Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “technological”

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 487 records · Page 27
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

NASA's Physics of the Cosmos and Cosmic Origins Technology Development Programs

The strategic astrophysics missions of the coming decades will help answer the questions "How did our universe begin and evolve?" and "How did galaxies, stars, and planets come to be?" Enabling these missions requires advances in key technologies far beyond the current state of the art. NASA's Physics of the Cosmos (PCOS) and Cosmic Origins (COR) Program Offices manage technology maturation projects funded through the Strategic Astrophysics Technology (SAT) program to accomplish such advances. The PCOS and COR Program Offices, residing at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), were established in 2011, and serve as the implementation arm for the Astrophysics Division at NASA Headquarters. We present an overview of the Programs' technology development activities and the current technology investment portfolio of 23 technology advancements. We discuss the process for addressing community-provided technology gaps and Technology Management Board (TMB)-vetted prioritization and investment recommendations that inform the SAT program. The process improves the transparency and relevance of our technology investments, provides the community a voice in the process, and promotes targeted external technology investments by defining needs and identifying customers. The Programs' priorities are driven by strategic direction from the Astrophysics Division, which is informed by the National Research Council's (NRC) "New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics" (NWNH) 2010 Decadal Survey report [1], the Astrophysics Implementation Plan (AIP) [2] as updated, and the Astrophysics Roadmap "Enduring Quests, Daring Visions" [3]. These priorities include technology development for missions to study dark energy, gravitational waves, X-ray and inflation probe science, and large far-infrared (IR) and ultraviolet (UV)/optical/IR telescopes to conduct imaging and spectroscopy studies. The SAT program is the Astrophysics Division's main investment method to mature technologies that will be identified by study teams set up to inform the 2020 Decadal Survey process on several large astrophysics mission concepts.

SPIE paper↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Advance Information Systems Technology (AIST) Program

NASA’s Earth Science Technology Office (ESTO) develops early-stage technologies to enhance scientific understanding. ESTO’s technologies can be reliably and confidently applied to a broad range of science measurements and missions, as well as facilitate practical applications to benefit society at large. As the lead technology office within the Earth Science Division of the NASA Science Mission Directorate, ESTO is focused on the technological challenges inherent to space-based investigations of our planet's dynamic, interrelated systems. Through flexible, science-driven technology strategies and a competitive selection process, ESTO-funded technologies have supported numerous Earth science missions as well as commercial applications. From next generation sensors and instruments to communication and information systems, ESTO technologies enable many NASA missions and data services. The Advanced Information Systems Technology (AIST) Program is one focal area of ESTO. AIST innovates information system technologies that enable the development of new observing systems as well as agile science investigations through data analytics and artificial intelligence tools and algorithms. AIST utilizes an end-to-end development approach with the goal of infusing mature technologies into future missions, measurements, and analysis. One thrust of AIST is data exploitation and analysis using an analytic center framework to make observational data and model output more accessible and usable to scientists conducting specific investigations as well as to extract higher-level science content and information from the data. The framework accelerates scientific discovery by harmonizing the data, tools, and computational resources. NASA’s upcoming Surface, Biology and Geology (SBG) mission is one such mission whose data architecture will leverage many of the technologies developed through the AIST program. This talk will highlight current and future program development goals.

Laura Rogers↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Gaps and Key Performance Parameters to Inform NASA Environmental Control and Life Support and Human Health and Performance Capability Technology Decisions

