Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “government funding”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

AIAA ASCEND 2023 Panel Session Proposal: Community Perspectives on Establishing a Government-Funded National Laboratory in a Commercially-Driven LEO Ecosystem

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

Erica Marie Rodgers Heusinkveld↗
NASA NTRS2023

Models for Facilitating Government-Funded Activities in the Post-ISS LEO Ecosystem

This study helps elucidate NASA’s future options for facilitating government-funded activities in the post-International Space Station (ISS) low-Earth orbit (LEO) ecosystem. NASA is preparing for the retirement of the ISS and transition of LEO activities to one or more Commercial LEO Destinations (CLDs) by 2030. This transition necessitates new models for connecting NASA and other users of the LEO environment to platforms and opportunities. In light of this transition, NASA senior leadership tasked the Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) with answering two questions: 1) what are potential models for an ISS National Lab facilitating government-funded or subsidized activities on a commercial LEO platform after the transition of the ISS to one or more private platforms, and 2) in light of these options, what modifications would be helpful to make in the current ISSNL-CASIS partnership and the NASA management processes as NASA plans for the transition of the ISS by 2030? To answer the first question, we conducted a stakeholder-driven analysis to identify a trade space of six differentiated model options. We then evaluated their performance in three potential future scenarios, according to evaluation criteria deemed important to stakeholders. The six models are illustrative and representational of a potential trade space. Additionally, each model requires change to current legislation. To further aid in leadership decision-making, we provided considerations for how to strengthen each model by mixing and matching different model aspects. To answer the second question, we looked to strengths of the top-performing models to evolve the current ISSNL-CASIS relationship and improve NASA’s posture for success post-ISS. We identified four possible modifications to the ISSNL-CASIS partnership and NASA’s management of these activities. By implementing these modifications early, NASA can increase the return from ISSNL-CASIS and help prepare for future models as one or more CLD replaces the ISS by 2030.

ISS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Models for Facilitating Government-Funded Activities in the Post-ISS LEO Ecosystem

This study helps elucidate NASA’s future options for facilitating government-funded activities in the post–International Space Station (ISS) low-Earth orbit (LEO) ecosystem. NASA is preparing for the retirement of the ISS and transition of LEO activities to one or more Commercial LEO Destinations (CLDs) by 2030. This transition necessitates new models for connecting NASA and other users of the LEO environment to platforms and opportunities. As the LEO ecosystem evolves through growth of the commercial space industry and NASA’s strategic goal to support the development of a robust LEO economy in which many stakeholders on Earth can participate, so must the way NASA facilitates government activities to ensure citizens realize the highest return on their investment in LEO. Specifically, this study aims to answer the question: What are potential models for an ISS National Lab facilitating government-funded or -subsidized activities on a commercial LEO platform after the transition of the ISS to one or more private platforms?

Erica Rodgers↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Models for Facilitating Government-Funded Activities in the Post-ISS LEO Ecosystem

NASA is preparing for the retirement of the ISS and transition of LEO activities to one or more Commercial LEO Destinations (CLDs) by 2030. This transition necessitates new models for connecting NASA and other government-funded users of the LEO environment to platforms and opportunities. This paper describes for consideration six models for facilitating government-funded activities in the post-ISS LEO ecosystem. These six models are illustrative and represent a wide trade space of potential options, each relying on unique mechanisms for facilitating activities on one or more commercial LEO platforms or vehicles. We assessed each model across three possible future scenarios varying in number and diversity of LEO activities and commercial offerings, and across five stakeholder-driven model evaluation criteria. We present the highlights of the analysis, including ways to modify and strengthen each model. The Government Research Broker model performs best across all future scenarios, followed by Innovation Campus, Anchor Tenant, and Fee for Service. While Matchmaker and Institute Network exhibit positive aspects, these models perform most favorably in future scenarios with well-established communities and markets. While each model has strengths and weaknesses, no single model in its current form performs well across all criteria in all three future scenarios. NASA leadership can adjust models as desired to align closer to their priorities using combinations of unique model mechanisms. A model that meets leadership priorities is likely a combination of features from multiple models.

