Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “SPACE”

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 1,585 records · Page 88

New Space Industries for the Next Millennium

New Space Industries For the Next Millennium is a final report of the findings from the New Space Industries Workshop held in Washington, DC, in February 1998. The primary purpose of this workshop was to identify what must be done to develop new markets, and to generate plans, milestones and new organizational relationships designed to facilitate the goal of space development. This document provides a summary report on the results of that workshop and is not intended as a statement of NASA or government policy. Previous studies had shown great potential for the development of new markets in space (e.g., travel and entertainment, space solar power, satellite and space transfer services, research and development in space, space manufacturing, and space resources), and a great need for coordination and formation of infrastructures (e.g., space transportation, space business parks, and space utilities), to facilitate the growth of new space businesses. The New Space Industries Workshop brought together government, academia, and industry participants from several previous studies and other professionals interested in the development of space for commercial purposes. Their participation provided input into the role of government and industry in space development as well as the technology needs that will enable space development. The opening of the frontier of space, not just to government missions but to private individuals and commercial business, is a challenge of overarching importance. It is our hope that the workshop and this final report continue in earnest the process of identifying and overcoming the barriers to large-scale public access and development of space in the early years of the next century.

Smitherman, D. V., Jr.↗

Global Trends in Space Access and Utilization

In the not-so-distant past, space access and air/space technology superiority were within the purview of the U.S. and former Soviet Union's respective space agencies, both vying for global leadership in space exploitation. In more recent years, with the emergence of the European Space Agency (ESA) member countries and Asian countries joining the family of space-faring nations, it is truer now more than ever that space access and utilization has become a truly global enterprise. In fact, according to the Space Report 2007, this enterprise is a $251-billion economy. It is possible to gauge the vitality of worldwide efforts from open sources in today's transparent, media-based society. In particular, print and web broadcasters regularly report and catalog global space activities for defense and civil purposes. For the purposes of this paper, a representative catalog of missions is used to illustrate the nature of the emerging "globalization." This paper highlights global trends in terms of not only the providers of space access, but also the end-users for the various recently accomplished missions. With well over 50 launches per year, in recent years, the launch-log reveals a surprising percentage of "cooperative or co-dependent missions" where different agencies, countries, and/or commercial entities are so engaged presumably to the benefit of all who participate. Statistics are cited and used to show that recently over d0% of the 50-plus missions involved multiple nations working collectively to deliver payloads to orbit. Observers, space policy professionals, and space agency leaders have eloquently proposed that it might require the combined resources and talents of multiple nations to advance human exploration goals beyond low earth orbit. This paper does not intend to offer new information with respect to whether international collaboration is necessary but to observe that, in continuing to monitor global trends, the results seem to support the thesis that a global interdependent effort with all its likely complexities is an increasingly viable and pragmatic option. The discussion includes a breakdown of space missions into those of civil (scientific), military, and strictly commercial nature. It concludes that all three are robust components of a globally diversified portfolio of activities relying, essentially, on a common space industrial base and space infrastructure. As in other industries, the distribution of space industry assets and knowledge across countries and continents enables a diverse suite of options and arrangements, particularly in the areas of civil and commercial space utilization. A survey of several ongoing bilateral and multilateral space collaboration examples are provided to augment the observations regarding multinational work in space.

Rahman, Shamim A.↗

Commercialization is Required for Sustainable Space Exploration and Development

The U.S. Space Exploration policy outlines an exciting new direction in space for human and robotic exploration and development beyond low Earth orbit. Pressed by this new visionary guidance, human civilization will be able to methodically build capabilities to move off Earth and into the solar system in a step-by-step manner, gradually increasing the capability for humans to stay longer in space and move further away from Earth. The new plans call for an implementation that would create an affordable and sustainable program in order to span over generations of explorers, each new generation pushing back the boundaries and building on the foundations laid by the earlier. To create a sustainable program it is important to enable and encourage the development of a selfsupporting commercial space industry leveraging both traditional and non-traditional segments of the industrial base. Governments will not be able to open the space frontier on their own because their goals change over relatively short timescales and because the large costs associated with human spaceflight cannot be sustained. A strong space development industrial sector is needed that can one day support the needs of commercial space enterprises as well as provide capabilities that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and other national space agencies can buy to achieve their exploration goals. This new industrial space sector will someday provide fundamental capabilities like communications, power, logistics, and even cargo and human space transportation, just as commercial companies are able to provide these services on Earth today. To help develop and bolster this new space industrial sector, NASA and other national space agencies can enable and facilitate it in many ways, including reducing risk by developing important technologies necessary for commercialization of space, and as a paying customer, partner, or anchor tenant. This transition from all or mostly government developed and operated facilities and services to commercial supplied facilities and services should be considered from the very earliest stages of planning. This paper will first discuss the importance of space commercialization to fulfilling national goals and the associated policy and strategic objectives that will enable space exploration and development. Then the paper will offer insights into how government can provide leadership to promote the nascent commercial space industry. In addition, the paper describes programs and policies already in place at NASA and offers five important principles government can use to strengthen space industry.