Human spaceflight is a complex endeavor requiring multiple capabilities for transportation, crew health, scientific goals, and safe return to Earth. The difference between spaceflight proven capabilities and those needed for future exploration architectures is defined as a capability gap. Capability gaps are not technology specific. Each capability gap is approachable with a wide array of technologies that have unique benefits and challenges. Determining what a capability’s relevant and distinguishing key performance parameters (KPPs) are for a mission is critical. Mass, power, and volume are always constrained and important, but defining these in a way normalized by performance is challenging. Additionally, KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are very important and still evolving. This paper provides the approach of the Environmental Control and Life Support – Crew Health and Performance (ECLSS-CHP) System Capability Leadership Team (SCLT) has used to define gaps and KPPs in support of the NASA’s Capabilities Integration Team data call objectives. The nine ECLSS-CHP capability areas are decomposed to capabilities with ~76 gaps and supported with KPPs. Rather than defining very detailed gaps, ECLSS-CHP defines high-level gaps to be technology agnostic. Within a gap, detailed KPPs are defined to both compare technologies and measure progress within a technology over time. Ideally, KPPs are clearly defined, widely communicated both internally and externally, and provide a common nomenclature to describe the state of the art and the degree of improvement required for exploration missions. KPPs help define when the gap is closed, and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Further technology improvements to enhance the capability, as measured by improved KPPs, must then be weighed against investments in open capability gaps that prevent NASA from achieving its exploration missions. It is uncommon that a technology maturation to improve all the relevant KPPs simultaneously but using KPPs is a critical technology investment decision making component. In addition to traditional technology selections, KPPs are informing how investments in ground testing prior to and in parallel with ISS technology demonstrations are required to improve reliability KPPs. The collection of all major technology activities within a capability area are captured on technology roadmaps to communicate how diverse program activities are coordinated to close gaps and infuse into exploration mission needs. A selection of ECLSS-CHP gaps and KPPs and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed.

Life Support↗
NASA NTRS2014

ExMC Technology Watch

The Technology Watch (Tech Watch) project is directed by the NASA Human Research Programs (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element, and primarily focuses on ExMC technology gaps. The project coordinates the efforts of multiple NASA centers, including the Johnson Space Center (JSC), Glenn Research Center (GRC), Ames Research Center (ARC), and the Langley Research Center (LaRC). The objective of Tech Watch is to identify emerging, high-impact technologies that augment current NASA HRP technology development efforts. Identifying such technologies accelerates the development of medical care and research capabilities for the mitigation of potential health issues encountered during human space exploration missions. The aim of this process is to leverage technologies developed by academia, industry and other government agencies and to identify the effective utilization of NASA resources to maximize the HRP return on investment. The establishment of collaborations with these entities is beneficial to technology development, assessment and/or insertion, and advance NASAs goal to provide a safe and healthy environment for human exploration. In fiscal year 2013, the Tech Watch project maintained student project activity aimed at specific ExMC gaps, completed the gap report review cycle for all gaps through a maturated gap report review process, and revised the ExMC Tech Watch Sharepoint site for enhanced data content and organization. Through site visits, internships and promotions via aerospace journals, several student projects were initiated and completed this past year. Upon project completion, the students presented their results via telecom or WebEx to the ExMC Element as a whole. The upcoming year will continue to forge strategic alliances and student projects in the interest of technology and knowledge gap closure. Through the population of Sharepoint with technologies assessed by the gap owners, the database expansion will develop a more comprehensive technology set for each gap. By placing such data in Sharepoint, the gap report updates in fiscal year 2014 are anticipated to be streamlined since the evaluated technologies will be readily available to the gap owners in a sortable archive, and may be simply exported into the final gap report presentation.

Technology gaps↗
NASA NTRS2014

ExMC Technology Watch

The Technology Watch (Tech Watch) project is directed by the NASA Human Research Program's (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element, and primarily focuses on ExMC technology gaps. The project coordinates the efforts of multiple NASA centers, including the Johnson Space Center (JSC), Glenn Research Center (GRC), Ames Research Center (ARC), and the Langley Research Center (LaRC). The objective of Tech Watch is to identify emerging, high-impact technologies that augment current NASA HRP technology development efforts. Identifying such technologies accelerates the development of medical care and research capabilities for the mitigation of potential health issues encountered during human space exploration missions. The aim of this process is to leverage technologies developed by academia, industry and other government agencies and to identify the effective utilization of NASA resources to maximize the HRP return on investment. The establishment of collaborations with these entities is beneficial to technology development, assessment and/or insertion, and advance NASA's goal to provide a safe and healthy environment for human exploration. In fiscal year 2013, the Tech Watch project maintained student project activity aimed at specific ExMC gaps, completed the gap report review cycle for all gaps through a maturated gap report review process, and revised the ExMC Tech Watch Sharepoint site for enhanced data content and organization. Through site visits, internships and promotions via aerospace journals, several student projects were initiated and completed this past year. Upon project completion, the students presented their results via telecom or WebEx to the ExMC Element as a whole. The upcoming year will continue to forge strategic alliances and student projects in the interest of technology and knowledge gap closure. Through the population of Sharepoint with technologies assessed by the gap owners, the database expansion will develop a more comprehensive technology set for each gap. By placing such data in Sharepoint, the gap report updates in fiscal year 2014 are anticipated to be streamlined since the evaluated technologies will be readily available to the gap owners in a sortable archive, and may be simply exported into the final gap report presentation