Erica Rodgers↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Models for Facilitating Government-Funded Activities in the Post-ISS LEO Ecosystem

NASA is preparing for the retirement of the ISS and transition of LEO activities to one or more Commercial LEO Destinations (CLDs) by 2030. This transition necessitates new models for connecting NASA and other government-funded users of the LEO environment to platforms and opportunities. This paper describes for consideration six models for facilitating government-funded activities in the post-ISS LEO ecosystem. These six models are illustrative and represent a wide trade space of potential options, each relying on unique mechanisms for facilitating activities on one or more commercial LEO platforms or vehicles. We assessed each model across three possible future scenarios varying in number and diversity of LEO activities and commercial offerings, and across five stakeholder-driven model evaluation criteria. We present the highlights of the analysis, including ways to modify and strengthen each model. The Government Research Broker model performs best across all future scenarios, followed by Innovation Campus, Anchor Tenant, and Fee for Service. While Matchmaker and Institute Network exhibit positive aspects, these models perform most favorably in future scenarios with well-established communities and markets. While each model has strengths and weaknesses, no single model in its current form performs well across all criteria in all three future scenarios. NASA leadership can adjust models as desired to align closer to their priorities using combinations of unique model mechanisms. A model that meets leadership priorities is likely a combination of features from multiple models.

Erica Rodgers↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Models for Facilitating Government-Funded Activities in the Post-ISS LEO Ecosystem

NASA is preparing for the retirement of the ISS and transition of LEO activities to one or more Commercial LEO Destinations (CLDs) by 2030. This transition necessitates new models for connecting NASA and other government-funded users of the LEO environment to platforms and opportunities. This paper describes for consideration six models for facilitating government-funded activities in the post-ISS LEO ecosystem. These six models are illustrative and represent a wide trade space of potential options, each relying on unique mechanisms for facilitating activities on one or more commercial LEO platforms or vehicles. We assessed each model across three possible future scenarios varying in number and diversity of LEO activities and commercial offerings, and across five stakeholder-driven model evaluation criteria. We present the highlights of the analysis, including ways to modify and strengthen each model. The Government Research Broker model performs best across all future scenarios, followed by Innovation Campus, Anchor Tenant, and Fee for Service. While Matchmaker and Institute Network exhibit positive aspects, these models perform most favorably in future scenarios with well-established communities and markets. While each model has strengths and weaknesses, no single model in its current form performs well across all criteria in all three future scenarios. NASA leadership can adjust models as desired to align closer to their priorities using combinations of unique model mechanisms. A model that meets leadership priorities is likely a combination of features from multiple models.

Erica Rodgers↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Models for Facilitating Government-Funded Activities in the Post-ISS LEO Ecosystem

The International Space Station National Lab (ISSNL) was established through Congressional authority in 2005 and has been managed by a nonprofit called the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space (CASIS) since 2011 to support research, development, education, and commercial activities in low-Earth orbit (LEO). NASA leadership is considering next steps for microgravity and orbital activities in LEO in preparation for the retirement of the International Space Station (ISS) and transition to Commercial LEO Destinations (CLDs) in the 2030 timeframe. Specifically, our study team within the NASA Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy addressed the question: What are potential models for an ISS National Lab facilitating government-funded or subsidized activities on a commercial LEO platform after the transition of the ISS to one or more private platforms? To inform the trade space of potential models, we conducted over 40 discussions with stakeholders internal and external to NASA and reviewed over 35 documents related to LEO legislation, commercialization, models, and activities. Following the extensive literature review and discussions with diverse stakeholders, we defined and evaluated six models, in addition to the current ISSNL model. We assessed each model across three possible future scenarios (dynamic, steady, and limited growth of the commercial LEO market and activities) and across five stakeholder-driven model evaluation criteria (ability to meet NASA’s needs, adaptability, opportunity for collaboration, market sustainability, and equity and accessibility). The six models in the future trade space were: • Government Research Broker: Customizable research efforts on transport vehicles and CLDs • Innovation Campus: Modern terrestrial campus with workforce focus • Anchor Tenant: Long-term, substantial agreement for leasing space on a single CLD • Fee for Service: Free market approach with NASA-sponsored grants and service/data buys • Matchmaker: Neutral third-party connecting users to platforms • Institute Network: Network of separate but related efforts to enable commercial scaling The Government Research Broker model performed best across the scenarios, followed by Innovation Campus, Anchor Tenant, and Fee for Service. While Matchmaker and Institute Network exhibited positive aspects, the two models performed most favorably in future scenarios with well-established communities and markets. The six models presented in this study are representative of the potential trade space and are illustrative examples. NASA leadership can adjust models as desired to align to their priorities more closely by using combinations of the unique model features provided in our analysis. The optimal model is likely a combination of features from multiple models. Building upon this work to best position NASA and the diverse stakeholders of LEO activities for success post-ISS, further work will explore the near-term impact of preparing for the transition of the ISS to CLDs by identifying opportunities for modifying the current ISSNL-CASIS partnership. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank the many reviewers and discussants, internal and external to NASA, that contributed to the work.