Martin, Gary L.↗

Space Resources and Mining: Current Objectives, Plans, and Missions

Why are Space Resources and Their Use Important? There are many reasons why people and nations want to explore space, and there are many different ways in which space can be explored. A critical interface linking both the ‘why’ and the ‘how’ of space exploration is the identification, extraction, and use of resources in space. In both NASA’s Journey to Mars: Pioneering Next Steps in Space Exploration released in October of 2015 and the Global Exploration Roadmap released in August 2013, the ability to find, quantify, extract, process, and use space resources was identified as a critical objective by NASA and over 14 other space agencies for achieving affordable and sustainable human exploration beyond Earth’s orbit, encouraging and creating new commercial entities and markets based on space activities, and increasing the terrestrial economy and quality-of-life benefits for all humankind. Robotic and especially human space exploration up to this point in time can be considered to be ‘Earth reliant’ in that everything needed to support and enable the mission is launched from Earth. The past Apollo missions to the Moon and the International Space Station currently in orbit above the Earth all rely on hardware, habitats, power, transportation, and life support consumables sent from Earth to keep the crew alive and working. As the distance from Earth increases, the cost of transportation and the risks due to failures and logistics disruptions also increases. By using resources found at the site of exploration to make mission critical consumables (such as propellants, fuel cell reactants and life support commodities), spare parts, and infrastructure needed to support surface activities (such as landing pads, roads, habitats/shelters, and power/thermal systems) commonly referred to as In Situ Resource Utilization, a significant amount of launch mass and cost can be saved and risk reduced. The ability to do these things also changes how exploration is performed from Earth Reliant to NASA’s goal of ‘Earth Independent’ exploration. After the US Apollo program was over, people began to recognize that it had been an inspiration for a generation of young students to go into Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) fields, and that the US industry and economy had significantly grown and lived off these students and the technological advances made to achieve these missions for decades. Space exploration should no longer be focused solely on scientific advancement or national pride, but for economic growth and population standard of living advancement. Considering the economic value of human exploration and how it could expand the economy of the US was brought to full light in a speech by John Marburger, the director of US Office of Science and Technology Policy under George W Bush at the Goddard Symposium in 2006. In his speech he highlighted that the ultimate goal was not to just Explore space but to Use space for the benefit of mankind. He further stated that the use of off-planet resources, in this case from the Moon, should be a critical architectural consideration for human space exploration to make it more affordable and sustainable. This could be achieved in two ways. The first is to start by encouraging and commercializing the extraction and production of transportation and life support related products from space resources, which could than lead to other resource uses once an affordable transportation architecture is established. The second is to encourage the spin-in of terrestrial technologies into space applications and spin-off of space technologies into terrestrial applications to increase the efficiency and profitability of terrestrial industries.

Sanders, Gerald B.↗

Understanding the Space Weathering of Mercury Through Laboratory Experiments

Introduction: Airless surfaces across the solar system are continually modified by energetic particles from solar wind and micrometeoroid bombardment [1,2]. This process is known as space weathering, and it alters the chemical, microstructural, and optical properties of surface regoliths on airless bodies, including Mercury. On the Moon and S-type asteroids, the reflectance spectral signatures of space weathering include reddening (increasing reflectance with increasing wavelength), darkening (lowering of reflectance), and the attenuation of characteristic absorption bands [2]. Such spectral changes are driven by the production of Fe-bearing nanoparticles(npFe) through both solar wind irradiation and micrometeoroid bombardment. While our understanding of space weathering for the Moon and near-Earth S-types asteroids is advanced, insight into how these processes operate on other planetary bodies is limited. In particular, Mercury experiences a uniquely intense space weathering environment than planetary counterparts at 1 AU, including a moreintense solar wind flux and higher velocity micrometeoroid impacts [4]. Additionally, Mercury has a surface composition unique in the inner solar system, including regions of the surface with very low albedo known as the low reflectance material (LRM), which is enriched in carbon, likely graphite, up to 4wt.% [5].In addition, the concentration of Fe across Mercury’s surface islow (<2 wt.%) compared to the Moonor S-type asteroids asteroids[6]. Our understanding of the effects of space weathering on C-rich and Fe-poor phases is limited. Since Fe plays a critical role inthe development of space weathering characteristicson other airless surfaces(e.g., npFe), its limited availability may significantly affect the development of space weathering features in Mercury surface materials. We can simulate space weathering processes in the laboratory to explore their effects on the microstructural, chemical, and spectral characteristics of Mercury surface materials[7]. Here we used pulsed laser irradiation to simulate the short duration, high-temperature events associated with micrometeoroid impacts. We performed coordinated analyses including reflectance spectroscopy and electron microscopy to investigate the spectral, chemical, and microstructural changes in these mercurian analog samples. Methods: For these experiments, we usedforsteritic olivine with varying FeOcontents, a mineral phase proposed to be abundant on the surface of Mercury. We mixed each sample with graphite to simulate LRM regions of the surface. Wesynthesized the olivinesamplesat 1-bar at NASA’s Johnson Space Centerand prepared pressed powder pellets for laser irradiation [8].We prepared three samples, each with a base layer of olivineto maintain structural integrity and topped witha surface layer containing the graphite-olivine mixture: 1) Sample SC-001 San Carlos olivine(Fo90.91),2)Sample F-S-002 with0.05 wt.% FeO olivine, and 3) F-T-004 with 0.53 wt.% FeO olivine. Each sample was mixed with 5 wt.% powdered graphite and had grain sizes ranging from 45to 125μm. We irradiated each sample usinga pulsed Nd-YAG laser, (l=1064 nm, ~6 ns pulse duration, energy of 48 mJ/pulse) while undervacuumat Northern Arizona University. The laser was rastered1x and then 5x over the surfaceof each sample to simulate progressive space weathering. We collected in situreflectance spectra from the samples after each laser pulse witha Nicolet IS50 Fourier-Transform Infrared spectrometer (lfrom 0.65-2.5 μm). We used an FEI Nova NanoSEM200scanning electron microscope (SEM) and a Hitachi TM4000 Plus benchtop SEM at Purdue University to image the surface morphology and topography of the samples. We extracted thin sections for analysis in the transmission electron microscope(TEM)using the FEI Helios NanoLab 660 focused ion beam (FIB) SEM at the University of Arizona.We performed analysis of the microstructural and chemical characteristics of the samples using the 200 keV JEOL 2500 scanning TEM at Johnson Space Center. Reflectance Spectroscopy Results:Reflectance spectra for each sample are shown in Fig. 1.SC-001:The spectrum of the unirradiated sample exhibits a weak 1.0 μm absorption feature, associated with Fe2+in the olivine,and low overall reflectance (Fig. 1a). Thereflectance and the depth of the absorption band increases after 1x laser raster but are at their lowest after 5x laser rasters.F-T-004:The unirradiated sample has a blue-sloped spectrum with low reflectance without identifiable absorption features (Fig. 1b). With progressive laser irradiation, the sample reflectance increases and becomes strongly red-sloped.F-S-002:The unirradiated sample exhibits a dark, blue-slopedspectrum. The brightness of the sample increases significantly from <0.2average reflectance over >0.8 reflectance in the most irradiated sampleand thespectral slope also becomesslightly reddened (Fig. 1c). Microstructural and Chemical Analysis: Two primary alteration textures were observed in the samples exposed to simulated space weathering: 1) fluffy C-rich,and 2) vesiculated melt. The fluffy C-rich texture is composed oflow-densitydeposits distributed across the surface of the sample(Fig. 2A). Analysis of a FIB section extracted from a low-density C-rich region in sample SC-001 reveals multiple globule-type deposits, discrete from stacked graphite, likely produced via melting from the laser irradiation [9].The vesiculated melt textureis smooth and uniformly distributed across isolated regions of the sample surface. The vesicles measure up to 100s of nmin diameter. Analysis of a FIB section from this texture was extracted from sample F-T-004 reveals a layer of amorphous melt material, close to 100 nm thick and uniform across the FIB section (Fig. 2B). Isolated regions of this melt layer contain small nanoparticles, <5 nm in diameter. Chemical analysis through energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy reveals the composition of this layer is enriched in Si and depleted in Mg and O compared to the underlying sample. Implications for Space Weathering on Mercury: Previous experiments simulating space weathering of Mercury have showndarkening and reddening of spectra[7,10].However, our use of low-Fe materials and graphite to create a sample set more analogous to the mercurian surface. Our results indicate that sample composition plays a significant and important role in the space weathering of Mercury. In particular, our spectral data demonstrates a strong correlation between spectral slope, Fe content, and simulated space weathering. While the variation in FeO content between samples F-S-002 and F-T-004 is <0.6 wt.%, the spectra deviate from flat to strongly red-sloped(F-T-004). This reddeningmay be linked to the presence of very small nanoparticles observed in the melt textures extracted from sample F-T-004. For the SC-001 sample, the fluffy C-rich textures may be developed by the amalgamation of small graphite particles into these unique morphologies. Such observations indicate that space weathering on Mercury may result in both familiar and new microstructural and chemical characteristics. References: [1]Hapke B. (2001) J. Geophys. Res.-Planet.,106,10039–10073. [2]Pieters C.M. and Noble S.K. (2016) J. Geophys. Res-Planet., 121, 1865–1884. [3] Lucey P.G., and Riner, M.A. (2011) Icarus,212, 451-462.[4]CintalaM.J.(1992)J. Geophys. Res.-Planet.,97,947–973.[5]Klima R.L.et al.(2018)Geophys.Res.Letters, 45, 2945–2953. [6]Nittler L.R., et al. (2011) Science 333, 1847-1850.[7]Sasaki S. and Kurahashi E. (2004) Space weathering on Mercury, Adv.Space Res., 33, 2152-2155.[8] Vander KaadenK.E., et al. (2018) LPSCXLIX, Abstract 1230. [9] McGlaun M.L. et al. (2019) LPSCL, Abstract 2019. [10] TrangD.et al. (2018)LPSCXLIX,Abstract2083

