SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
A critical assessment by approximately 70 community representatives from NASA, academia, industry, research institutions, and international organizations of candidate activities on the lunar surface and its vicinity that may feed forward to support affordable and sustainable human missions to the surface of Mars in 2030s.
The workshop was held to provide a forum for communication within the space materials and structures technology developer and user communities. Workshop participants were organized into a Vehicle Technology Requirements session and three working panels: Materials and Structures Technologies for Vehicle Systems; Propulsion Systems; and Entry Systems. The goals accomplished were (1) to develop important strategic planning information necessary to transition materials and structures technologies from lab research programs into robust and affordable operational systems; (2) to provide a forum for the exchange of information and ideas between technology developers and users; and (3) to provide senior NASA management with a review of current space transportation programs, related subjects, and specific technology needs. The workshop thus provided a foundation on which a NASA and industry effort to address space transportation materials and structures technologies can grow.
The role of accurate thermophysical property data in the process design and modeling of solidification processes was the subject of a workshop held on 22-23 Oct. 1992 in Cleveland, Ohio. The workshop was divided into three sequential sessions dealing with (1) industrial needs and priorities for thermophysical data, (2) experimental capabilities for measuring the necessary data, and (3) theoretical capabilities for predicting the necessary data. In addition, a 2-hour panel discussion of the salient issues was featured as well as a 2-hour caucus that assessed priorities and identified action plans.
A summary of the NASA Lewis Research Center (LeRC) Workshop on Forced Response in Turbomachinery in August, 1993 is presented. It was sponsored by the following NASA organizations: Structures, Space Propulsion Technology, and Propulsion Systems Divisions of NASA LeRC and the Aeronautics and Advanced Concepts & Technology Offices of NASA Headquarters. In addition, the workshop was held in conjunction with the GUIde (Government/Industry/Universities) Consortium on Forced Response. The workshop was specifically designed to receive suggestions and comments from industry on current research at NASA LeRC in the area of forced vibratory response of turbomachinery blades which includes both computational and experimental approaches. There were eight presentations and a code demonstration. Major areas of research included aeroelastic response, steady and unsteady fluid dynamics, mistuning, and corresponding experimental work.
This document contains the agenda and presentation abstracts for the Thermal Barrier Coating Workshop, sponsored by NASA, DOE, and NIST. The workshop covered thermal barrier coating (TBC) issues related to applications, processing, properties, and modeling. The intent of the workshop was to highlight the state of knowledge on TBC's and to identify critical gaps in knowledge that may hinder TBC use in advanced applications. The workshop goals were achieved through presentations by 22 speakers representing industry, academia, and government as well as through extensive discussion periods.
This document contains papers for the Thermal Barrier Coating Workshop sponsored by NASA Lewis Research Center and cosponsored by DOE and NIST. The workshop was held in Westlake, Ohio, 27-29 Mar. 1995. The workshop covered thermal barrier coating (TBC) issues related to applications, processing, properties, and modeling. The intent of the workshop was to highlight the state of knowledge on TBC's and to identify critical gaps in knowledge that may hinder TBC use in advanced applications. The workshop goals were achieved through presentations by 22 speakers representing industry, academia, and government as well as through extensive discussion periods.