Exploration Medical Capability↗
NASA NTRS2016

A Cognitive Systems Engineering Approach to Developing HMI Requirements for New Technologies

This document examines the challenges inherent in designing and regulating to support human-automation interaction for new technologies that will deployed into complex systems. A key question for new technologies, is how work will be accomplished by the human and machine agents. This question has traditionally been framed as how functions should be allocated between humans and machines. Such framing misses the coordination and synchronization that is needed for the different human and machine roles in the system to accomplish their goals. Coordination and synchronization demands are driven by the underlying human-automation architecture of the new technology, which are typically not specified explicitly by the designers. The human machine interface (HMI) which is intended to facilitate human-machine interaction and cooperation, however, typically is defined explicitly and therefore serves as a proxy for human-automation cooperation requirements with respect to technical standards for technologies. Unfortunately, mismatches between the HMI and the coordination and synchronization demands of the underlying human-automation architecture, can lead to system breakdowns. A methodology is needed that both designers and regulators can utilize to evaluate the expected performance of a new technology given potential human-automation architectures. Three experiments were conducted to inform the minimum HMI requirements a detect and avoid system for unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). The results of the experiments provided empirical input to specific minimum operational performance standards that UAS manufacturers will have to meet in order to operate UAS in the National Airspace System (NAS). These studies represent a success story for how to objectively and systematically evaluate prototype technologies as part of the process for developing regulatory requirements. They also provide an opportunity to reflect on the lessons learned from a recent research effort in order to improve the methodology for defining technology requirements for regulators in the future. The biggest shortcoming of the presented research program was the absence of the explicit definition, generation and analysis of potential human-automation architectures. Failure to execute this step in the research process resulted in less efficient evaluation of the candidate prototypes technologies in addition to the complete absence of different approaches to human-automation cooperation. For example, all of the prototype technologies that were evaluated in the research program assumed a human-automation architecture that relied on serial processing from the automation to the human. While this type of human-automation architecture is typical across many different technologies and in many different domains, it ignores different architectures where humans and automation work in parallel. Defining potential human-automation architectures a priori also allows regulators to develop scenarios that will stress the performance boundaries of the technology during the evaluation phase. The importance of adding this step of generating and evaluating candidate human-automation architectures prior to formal empirical evaluation is discussed.

human systems integration↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA's Physics of the Cosmos and Cosmic Origins Technology Development Programs

NASA's Physics of the Cosmos (PCOS) and Cosmic Origins (COR) Program Offices, established in 2011, reside at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). The offices serve as the implementation arm for the Astrophysics Division at NASA Headquarters. We present an overview of the programs' technology development activities and technology investment portfolio, funded by NASA's Strategic Astrophysics Technology (SAT) program. We currently fund 19 technology advancements to enable future PCOS and COR missions to help answer the questions "How did our universe begin and evolve?" and "How did galaxies, stars, and planets come to be?" We discuss the process for addressing community-provided technology gaps and Technology Management Board (TMB)-vetted prioritization and investment recommendations that inform the SAT program. The process improves the transparency and relevance of our technology investments, provides the community a voice in the process, and promotes targeted external technology investments by defining needs and identifying customers. The programs' goal is to promote and support technology development needed to enable missions envisioned by the National Research Council's (NRC) "New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics" (NWNH) Decadal Survey report [1] and the Astrophysics Implementation Plan (AIP) [2]. These include technology development for dark energy, gravitational waves, X-ray and inflation probe science, and a 4m-class UV/optical telescope to conduct imaging and spectroscopy studies, as a post-Hubble observatory with significantly improved sensitivity and capability.