M S Thompson↗

NASA’s Space Sustainability Strategy: An Overview and a Conceptual Framework for Implementation

Space sustainability is crucial for the continuation of humanity's exploration and utilization of space. NASA recognizes the imperative of maintaining a sustainable space operating environment to safeguard the future of space activities. On April 9, 2024, NASA released its first part of an integrated Space Sustainability Strategy focused on the domain of earth orbit, with future volumes to address impacts of space operations on earth itself; cislunar space, including the Lagrange points and the lunar surface; and deep space, including other celestial bodies. This commitment extends to ensuring the safety of astronauts conducting operations in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), as well as enabling missions to the Moon and Mars. Moreover, sustainable space practices are essential for the uninterrupted operation of NASA's robotic science missions, which monitor Earth's changes and probe the mysteries of the universe. The strategy sets out a set of goals, the first of which is to establish a framework for assessing space sustainability at NASA, addressing the absence of a universally accepted framework with key metrics that promotes understanding of how metrics are interconnected. This framework will provide a basis for evaluating the sustainability of orbital activities, with metrics informed by input from the domestic and international space community. Objectives under this goal include defining key parameters affecting space sustainability, determining tolerable levels of risk, and annually publishing NASA's effect on space sustainability, including compliance with orbital debris mitigation standards. The subsequent goals build upon this foundation, identifying effective actions for enhancing space sustainability, incentivizing adoption of these actions through technology development and policy changes, and ensuring coordination with the global space community. An organizational change within NASA is also proposed to facilitate day-to-day coordination and accountability for space sustainability efforts. By pursuing these goals, NASA aims to strengthen the technical foundations of and continue to set an example for sustainable space operations. Regular evaluation of NASA mission performance in context with meeting sustainability objectives will ensure alignment with evolving challenges in the space operating environment.

Matt Forsbacka↗

Materials International Space Station Experiment (MISSE): Overview, Accomplishments and Future Needs