Space resources must be used to support life on the Moon and exploration of Mars. Just as the pioneers applied the tools they brought with them to resources they found along the way rather than trying to haul all their needs over a long supply line, so too must space travelers apply their high technology tools to local resources. The pioneers refilled their water barrels at each river they forded; moonbase inhabitants may use chemical reactors to combine hydrogen brought from Earth with oxygen found in lunar soil to make their water. The pioneers sought temporary shelter under trees or in the lee of a cliff and built sod houses as their first homes on the new land; settlers of the Moon may seek out lava tubes for their shelter or cover space station modules with lunar regolith for radiation protection. The pioneers moved further west from their first settlements, using wagons they had built from local wood and pack animals they had raised; space explorers may use propellant made at a lunar base to take them on to Mars. The concept for this report was developed at a NASA-sponsored summer study in 1984. The program was held on the Scripps campus of the University of California at San Diego (UCSD), under the auspices of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). It was jointly managed under the California Space Inst. and the NASA Johnson Space Center, under the direction of the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST) at NASA Headquarters. The study participants (listed in the addendum) included a group of 18 university teachers and researchers (faculty fellows) who were present for the entire 10-week period and a larger group of attendees from universities, Government, and industry who came for a series of four 1-week workshops. The organization of this report follows that of the summer study. Space Resources consists of a brief overview and four detailed technical volumes: (1) Scenarios; (2) Energy, Power, and Transport; (3) Materials; (4) Social Concerns. Although many of the included papers got their impetus from workshop discussions, most have been written since then, thus allowing the authors to base new applications on established information and tested technology. All these papers have been updated to include the authors' current work. This overview, drafted by faculty fellow Jim Burke, describes the findings of the summer study, as participants explored the use of space resources in the development of future space activities and defined the necessary research and development that must precede the practical utilization of these resources. Space resources considered included lunar soil, oxygen derived from lunar soil, material retrieved from near-Earth asteroids, abundant sunlight, low gravity, and high vacuum. The study participants analyzed the direct use of these resources, the potential demand for products from them, the techniques for retrieving and processing space resources, the necessary infrastructure, and the economic tradeoffs. This is certainly not the first report to urge the utilization of space resources in the development of space activities. In fact, Space Resources may be seen as the third of a trilogy of NASA Special Publications reporting such ideas arising from similar studies. It has been preceded by Space Settlements: A Design Study (NASA SP-413) and Space Resources and Space Settlements (NASA SP-428). And other, contemporaneous reports have responded to the same themes. The National Commission on Space, led by Thomas Paine, in Pioneering the Space Frontier, and the NASA task force led by astronaut Sally Ride, in Leadership and America's Future in Space, also emphasize expansion of the space Infrastructure; more detailed exploration of the Moon, Mars, and asteroids; an early start on the development of the technology necessary for using space resources; and systematic development of the skills necessary for long-term human presence in space. Our report does not represent any Government-authorized view or official NASA policy. NASA's official response to these challenging opportunities must be found in the reports of its Office of Exploration, which was established in 1987. That office's report, released in November 1989, of a 90-day study of possible plans for human exploration of the Moon and Mars is NASA's response to the new initiative proposed by President Bush on July 20, 1989, the 20th anniversary of the Apollo 11 landing on the Moon: "First, for the coming decade, for the 1990s, Space Station Freedom, our critical next step in all our space endeavors. And next, for the new century, back to the Moon, back to the future, and this time, back to stay. And then a journey into tomorrow, a journey to another planet, a manned mission to Mars." This report, Space Resources, offers substantiation for NASA's bid to carry out that new initiative.
NASA has designated the Principal Center Assignment to the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) for implementation of the National Center for Advanced Manufacturing (NCAM). NCAM is NASA s leading resource for the aerospace manufacturing research, development, and innovation needs that are critical to the goals of the Agency. Through this initiative NCAM s people work together with government, industry, and academia to ensure the technology base and national infrastructure are available to develop innovative manufacturing technologies with broad application to NASA Enterprise programs, and U.S. industry. Educational enhancements are ever-present within the NCAM focus to promote research, to inspire participation and to support education and training in manufacturing. Many important accomplishments took place during 2002. Through NCAM, NASA was among five federal agencies involved in manufacturing research and development (R&D) to launch a major effort to exchange information and cooperate directly to enhance the payoffs from federal investments. The Government Agencies Technology Exchange in Manufacturing (GATE-M) is the only active effort to specifically and comprehensively address manufacturing R&D across the federal government. Participating agencies include the departments of Commerce (represented by the National Institute of Standards and Technology), Defense, and Energy, as well as the National Science Foundation and NASA. MSFC s ongoing partnership with the State of Louisiana, the University of New Orleans, and Lockheed Martin Corporation at the Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF) progressed significantly. Major capital investments were initiated for world-class equipment additions including a universal friction stir welding system, composite fiber placement machine, five-axis machining center, and ten-axis laser ultrasonic nondestructive test system. The NCAM consortium of five universities led by University of New Orleans with Mississippi State University, Tennessee Technological University, Texas A&M University, and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University provided wide-ranging engineering research, new degree/curriculum programs, and a web-based lecture series. NCAM has fostered an important presence and leadership role within the national manufacturing community. Its progressive influence can be seen in government, industry and academia, and in national associations, professional organizations, conferences, workshops, and forums.
