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.
Presenting analysis framework and initial analysis of potential floating offshore wind cost reduction pathways to reach the U.S. Department of Energy's Floating Offshore Wind Shot goal of $45/MWh by 2035.
At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), foresight is a coordinated, iterative, and continual process for making informed decisions. NASA faces diverse and relatively unique challenges and opportunities as the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration. To address these challenges and leverage opportunities, NASA uses foresight to strategically plan technology development across four mission directorates: Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, Space Technology Mission Directorate, Science Mission Directorate, and Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate. The mission directorates leverage a broad community of experts and partners to incorporate technology foresight into mission and program planning. Through this process NASA realizes tangible benefits to the agency’s science, technology, and exploration programs. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT) serves as a trusted authority to inform technology strategy and advocacy at the agency, enabling future missions and advancing U.S. economic competitiveness. Specifically, OCT coordinates and uses inputs from abroad community of experts, both internal and external to NASA, to inform decision making for technology plans, investments, and partnerships. OCT develops the NASA Technology Taxonomy to standardize communication across the agency’s diverse technology portfolio and the related Strategic Technology Investment Plan that integrates priorities and informs technology investment. Through these efforts, OCT has refined elements of foresight-informed strategic planning that may be applicable to other technology-driven industries where foresight is essential for resilience. This chapter describes the processes of foresight for technology development at NASA and provides insight into the value the agency derives from these processes. The chapter further describes the role of OCT as an independent advisory office that supports NASA’s efforts to capitalize on foresight and strategic technology planning. We present these examples with consideration for how organizations in defense, security, and other technology-driven industries can operationalize foresight in their own strategic technology development.
At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), foresight is a coordinated, iterative, and continual process for making informed decisions. NASA faces diverse and relatively unique challenges and opportunities as the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration. To address these challenges and leverage opportunities, NASA uses foresight to strategically plan technology development across four mission directorates: Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, Space Technology Mission Directorate, Science Mission Directorate, and Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (recently separated into the new Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate and Space Operations Mission Directorate). The mission directorates leverage a broad community of experts and partners to incorporate technology foresight into mission and program planning. Through this process NASA realizes tangible benefits to the agency’s science, technology, and exploration programs. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) provides strategic advice, supported by independent assessments and rigorous analysis, to inform NASA senior leadership on key areas to align mission and agency-level activities. OTPS serves as a trusted authority to inform technology strategy at the agency to enable future missions. Specifically, OTPS coordinates and uses inputs from a broad community of experts, both internal and external to NASA, to inform decision making for technology plans, investments, and partnerships. OTPS develops and maintains the NASA Technology Taxonomy to standardize communication across the agency’s diverse technology portfolio and the related Strategic Technology Investment Plan that integrates priorities and informs technology investment. Through these efforts, OTPS has refined elements of foresight-informed strategic planning that may be applicable to other technology-driven industries where foresight is essential for resilience. This chapter describes the processes of foresight for technology development at NASA and provides insight into the value the agency derives from these processes. The chapter further describes the role of OTPS as an independent advisory office that supports NASA’s efforts to capitalize on foresight and strategic technology planning. We present these examples with consideration for how organizations in defense, security, and other technology-driven industries can operationalize foresight in their own strategic technology development.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
In the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) fields, computing and information technologies play an increasingly prevalent and complex role in day-to-day work. Consequently, educators must adjust and, in many cases, reimagine curricula and teaching methodologies to adapt to the changing landscape. Past research efforts led by the ASCE Computing Division Education Committee, formerly called the Task Committee on Computing Education of the Technical Council on Computing and Information Technology (TCCIT), have regularly surveyed AEC educators to understand computing trends in AEC curricula, with the latest survey taking place nearly a decade ago. This work presents the results of an updated survey that used this prior work as a springboard, providing timely insights into the computing skills and curricular barriers faced by AEC educators today. The results showed that the technical skills used by students have evolved, but the barriers faced in incorporating new skills into curricula have remained largely the same. In addition to comparisons with prior surveys, this work presents the results of an expanded, open-ended portion of the survey that explores educator perspectives on the future of the AEC workforce in a broader lens than used in previous surveys. Thematic analysis of these open-ended responses revealed themes that were common among responses and provided organization to the findings. For example, educators provided their vision of what competencies the future AEC workforce would need, which were thematically organized into a continuum based on the level of interaction between humans and technology. These results suggest an increasingly complex and evolving relationship between the AEC workforce and emerging technology, highlighting the need for educators to encourage the development of technological adaptability and agility. Overall, this work provides a systematic comparison of current educational practices in AEC computing with a decade ago to illustrate educational shifts and adds a prediction of AEC trends from experts in AEC education, providing crucial discussion of curricular transformations that will better position students for success in the workforce.