Technology Management Board (TMB)↗
DOE OSTI2025

Technology and Innovation Roadmap

This Technology and Innovation Roadmap outlines the Hanford Tank Waste Operations & Closure, LLC (H2C) strategic approach for advancing the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment Mission (HTWTM) through technology development. Our focus is on addressing technology needs that address risks, enhance efficiency, ensure worker safety, and uphold environmental standards. This Roadmap identifies key technology initiatives essential for the successful completion of the Hanford Site tank waste cleanup. Updated annually, it incorporates insights from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the Integrated Tank Disposition Contractor (ITDC) H2C, recognized national lab experts, and fieldwork specialists. The Roadmap includes approximately 100 technology elements, each detailed in Technology Element Description Summaries (TEDS) and summarized in catalog sheets. These elements are crucial for aligning technology development activities with mission objectives across the HTWTM. With the initiation of the Direct-Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) program and the operation of the Tank Side Cesium Removal (TSCR) system, our focus now shifts to the support of scaled up production in East Area; applying similar and exploring new treatment alternatives to West Area Tank Waste; and advancing retrieval, delivery and treatment technologies for waste managed as high-level waste (HLW) across the Hanford tank farms. This transition is reflected in the technology and maturation (TM&E) charts, which highlight the evolving technology priorities. This document serves as a guide for navigating the challenges and opportunities in technology development at the Hanford Site.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

Evaluating Tools and Technologies for Monitoring Baleen Whales During Offshore Wind Foundation Installation

Impacts to baleen whales are of particular concern in the context of offshore wind development because of their conservation status, the overlap of their habitat with current and planned offshore wind energy facilities, and their expected sensitivity to low-frequency sounds, such as those produced during pile driving. Therefore, this report focuses on monitoring technologies capable of detecting this species group. The scope of this report is to assess the current state of technologies and methods for monitoring baleen whales in low- and no-light conditions in conjunction with offshore wind foundation installation. This work considers the performance of various sensing technologies that can be used to observe the presence of baleen whales near offshore construction activities. The scope of work includes: 1. Technology Performance Metrics – Identify metrics that can be used to assess technology performance. 2. Technology Evaluation – Synthesize the past performance of technologies with respect to the performance metrics based on available literature. 3. Technology Characterization Framework – Describe a potential framework to characterize technology performance with a standardized approach. 4. Technology Research and Development Needs – Identify future needs and opportunities for research, development, and deployment to improve technologies.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
NASA NTRS1990

A study of mass data storage technology for rocket engine data

The results of a nine month study program on mass data storage technology for rocket engine (especially the Space Shuttle Main Engine) health monitoring and control are summarized. The program had the objective of recommending a candidate mass data storage technology development for rocket engine health monitoring and control and of formulating a project plan and specification for that technology development. The work was divided into three major technical tasks: (1) development of requirements; (2) survey of mass data storage technologies; and (3) definition of a project plan and specification for technology development. The first of these tasks reviewed current data storage technology and developed a prioritized set of requirements for the health monitoring and control applications. The second task included a survey of state-of-the-art and newly developing technologies and a matrix-based ranking of the technologies. It culminated in a recommendation of optical disk technology as the best candidate for technology development. The final task defined a proof-of-concept demonstration, including tasks required to develop, test, analyze, and demonstrate the technology advancement, plus an estimate of the level of effort required. The recommended demonstration emphasizes development of an optical disk system which incorporates an order-of-magnitude increase in writing speed above the current state of the art.

Ready, John F.↗
NASA NTRS1992

User needs as a basis for advanced technology

The NASA Integrated Technology Plan (ITP) is described with treatment given to the identification of U.S. technology needs, space research and technology programs, and some ITP implementations. The ITP is based on the development and transfer of technologies relevant to the space program that also have significant implications for general technological research. Among the areas of technological research identified are: astrophysics, earth sciences, microgravity, and space physics. The Office of Space Science and Applications prioritizes the technology needs in three classes; the highest priority is given to submm and microwave technologies for earth sciences and astrophysics study. Other government and commercial needs are outlined that include cryogenic technologies, low-cost engines, advanced data/signal processing, and low-cost ELVs. It is demonstrated that by identifying and addressing these areas of user technology needs NASA's research and technology program can enhance U.S. trade and industrial competitiveness.

