasks required to achieve technology readiness. Of this total, 24 tasks were subsequently identified as being pacing technology tasks and were recommended for initiation in FY 1980 and FY 1981.

Gualdoni, R. A.↗

NASA NTRS2002

LWS/SET Technology Experiment Carrier

This paper examines the approach taken to building a low-cost, modular spacecraft bus that can be used to support a variety of technology experiments in different space environments. It describes the techniques used and design drivers considered to ensure experiment independence from as yet selected host spacecraft. It describes the technology experiment carriers that will support NASA's Living With a Star Space Environment Testbed space missions. NASA has initiated the Living With a Star (LWS) Program to develop a better scientific understanding to address the aspects of the connected Sun-Earth system that affect life and society. A principal goal of the program is to bridge the gap between science, engineering, and user application communities. The Space Environment Testbed (SET) Project is one element of LWS. The Project will enable future science, operational, and commercial objectives in space and atmospheric environments by improving engineering approaches to the accommodation and/or mitigation of the effects of solar variability on technological systems. The SET Project is highly budget constrained and must seek to take advantage of as yet undetermined partnering opportunities for access to space. SET will conduct technology validation experiments hosted on available flight opportunities. The SET Testbeds will be developed in a manner that minimizes the requirements for accommodation, and will be flown as flight opportunities become available. To access the widest range of flight opportunities, two key development requirements are to maintain flexibility with respect to accommodation constraints and to have the capability to respond quickly to flight opportunities. Experiments, already developed to the technology readiness level of needing flight validation in the variable Sun-Earth environment, will be selected on the basis of the need for the subject technology, readiness for flight, need for flight resources and particular orbit. Experiments will be accumulated by the Project and manifested for specific flight opportunities as they become available. The SET Carrier is designed to present a standard set of interfaces to SET technology experiments and to be modular and flexible enough to interface to a variety of possible host spacecraft. The Carrier will have core components and mission unique components. Once the core carrier elements have been developed, only the mission unique components need to be defined and developed for any particular mission. This approach will minimize the mission specific cost and development schedule for a given flight opportunity. The standard set of interfaces provided by SET to experiments allows them to be developed independent of the particulars of a host spacecraft. The Carrier will provide the power, communication, and the necessary monitoring features to operate experiments. The Carrier will also provide all of the mechanical assemblies and harnesses required to adapt experiments to a particular host. Experiments may be hosted locally with the Carrier or remotely on the host spacecraft. The Carrier design will allow a single Carrier to support a variable number of experiments and will include features that support the ability to incrementally add experiments without disturbing the core architecture.

Sherman, Barry↗

NASA NTRS2012

Decision Gate Process for Assessment of a NASA Technology Development Portfolio

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

Kohli, Rajiv↗

DOE OSTI2021

Developing Technology Performance Level Assessments for Early-Stage Wave Energy Converter Technologies: Preprint

The advantage of using Technology Performance Level (TPL) in conjunction with Technology Readiness Level (TRL) assessments in guiding technology development trajectories to successful outcomes in less time, at less overall cost, and with less encountered risk has been well articulated in the literature. In partnership with industry and international collaborators, a TPL assessment methodology for grid-connected applications has been developed through the application of the systems engineering approach. Metrics under seven different categories have been developed, weighted based on their relative relevance, and combined to yield a composite score. The methodology has been implemented in a spreadsheet tool plus a web application specifically aimed at assessing early stage (TRL 1-3) concepts. The target use cases are (a) technology developers improving their design, to find fatal flaws early, to get feedback on current design, to identify areas of improvement that will yield the highest return on investment, (b) reviewers assessing technologies in competitions or for making funding decisions, (c) investor or project developer doing due diligence, (d) policy makers landscaping the technology domain for formulating R&D strategy. The methodology and the tools are undergoing continuous improvement based on the experience and lessons learnt from applying it to internal and external marine energy technology development projects. The methodology is also being adapted for assessing WECs servicing markets outside the continental grid - broadly categorized as Powering the Blue Economy (PBE) applications. Such applications have vastly different functional requirements entailing a modification of the methodology to account for their higher risk tolerance, reduced price sensitivities, lower power needs, different permitting protocols, etc. This paper presents the latest status of the TPL assessment methodology and tools, describes its adaptation to select PBE markets, and explores its extension to other domains where it could provide a comprehensive and holistic measure of a nascent or disruptive technology's technoeconomic performance potential.