Materials and devices used on the exterior of spacecraft in low Earth orbit (LEO) are subjected to environmental threats that can cause degradation in material properties, possibly threatening spacecraft mission success. These threats include: atomic oxygen (AO), ultraviolet and x-ray radiation, charged particle radiation, temperature extremes and thermal cycling, micrometeoroid and debris impacts, and contamination. Space environmental threats vary greatly based on spacecraft materials, thicknesses and stress levels, and the mission environment and duration. For more than a decade the Materials International Space Station Experiment (MISSE) has enabled the study of the long duration environmental durability of spacecraft materials in the LEO environment. The overall objective of MISSE is to test the stability and durability of materials and devices in the space environment in order to gain valuable knowledge on the performance of materials in space, as well as to enable lifetime predictions of new materials that may be used in future space flight. MISSE is a series of materials flight experiments, which are attached to the exterior of the International Space Station (ISS). Individual experiments were loaded onto suitcase-like trays, called Passive Experiment Containers (PECs). The PECs were transported to the ISS in the Space Shuttle cargo bay and attached to, and removed from, the ISS during extravehicular activities (EVAs). The PECs were retrieved after one or more years of space exposure and returned to Earth enabling post-flight experiment evaluation. MISSE is a multi-organization project with participants from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Department of Defense (DoD), industry and academia. MISSE has provided a platform for environmental durability studies for thousands of samples and numerous devices, and it has produced many tangible impacts. Ten PECs (and one smaller tray) have been flown, representing MISSE 1 through MISSE 8, yielding long-duration space environmental performance and durability data that enable material validation, processing recertification and space qualification; improved predictions of materials and component lifetimes in space; model verification and development; and correlation factors between space-exposure and ground-facilities enabling more accurate in-space performance predictions based on ground-laboratory testing. A few of the many experiment results and observations, and their impacts, are provided. Those highlighted include examples on improved understanding of atomic oxygen scattering mechanisms, LEO coating durability results, and polymer erosion yields and their impacts on spacecraft design. The MISSE 2 Atomic Oxygen Scattering Chamber Experiment discovered that the peak flux of scattered AO was determined to be 45 deg from normal incidence, not the model predicted cosine dependence. In addition, the erosion yield (E(sub y)) of Kapton H for AO scattered off oxidized-Al is 22% of the E(sub y) of direct AO impingement. These results were used to help determine the degradation mechanism of a cesium iodide detector within the Hubble Space Telescope Cosmic Origins Spectrograph Experiment. The MISSE 6 Indium Tin Oxide (ITO) Degradation Experiment measured surface electrical resistance of ram and wake ITO coated samples. The data confirmed that ITO is a stable AO protective coating, and the results validated the durability of ITO conductive coatings for solar arrays for the Atmosphere-Space Transition 2 Explorer program. The MISSE 2, 6 and 7 Polymer Experiments have provided LEO AO Ey data on over 120 polymer and composites samples. The flight E(sub y) values were found to range from 3.05 x 10(exp -26) cu cm/atom for the AO resistant polymer CORIN to 9.14 x 10(exp -26) cu cm/atom for polyoxymethylene (POM). In addition, flying the same polymers on different missions has advanced the understanding of the AO E(sub y) dependency on solar exposure for polymers containing fluorine. The MISSE polymer results are highly requested and have impacted spacecraft design for WorldView-2 & -3, the Global Precipitation Measurement-Microwave Imager, and other spacecraft. The flight data has enabled the development of an Atomic Oxygen Erosion Predictive Tool that allows the erosion prediction of new and non-flown polymers. The data has also been used to develop a new NASA Technical Standards Handbook "Spacecraft Polymers Atomic Oxygen Durability Handbook." Many intangible benefits have also been derived from MISSE. For example, over 40 students have collaborated on Glenn's MISSE experiments, which have resulted in greater than $80K in student scholarships and awards in national and international science fairs. Students have also given presentations and won poster competition awards at international space conferences.

Flight Experiment↗

Introduction to Space Station Freedom

NASA field centers and contractors are organized to develop 'work packages' for Space Station Freedom. Marshall Space Flight Center and Boeing are building the U.S. laboratory and habitation modules, nodes, and environmental control and life support system; Johnson Space Center and McDonnell Douglas are responsible for truss structure, data management, propulsion systems, thermal control, and communications and guidance; Lewis Research Center and Rocketdyne are developing the power system. The Canadian Space Agency (CSA) is contributing a Mobile Servicing Center, Special Dextrous Manipulator, and Mobile Servicing Center Maintenance Depot. The National Space Development Agency of Japan (NASDA) is contributing a Japanese Experiment Module (JEM), which includes a pressurized module, logistics module, and exposed experiment facility. The European Space Agency (ESA) is contributing the Columbus laboratory module. NASA ground facilities, now in various stages of development to support Space Station Freedom, include: Marshall Space Flight Center's Payload Operations Integration Center and Payload Training Complex (Alabama), Johnson Space Center's Space Station Control Center and Space Station Training Facility (Texas), Lewis Research Center's Power System Facility (Ohio), and Kennedy Space Center's Space Station Processing Facility (Florida). Budget appropriations impact the development of the Space Station. In Fiscal Year 1988, Congress appropriated only half of the funds that NASA requested for the space station program ($393 million vs. $767 million). In FY 89, NASA sought $967 million for the program, and Congress appropriated $900 million. NASA's FY 90 request was $2.05 billion compared to an appropriation of $1.75 billion; the FY 91 request was $2.45 billion, and the appropriation was $1.9 billion. After NASA restructured the Space Station Freedom program in response to directions from Congress, the agency's full budget request of $2.029 billion for Space Station Freedom in FY 92 was appropriated. For FY 93, NASA is seeking $2.25 billion for the program; the planned budget for FY 94 is $2.5 billion. Further alterations to the hardware configuration for Freedom would be a serious setback; NASA intends 'to stick with the current baseline' and continue planning for utilization.