This presentation is designed as a limited-scope "tutorial" and is aimed primarily at the CFDer who has not been exposed to stability and control problems. Examples of some classic S&C problems are used for illustration. S&C is a fundamental technology for enabling flight, but significant problems with the prediction of S&C characteristics persists, especially where separated flow is involved. Even after 100 years of flight, experimental methods still have significant limitations. Experimental and computational tools can and must be complementary. NASA Flight Prediction Workshop (Williamsburg, Virginia, November 2002) brought together experts from government, industry, and academia to discuss problems associated with state-of-the-art flight prediction. Among the concerns highlighted were deficiencies in S&C prediction lack of calibrated CFD tools for aerodynamic prediction in general.
A workshop at NASA Ames Research Center was held with airline industry stakeholders to demonstrate the impact of using Trajectory Options Sets (TOSs) during a Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP) for severe weather operations. The demonstration was conducted using apart-task Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) simulation of the Integrated Demand Management (IDM) concept, which is an air traffic management method that uses CTOP to deliver preconditioned traffic to the Time-Based Flow Management (TBFM) region. The demonstration addressed the following research objectives: first, determine who receives a greater benefit, TOS-participating or TOS-excluded airlines? Second, determine which method of trajectory selection yields a better solution, human/manual selection or automation? Finally, obtain feedback from stakeholders on their impression of the concept and recommendations for future work. The results showed that TOS-participating airlines received greater benefit in terms of total ground delay, ground delay savings, number of reroute options, and additional flight time, compared to TOS-excluded airlines. However, this result was dependent on the situational context, such as the number and location of flights. We found that all airlines benefitted when just a subset of airlines submitted TOS, but the greatest benefit went to the TOS-participating airlines. These benefits to the TOS-participating airlines were diminished as the number of TOS-participants in the system increased. Therefore, there was an “early-adopter” effect that suggested airlines could benefit by becoming the first to equip TOS without causing unfair disadvantages to those who do not equip TOS. In addition, we found that manual selection of trajectory options performed similarly to CTOP, but the CTOP solution was more efficient in terms of number of reroutes, additional flight time, and average ground delay for rerouted flights. Feedback from the stakeholders was solicited, and their overall impressions of the demonstrations were positive. They remarked that CTOP could do a better job than current day solutions, and they thought airlines could benefit from continuing to develop TOS capabilities.
The C3P &. NASA International Workshop on Environment and Alternative Energy was held on November 15-18, 2011 at the European Space Agency (ESA)'s Research and Technology Centre (ESTEC) in Noordwijk, The Netherlands. The theme of the workshop was "Global Collaboration in Environmental and Alternative Energy Strategies". The workshop was held at ESTEC's conference center. More than 110 individuals from eleven countries attended the workshop. For the first time since the inception of NASA-C3P workshops, a full day was dedicated to a student session. Fifteen students from around the globe gave oral presentations along with poster displays relating to the latest technologies in environmental and alternative energy strategies. Judges from NASA, C3P and ESA awarded plaques to the top three students. In addition to the students, thirty eight U.S. and international subject matter experts presented on the following general environmental-related topics: (1) Hazardous materials management and substitution in support of space operations (2) Emerging renewable and alternative energy technologies (3) Sustainable development and redevelopment (4) Remediation technologies and strategies The workshop also included a panel discussion on the topic of the challenges of operating installations across borders. Throughout the workshop, attendees heard about the scope of environmental and energy challenges that industry and governments face. They heard about technologies for increasing energy efficiency and increasing use of renewable energy. They learned about ways companies and government agencies are using materials, processes, goods and services in a manner more respectful with the environment and in compliance with health and safety rules. The concept of partnerships and their inherent benefits was evidenced throughout the workshop. Partnering is a key aspect of sustainability because sustainable development is complicated. Through formal presentations and side discussions, attendees commented on the need for continued exploration of joint projects of mutual interest.