Erica Rodgers↗
NASA NTRS1977

Evaluating the benefits of government funded R & D aimed at the private sector

Federal funding of technological research and development is discussed with regard to the procedures for an economic analysis with the goals of (1) determining when the public sector should invest in a research and development program, (2) evaluating the likelihood of private sector participation in terms of public sector participation, and (3) considering the major factors in the formulation of a research and development program in terms of defining initiatives. Public sector investments are evaluated, noting procedures for determining whether benefits exceed costs. The role of the public sector research and development planning is described, considering the procedure for private sector implementation decisions and a methodology for evaluating the possibility of private sector commercialization. The economic value of the public sector research and development program is presented with attention given to a specific case of NASA-sponsored research and development aimed toward the commercialization of new public communications services.

Greenberg, J. S.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Implementation of Ferroelectric Memories for Space Applications

Ferroelectric random access semiconductor memories (FeRAMs) are an ideal nonvolatile solution for space applications. These memories have low power performance, high endurance and fast write times. By combining commercial ferroelectric memory technology with radiation hardened CMOS technology, nonvolatile semiconductor memories for space applications can be attained. Of the few radiation hardened semiconductor manufacturers, none have embraced the development of radiation hardened FeRAMs, due a limited commercial space market and funding limitations. Government funding may be necessary to assure the development of radiation hardened ferroelectric memories for space applications.

Philpy, Stephen C.↗
NASA NTRS2007

General Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT) Acceptance Test Plan [Draft]

The information presented in this Acceptance Test Plan document shows the current status of the General Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT). GMAT is a software system developed by NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in collaboration with the private sector. The GMAT development team continuously performs acceptance tests in order to verify that the software continues to operate properly after updates are made. The GMAT Development team consists of NASA/GSFC Code 583 software developers, NASA/GSFC Code 595 analysts, and contractors of varying professions. GMAT was developed to provide a development approach that maintains involvement from the private sector and academia, encourages collaborative funding from multiple government agencies and the private sector, and promotes the transfer of technology from government funded research to the private sector. GMAT contains many capabilities, such as integrated formation flying modeling and MATLAB compatibility. The propagation capabilities in GMAT allow for fully coupled dynamics modeling of multiple spacecraft, in any flight regime. Other capabilities in GMAT inclucle: user definable coordinate systems, 3-D graphics in any coordinate system GMAT can calculate, 2-D plots, branch commands, solvers, optimizers, GMAT functions, planetary ephemeris sources including DE405, DE200, SLP and analytic models, script events, impulsive and finite maneuver models, and many more. GMAT runs on Windows, Mac, and Linux platforms. Both the Graphical User Interface (GUI) and the GMAT engine were built and tested on all of the mentioned platforms. GMAT was designed for intuitive use from both the GUI and with an importable script language similar to that of MATLAB.

Dove, Edwin↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Operating a Crewed Spacecraft in the Age of Commercial Space Using Private/Government Partnership

Fifty years after humans completed a large-scale United States government-funded and government-engineered effort of landing humans on the moon, human spaceflight has entered a new paradigm. Private companies are now investing their own money and taking on an ever-increasing role in human spaceflight, in partnership with the U.S. government. This paper will describe the development of one of these partnerships through the lens of its mission operations team. As part of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), NASA selected Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner as one of the next generation of crewed vehicles. Boeing opted to partner with the US Government for their Starliner operations by contracting with NASA’s Mission Control teams in the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) at the Johnson Space Center to create its own Mission Operations (MO) flight controllers. Partnering with FOD provided benefits to both Boeing and NASA while also creating new challenges. MO brought over 60 years of crewed spaceflight experience and infrastructure to Boeing’s new program. Within certain legal constraints, MO was able to work closely and efficiently with their FOD counterparts who were performing both integration duties and, under the auspices of the CCP, insight of the contractors, in this case Boeing. Involvement of NASA as the Boeing operations agent did lead to what management deemed a ‘healthy tension’ within FOD, challenging old processes and often creating better, more robust teamwork. Successful development of the framework and boundaries of both the legal aspects and the oversight tensions has been one of the keys to developing a successful corporate/government partnership. Due to the highly automated nature of the Starliner, the MO organization was designed to be much smaller than previous NASA’s flight control teams for past programs. NASA has learned through the decades that spacecraft design and operations need to be as flexible and forgiving as possible. NASA’s Commercial Crew Program was established to sponsor corporate development of economical vehicles that could get humans to and from low Earth orbit. These companies, of course, need to meet contractual obligations in providing a safe means of transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), but also need to do so in a manner that leads to the venture resulting in a profit at the same time. Through MO’s involvement in the development of this spaceflight paradigm shift, there are ample lessons to be conveyed to future teams and programs working to develop similar missions.