Agricultural systems are currently undergoing rapid shifts owing to socioeconomic development, technological change, population growth, economic opportunity, evolving demand for commodities, and the need for sustainability amid global environmental change. It is not sufficient to maintain current harvest levels; rather, there is a need to rapidly increase production in light of a population growing to nearly 10 billion by mid-century and to more than 11 billion by 2100 (FAO, 2016; UN, 2016; Popkin et al., 2012). Current and future agricultural systems are additionally burdened by human-caused climate change, the result of accumulating greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions, ecological destruction, and land use changes that have altered the chemical composition of Earth’s atmosphere and trapped energy in the Earth system (IPCC, 2013; Porter et al., 2014). This increased energy has already raised average surface temperatures by approximately 1 degree Centigrade (GISTEMP Team, 2017; Hansen et al., 2010), leading early on to the term “global warming,” but this phenomenon is now more accurately referred to as “climate change” because it also modifies atmospheric circulation, adjusts regional and seasonal precipitation patterns, and shifts the distribution and characteristics of extreme events (Bindoff et al., 2013; Collins et al., 2013). Food and health systems face increasing risk owing to progressive climate change now manifesting itself as more frequent, severe extreme weather events—heat waves, droughts, and floods (IPCC, 2013). Often without warning, weather-related shocks can have catastrophic and reverberating impacts on the increasingly exposed global food system—through production, processing, distribution, retail, disposal, and waste. Simultaneously, malnutrition and ill health are arising from lack of access to nutritious food, exacerbated in crises such as food price spikes or shortages. For some countries, particularly import-dependent low-income countries, weather shocks and price spikes can lead to social unrest, famine, and migration.
Spaceflight is colloquially deemed, the final frontier, or the last area which humans have not yet explored in great depth. While this is true, there are still many regions on Earth that remain isolated from the urban, socially and electronically connected world. Because travelling to space requires a great deal of foresight, engineers are required to think creatively in order to invent technologies that are durable enough to withstand the rigors of the unique and often treacherous environment of outer space. The innovations that are a result of spaceflight designs can often be applied to life on Earth, particularly in the rural, isolated communities found throughout the world. The NASA Human Health and Performance Center (NHHPC) is a collaborative, virtual forum that connects businesses, non-profit organizations, academia, and government agencies to allow for better distribution of ideas and technology between these entities (http://www.nasa.gov/offices/NHHPC). There are many technologies that have been developed for spaceflight that can be readily applied to rural communities on Earth. For example, water filtration systems designed for spaceflight must be robust and easily repaired; therefore, a system with these qualifications may be used in rural areas on Earth. This particular initiative seeks to connect established, non-profit organizations working in isolated communities throughout the world with NASA technologies devised for spaceflight. These technologies could include water purification systems, solar power generators, or telemedicine techniques. Applying innovative, spaceflight technologies to isolated communities on Earth provides greater benefits from the same research dollars, thus fulfilling the Space Life Science motto at Johnson Space Center: Exploring Space and Enhancing Life. This paper will discuss this NHHPC global outreach initiative and give examples based on the recent work of the organization.