metrics↗

DOE OSTI2021

Developing Technology Performance Level Assessments for Early-Stage Wave Energy Converter Technologies

metrics↗

DOE OSTI2022

WaveSPARC: TPL Assessment - Guiding Technology Development Trajectories to Successful Outcomes in Less Time, at Less Overall Cost, and With Less Encountered Risk

marine renewable energy↗

DOE OSTI2023

On the feasibility of future colliders: report of the Snowmass'21 Implementation Task Force

Colliders are essential research tools for particle physics. Numerous future collider proposal were discussed in the course of the US high energy physics community strategic planning exercise Snowmass'21. The Implementation Task Force (ITF) has been established to evaluate the proposed future accelerator projects for performance, technology readiness, schedule, cost, and environmental impact. Corresponding metrics has been developed for uniform comparison of the proposals ranging from Higgs/EW factories to multi-TeV lepton, hadron and ep collider facilities, based on traditional and advanced acceleration technologies. Here, this article describes the metrics and approaches, and presents evaluations of future colliders performed by the ITF.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗

NASA NTRS1999

Lithium-Ion Batteries for Aerospace Applications

This presentation reviews: (1) the goals and objectives, (2) the NASA and Airforce requirements, (3) the potential near term missions, (4) management approach, (5) the technical approach and (6) the program road map. The objectives of the program include: (1) develop high specific energy and long life lithium ion cells and smart batteries for aerospace and defense applications, (2) establish domestic production sources, and to demonstrate technological readiness for various missions. The management approach is to encourage the teaming of universities, R&D organizations, and battery manufacturing companies, to build on existing commercial and government technology, and to develop two sources for manufacturing cells and batteries. The technological approach includes: (1) develop advanced electrode materials and electrolytes to achieve improved low temperature performance and long cycle life, (2) optimize cell design to improve specific energy, cycle life and safety, (3) establish manufacturing processes to ensure predictable performance, (4) establish manufacturing processes to ensure predictable performance, (5) develop aerospace lithium ion cells in various AH sizes and voltages, (6) develop electronics for smart battery management, (7) develop a performance database required for various applications, and (8) demonstrate technology readiness for the various missions. Charts which review the requirements for the Li-ion battery development program are presented.

Surampudi, S.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Benefits of Using a Mars Forward Strategy for Lunar Surface Systems

This paper identifies potential risk reduction, cost savings and programmatic procurement benefits of a Mars Forward Lunar Surface System architecture that provides commonality or evolutionary development paths for lunar surface system elements applicable to Mars surface systems. The objective of this paper is to identify the potential benefits for incorporating a Mars Forward development strategy into the planned Project Constellation Lunar Surface System Architecture. The benefits include cost savings, technology readiness, and design validation of systems that would be applicable to lunar and Mars surface systems. The paper presents a survey of previous lunar and Mars surface systems design concepts and provides an assessment of previous conclusions concerning those systems in light of the current Project Constellation Exploration Architectures. The operational requirements for current Project Constellation lunar and Mars surface system elements are compared and evaluated to identify the potential risk reduction strategies that build on lunar surface systems to reduce the technical and programmatic risks for Mars exploration. Risk reduction for rapidly evolving technologies is achieved through systematic evolution of technologies and components based on Moore's Law superimposed on the typical NASA systems engineering project development "V-cycle" described in NASA NPR 7120.5. Risk reduction for established or slowly evolving technologies is achieved through a process called the Mars-Ready Platform strategy in which incremental improvements lead from the initial lunar surface system components to Mars-Ready technologies. The potential programmatic benefits of the Mars Forward strategy are provided in terms of the transition from the lunar exploration campaign to the Mars exploration campaign. By utilizing a sequential combined procurement strategy for lunar and Mars exploration surface systems, the overall budget wedges for exploration systems are reduced and the costly technological development gap between the lunar and Mars programs can be eliminated. This provides a sustained level of technological competitiveness as well as maintaining a stable engineering and manufacturing capability throughout the entire duration of Project Constellation.