Mankins, John C.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Utilization of Space Station Freedom for technology research

Space Station Freedom presents a unique opportunity for technology developers to conduct research in the space environment. Research can be conducted in the pressurized volume of the Space Station's laboratories or attached to the Space Station truss in the vacuum of space. Technology developers, represented by the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST), will have 12 percent of the available Space Station resources (volume, power, data, crew, etc.) to use for their research. Most technologies can benefit from research on Space Station Freedom and all these technologies are represented in the OAST proposed traffic model. This traffic model consists of experiments that have been proposed by technology developers but not necessarily selected for flight. Experiments to be flown in space will be selected through an Announcement of Opportunity (A.O.) process. The A.O. is expected to be released in August, 1992. Experiments will generally fall into one of the 3 following categories: (1) Individual technology experiments; (2) Instrumented Space Station; and (3) Guest investigator program. The individual technology experiments are those that do not instrument the Space Station nor directly relate to the development of technologies for evolution of Space Station or development of advanced space platforms. The Instrumented Space Station category is similar to the Orbiter Experiments Program and allows the technology developer to instrument subsystems on the Station or develop instrumentation packages that measure products or processes of the Space Station for the advancement of space platform technologies. The guest investigator program allows the user to request data from Space Station or other experiments for independent research. When developing an experiment, a developer should consider all the resources and infrastructure that Space Station Freedom can provide and take advantage of these to the maximum extent possible. Things like environment, accommodations, carriers, and integration should all be taken into account. In developing experiments at Langley Research Center, an iterative approach is proving useful. This approach uses Space Station utilization and subsystem experts to advise and critique experiment designs to take advantage of everything the Space Station has to offer. Also, solid object modeling and animation computer tools are used to fully visualize the experiment and its processes. This process is very useful for attached payloads and allows problems to be detected early in the experiment design phase.

Avery, Don E.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Technology in action

In keeping with the NASA Administrator's announcement that technology transfer will become a fundamental mission of NASA, the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) has initiated new programs to reach the heartland of U.S. industry. The Center has continued to expand its already well-established outreach program aimed at helping American business, industry, and academia at the grassroots level. The goal is to ensure that America regains and maintains its proper place of leadership among the world's technologically developed nations. MSFC's national goal is to enhance America's competitiveness in the world marketplace, fortify the value of the dollar, and ensure technological breakthroughs by American laboratories benefit taxpayers and industries. The Technology Utilization (TU) Office at MSFC believes a number of measures are possible to slow, then halt, and ultimately reverse the erosion of American technological leadership. MSFC's TU Office is reaching out to American industry on an increasingly broadening scope, facilitating the transfer of NASA derived technologies to American businesses, industries, educational institutions, and individuals. There are many valid approaches to achieving this goal. Some, such as the National Technology Initiative, begin at the top and work down through America's top corporate structure. Others, such as the technology transfer program that MSFC has implemented, begin at the one-on-one, grassroots level -- working with small and medium-sized firms that form the bulk of American industry. What can be done by one NASA center is, admittedly, limited. But by extrapolating this one-on-one approach to the more than 700 Federal laboratories, a great deal can be accomplished. This report contains an examination of outreach and in reach programs, problem statements programs, applications projects, new technology reporting, new technology administration, and the need for increased resources to further facilitate technology transfer.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1993

Technology as a driver for improved space products

Technology development is frequently undertaken by research groups which are independent of program organizations, and then the difficult task is faced some time during the program development of selecting the technology level which will meet the program's needs. This paper examines that process and suggests an approach which helps to establish the 'right' technology level and conditions under which the technology will actually be introduced into the program. The paper recommends that a technology insertion milestone be formally established to select the technologies or technology levels which will be incorporated during hardware development. The Technology Insertion Milestone should be a program event, and it should occur shortly before the design and development phase. Working with the program office, technology options can be presented and their payoff estimated for the program. Coupled with that appraisal should be a definition of the activity necessary to bring the technology options to the point where the program management would commit to its usage with confidence. Examples are given of two NASA programs, Pluto Fast Fly-By and TIMED, where the Technology Insertion Milestone process has been established and is underway.