In planning and in crisis, electrical power has been a key consideration when humans venture into space. Since the 1950's, nuclear fission (splitting of atoms) power has been a logical alternative in both fact and fiction, due to its ability to provide abundant power with high energy density, reliability, and immunity to severe environments. Bringing space fission power to a state of readiness for exploration has depended on clearing the hurdle of technology readiness demonstration. Due to the happy coincidence of heritage from prior space fission development efforts such as the Prometheus program, foresight from NASA's Exploration Mission Systems Directorate in the mid-2000's, and relative budget stability through the late 2000's, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and Department of Energy (DOE), with their industry partners, are poised to push through to this objective. Hardware for a 12 kWe non-nuclear Fission Power System Technology Demonstration Unit is being fabricated now on a schedule that will enable a low-cost demonstration of technology readiness in the mid-2010s, with testing beginning as early as 2012. With space fission power system technology demonstrated, exploration mission planners will have the flexibility to respond to a broad variety of missions and will be able to provide abundant power so that future explorers will, in planning or crisis, have the power they need when they most need it.
Analyses of Apollo samples have provided fundamental insights into the origin and history of the Earth-Moon system and the solar system broadly. With great foresight, a subset of samples from Apollo were left unprocessed so that they could be studied by future generations with their modern technology. To prepare for the return of samples from the Moon by the Artemis Program, NASA initiated the Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis Program (ANGSA) to analyze a subset of the previously unprocessed Apollo samples. The ANGSA consortium consisted of 9 original teams funded by NASA that combined into a single science team referred to as the ANGSA Science Team. ANGSA was designed to function like the sample analysis phase of a sample return mission with a goal to investigate the lower portion of a double drive tube previously sealed on the lunar surface (73001), the upper portion of that drive tube that had remained unopened (73002), and a variety of Apollo 17 samples that had remained stored at -20 ºC for approximately 50 years.
In the spring and summer of 1996, three independent teams studied the feasibility of a large aperture space telescope to follow the Hubble Space Telescope. The scientific goals for the new telescope had been laid out in a report by the HST & Beyond Committee, a group appointed by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy to consider the needs of the astronomical community after the nominal end of the HST mission in 2005. The technical capabilities and constraints on the new observatory were daunting: the telescope optics should be at least 4 meters in diameter and passively cooled to achieve optimum sensitivity in the near-infrared portion of the spectrum. Moreover, the costs should be kept within a fraction of those for the HST: approximately $500M for construction and $900M for lifetime costs, not including support for scientific data analysis. In their presentations to NASA on 19-21 August, 1996, the teams led by Lockheed Martin, TRW, and the Goddard Space Flight Center concluded that a Next Generation Space Telescope (NGST) was not only feasible and affordable, but that it could be made more powerful using recent breakthroughs in space technologies. Coming on the heels of breathtaking HST observations of distant galaxies in the process of formation, such an NGST could bridge the gap in our understanding of the earliest origins of stars, galaxies, and the elements that are the foundations of Life. This report presents the findings of the three teams and the technological roadmap which will guide us to the successful development of the NGST over the next decade. We have made liberal use of the written material, tables, and diagrams prepared by the three study teams. We have also taken advantage of the knowledge and ideas of our colleagues in government, industry and academia. In Appendix A, we list the members of the three study groups, the NGST Science Working Group and the NGST Scientific Oversight Committee. We deeply appreciate their assistance, advice, and enthusiasm. The scientific and technological goals of NGST are part of the Origins initiative in the Office of Space Science, NASA Headquarters. We are pleased to acknowledge the support and leadership of Edward Weiler, a steadfast friend of HST, Harley Thronson, a proponent of all things infrared, and Mike Kaplan, a tireless advocate of new technology. John Campbell, Project Manager for HST, initiated the NGST study at GSFC and we deeply appreciate his formative efforts and continued support. We are also grateful for the foresight of Riccardo Giacconi, Director General of the European Southern Observatory (ESO), and the efforts of his staff. We note that European Space Agency (ESA) staff at the Space Telescope Science Institute and ESO played important roles in the NGST scientific and technical studies. We look forward to future collaboration with ESA, ESO, and other international partners.