Kohrs, Richard↗

Space Resources Roundtable 2

Contents include following: Developing Technologies for Space Resource Utilization - Concept for a Planetary Engineering Research Institute. Results of a Conceptual Systems Analysis of Systems for 200 m Deep Sampling of the Martian Subsurface. The Role of Near-Earth Asteroids in Long-Term Platinum Supply. Core Drilling for Extra-Terrestrial Mining. Recommendations by the "LSP and Manufacturing" Group to the NSF-NASA Workshop on Autonomous Construction and Manufacturing for Space Electrical Power Systems. Plasma Processing of Lunar and Planetary Materials. Percussive Force Magnitude in Permafrost. Summary of the Issues Regarding the Martian Subsurface Explorer. A Costing Strategy for Manufacturing in Orbit Using Extraterrestrial Resources. Mine Planning for Asteroid Orebodies. Organic-based Dissolution of Silicates: A New Approach to Element Extraction from LunarRegohth. Historic Frontier Processes Active in Future Space-based Mineral Extraction. The Near-Earth Space Surveillance (NIESS) Mission: Discovery, Tracking, and Characterization of Asteroids, Comets, and Artificial Satellites with a microsatellite. Privatized Space Resource Property Ownership. The Fabrication of Silicon Solar Cells on the Moon Using In-Situ Resources. A New Strategy for Exploration Technology Development: The Human Exploration and Development of Space (HEDS) Exploratiori/Commercialization Technology Initiative. Space Resources for Space Tourism. Recovery of Volatiles from the Moon and Associated Issues. Preliminary Analysis of a Small Robot for Martian Regolith Excavation. The Registration of Space-based Property. Continuous Processing with Mars Gases. Drilling and Logging in Space; An Oil-Well Perspective. LORPEX for Power Surges: Drilling, Rock Crushing. An End-To-End Near-Earth Asteroid Resource Exploitation Plan. An Engineering and Cost Model for Human Space Settlement Architectures: Focus on Space Hotels and Moon/Mars Exploration. The Development and Realization of a Silicon-60-based Economy in CisLunar Space. Our Lunar Destiny: Creating a Lunar Economy. Cost-Effective Approaches to Lunar Passenger Transportation. Lunar Mineral Resources: Extraction and Application. Space Resources Development - The Link Between Human Exploration and the Long-term Commercialization of Space. Toward a More Comprehensive Evaluation of Space Information. Development of Metal Casting Molds by Sol-Gel Technology Using Planetary Resources. A New Concept in Planetary Exploration: ISRU with Power Bursts. Bold Space Ventures Require Fervent Public Support. Hot-pressed Iron from Lunar Soil. The Lunar Dust Problem: A Possible Remedy. Considerations on Use of Lunar Regolith in Lunar Constructions. Experimental Study on Water Production by Hydrogen Reduction of Lunar Soil Simulant in a Fixed Bed Reactor.

Ignatiev, A.↗

Fact Sheet: National Space Policy

For over three decades, the United States has led the world in the exploration and use of outer space. Our achievements in space have inspired a generation of Americans and people throughout the world. We will maintain this leadership role by supporting a strong, stable, and balanced national space program that serves our goals in national security, foreign policy, economic growth, environmental stewardship, and scientific and technical excellence. Access to and use of space are central for preserving peace and protecting US national security as well as civil and commercial interests. The United States will pursue greater levels of partnership and cooperation in national and international space activities and work with other nations to ensure the continued exploration and use of outer space for peaceful purposes. The goals of the US space program are to: (a) Enhance knowledge of the Earth, the solar system, and the universe through human and robotic exploration; (b) Strengthen and maintain the national security of the United States; (c) Enhance the economic competitiveness and scientific and technical capabilities of the United States; (d) Encourage State, local, and private sector investment in, and use of, space technologies; (e) Promote international cooperation to further US domestic, national security, and foreign policies. The United States is committed to the exploration and use of outer space by all nations for peaceful purposes and for the benefit of all humanity. "Peaceful purposes" allow defense and intelligence-related activities in pursuit of national security and other goals. The United States rejects any claims to sovereignty by any nation over outer space or celestial bodies, or any portion thereof, and rejects any limitations on the fundamental right of sovereign nations to acquire data from space. The United States considers the space systems of any nation to be national property with the right of passage through and operations in space without interference. Purposeful interference with space systems shall be viewed as an infringement on sovereign rights. The US Government will maintain and coordinate separate national security and civil space systems where differing needs dictate. All actions undertaken by agencies and departments in implementing the national space policy shall be consistent with US law, regulations, national security requirements, foreign policy, international obligations, and nonproliferation policy. The National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) is the principal forum for resolving issues related to national space policy. As appropriate, the NSTC and NSC will co-chair policy process. This policy will be implemented within the overall resource and policy guidance provided by the President.

Source record↗

A High-power Electric Propulsion Test Platform in Space

This paper will describe the results of the preliminary phase of a NASA design study for a facility to test high-power electric propulsion systems in space. The results of this design study are intended to provide a firm foundation for subsequent detailed design and development activities leading to the deployment of a valuable space facility. The NASA Exploration Systems Mission Directorate is sponsoring this design project. A team from the NASA Johnson Space Center, Glenn Research Center, the Marshall Space Flight Center and the International Space Station Program Office is conducting the project. The test facility is intended for a broad range of users including government, industry and universities. International participation is encouraged. The objectives for human and robotic exploration of space can be accomplished affordably, safely and effectively with high-power electric propulsion systems. But, as thruster power levels rise to the hundreds of kilowatts and up to megawatts, their testing will pose stringent and expensive demands on existing Earth-based vacuum facilities. These considerations and the human access to near-Earth space provided by the International Space Station (ISS) have led to a renewed interest in space testing. The ISS could provide an excellent platform for a space-based test facility with the continuous vacuum conditions of the natural space environment and no chamber walls to modify the open boundary conditions of the propulsion system exhaust. The test platform could take advantage of the continuous vacuum conditions of the natural space environment. Space testing would provide open boundary conditions without walls, micro-gravity and a realistic thermal environment. Testing on the ISS would allow for direct observation of the test unit, exhaust plume and space-plasma interactions. When necessary, intervention by on-board personnel and post-test inspection would be possible. The ISS can provide electrical power, a location for diagnostic instruments, data handling and thermal control. The platform will be designed to accommodate the side-by-side testing of multiple types of electric thrusters. It is intended to be a permanent facility in which different thrusters can be tested over time. ISS crews can provide maintenance for the platform and change out thruster test units as needed. The primary objective of this platform is to provide a test facility for electric propulsion devices of interest for future exploration missions. These thrusters are expected to operate in the range of hundreds of kilowatts and above. However, a platform with this capability could also accommodate testing of thrusters that require much lower power levels. Testing at the higher power levels would be accomplished by using power fiom storage devices on the platform, which would be gradually recharged by the ISS power generation system. This paper will summarize the results of the preliminary phase of the study with an explanation of the user requirements and the initial conceptual design. The concept for test operations will also be described. The NASA project team is defining the requirements but they will also reflect the inputs of the broader electric propulsion community including those at universities, commercial enterprises and other government laboratories. As a facility on the International Space Station, the design requirements are also intended to encompass the needs of international users. Testing of electric propulsion systems on the space station will help advance the development of systems needed for exploration and could also serve the needs of other customers. Propulsion systems being developed for commercial and military applications could be tested and certification testing of mature thrusters could be accomplished in the space environment.

