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.
This report describes the current status of the Advanced Post-Irradiation Examination Capability (APIEC) Project and the initial complement of post-irradiation examination (PIE) instruments proposed to advance the state-of the-art for nuclear characterization.
An assessment of the risk of utilizing ion propulsion to perform a rendezvous mission with Halley's comet in 1985 is presented, and consideration recommendations for reducing identified risks to the lowest possible level at project start in October 1978 were made.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
When technologies are traded for incorporation into vehicle systems to support a specific mission scenario, they are often assessed in terms of Technology Readiness Level (TRL). TRL is based on three major categories of Core Technology Components, Ancillary Hardware and System Maturity, and Control and Control Integration. This paper describes the Technology Readiness Level assessment of the Carbon Dioxide Reduction Assembly (CRA) for use on the International Space Station. A team comprising of the NASA Johnson Space Center, Marshall Space Flight Center, Southwest Research Institute and Hamilton Sundstrand Space Systems International have been working on various aspects of the CRA to bring its TRL from 4/5 up to 6. This paper describes the work currently being done in the three major categories. Specific details are given on technology development of the Core Technology Components including the reactor, phase separator and CO2 compressor.
Technology assessments provide a status of the development maturity of specific technologies. Along with benefit analysis, the risks the project assumes can be quantified. Normally due to budget constraints, the competing technologies are prioritized and decisions are made which ones to fund. A detailed technology development plan is produced for the selected technologies to provide a roadmap to reach the desired maturity by the project s critical design review. Technology assessments can be conducted for both technology only tasks or for product development programs. This paper is primarily biased toward the product development programs. The paper discusses the Ares Project s approach to technology assessment. System benefit analysis, risk assessment, technology prioritization, and technology readiness assessment are addressed. A description of the technology readiness level tool being used is provided.
The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) sponsors a crosscutting technology development (CTD) program addressing common instrumentation & controls (I&C) needs in all DOE-NE sponsored programs. In 2012, DOE-NE initiated the Nuclear Energy Enabling Technology (NEET) Program to conduct research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) in crosscutting technologies that directly support and enable the development of existing, new and advanced reactor designs, and fuel cycle technologies. These technologies will advance the state of nuclear technology, improve its competitiveness, and promote continued contribution to meeting our Nation’s energy and environmental challenges. The NEET Program has spurred innovation in the field of sensors and instrumentation, advanced methods for manufacturing, and cyber security. The Advanced Sensors and Instrumentation (ASI) program is one element of the NEET CTD that has spurred innovation in the measurement science field by funding research on sensors, instrumentation and controls, communication, and advanced analytics that measure system parameters, gauge component control input, and provide power plant owners and operators critical awareness so they can plan and safely manage operational evolutions. The NEET ASI Program has carried out research and development (R&D) required to develop and deploy innovative and advanced sensors, and instrumentation and control capabilities for current and future nuclear energy systems, and to enable the advanced technologies essential to NE’s R&D efforts needed to realize mission goals. The concept of technology readiness assessment is helpful for the classification of instrumentation technology as part of the program strategy. A technology readiness assessment evaluates technology maturity using the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale and was pioneered by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in the 1980s for space technology. It has recently been adopted to advance fuels and materials. The NEET ASI program objective is to mature instruments technology to TRL 6, which is “demonstration of the technology in relevant environment.” While there may be instances in which a different strategy is justified, the aim of the program is to respond to DOE program and stakeholder needs for nuclear instrumentation then hand off the technology after demonstration for integration in a more complex system, for example an irradiation test, experimental loop or a plant component such as the core, primary system or heat exchanger. A mechanism to continue some level of support from NEET ASI during and after the adoption (for example, to maintain fabrication and calibration capabilities) will be defined as the first example of technology hand off comes to fruition. In addition, several paths exist within DOE to complement NEET ASI activities to extend the maturity beyond TRL, for example through GAIN, technology commercialization funding, and small-business programs. Role of NEET ASI CINR projects in the TRL space, and integration with direct funded demonstration.