Mulqueen, Jack↗

NASA NTRS1988

NLF technology is ready to go

Natural laminar flow (NLF) can reduce drag on aircraft developed using modern structural design methods. Modern metal and composite construction methods can meet NLF requirements for subsonic commuter and business airframes. NLF research at NASA concentrates on expanding the practical application of NLF drag reduction technology; payoffs include progress with liquid-crystal flow visualization, NLF on three-dimensional bodies, and the effects of acoustics on laminar stability. Fuel savings from 2 to 4 percent are expected if laminar flow could be achieved over the forward 50 percent of engine nacelles on large transports depending on the configuration. It is concluded that the skill required to use NLF for drag reduction depends on understanding the conservative design corridors within which laminar flow is durable and reliable.

Holmes, Bruce J.↗

NASA NTRS1977

SEP full-scale wing technology development

A technology development program has generated a detail design of a lightweight 25 kW solar array for Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP). The fabrication and test of a full-scale array wing, 32.0 m x 4.06 m, is in progress to demonstrate technology readiness for fabrication, testing and flight of the large area lightweight solar array system. This paper presents the requirements for the 66 W/kg array and the component testing that has been performed to demonstrate technology readiness in the areas of SEP mission environmental survival, zero-gravity flat-fold array retraction, and NDT development testing. A zero-gravity test program was performed in the NASA KC-135 aircraft using a three-panel, full-width segment of the flat-fold array blanket with three degrees of panel stiffening. The full-scale solar array wing being fabricated is composed of three electrical modules, 76 x 200 cm, and mass simulator panels each 76 x 400 cm employing 2 x 4 cm glass slides (4.5 panels) and aluminum mass simulators (35 panels).

Elms, R. V., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Review of NASA In-Space Propulsion Technology Program Inflatable Decelerator Investments

The NASA In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) Program is managed by the NASA Headquarters Science Mission Directorate and is implemented by the Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. The ISPT objective is to fund development of promising in- space propulsion technologies that can decrease flight times, decrease cost, or increase delivered payload mass for future science missions. Before ISPT will invest in a technology, the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of the concept must be estimated to be at TRL 3. A TRL 3 signifies that the technical community agrees that the feasibility of the concept has been proven through experiment or analysis. One of the highest priority technology investments for ISPT is Aerocapture. The aerocapture maneuver uses a planetary atmosphere to reduce or alter the speed of a vehicle allowing for quick, propellantless (or using very little propellant) orbit capture. The atmosphere is used as a brake, transferring the energy associated with the vehicle s high speed into thermal energy. The ISPT Aerocapture Technology Area (ATA) is currently investing in the development of advanced lightweight ablative thermal protection systems, high temperature composite structures, and heat-flux sensors for rigid aeroshells. The heritage of rigid aeroshells extends back to the Apollo era and this technology will most likely be used by the first generation aerocapture vehicle. As a second generation aerocapture technology, ISPT is investing in three inflatable aerodynamic decelerator concepts for planetary aerocapture. They are: trailing ballute (balloon-parachute), attached afterbody ballute, and an inflatable aeroshell. ISPT also leverages the NASA Small Business Innovative Research Program for additional inflatable decelerator technology development. In mid-2004 ISPT requested an independent review of the three inflatable decelerator technologies funded directly by ISPT to validate the TRL and to identify technology maturation concerns. An independent panel with expertise in advanced thin film materials, aerothermodynamics, trajectory design, and inflatable structures was convened to assess the ISPT investments. The panel considered all major technical subsystems including materials, aerothermodynamics, structural dynamics, packaging, and inflation systems. The panel assessed the overall technology readiness of inflatable decelerators to be a 3 and identified fluid-structure interaction, aeroheating, and structural adhesives to be of highest technical concern.

Richardson, Erin H.↗