Robert C Dempsey↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Operating a Crewed Spacecraft in the Age of Commercial Space Using Private/Government Partnership

Fifty years after humans completed a large-scale United States government-funded and government-engineered effort of landing humans on the moon, human spaceflight has entered a new paradigm. Private companies are now investing their own money and taking on an ever-increasing role in human spaceflight, in partnership with the U.S. government. This paper will describe the development of one of these partnerships through the lens of its mission operations team. As part of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), NASA selected Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner as one of the next generation of crewed vehicles. Boeing opted to partner with the US Government for their Starliner operations by contracting with NASA’s Mission Control teams in the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) at the Johnson Space Center to create its own Mission Operations (MO) flight controllers. Partnering with FOD provided benefits to both Boeing and NASA while also creating new challenges. MO brought over 60 years of crewed spaceflight experience and infrastructure to Boeing’s new program. Within certain legal constraints, MO was able to work closely and efficiently with their FOD counterparts who were performing both integration duties and, under the auspices of the CCP, insight of the contractors, in this case Boeing. Involvement of NASA as the Boeing operations agent did lead to what management deemed a ‘healthy tension’ within FOD, challenging old processes and often creating better, more robust teamwork. Successful development of the framework and boundaries of both the legal aspects and the oversight tensions has been one of the keys to developing a successful corporate/government partnership. Due to the highly automated nature of the Starliner, the MO organization was designed to be much smaller than previous NASA’s flight control teams for past programs. NASA has learned through the decades that spacecraft design and operations need to be as flexible and forgiving as possible. NASA’s Commercial Crew Program was established to sponsor corporate development of economical vehicles that could get humans to and from low Earth orbit. These companies, of course, need to meet contractual obligations in providing a safe means of transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), but also need to do so in a manner that leads to the venture resulting in a profit at the same time. Through MO’s involvement in the development of this spaceflight paradigm shift, there are ample lessons to be conveyed to future teams and programs working to develop similar missions.

Robert C. Dempsey↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Operating a Crewed Spacecraft in the Age of Commercial Space Using Private/Government Partnership

Fifty years after humans completed a large-scale United States government-funded and government-engineered effort of landing humans on the moon, human spaceflight has entered a new paradigm. Private companies are now investing their own money and taking on an ever-increasing role in human spaceflight, in partnership with the U.S. government. This paper will describe the development of one of these partnerships through the lens of its mission operations team. As part of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), NASA selected Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner as one of the next generation of crewed vehicles. Boeing opted to partner with the US Government for their Starliner operations by contracting with NASA’s Mission Control teams in the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) at the Johnson Space Center to create its own Mission Operations (MO) flight controllers. Partnering with FOD provided benefits to both Boeing and NASA while also creating new challenges. MO brought over 60 years of crewed spaceflight experience and infrastructure to Boeing’s new program. Within certain legal constraints, MO was able to work closely and efficiently with their FOD counterparts who were performing both integration duties and, under the auspices of the CCP, insight of the contractors, in this case Boeing. Involvement of NASA as the Boeing operations agent did lead to what management deemed a ‘healthy tension’ within FOD, challenging old processes and often creating better, more robust teamwork. Successful development of the framework and boundaries of both the legal aspects and the oversight tensions has been one of the keys to developing a successful corporate/government partnership. Due to the highly automated nature of the Starliner, the MO organization was designed to be much smaller than previous NASA’s flight control teams for past programs. NASA has learned through the decades that spacecraft design and operations need to be as flexible and forgiving as possible. NASA’s Commercial Crew Program was established to sponsor corporate development of economical vehicles that could get humans to and from low Earth orbit. These companies, of course, need to meet contractual obligations in providing a safe means of transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), but also need to do so in a manner that leads to the venture resulting in a profit at the same time. Through MO’s involvement in the development of this spaceflight paradigm shift, there are ample lessons to be conveyed to future teams and programs working to develop similar missions.