Petro, Andrew J.↗

Strategies For Human Exploration Leading To Human Colonization of Space

Enabling the commercial development of space is key to the future colonization of space and key to a viable space exploration program. Without commercial development following in the footsteps of exploration it is difficult to justify and maintain public interest in the efforts. NASA's exploration program has suffered from the lack of a good commercial economic strategy for decades. Only small advances in commercial space have moved forward, and only up to Earth orbit with the commercial satellite industry. A way to move beyond this phase is to begin the establishment of human commercial activities in space in partnership with the human exploration program. In 2007 and 2008, the authors researched scenarios to make space exploration and commercial space development more feasible as part of their graduate work in the Space Architecture Program at the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture at the University of Houston, Houston, Texas. Through this research it became apparent that the problems facing future colonization are much larger than the technology being developed or the international missions that our space agencies are pursuing. These issues are addressed in this paper with recommendations for space exploration, commercial development, and space policy that are needed to form a strategic plan for human expansion into space. In conclusion, the authors found that the current direction in space as carried out by our space agencies around the world is definitely needed, but is inadequate and incapable of resolving all of the issues that inhibit commercial space development. A bolder vision with strategic planning designed to grow infrastructures and set up a legal framework for commercial markets will go a long way toward enabling the future colonization of space.

Smitherman, David↗

Design Concepts for a Small Space-Based GEO Relay Satellite for Missions Between Low Earth and near Earth Orbits

The main purpose of the Small Space-Based Geosynchronous Earth orbiting (GEO) satellite is to provide a space link to the user mission spacecraft for relaying data through ground networks to user Mission Control Centers. The Small Space Based Satellite (SSBS) will provide services comparable to those of a NASA Tracking Data Relay Satellite (TDRS) for the same type of links. The SSBS services will keep the user burden the same or lower than for TDRS and will support the same or higher data rates than those currently supported by TDRS. At present, TDRSS provides links and coverage below GEO; however, SSBS links and coverage capability to above GEO missions are being considered for the future, especially for Human Space Flight Missions (HSF). There is also a rising need for the capability to support high data rate links (exceeding 1 Gbps) for imaging applications. The communication payload on the SSBS will provide S/Ka-band single access links to the mission and a Ku-band link to the ground, with an optical communication payload as an option. To design the communication payload, various link budgets were analyzed and many possible operational scenarios examined. To reduce user burden, using a larger-sized antenna than is currently in use by TDRS was considered. Because of the SSBS design size, it was found that a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket could deliver three SSBSs to GEO. This will greatly reduce the launch costs per satellite. Using electric propulsion was also evaluated versus using chemical propulsion; the power system size and time to orbit for various power systems were also considered. This paper will describe how the SSBS will meet future service requirements, concept of operations, and the design to meet NASA users' needs for below and above GEO missions. These users' needs not only address the observational mission requirements but also possible HSF missions to the year 2030. We will provide the trade-off analysis of the communication payload design in terms of the number of links looking above and below GEO; the detailed design of a GEO SSBS spacecraft bus and its accommodation of the communication payload, and a summary of the trade study that resulted in the selection of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle to deploy the SSBS and its impact on cost reductions per satellite. ======================================================================== Several initiatives have taken place within NASA1 and international space agencies2 to create a human exploration strategy for expanding human presence into the solar system; these initiatives have been driven by multiple factors to benefit Earth. Of the many elements in the strategy one stands out: to send robotic and human missions to destinations beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO), including cis-lunar space, Near-Earth Asteroids (NEAs), the Moon, and Mars and its moons.3, 4 The time frame for human exploration to various destinations, based on the public information available,1,4 is shown in Figure 1. Advance planning is needed to define how future space communications services will be provided in the new budget environment to meet future space communications needs. The spacecraft for these missions can be dispersed anywhere from below LEO to beyond GEO, and to various destinations within the solar system. NASA's Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) program office provides communication and tracking services to space missions during launch, in-orbit testing, and operation phases. Currently, SCaN's space networking relay satellites mainly provide services to users below GEO, at Near Earth Orbit (NEO), below LEO, and in deep space. The potential exists for using a space-based relay satellite, located in the vicinity of various solar system destinations, to provide communication space links to missions both below and above its orbit. Such relays can meet the needs of human exploration missions for maximum connectivity to Earth locations and for reduced latency. In the past, several studies assessed the ability of satellite-based relays working above GEO in conjunction with Earth ground stations. Many of these focused on the trade between space relay and direct-to-Earth station links5,6,7. Several others focused on top-level architecture based on relays at various destinations8,9,10,11,12. Much has changed in terms of microwave and optical technology since the publication of the referenced papers; Ka-band communication systems are being deployed, optical communication is being demonstrated, and spacecraft buses are becoming increasingly more functional and operational. A design concept study was undertaken to access the potential for deploying a Small Space-Based Satellite (SSBS) relay capable of serving missions between LEO and NEO. The needs of future human exploration missions were analyzed, and a notional relay-based architecture concept was generated as shown in Fig. 1. Relay satellites in Earth through cis-Lunar orbits are normally located in stable orbits requiring low fuel consumption. Relay satellites for Mars orbit are normally selected based on the mission requirement and projected fuel consumption. Relay satellites have extreme commonalities of functions between them, differing only in the redundancy and frequencies used; therefore, the relay satellite in GEO was selected for further analysis since it will be the first step in achieving a relay-based architecture for human exploration missions (see Fig.Figure 2). The mission design methodology developed by the Collaborative Modeling for Parametric Assessment of Space Systems (COMPASS) team13 was used to produce the satellite relay design and to perform various design trades. At the start of the activity, the team was provided with the detailed concept of the notional architecture and the system and communication payload drivers.