This paper explores the differences between, and shares the lessons learned from, two hypervelocity impact experiments critical to the update of orbital debris environment models. The procedures and processes of the fourth Satellite Orbital Debris Characterization Impact Test (SOCIT) were analyzed and related to the ongoing DebriSat experiment. SOCIT was the first hypervelocity impact test designed specifically for satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO). It targeted a 1960's U.S. Navy satellite, from which data was obtained to update pre-existing NASA and DOD breakup models. DebriSat is a comprehensive update to these satellite breakup models- necessary since the material composition and design of satellites have evolved from the time of SOCIT. Specifically, DebriSat utilized carbon fiber, a composite not commonly used in satellites during the construction of the US Navy Transit satellite used in SOCIT. Although DebriSat is an ongoing activity, multiple points of difference are drawn between the two projects. Significantly, the hypervelocity tests were conducted with two distinct satellite models and test configurations, including projectile and chamber layout. While both hypervelocity tests utilized soft catch systems to minimize fragment damage to its post-impact shape, SOCIT only covered 65% of the projected area surrounding the satellite, whereas, DebriSat was completely surrounded cross-range and downrange by the foam panels to more completely collect fragments. Furthermore, utilizing lessons learned from SOCIT, DebriSat's post-impact processing varies in methodology (i.e., fragment collection, measurement, and characterization). For example, fragment sizes were manually determined during the SOCIT experiment, while DebriSat utilizes automated imaging systems for measuring fragments, maximizing repeatability while minimizing the potential for human error. In addition to exploring these variations in methodologies and processes, this paper also presents the challenges DebriSat has encountered thus far and how they were addressed. Accomplishing DebriSat's goal of collecting 90% of the debris, which constitutes well over 100,000 fragments, required addressing many challenges stemming from the very large number of fragments. One of these challenges arose in identifying the foam-embedded fragments. DebriSat addressed this by X-raying all of the panels once the loose debris were removed, and applying a detection algorithm developed in-house to automate the embedded fragment identification process. It is easy to see how the amount of data being compiled would be outstanding. Creating an efficient way to catalog each fragment, as well as archiving the data for reproducibility also posed a great challenge for DebriSat. Barcodes to label each fragment were introduced with the foresight that once the characterization process began, the datasheet for each fragment would have to be accessed again quickly and efficiently. The DebriSat experiment has benefited significantly by leveraging lessons learned from the SOCIT experiment along with the technological advancements that have occurred during the time between the experiments. The two experiments represent two ages of satellite technology and, together, demonstrate the continuous efforts to improve the experimental techniques for fragmentation debris characterization.
Energy systems function as both technological systems and temporal institutions that shape how societies coordinate, justify, and support collective choices over time. This paper introduces the concept of governance horizons to explain why energy transitions can remain morally supported yet become institutionally weak under increasing pressure. We argue that governability depends on institutions' capacity to synchronize across multiple timeframes - aligning short-term decisions with intermediate coordination and long-term commitments. When this synchronization fails, transitions struggle not because their goals are dismissed, but because governance lacks sufficient time to justify, coordinate, and uphold decisions. Comparative analysis of San Antonio, Texas, and Interior Alaska reveals how energy system pressures generate distinct temporal configurations: San Antonio exhibits governance horizon stretching, where institutions must simultaneously meet near-term reliability demands and long-term transformation goals, while Interior Alaska exhibits horizon compression, where extreme environmental constraints force decision-making into short stabilization cycles. In both contexts, public support for sustainability goals coexists with institutional strain because evaluative judgments are unevenly distributed over time. A temporal configuration analysis is introduced as a diagnostic analytic stance for identifying these patterns. By treating temporal alignment as an explanatory variable rather than a background condition, this approach clarifies how feasibility, sequencing, and legitimacy are shaped by constraints on institutional time. The analysis demonstrates that successful energy transitions depend not only on technological innovation or institutional support, but on governance systems’ ability to sustain credible coordination across multiple time horizons.