Kline, Richard L.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Evaluation Criteria for Solid Waste Processing Research and Technology Development

A preliminary list of criteria is proposed for evaluation of solid waste processing technologies for research and technology development (R&TD) in the Advanced Life Support (ALS) Program. Completion of the proposed list by current and prospective ALS technology developers, with regard to specific missions of interest, may enable identification of appropriate technologies (or lack thereof) and guide future development efforts for the ALS Program solid waste processing area. An attempt is made to include criteria that capture information about the technology of interest as well as its system-wide impacts. Some of the criteria in the list are mission-independent, while the majority are mission-specific. In order for technology developers to respond to mission-specific criteria, critical information must be available on the quantity, composition and state of the waste stream, the wast processing requirements, as well as top-level mission scenario information (e.g. safety, resource recovery, planetary protection issues, and ESM equivalencies). The technology readiness level (TRL) determines the degree to which a technology developer is able to accurately report on the list of criteria. Thus, a criteria-specific minimum TRL for mandatory reporting has been identified for each criterion in the list. Although this list has been developed to define criteria that are needed to direct funding of solid waste processing technologies, this list processes significant overlap in criteria required for technology selection for inclusion in specific tests or missions. Additionally, this approach to technology evaluation may be adapted to other ALS subsystems.

Levri, Julie A.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Technology Development Report: CDDF, Dual Use Partnerships, SBIR/STTR: Fiscal Year 2003 Activities

The FY2003 NASA John C. Stennis Stennis Space Center (SSC) Technology Development Report provides an integrated report of all technology development activities at SSC. This report actually combines three annual reports: the Center Director's Discretionary Fund (CDDF) Program Report, Dual Use Program Report, and the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Program Report. These reports are integrated in one document to summarize all technology development activities underway in support of the NASA missions assigned to SSC. The Dual Use Program Report provides a summary review of the results and status of the nine (9) Dual Use technology development partnership projects funded and managed at SSC during FY2003. The objective of these partnership projects is to develop or enhance technologies that will meet the technology needs of the two NASA SSC Mission Areas: Propulsion Test and Earth Science Applications. During FY2003, the TDTO managed twenty (20) SBIR Phase II Projects and two (2) STTR Phase II Projects. The SBIR contracts support low TRL technology development that supports both the Propulsion Test and the Earth Science Application missions. These projects are shown in the SBIR/STTR Report. In addition to the Phase II contracts, the TDTO managed ten (10) SBIR Phase I contracts which are fixed price, six month feasibility study contracts. These are not listed in this report. Together, the Dual Use Projects and the SBIR/STTR Projects constitute a technology development partnership approach that has demonstrated that success can be achieved through the identification of the technical needs of the NASA mission and using various available partnership techniques to maximize resource utilization to achieve mutual technology goals. Greater use of these partnership techniques and the resource leveraging they provide, is a goal of the TDTO, providing more support to meet the technology development needs of the mission areas at SSC.

Bailey, John W.↗
NASA NTRS2006

System Architecture Modeling for Technology Portfolio Management using ATLAS

Strategic planners and technology portfolio managers have traditionally relied on consensus-based tools, such as Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Quality Function Deployment (QFD) in planning the funding of technology development. While useful to a certain extent, these tools are limited in the ability to fully quantify the impact of a technology choice on system mass, system reliability, project schedule, and lifecycle cost. The Advanced Technology Lifecycle Analysis System (ATLAS) aims to provide strategic planners a decision support tool for analyzing technology selections within a Space Exploration Architecture (SEA). Using ATLAS, strategic planners can select physics-based system models from a library, configure the systems with technologies and performance parameters, and plan the deployment of a SEA. Key parameters for current and future technologies have been collected from subject-matter experts and other documented sources in the Technology Tool Box (TTB). ATLAS can be used to compare the technical feasibility and economic viability of a set of technology choices for one SEA, and compare it against another set of technology choices or another SEA. System architecture modeling in ATLAS is a multi-step process. First, the modeler defines the system level requirements. Second, the modeler identifies technologies of interest whose impact on an SEA. Third, the system modeling team creates models of architecture elements (e.g. launch vehicles, in-space transfer vehicles, crew vehicles) if they are not already in the model library. Finally, the architecture modeler develops a script for the ATLAS tool to run, and the results for comparison are generated.

