SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
NASA's flagship developments have historical cost and schedule growth. A repeated offender is funding: funding assessments and funding execution. This white paper explores strategies to improve both of these: have more accurate cost assessments and more appropriate funding methods for significantly better development cost and schedule performance.
U.S. Government spending to fund the research and development of electronics for a variety of applications is discussed. Commercial enterprises also spend large sums on research and development of electronics and other areas of interest to the U.S. Government and its agencies. The government can take advantage of industrial research programs and thereby maximize the utilization of their own.
Federally-funded research and development (R&D) represents a significant annual investment (approximately $79 billion in fiscal year 1996) on the part of U.S. taxpayers. Based on the results of a 10-year study of knowledge diffusion in U.S. aerospace industry, the authors take the position that U.S. competitiveness will be enhanced if knowledge management strategies, employed within a capability-enhancing U.S. technology policy framework, are applied to diffusing the results of federally-funded R&D. In making their case, the authors stress the importance of knowledge as the source of competitive advantage in today's global economy. Next, they offer a practice-based definition of knowledge management and discuss three current approaches to knowledge management implementation-mechanistic, "the learning organization," and systemic. The authors then examine three weaknesses in existing U.S. public policy and policy implementation-the dominance of knowledge creation, the need for diffusion-oriented technology policy, and the prevalence of a dissemination model- that affect diffusion of the results of federally-funded R&D. To address these shortcomings, they propose the development of a knowledge management framework for diffusing the results of federally-funded R&D. The article closes with a discussion of some issues and challenges associated with implementing a knowledge management framework for diffusing the results of federally-funded R&D.
The Glenn Technical Library is a science and engineering library that primarily supports research activities at the Glenn Research Center, and provides selected services to researchers at all of the NASA research centers. Resources available in the library include books, journals, CD-ROMs, and access to various online sources, as well as live reference and inter-library loan services. The collection contains over 77,000 books, 800,000 research reports, and print or online access to over 1,400 journals. Currently the library operates within the Logistics and Technical Information Division, and is funded as an open-access resource within the GRC. Some of the research units at the GRC have recently requested that the library convert to a "pay-for-services" model, in which individual research units could fund only those journal subscriptions for which they have a specific need. Under this model, the library would always maintain a certain minimum level of pooled-expense services, including the ready reference and book collections, and inter-library loan services. Theoretically the "pay-for-services" model would encourage efficient financial allocation, and minimize the extent to which paid journal subscriptions go unused. However, this model also could potentially negate the benefits of group purchases for journal subscriptions and access. All of the major journal publishers offer package subscriptions that compare favorably in cost with the sum of individual subscription costs for a similar selection of titles. Furthermore, some of these subscription packages are "consortium" purchases that are funded collectively by the libraries at multiple NASA research centers; such consortia1 memberships would be difficult for the library to pay, if enough GRC research units were to withdraw their pooled contributions. cost of collectively-funded journal access with the cost of individual subscriptions. My primary task this summer is to create the cost dataset framework, and collect as much of the relevant data as possible. Hopefully this dataset will permit the research units at the GRC, and library administration as well, to make informed decisions about future library funding. Prior to the creation of the actual dataset, I established a comprehensive list of the library s print and online journal subscriptions. This list will be useful outside the context of the cost analysis project, as an addition to the library website. The cost analysis dataset s primary fields are: journal name, vendor, publisher, ISSN (International Standard Serial Number, to uniquely identify the titles), stand-alone price, and indication as to the presence of the journal in current GRC Technical Library consortium membership subscriptions. The dataset will hopefully facilitate comparisons between the stand-alone journal prices and the cost of shared journal subscriptions for groups of titles.