Papers that provide a technical foundation including research and technology base candidates for each of six space themes - space power, space industrialization, search for extraterrestrial intelligence, exploration of the solar system, global service, and advanced transportation systems - are presented. The material is mainly intended for further use by workshop participants and NASA elements concerned with space research and technology. While the data presented do not represent official plans or positions, they are part of the process of evolving such plans and positions. The information contained reflects the efforts of workshop participants and should be an aid in the successful implementation and execution of the Agency's near- and far-term advanced technology program.
The aim of this report is to synthesize key feedback received from the three-part Circularity Futures workshop series held in Spring 2024. The workshop series was conducted by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) on behalf of U.S. Department of Energy, Office Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), and was broken into three workshops: Workshop 1 - Circularity Analysis Needs and Priorities; Workshop 2 - Circularity Metrics and Indicators; and Workshop 3 - Circularity Data. Together, the workshops focused on identifying the existing priorities and gaps in the circularity modeling space, understanding different stakeholders' use and interpretation of circularity metrics and indicators, identifying common data gaps and data quality challenges, and assessing the robustness of available solutions. The workshop series brought a diverse group of stakeholders - including representatives from U.S. government offices, national labs, nonprofit organizations, industry, and academia - to collect first-hand feedback on needs, priorities, challenges and opportunities in the circularity modeling and analysis space. The workshop discussions highlighted numerous common needs, priorities and challenges among the interviewed groups. Several topics were frequently discussed, including: 1) Circularity as a pathway for sustainable economic growth: While circularity is generally defined in terms of resource conservation and reducing wasteful disposal of materials, participants agreed that circular strategies should serve broader economic, environmental, and social goals. It is therefore crucial for circularity analysis to look beyond waste reduction and instead evaluate a variety of impact metrics such as cost savings, job creation, air quality, and pollutant emissions. Mutli-criteria decision-making frameworks may be useful for making sense of disparate metrics and evaluating tradeoffs between impact categories.; 2) Economic and social factors are not well understood: Underdevelopment of existing end-of-life (EOL) management infrastructure, inconsistent standardization codes and policy space in reusing recycled content, and suboptimal collection and sorting strategies collectively contribute to uncertainty about the economic potential of circular pathways. The latter observation is consistent among all technologies but more emphasized for renewable energy systems. Social impacts of circularity practices are less understood and less researched than other sustainability aspects.; 3) Inconsistent methods for assessing emerging technologies: LCA and TEA results vary widely depending on the assumptions made with regards to market adoption of new technologies. Emerging technologies suffer limited availability of data needed to conduct a robust circularity analysis. Yet, understanding projected impacts of proposed nascent technology is a key need for different stakeholder groups.; and 4) Lack of temporally and geospatially explicit data: There is a need for open data that represents variations in circularity technologies over time and location. The lack thereof leads to aggregated and potentially misrepresented results in circularity analysis. Sensitivity analyses should be included to verify whether options perceived as more sustainable align with real-world practices.
The Astrotech 21 Optical Systems Technology Workshop was held in Pasadena, California on March 6-8, 1991. The purpose of the workshop was to examine the state of Optical Systems Technology at the National Aeronautics Space Administration (NASA), and in industry and academia, in view of the potential Astrophysics mission set currently being considered for the late 1990's through the first quarter of the 21st century. The principal result of the workshop is this publication, which contains an assessment of the current state of the technology, and specific technology advances in six critical areas of optics, all necessary for the mission set. The workshop was divided into six panels, each of about a dozen experts in specific fields, representing NASA, industry, and academia. In addition, each panel contained expertise that spanned the spectrum from x-ray to submillimeter wavelengths. This executive summary contains the principal recommendations of each panel. The six technology panels and their chairs were: (1) Wavefront Sensing, Control, and Pointing, Thomas Pitts, Itek Optical Systems, A Division of Litton; (2) Fabrication, Roger Angel, Steward Observatory, University of Arizona; (3) Materials and Structures, Theodore Saito, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; (4) Optical Testing, James Wyant, WYKO Corporation; (5) Optical Systems Integrated Modeling, Robert R. Shannon, Optical Sciences Center, University of Arizona; and (6) Advanced Optical Instruments Technology, Michael Shao, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology. This Executive Summary contains the principal recommendations of each panel.