Relay Satellites↗

Thermal Protection Systems Technology Transfer from Apollo and Space Shuttle to the Orion Program

This paper describes how the Orion program is utilizing the Thermal Protection System (TPS) experience from the Apollo and Space Shuttle programs to reduce program risk and improve affordability to meet NASA's future manned exploration missions. The Orion program successfully completed the Exploration Flight Test (EFT-1) mission in 2014 and is currently assembling, integrating, and testing the next spacecraft for the Exploration Mission (EM-1) to meet the flight test objectives of an unmanned orbital mission to the moon and return to earth in 2019. The Orion spacecraft production operations are located in the Neil Armstrong Operations and Checkout (O&C) facility at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) providing an affordable and seamless delivery approach of vehicles directly to the launch site eliminating spacecraft transportation and additional checkout testing. Innovative vehicle design, manufacturing and test operations approaches are maturing and evolving with each Orion vehicle build to support the challenging NASA exploration mission requirements beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) while reducing program cost and schedule impacts. An example of Orion's evolution is the incorporation of an improved heat shield design, assembly and testing approach to meet the higher re-entry velocities for a lunar return for the EM-1 mission. The EFT- 1 heat shield was based on the Apollo heat shield manufacturing processes and was assembled at a supplier location and then transported to KSC for final integration. The EM-1 heat shield is now manufactured, assembled, tested, and installed into the spacecraft at the O&C facility reducing program cost and production schedules. The transition of the Space Shuttle TPS capabilities has enabled Orion to provide a human rated capsule design using proven materials and processes established over years of orbiter re-entry missions. The Orion Crew Module (CM) TPS configuration is derived from the Apollo CM approach utilizing improved materials and processes developed from the Space Shuttle program. The Orion EFT-1 heat shield utilized the Avcoat ablative material from Apollo which was injected into a honeycomb substrate and has been updated for EM-1 incorporating a block configuration bonded to a composite shell structure. This approach utilizes the proven Avcoat material for the heat shield ablator and is utilizing derived bonding and inspection methods and techniques from the Space Shuttle tile experience. The Orion back shell TPS configuration is based on Space Shuttle tile designs using proven tile materials and coatings. The Orion forward bay cover utilizes the high temperature tiles similar to the back shell tiles and low temperature blankets derived from the Space Shuttle program reducing weight impacts. Space Shuttle Multi-Layer Insulation (MLI) is installed in the Orion capsule to control the interior temperature environment providing a light weight design. These TPS design approaches have performed successfully on the Orion first flight test on EFT-1 and are incorporated in the configuration for the next flight test for EM-1. Completion of these two flight tests will certify the TPS for the Orion program for human rated exploration missions and has reduced the development cost to the Orion program. In addition to transitioning the Space Shuttle TPS design configurations to Orion, the supporting manufacturing infrastructure, manufacturing processes, and inspection methods are also incorporated into the Orion assembly operations at KSC. This has avoided significant startup schedule and costs impacts of new capabilities and development of support operations necessary to fabricate, install, inspect, and validate the TPS installations for the Orion spacecraft. The Thermal Protection System Facility (TPSF) which supported the Space Shuttle program provides the heat shield Avcoat blocks and the back shell AETB-8 tiles for Orion program. Extending the existing Space Shuttle TPS operations at KSC provides onsite support to the Orion spacecraft assembly operations. A significant benefit to the Orion program is the transition of the Space Shuttle technician work force at KSC. This highly skilled workforce was able to transition to the Orion program and immediately support the TPS installation operations. They brought with them the human rated manufacturing and assembly operations culture that was critical to the Space Shuttle success avoiding the retraining cost and schedule impacts of a new workforce to Orion. The technician skills certification program from the Space Shuttle was found to be compatible with the Lockheed Martin technician certification programs enabling a seamless training process utilizing process similarity avoiding the cost of retraining the work force to Orion standards. The existing workforce is certificated for multiple processes enabling reassignment of technicians to other tasks in the Orion AI&P operations reducing the overall touch labor manpower requirements. Additional benefits of using the Space Shuttle workforce is the incorporation of the lessons learned from Space Shuttle processes to improve the Orion TPS processes. This has resulted in a continuous evolution of TPS processes to improve the producibility and reduce the program cost for the TPS for the Orion program. Transitioning the Apollo and Space Shuttle TPS designs, processes, and technician workforce has been instrumental in enabling Orion to successfully meet the program challenges for NASA's exploration missions of the future.

Stewart, Michael↗

Opportunities for research on Space Station Freedom

NASA has allocated research accommodations on Freedom (equipment, utilities, etc.) to the program offices that sponsor space-based research and development as follows: Space Science and Applications (OSSA)--52 percent, Commercial Programs (OCP)--28 percent, Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST)--12 percent, and Space Flight (OSF)--8 percent. Most of OSSA's allocation will be used for microgravity and life science experiments; although OSSA's space physics, astrophysics, earth science and applications, and solar system exploration divisions also will use some of this allocation. Other Federal agencies have expressed an interest in using Space Station Freedom. They include the National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Geological Survey, National Science Foundation, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Energy. Payload interfaces with space station lab support equipment must be simple, and experiment packages must be highly contained. Freedom's research facilities will feature International Standard Payload Racks (ISPR's), experiment racks that are about twice the size of a Spacelab rack. ESA's Columbus lab will feature 20 racks, the U.S. lab will have 12 racks, and the Japanese lab will have 10. Thus, Freedom will have a total of 42 racks versus 8 for Space lab. NASA is considering outfitting some rack space to accommodate small, self-contained payloads similar to the Get-Away-Special canisters and middeck-locker experiment packages flown on Space Shuttle missions. Crew time allotted to experiments on Freedom at permanently occupied capability will average 25 minutes per rack per day, compared to six hours per rack per day on Spacelab missions. Hence, telescience--the remote operation of space-based experiments by researchers on the ground--will play a very important role in space station research. Plans for supporting life sciences research on Freedom focus on the two basic goals of NASA 's space life sciences program: to ensure the health, safety, and productivity of humans in space and to acquire fundamental knowledge of biological processes. Space-based research has already shown that people and plants respond the same way to the microgravity environment: they lose structure. However, the mechanisms by which they respond are different, and researchers do not yet know much about these mechanisms. Life science research accommodations on Freedom will include facilities for experiments designed to address this and other questions, in fields such as gravitational biology, space physiology, and biomedical monitoring and countermeasures research.