The Heliophysics Low Cost Access to Space (H-LCAS) and Flight Opportunities in Research and Technology (H-FORT) grant budgets primarily fund the development and construction of instrumentation. A side effect of this approach is that mission operations, including data collection and data processing, tend to be severely under budget (or unfunded). In order to satisfy the requirements of modern missions, we recommend a new funding source for mission operations. This funding source is increasingly vital going forward as new missions collect exponentially more data compared to past missions. Similarly, to take full advantage of underutilized historical datasets, we recommend adding another funding source to analyze these valuable datasets. Without these funding sources, mission datasets will, in the best case, be significantly underdeveloped and underutilized, and more likely, will fall dramatically short of their required scope.
Introduction: The goal of this summer internship research project was to explore the relationship between the level of funding for science team research and science productivity for planetary spaceflight missions. The productivity and funding for the prime and extended missions were compared when possible. Determining the actual rather than anecdotal relationship between the level of science team funding and their productivity will help determine the adequacy of science team funding. Additionally, determining whether productivity increases or decreases over time (within missions, or within the years between different missions) provides insights into ongoing trends. This project was conducted using data from 11 extended missions within the Planetary Science Division. The main goals of this project were to 1) quantify the level of productivity of the science team during the extended portion of each mission, 2) compare the level of productivity between different types of missions, and 3) compare the level of productivity between the prime missions and extended missions. Methodology: The central metric enters around the “publication rate” of each mission. This rate is normalized in a variety of ways, including the number of publications per year, per Co-I, and per instruments. For the most part, this data was attainable through mission websites, team rosters, and data collected from previous projects. The publication data for this project utilized the SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System, and it consisted of a search for any papers from the extended mission that had a co-investigator as an author. The time period for these searches also included an additional two years after the end of the extended mission to account for additional time it typically takes to finish data analysis and publish papers. Data from prime missions was collected from a previous project that measured similar metrics for the same missions. When comparing the different types of missions, three factors were used: mission size, dates of the prime and extended missions, and the type of the mission (rover, flyby, orbiter, or lander). To determine mission size, missions were compared by the number of Co-I’s on the mission, the number of instruments in the payload, and the mission class. Findings: On average, prime mission publication rates were generally higher than those of extended missions. Out of the nine missions used for this comparison, six had a higher prime mission publication rate and three had a higher extended mission publication rate. This distinction was interesting to observe, but it should be noted that the methodology for determing the number of published papers differed for the prime missions and the extended missions Discovery missions were found to be the most scientifically productive. Additionally, more recent extended missions tend to possess greater productivity. When comparing missions of different types, it was found that orbiters were much more productive than other types of missions. Future Work: There are a number of opportunities to extend and improve on this project in the future. Even though the metrics used were the same, the prime mission data could be recollected from the same sources as the extended mission data (Astrophysics Data System) to insure greater consistency. The impact level of the publications could also be accounted for, and financial data could be used to compare teams with different levels of funding. Additionally, more missions could be examined to increase the sample size of these comparisons, especially the comparison of different mission types which had an incredibly small sample size for some categories.