A method of conducting a technology readiness assessment was developed. It uses existing OAST technology readiness and risk criteria to define a technology readiness factor that considers both the required gain in technology readiness level to achieved technology readiness plus the degree of effort associated with achieving the gain. The results indicate that Solar Electric Propulsion is preferred based on technology readiness criteria. Both Solar Sail and Solar Electric Propulsion have a high level of transfer potential for future NASA missions, and each has considerable technology spillover for non-NASA applications.
Technology assessments of fourteen science instruments were conducted within NASA using the NASA Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Metric. The instruments were part of three NASA Earth Science Decadal Survey missions in pre-formulation. The Earth Systematic Missions Program (ESMP) Systems Engineering Working Group (SEWG), composed of members of three NASA Centers, provided a newly modified electronic workbook to be completed, with instructions. Each instrument development team performed an internal assessment of its technology status, prepared an overview of its instrument, and completed the workbook with the results of its assessment. A team from the ESMP SEWG met with each instrument team and provided feedback. The instrument teams then reported through the Program Scientist for their respective missions to NASA's Earth Science Division (ESD) on technology readiness, taking the SEWG input into account. The instruments were found to have a range of TRL from 4 to 7. Lessons Learned are presented; however, due to the competition-sensitive nature of the assessments, the results for specific missions are not presented. The assessments were generally successful, and produced useful results for the agency. The SEWG team identified a number of potential improvements to the process. Particular focus was on ensuring traceability to guiding NASA documents, including the NASA Systems Engineering Handbook. The TRL Workbook has been substantially modified, and the revised workbook is described.
Stirling Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) are being developed as an option to provide power on future space science missions where robotic spacecraft will orbit, flyby, land or rove. A Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG) could offer space missions a more efficient power system that uses one fourth of the nuclear fuel and decreases the thermal footprint of the current state of the art. The RPS Program Office, working in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), manages projects to develop thermoelectric and dynamic power systems, including Stirling Radioisotope Generators (SRGs). The Stirling Cycle Technology Development (SCTD) Project, located at Glenn Research Center (GRC), is developing Stirling-based subsystems, including convertors and controllers. The SCTD Project also performs research that focuses on a wide variety of objectives, including increasing convertor temperature capability to enable new environments, improving system reliability or fault tolerance, reducing mass or size, and developing advanced concepts that are mission enabling. Research activity includes maturing subsystems, assemblies, and components to prepare them for infusion into future convertor and generator designs. The status of several technology development efforts are described here. As part of the maturation process, technologies are assessed for readiness in higher-level subsystems. To assess the readiness level of the Dual Convertor Controller (DCC), a Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) was performed and the process and results are shown. Stirling technology research is being performed by the SCTD Project for NASA's RPS Program Office, where tasks focus on maturation of Stirling-based systems and subsystems for future space science missions.
Stirling Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) are being developed as an option to provide power on future space science missions where robotic spacecraft will orbit, flyby, land or rove. A Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG) could offer space missions a more efficient power system that uses one fourth of the nuclear fuel and decreases the thermal footprint of the current state of the art. The RPS Program Office, working in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), manages projects to develop thermoelectric and dynamic power systems, including Stirling Radioisotope Generators (SRGs). The Stirling Cycle Technology Development (SCTD) Project, located at Glenn Research Center (GRC), is developing Stirling-based subsystems, including convertors and controllers. The SCTD Project also performs research that focuses on a wide variety of objectives, including increasing convertor temperature capability to enable new environments, improving system reliability or fault tolerance, reducing mass or size, and developing advanced concepts that are mission enabling. Research activity includes maturing subsystems, assemblies, and components to prepare them for infusion into future convertor and generator designs. The status of several technology development efforts are described here. As part of the maturation process, technologies are assessed for readiness in higher-level subsystems. To assess the readiness level of the Dual Convertor Controller (DCC), a Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) was performed and the process and results are shown. Stirling technology research is being performed by the SCTD Project for NASA's RPS Program Office, where tasks focus on maturation of Stirling-based systems and subsystems for future space science missions.