Phillips, Robert W.↗

The Capabilities of Space Stations

Over the past two years the U.S. space station program has evolved to a three-phased international program, with the first phase consisting of the use of the U.S. Space Shuttle and the upgrading and use of the Russian Mir Space Station, and the second and third phases consisting of the assembly and use of the new International Space Station. Projected capabilities for research, and plans for utilization, have also evolved and it has been difficult for those not directly involved in the design and engineering of these space stations to learn and understand their technical details. The Committee on the Space Station of the National Research Council, with the concurrence of NASA, undertook to write this short report in order to provide concise and objective information on space stations and platforms -- with emphasis on the Mir Space Station and International Space Station -- and to supply a summary of the capabilities of previous, existing, and planned space stations. In keeping with the committee charter and with the task statement for this report, the committee has summarized the research capabilities of five major space platforms: the International Space Station, the Mir Space Station, the Space Shuttle (with a Spacelab or Spacehab module in its cargo bay), the Space Station Freedom (which was redesigned to become the International Space Station in 1993 and 1994), and Skylab. By providing the summary, together with brief descriptions of the platforms, the committee hopes to assist interested readers, including scientists and engineers, government officials, and the general public, in evaluating the utility of each system to meet perceived user needs.

Source record↗

The New National Vision for Space Exploration

From the Apollo landings on the Moon, to robotic surveys of the Sun and the planets, to the compelling images captured by advanced space telescopes, U.S. achievements in space have revolutionized humanity s view of the universe and have inspired Americans and people around the world. These achievements also have led to the development of technologies that have widespread applications to address problems on Earth. As the world enters the second century of powered flight, it is appropriate to articulate a new vision that will define and guide U.S. space exploration activities for the next several decades. Today, humanity has the potential to seek answers to the most fundamental questions posed about the existence of life beyond Earth. Telescopes have found planets around other stars. Robotic probes have identified potential resources on the Moon, and evidence of water - a key ingredient for life - has been found on Mars and the moons of Jupiter. Direct human experience in space has fundamentally altered our perspective of humanity and our place in the universe. Humans have the ability to respond to the unexpected developments inherent in space travel and possess unique skills that enhance discoveries. Just as Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo challenged a generation of Americans, a renewed U.S. space exploration program with a significant human component can inspire us - and our youth - to greater achievements on Earth and in space. The loss of Space Shuttles Challenger and Columbia and their crews are a stark reminder of the inherent risks of space flight and the severity of the challenges posed by space exploration. In preparation for future human exploration, we must advance our ability to live and work safely in space and, at the same time, develop the technologies to extend humanity s reach to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. The new technologies required for further space exploration also will improve the Nation s other space activities and may provide applications that could be used to address problems on Earth. Like the explorers of the past and the pioneers of flight in the last century, we cannot today identify all that we will gain from space exploration; we are confident, nonetheless, that the eventual return will be great. Like their efforts, the success of future U.S. space exploration will unfold over generations. The fundamental goal of this new national vision is to advance U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests through a robust space exploration program. In support of this goal, the United States will: 1) Implement a sustained and affordable human and robotic program to explore the solar system and beyond; 2) Extend human presence across the solar system, starting with a human return to the Moon by the year 2020, in preparation for human exploration of IMars and other destinations; 3) Develop the innovative technologies, knowledge, and infrastructures both to explore and to support decisions about the destinations for human exploration; and 4) Promote international and commercial participation in exploration to further U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests.

Sackheim, Robert L.↗

Space Biotechnology and Commercial Applications University of Florida

The Space Biotechnology and Commercial Applications grant was funded by NASA's Kennedy Space Center in FY 2002 to provide dedicated biotechnology and agricultural research focused on the regeneration of space flight environments with direct parallels in Earth-based applications for solving problems in the environment, advances in agricultural science, and other human support issues amenable to targeted biotechnology solutions. This grant had three project areas, each with multiple tasks. They are: 1) Space Agriculture and Biotechnology Research and Education, 2) Integrated Smart Nanosensors for Space Biotechnology Applications, and 3) Commercial Applications. The Space Agriculture and Biotechnology Research and Education (SABRE) Center emphasized the fundamental biology of organisms involved in space flight applications, including those involved in advanced life support environments because of their critical role in the long-term exploration of space. The SABRE Center supports research at the University of Florida and at the Space Life Sciences Laboratory (SLSL) at the Kennedy Space Center. The Integrated Smart Nanosensors for Space Biotechnology Applications component focused on developing and applying sensor technologies to space environments and agricultural systems. The research activities in nanosensors were coordinated with the SABRE portions of this grant and with the research sponsored by the NASA Environmental Systems Commercial Space Technology Center located in the Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences. Initial sensor efforts have focused on air and water quality monitoring essential to humans for living and working permanently in space, an important goal identified in NASA's strategic plan. The closed environment of a spacecraft or planetary base accentuates cause and effect relationships and environmental impacts. The limited available air and water resources emphasize the need for reuse, recycling, and system monitoring. It is essential to collect real-time information from these systems to ensure crew safety. This new class of nanosensors will be critical to monitoring the space flight environment in future NASA space systems. The Commercial Applications component of this program pursued industry partnerships to develop products for terrestrial use of NASA sponsored technologies, and in turn to stimulate growth in the biotechnology industry. For technologies demonstrating near term commercial potential, the objective is to include industry partners on or about the time of proof of concept that will not only co-invest in the technology but also take the resultant technology to the commercial market.

Phillips, Winfred↗