AIAA ASCEND 2023 Panel Session Proposal: Community Perspectives on Establishing a Government-Funded National Laboratory in a Commercially-Driven LEO Ecosystem Submitted by the NASA Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy March 8, 2023 Session Format: Panel Session Topic: Expanding and Evolving the Space Economy Session Title: Community Perspectives on Establishing a Government-Funded National Laboratory in a Commercially-Driven LEO Ecosystem Short Session Description: NASA is preparing for the retirement of the ISS and transition of government-sponsored low-Earth orbit (LEO) activities to Commercial LEO Destinations (CLDs), which includes a government-funded national lab. This transition necessitates new models to connect government-funded users of the LEO environment to CLDs. This panel will highlight updates on what may constitute a national laboratory, share perspectives from members of LEO user communities, and open the discussion for additional comments. Requested Session Duration: 90 minutes Extended Session Description: NASA is preparing for the retirement of the ISS and transition of low-Earth orbit (LEO) activities to Commercial LEO Destinations (CLDs), including planning for a national laboratory. This transition necessitates new models for connecting government-funded users of the LEO environment to CLDs. NASA has made progress on models and a stepwise strategy to enable this national laboratory. This session will discuss guiding national strategies and highlight perspectives on what constitutes a national laboratory from current user communities. A NASA panel participant will introduce the rationale for continuing a national laboratory utilizing CLDs and speak on progress-to-date. This includes furthering national priorities to continue a space-based microgravity national laboratory. It also may include a brief overview of a study conducted by NASA which elucidates a trade space of models for a national laboratory and highlights from an interagency working group on microgravity for additional context. A moderator and five panelists representing diverse LEO user communities will then share perspectives on topics relating to this new dynamic ecosystem, expectations for models and activities, and other thoughts on NASA’s progress. Panelists may consist of members from the following communities: NASA, other U.S. government agencies, startups, small businesses, academia, and non-profits. The panel then plans to open discussion to the audience for questions, input, and additional feedback. Session Goal(s)/Outcome(s): By hosting a panel session, NASA aims to accomplish two goals. First, NASA wishes to update the community on progress towards establishing a national laboratory in low-Earth orbit. This includes sharing key perspectives heard from stakeholder communities. The second goal is to highlight the collaborative nature of such an undertaking and to facilitate additional discussion with other current and future users of the LEO community. Participants (not exhaustive): Erica Rodgers; Robyn Gatens
The present exploration of the diffusion of federally-funded R&D via the information-seeking behavior of scientists and engineers proceeds under three assumptions: (1) that knowledge transfer and utilization is as important as knowledge production; (2) that the diffusion of knowledge obtained through federally-funded R&D is necessary for the maintenance of U.S. preeminence in the aerospace field; and (3) that federally-funded NASA and DoD technical reports play an important, albeit as-yet undefined, role in aerospace R&D diffusion. A conceptual model is presented for the process of knowledge diffusion that stresses the role of U.S. government-funded technical reports.
The U.S. government technical report is a primary means by which the results of federally funded research and development are transferred to the U.S. aerospace industry. However, little is known about this information product in terms of its actual use, importance, and value in the transfer of federally funded R&D. To help establish a body of knowledge, the U.S. government technical report is being investigated as part of the 'NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project'. In this report, we summarize the literature on technical reprts and provide a model that depicts the transfer of federally funded aerospace R&D via the U.S. government technical report. We present results from five studies of our investigation of aerospace knowledge diffusion vis-a-vis the U.S. government technical report and close with a brief overview of on-going research into the use of the U.S. government technical report as a rhetorical device for transferring federally funded aerospace R&D.
In this paper, the diffusion of federally funded aerospace R&D is explored from the perspective of the information-seeking behavior of U.S. aerospace engineers and scientists. The following three assumptions frame this exploration: (1) knowledge production, transfer, and utilization are equally important components of the aerospace R&D process; (2) the diffusion of knowledge resulting from federally funded aerospace R&D is indispensable for the U.S. to remain a world leader in aerospace; and (3) U.S. government technical reports, produced by NASA and DOD, play an important, but as yet undefined, role in the diffusion of federally funded aerospace R&D. A conceptual model for federally funded aerospace knowledge diffusion, one that emphasizes U.S. goverment technical reports, is presented. Data regarding three research questions concerning the information-seeking behavior of U.S. aerospace engineers and scientists are also presented.
NASA's Office of Space and Terrestrial Applications (OSTA) is currently assessing approaches to transferring NASA technology to both the public and private sectors. As part of this assessment, NASA is evaluating the effectiveness of an ongoing program in remote sensing technology transfer conducted by 20 university contractors/grantees, each supported totally or partially by NASA funds. The University-Space Applications program has as its objective the demonstration of practical benefits from the use of remote sensing technology to a broad spectrum of new users, principally in state and local governments. To evaluate the University-Space Applications program, NASA has a near-term requirement for data on each university effort including total funding, funding sources, length of program, program description, and effectiveness measures.