Thompson, Robert W.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Aerocapture Technology Development for Planetary Science - Update

Within NASA's Science Mission Directorate is a technological program dedicated to improving the cost, mass, and trip time of future scientific missions throughout the Solar System. The In-Space Propulsion Technology (ISPT) Program, established in 2001, is charged with advancing propulsion systems used in space from Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 3 to TRL6, and with planning activities leading to flight readiness. The program's content has changed considerably since inception, as the program has refocused its priorities. One of the technologies that has remained in the ISPT portfolio through these changes is Aerocapture. Aerocapture is the use of a planetary body's atmosphere to slow a vehicle from hyperbolic velocity to a low-energy orbit suitable for science. Prospective use of this technology has repeatedly shown huge mass savings for missions of interest in planetary exploration, at Titan, Neptune, Venus, and Mars. With launch vehicle costs rising, these savings could be the key to mission viability. This paper provides an update on the current state of the Aerocapture technology development effort, summarizes some recent key findings, and highlights hardware developments that are ready for application to Aerocapture vehicles and entry probes alike. Description of Investments: The Aerocapture technology area within the ISPT program has utilized the expertise around NASA to perform Phase A-level studies of future missions, to identify technology gaps that need to be filled to achieve flight readiness. A 2002 study of the Titan Explorer mission concept showed that the combination of Aerocapture and a Solar Electric Propulsion system could deliver a lander and orbiter to Titan in half the time and on a smaller, less expensive launch vehicle, compared to a mission using chemical propulsion for the interplanetary injection and orbit insertion. The study also identified no component technology breakthroughs necessary to implement Aerocapture on such a mission. Similar studies of Aerocapture applications at Neptune, Venus, and Mars were studied in 2003 through 2005. All showed significant performance improvements for the missions studied. Findings from these studies were used to guide the technology development tasks originally solicited in a 2002 NASA ROSS Research Announcement. The tasks are now in their final year and have provided numerous improvements in modeling and hardware, for use in proposals or new mission starts. Major Accomplishments: Since validation of the Aerocapture maneuver requires a space flight, ground developments have focused on modeling and environment prediction, materials, and sensors. Lockheed Martin has designed and built a 2-meter Carbon-Carbon aeroshell "hot structure." The article utilizes co-cured stiffening ribs and advanced insulation to achieve large scale, and up to a 40% reduction in areal density over the Genesis probe construction. This concept would be an efficient solution for probes that experience heat rates near 800-1000 W/cm(exp 2), such as at Venus and Earth. Applied Research Associates has extensively tested a family of efficient ablative TPS materials that provide solutions for a range of heating conditions. These materials are being applied to high-temperature structures built by ATK Space Systems, led by Langley Research Center. One-meter aeroshells will be thermally tested to validate construction and demonstrate higher bondline temperatures, which can lead to mass savings of up to 30% over traditional heatshields. Ames Research Center has developed aeroshell instrumentation that could measure environmental conditions and material performance during atmospheric entry. Instruments to measure TPS recession, heat flux, and catalycity could be combined with traditional sensors to provide a "plug-and-play" system for minimal mass and power, that would acquire flight data for model improvement and risk reduction on future missions. Improved atmospheric and aerothermodynamic models ha also been a major focus of the program. Next Steps: Aerocapture is one of five technologies in competition for a flight validation opportunity through the New Millennium Program. If selected, a fully autonomous vehicle will perform an Aerocapture at Earth in 2010, and flight data will be used to validate the guidance system and the TPS material for science mission infusion.

Munk, Michelle M.↗