Over the past forty years, microgravity has inspired and enabled applications in a wide range of sectors including medicine, materials, computers, communications, and national defense. Trends show that demand for high-tech solutions is increasing in these sectors, solutions that require higher resolution, greater precision, novel materials, innovative processes, and more sophisticated tools. These are areas where microgravity can offer unique capabilities for innovation. The Emerging Space Office (ESO) has engaged in multiple studies over the past year that have found that microgravity RD is one of the most promising technology areas for contributing to economic growth and to NASAs mission. The focus of these studies was on terrestrial markets rather than NASA applications, applied research rather than basic research, and commercial rather than academic investigators. There have been more success stories than are generally appreciated and there are significant areas of promising future potential. Many of the problems that have limited commercial microgravity development in the past are being solved. Microgravity research and development (RD) requires iteration and learning, as rapidly as possible. New technologies enable high throughput and rapid data collection in increasingly small payloads. The International Space Station is in orbit and provides a laboratory that is available 247 at least until 2024. Frequent flights by commercial space providers to and from the ISS now enable the fast learning cycles needed by high-tech industries. Launch costs are decreasing and the ability to return payloads to Earth is increasing. New commercial space laboratories, such as those being developed by SpaceX and Bigelow Aerospace, are in the final stages of development and testing. This ecosystem for microgravity RD has never been available before. These are game-changer conditions for attracting high-tech industries to space for terrestrial, as well as NASA, applications. However, few know that these capabilities are available or how to use them. In aggregate, the potential value for new applications from microgravity RD over the next ten years could add billions of dollars per year in terrestrial applications to the future economy, create new jobs, and generate a wide range of public benefits in medical advances, while broadening the customer base for the emerging space industry.
In 2002, the Foresight and Governance Project at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, D.C, organized a "Global Foresight Workshop" in partnership with NASA and in cooperation with other Federal Agencies to provide integrated consideration of broad challenges for the 2lst century. Many long-range goals for the nation were discussed and selected, among them were space related goals of interest to NASA. During much of the Agency's history, NASA advanced studies have focused consistently on the challenges of science-driven space exploration and operations. However, workshop findings indicate little interest in these goals unless they can also solve national and global issues. Many technologies and space development studies indicate great potential to enable new, important commercial markets in space that could address the many global challenges facing America in this century. But communication of these ideas are lacking. In conclusion, it appears that the commercial development of space could have broad implications on many impending problems, including energy resources, environmental impact, and climate changes. The challenge will be to develop a consistent coordinated effort among the many industries and Agencies that should be involved in opening this new frontier for these new commercial markets.
Who's to say that a little light can t go a long way? Tiny light-emitting diode (LED) chips used to grow plants in space are lighting the way for cancer treatment, wound healing, and chronic pain alleviation on Earth. In 1993, Quantum Devices, Inc. (QDI), of Barneveld, Wisconsin, began developing the HEALS (High Emissivity Aluminiferous Light-emitting Substrate) technology to provide high-intensity, solid-state LED lighting systems for NASA Space Shuttle plant growth experiments. The company evolved out of cooperative efforts with the Wisconsin Center for Space Automation and Robotics (WCSAR) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison a NASA center for the Commercial Development of Space. Ronald W. Ignatius, QDI s president and chairman, represented one of WCSAR s industrial partners at the time. WCSAR was conducting research on light sources for promoting food growth within closed environments where humans would be present for a long duration, such as the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station. With the support of WCSAR, Ignatius experimented with LEDs, which provide high-energy efficiency and virtually no heat, despite releasing waves of light 10 times brighter than the Sun. Ignatius admits that some scientists involved in the project were skeptical at first, thinking that the idea of using LEDs to promote plant growth was far-fetched. The experiments, however, demonstrated that red LED wavelengths could boost the energy metabolism of cells to advance plant growth and photosynthesis. This finding prompted Ignatius to develop a line of LED products that emit the exact wavelength of light that plants use in photosynthesis. Our company gives credit to Dr. Ray Bula, the director of WCSAR, for having the foresight to go against the prevailing dogma of the time and design the first plant experiment using monochromatic light to grow lettuce plants, Ignatius proclaims. In 1989, Ignatius formed QDI to bring the salt grain-sized LEDs to market, and in October 1995, the light sources made their Space Shuttle flight debut on the second U.S. Microgravity Laboratory Spacelab mission (STS-73, Columbia)