This annual report comprises a set of summaries, describing task objectives, progress and results or accomplishments, future outlook, and financial status for each director's discretionary fund (DDF) task that was active during fiscal year 1984. Publications and conference presentations related to the work are listed. The individual reports are categorized as interim or final according to whether the task efforts are ongoing or completed. A partial list of new tasks to be initiated with fiscal year 1985 funds and a glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, used by the task authors in their summaries are included. The table of contents lists the DDF reports in sequence by their task number, which is derived from the 13-digit code assigned to account for the fund awarded to the task project.
As the strategic knowledge gaps mature for the exploration of Mars, Mars sample return (MSR), and Phobos/Deimos missions, one approach that becomes more probable involves smaller science instrumentation and integrated science suites. Recent technological advances provide the foundation for a significant evolution of instrumentation; however, the funding support is currently too small to fully utilize these advances. We propose that an increase in funding for instrumentation development occur in the near-term so that these foundational technologies can be applied. These instruments would directly address the significant knowledge gaps for humans to Mars orbit, humans to the Martian surface, and humans to Phobos/ Deimos. They would also address the topics covered by the Decadal Survey and the Mars scientific goals, objectives, investigations and priorities as stated by the MEPAG. We argue that an increase of science instrumentation funding would be of great benefit to the Mars program as well as the potential for human exploration of the Mars system. If the total non-Earth-related planetary science instrumentation budget were increased 100% it would not add an appreciable amount to the overall NASA budget and would provide the real potential for future breakthroughs. If such an approach were implemented in the near-term, NASA would benefit greatly in terms of science knowledge of the Mars, Phobos/Deimos system, exploration risk mitigation, technology development, and public interest.
The presentation will address the varied and diverse ways that NLR provides DOE funding to support Clean Cities and Communities coalition projects. This includes three project approaches: Jumpstart funding, Coalition Building, and Energy to Communities (E2C).
The world-wide recession, and other factors, have led to reduced or flat budgets in real terms for space agencies around the world. Consequently space science projects and proposals have been under pressure and seemingly will continue to be pressured for some years into the future. A new concept for space science funding is underway at JPL. A partnership has been arranged with a commercial, for-profit, company that proposes to implement a (bandwidth-on-demand) information and telephone system through a network of low earth orbiting satellites (LEO). This network will consist of almost 1000 satellites operating in polar orbit at Ka-band. JPL has negotiated an agreement with this company that each satellite will also carry one or more science instruments for astrophysics, astronomy, and for earth observations. This paper discussed the details of the arrangement and the financial arrangements. It describes the technical parameters, such as the 60 GHz wideband inter-satellite links and the frequency, time, and position control, on which the science is based, and it also discusses the complementarity of this commercially funded space science with conventional space science.
The Center Innovation Fund Annual Report for FY18 is an annual report for Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) Leadership, STMD Principle Technologists, and Center Innovation Fund Management. Attached is the Highlights/Abstract section of this annual report, which is the only section to be shared outside of NASA. Contributors were asked not to include any SBU information for these report summaries.
This quick-reference sheet provides a list of funding programs for the solid waste and wastewater sectors available at the national state levels. These funding programs are related to existing infrastructure improvements, as well as the development of new energy efficiency and renewable energy systems (including waste-to-energy).
Tunisia’s Energy Transition Fund (FTE), created in 2013, was established to promote energy efficiency and renewable energy projects in the public and private sectors. To overcome financing challenges related to the energy transition, Tunisia’s National Agency for Energy Conservation (ANME) seeks both to strengthen available financial resources and to develop innovative financing structures. Revolving Loan Funds (RLFs) are one such innovative financing structure, used by countries around the world to foster the development of distributed clean energy projects. This report aims to inform policy makers and various stakeholders on the opportunity to design an RLF by drawing on successful experiences from other countries. Specifically, this report provides analytical support for discussions with ANME and its partners to develop an RLF in the context of Tunisia. It outlines the 12 essential steps for establishing a RLF and includes detailed case studies demonstrating successful RLF implementation across various contexts.