The primary objective of this workshop is to identify areas of advancement in sensor measurements and technologies that will help to define standard practices and procedures that will better enable the infusion into flight programs of sensors with improved capabilities but limited or no flight heritage. These standards would be crucial to demonstrating a methodology for validating current models while also creating the possibility of being able to have sufficient data to either update these models (e. g., spatial or temporal resolution, etc.) or develop new models based on the ability to simulate the new measured physical parameters. The workshop is also intended to narrow the gap between sensor measurements (and techniques), data processing techniques and the ability to make use of that data by gathering together experts in the field for a short workshop. This collaboration will unite NASA and other government agencies with contractor capabilities industry-wide to prevent duplication, spawn synergistic growth in sensor technology, help analysts make good engineering decisions and help focus new sensor maturation efforts to better meet future flight program customers' needs. This is the first such workshop designed to specifically address establishing a standardized protocol/methodology for demonstrating the technology readiness of non-flight heritage sensor systems. While other similar workshops are held covering many areas of interest to the sensor development community, no other meeting is specific enough to address this vital but often overlooked topic. By encouraging cross-fertilization of ideas from instrument experts from many different backgrounds, it is hoped that this workshop will initiate innovative new ideas and concepts in sensor development, calibration and validation. It is anticipated this workshop will repeat periodically as needed.
To continue to build broadly based consensus on the future of human space exploration, the Fourth Community Workshop on Achievability and Sustainability of Human Exploration of Mars (AM IV), organized by Explore Mars, Inc. and the American Astronautical Society, was held at the Double Tree Inn in Monrovia, CA., December 68, 2016. Approximately 60 invited professionals from the industrial and commercial sectors, academia, and NASA, along with international colleagues, participated in the workshop. These individuals were chosen to be representative of the breadth of interests in astronaut and robotic Mars exploration.
Domestic biomass crops such as sorghum, switchgrass, Miscanthus, and poplar can provide United States industries with renewable feedstocks while also supporting low-input farming systems and strengthening supply chains for biofuels, biochemicals and biomaterials. The U.S. leads globally in biomass crop genomics, yet progress in engineering traits is constrained by slow, genotype-dependent transformation methods and lengthy Design-Build-Test-Learn (DBTL) cycles. At a May 2025 workshop, a panel of experts recommended establishing a DOE Plant Transformation Capability (PTC) to overcome these barriers. The PTC would unite two missions: advancing research to achieve genotype-independent, automated methods, and delivering scalable transformation services through a user-facility model. With expected gains of 10–100x in efficiency, including transformation and cost reduction, the PTC would accelerate the path from discovery to engineered plants, expand community access and training, and support downstream applications and workflows including field trials and regulatory navigation. By enabling rapid and predictable crop engineering, the PTC would strengthen U.S. supply chains, enhance industrial competitiveness, and ensure that DOE’s genomic investments deliver national impact.
The DOE/NRC Criticality Safety for Commercial-Scale HALEU Fuel Cycle and Transportation (DNCSH) project was established through the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (H.R. 5376) to support the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and industry in addressing critical experiment validation gaps that impede the licensing basis and regulatory approval of high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) operations. An initial public workshop was held in February 2024 to address HALEU transportation validation gaps. The resulting call for proposals was released in April and resulted in funding for the execution and/or evaluation of 16 critical experiments. A second public workshop was held in August 2025 to address facility and operational validation gaps, precluding a second call for proposals. A list of attendees is provided in APPENDIX A, Table A-1. A total of 319 participants joined the meeting, which was hosted online via Microsoft Teams as well as in person. The slides from the meeting were uploaded online to the NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The meeting agenda is provided in Table 1-1. In preparation for the meeting, a study was performed to examine expected fissile forms for the fuel cycles of various fuel types at different stages of production and the apparent validation gaps. The resulting report, titled “Benchmark Gap Assessment for the Manufacturing of High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium Fuels,” provided the foundation for the discussions that took place during the workshop. The discussions and the validation gaps in the report were used to develop the second call for proposals. The present report presents the feedback received before, during, and after the second workshop. All the data presented are based on voluntarily self-reported identification, opinions from workshop participants, and survey responses and are assumed to be as accurate as practically reasonable. The discussions during the workshop and the subsequent survey responses were intended to direct attention to industry-specific areas of interest and to collect feedback on the work performed to date by the DNCSH project.