Robert C. Dempsey↗
DOE OSTI2022

Contech to Accelerate Cleantech: Seeding Emerging Innovation Programs for Construction Productivity and Energy Efficiency Integration; Preprint

Investments in U.S.-based start-ups that focus on advanced building construction technologies to increase construction productivity (contech) surged to approximately $3.1 billion in 2018 (as per Crunchbase data). More recently, emerging programs by government funding agencies, philanthropic foundations, and venture capitalists have been instrumental in supporting contech start-ups for innovations that increase productivity of energy efficiency integration and accelerate clean energy technologies (cleantech) for the buildings sector. These programs include R&D support and funding mechanisms for contech and cleantech. Traditionally, contech and cleantech are considered as two different innovation ecosystems. To enhance and scale up energy efficiency in buildings, creative programs that bring together contech and cleantech are critical. This paper provides a landscape assessment of the "contech-for-cleantech" innovation ecosystem in the U.S. and its impact in accelerating technology readiness and the development pipeline of "contech-for-cleantech". Technologies highlighted are robotics for retrofits, prefabrication of energy-efficient products, and advanced manufacturing of low-carbon net-zero buildings construction. Programs discussed include those led by (1) government funding agencies: American-Made Challenges with prizes like E-ROBOT for retrofits with robotics, (2) philanthropic foundations: Wells Fargo Innovation Incubator (IN2) that includes focus on energy efficiency and prefabrication, and (3) venture capitalists: Shadow Ventures Green Building Accelerator program which provides funding support to start-ups with ambitious plans for decarbonizing the built environment. This paper will also expand upon robust processes and criteria involved in judging and down-selection of start-ups through vetting and feedback from national lab researchers and industry experts in both cleantech and contech.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Automation of Solid Oxyde Electrolyzer Cell (SOEC) & Stack Assembly

The work performed under this agreement before the No/Go decision amounted to the following: 1. Preliminary manufacturing requirements defined by business sensitivity, baseline processes & risk assessment; 2. Process & materials development, in-line gauge exploration, and preliminary automation work used to reduce risk & further refine equipment specifications; 3. “Request for Quote” issued to multiple suppliers for major equipment; 4. Application specific equipment, hardware, and fixturing will be more beneficial to fabricate inhouse; 5.Current proposals & estimates meet cycle time, capital spend, & direct labor; space is on target but requires awareness; 6. Team will continue to explore opportunities to reduce risk (dry time, traceability); 7. Go / No-Go, Purchase Orders, Equipment build & commissioning next All other future task were not completed because during the Go /No-Go decision it was confirmed this project was a "No-Go" and did not proceed past BP1; these included the following: 1. Preliminary manufacturing requirements defined by business sensitivity, baseline processes & risk assessment; 2. Process & materials development, in-line gauge exploration, and preliminary automation work used to reduce risk & further refine equipment specifications; 3. “Request for Quote” issued to multiple suppliers for major equipment; 4. Application specific equipment, hardware, and fixturing will be more beneficial to fabricate inhouse; 5. Current proposals & estimates meet cycle time, capital spend, & direct labor; space is on target but requires awareness; 6. Team will continue to explore opportunities to reduce risk (dry time, traceability) In final preparation of the termination of the Automation of Solid Oxyde Electrolyzer Cell (SOEC) & Stack Assembly, Cummins has purchased no equipment with government funds, and there is no government-owned property in Cummins possession related to this project. Minimal labor and travel were completed and paid. This acts as the Final technical report and concludes our business with DOE on this grant.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2025

GDE-55115 Rev 1 Dome Scheduling Application

This document describes how a reactor developer applies for time in the Demonstration of Microreactor Experiments (DOME) facility. It also describes how applications are evaluated to develop the annual and outyear DOME schedule. The application process assumes that testing in DOME is funded by the applicant, and may be superseded by government-funded projects to accommodate government priorities.

21 - SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLAN↗
NASA NTRS2000

Microgravity Platforms

The world's space agencies have been conducting microgravity research since the beginning of space flight. Initially driven by the need to understand the impact of less than- earth gravity physics on manned space flight, microgravity research has evolved into a broad class of scientific experimentation that utilizes extreme low acceleration environments. The U.S. NASA microgravity research program supports both basic and applied research in five key areas: biotechnology - focusing on macro-molecular crystal growth as well as the use of the unique space environment to assemble and grow mammalian tissue; combustion science - focusing on the process of ignition, flame propagation, and extinction of gaseous, liquid, and solid fuels; fluid physics - including aspects of fluid dynamics and transport phenomena; fundamental physics - including the study of critical phenomena, low-temperature, atomic, and gravitational physics; and materials science - including electronic and photonic materials, glasses and ceramics, polymers, and metals and alloys. Similar activities prevail within the Chinese, European, Japanese, and Russian agencies with participation from additional international organizations as well. While scientific research remains the principal objective behind these program, all hope to drive toward commercialization to sustain a long range infrastructure which .benefits the national technology and economy. In the 1997 International Space Station Commercialization Study, conducted by the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, some viable microgravity commercial ventures were identified, however, none appeared sufficiently robust to privately fund space access at that time. Thus, government funded micro gravity research continues on an evolutionary path with revolutionary potential.

Del Basso, Steve↗