he focus of this report is TRL/MRL analysis of hydrogen storage; it documents the methodology and results of an effort to identify hydrogen storage technologies’ technical and manufacturing readiness for early market motive and non-motive applications and to provide a path forward toward commercialization. Motive applications include materials handling equipment (MHE) and ground support equipment (GSE), such as forklifts, tow tractors, and specialty vehicles such as golf carts, lawn mowers and wheel chairs. Non-motive applications are portable, stationary or auxiliary power units (APUs) and include portable laptops, backup power, remote sensor power, and auxiliary power for recreational vehicles, hotels, hospitals, etc. Hydrogen storage technologies assessed include metal hydrides, chemical hydrides, sorbents, gaseous storage, and liquid storage. The assessments are based on a combination of Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) designations that enable evaluation of hydrogen storage technologies at varying levels of development. The manufacturing status could be established from eight risk elements: Technical Maturity, Design, Materials, Cost & Funding, Process Capability, Personnel, Facilities and Manufacturing Planning. This approach provides a logical methodology and roadmap to enable the identification of hydrogen storage technologies, their advantages/disadvantages, gaps and R&D needs on an unbiased and transparent scale that is easily communicated to interagency partners. This technology readiness assessment (TRA) report documents the process used to conduct the TRA/MRA (technology and manufacturing readiness assessment), reports the TRL and MRL for each assessed technology and provides recommendations based on the findings. To investigate the state of the art and needs to mature the technologies, PNNL prepared a questionnaire to assign TRL and MRL for each hydrogen storage technology. The questionnaire was sent to identified hydrogen storage technology developers and manufacturers who were asked to perform a self-assessment. We included both domestic and international organizations including U.S. national laboratories, U.S. companies, European companies and Japanese companies. PNNL collected the data and performed an analysis to deduce the level of maturity and to provide program recommendations.
The level of proficiency attained by the most effective physical and chemical regenerative processes capable of providing a habitable atmospheric environment in a spacecraft is assessed. It is shown that both the Sabatier and Bosh reactions are in a mature stage of technological readiness and can effectively reduce the carbon dioxide in a spacecraft. An electrochemical method for concentrating CO2 from an air environment offers promise to approach low levels of pCO2 control. Technological advances in the fields of solid polymer electrolytes and oxygen evolution electrocatalysts have led to a water electrolysis system that can maintain efficient performance for several years. Nitrogen supply and control of the composition of the spacecraft atmosphere is effectively provided by the circulating electrolyte technique.
Planning and decision making amidst programmatic and technological risks represent significant challenges for projects. This presentation addresses the four step risk-assessment process needed to determine clear path forward to mature needed technology and design, license, and construct advanced nuclear power plants, which have never been built before, including Small Modular Reactors. This four step process has been carefully applied to the Next Generation Nuclear Plant. STEP 1 - Risk Identification Risks are identified, collected, and categorized as technical risks, programmatic risks, and project risks, each of which result in cost and schedule impacts if realized. These include risks arising from the use of technologies not previously demonstrated in a relevant application. These risks include normal and accident scenarios which the SMR could experience including events that cause the disablement of engineered safety features (typically documented in Phenomena Identification Ranking Tables (PIRT) as produced with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission) and design needs which must be addressed to further detail the design. Product - Project Risk Register contained in a database with sorting, presentation, rollup, risk work off functionality similar to the NGNP Risk Management System . STEP 2 - Risk Quantification The risks contained in the risk register are then scored for probability of occurrence and severity of consequence, if realized. Here the scoring methodology is established and the basis for the scoring is well documented. Product - Quantified project risk register with documented basis for scoring. STEP 3 - Risk Handling Strategy Risks are mitigated by applying a systematic approach to maturing the technology through Research and Development, modeling, test, and design. A Technology Readiness Assessment is performed to determine baseline Technology Readiness Levels (TRL). Tasks needed to mature the technology are developed and documented in a roadmap. Product - Risk Handling Strategy. STEP 4 - Residual Risk Work off The risk handling strategy is entered into the Project Risk Allocation Tool (PRAT) to analyze each task for its ability to reduce risk. The result is risk-informed task prioritization. The risk handling strategy is captured in the Risk Management System, a relational database that provides conventional database utility, including data maintenance, archiving, configuration control, and query ability. The tool's Hierarchy Tree allows visualization and analyses of complex relationships between risks, risk mitigation tasks, design needs, and PIRTs. Product - Project Risk Allocation Tool and Risk Management System which depict project plan to reduce risk and current progress in doing so.