This whitepaper provides strategic insights and recommendations into security cloud-based solutions for electric utilities, encompassing operational technology (OT), virtual power plants (VPP), distributed energy resources (DERs), applications, networks, and data storage as they transition to and leverage cloud infrastructure through managed service providers (MSPs) and cloud service providers (CSPs). Principles derived from established frameworks serve as a foundation for best practices across cybersecurity projects and remove the constraints of settling on a single framework. For organizations that prefer not to integrate a specific framework altogether, elements of the proposed approach could be adopted or tailored to best fit defined requirements and expected functionalities. The Cirrus assessment, a utility cloud feasibility tool, and the roadmap it provides serve as a precursor to this paper, which seeks to be a valuable resource for defining next steps following cloud technology integration feasibility appraisal. With its comprehensive approach to adoption, the Cirrus framework offers strategic guidance on responsibly preparing for or deploying a utility cloud solution. The previously published whitepaper, “Use Case-Informed Framework for Utility Cloud Migration,” details the guiding strategy, research, and deployment of cloud solutions within electric and interconnected grid systems. Before implementing the controls suggested in this document, it is recommended that stakeholders complete Cirrus's cloud integration assessment and pair the results with their unique cybersecurity controls to form a comprehensive cloud-based utility cybersecurity plan. The Cirrus outcome will consider a series of future architectures for the grid before and after the energy transition and evaluate the arguments for and against cloud applications for each electric and interconnected grid layer. This document is a companion to the original whitepaper, "Use Case-Informed Framework for Utility Cloud Migration" to further identify and recommend security controls based on Cirrus’s cloud integration assessment output. The following whitepaper outlines the cybersecurity controls that secure cloud-service models pertinent to the electric sector using the predefined categories identify, protect, detect, and respond and recover. The objective is to outline prescriptive security controls based on the type of architecture and data stored in the cloud. The focus includes dissecting the shared responsibility model and elucidating what on-premises Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), and Software as a Service (SaaS) entail. A pivotal consideration in this context is allocating responsibility for foundational cybersecurity aspects—having used Cirrus for the cloud integration assessment. The ensuing controls detailed herein also represent a checklist of controls necessary for a secure cloud transition, equipping utilities with the knowledge to navigate this digital transformation with confidence and strategic foresight in a safe and responsible manner.
As an alternative to conventional tubing instrumentation for measuring airflow, designers and technicians at the NASA Glenn Research Center have been fabricating packaging components and assembling a set of unique probes using commercial-off-the-shelf microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) integrated circuits (computer chips). Using MEMS as an alternative has some compelling advantages over standard measurement devices. Sensor technologies have matured through high-production usage in industries such as automotive and aircraft manufacturers. Currently, MEMS are the choice in applications such as tire pressure monitors, altimeters, pneumatic controls, cable leak detectors, and consumer appliances. Conventional instrumentation uses tubing buried in the model aerodynamic surfaces or wind tunnel walls. The measurements are made when pressure is introduced at the tube opening. The pressure then must travel the tubing for lengths ranging from 20 to hundreds of feet before reaching an electronic signal conditioner. This condition causes a considerable amount of damping and requires measurements to be made only after the test rig has reached steady-state operation. The electronic MEMS pressure sensor is able to take readings continuously under dynamic states in nearly real time. The use of stainless steel tubing for pressure measurements requires many tubes to be cleaned, cut to length, carefully installed, and delicately deburred and spliced for use. A cluster of a few hundred 1/16-in.- (0.0625-in.-) diameter tubes (not uncommon in research testing facilities) can be several inches in diameter and may weigh enough to require two men to handle. Replacing hard tubing with electronic chips can eliminate much of the bulk. Each sensor would fit on the tip of the 1/16-in. tubing with room to spare. The P592 piezoresistive silicon pressure sensor (Lucas NovaSensor, Fremont, CA) was chosen for this project because of its cost, availability, and tolerance to extreme ambient conditions. The chip is 1 mm square by 0.6 mm thick (0.039 by 0.023 in.) with 0.12-mm (0.005-in.) wire connection tabs. Three MEMS chips were used to build the first type of flow-angularity probe. This MEMS probe will be demonstrated as an alternative to a standard tube type "Cobra Probe" now used routinely in wind tunnel and aeronautical hardware applications. The response time and accuracy would allow the probe to be translated on an actuator across a flow field, yielding precision dynamic measurements not possible with conventional instrumentation. The low profile, the minimal power requirement, the rugged construction, and the moderate cost all contribute to making MEMS sensors the enticing choice instrument in future research measurement needs. The MEMS probe efforts are a continuation of work initiated by Brian Willis, without whose foresight and efforts this project would never have been realized. This task was funded through cooperation with the NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) program at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.