Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “policy directives”

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 55 records · Page 3

The Acquisition, Containment, and Curation of Mars Samples on Earth

The Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office at NASA Johnson Space Center (henceforth AACO) is responsible for receiving and curating all of NASA’s extraterrestrial samples, current and future (as per NASA Policy Directive (NPD) 7100.10E “Curation of Extraterrestrial Materials”). As such, the AACO coordinates sample capture, containment, and transportation to the curation facility as well as documents, preserves, prepares, and distributes all of the samples within NASA’s astromaterial collections for research, education, and public outreach. Since the lunar rock and soil samples returned during the Apollo Program, NASA’s first Class V Restricted Earth Return Missions, the AACO curates six other astromaterials collections. Lessons learned from each collection and respective missions (e.g. Apollo, Genesis, Stardust) as well as advancements in science and technology have informed the AACO’s plan for acquiring and curating Martian samples. Given the nature of the collection, a mobile and modular facility is recommended. The two broad requirements a Mars sample facility must maintain are: 1) the ability to contain the samples to protect the public from exposure of an “unknown unknown” biological agent and 2) ensure the scientific integrity of the samples are maintained (while maximizing scientific outcome). Although Apollo samples were eventually deemed safe and released to the scientific community for evaluation, there is no guarantee that this will be the case for Martian samples. Therefore, the facility in which the samples will be contained and investigated must be modular and able to accommodate an array of instrumentation that could be highly variable depending on the initial scientific outcomes. Furthermore, in order to facilitate proper sample capture and containment upon landing as well as sample distribution to other laboratories with proper containment, a mobile facility is a valuable investment.

Harrington, Andrea D.↗

Space Traffic Management with a NASA UAS Traffic Management (UTM) Inspired Architecture

Space is becoming increasingly congested as the number of on-orbit satellites and debris objects continues to grow. Space traffic management (STM) is critical for ensuring that the expanding orbital population operates safely and efficiently, avoiding collisions and radio-frequency interference while still facilitating widespread space operations. Recent events such as the FCC approval of SpaceX’s ~12,000 satellite constellation, the signing of Space Policy Directive 3 (which moves Space Situational Awareness responsibilities away from the Department of Defense and to a civil agency), and the growth in rideshare and small launch vehicles illustrate the rapidly changing nature of this domain. This paper will describe the concept of operations (ConOps) for a civilian STM research initiative, which has been developed from previous NASA work to enable safe operation of small unmanned aircraft systems. The STM ConOps proposes an architecture to enable efficient data sharing and coordination between participants to facilitate safe spaceflight operations. It is designed to utilize and promote the emerging field of commercial STM services, as a complement to existing government-provided STM services. The concept envisions a phased evolution that would gradually integrate additional capabilities, proposing a first phase architecture and tentative plans for a broader system. Work towards developing an STM research and prototyping platform is also discussed.

UTM↗

NASA's Human Lunar Landing Strategy

In response to the 2018 White House Space Policy Directive-1 to lead an innovative and sustainable lunar exploration, and to the Vice President’s March 2019 direction to do so by 2024, NASA is working to establish humanity's presence on and around the Moon by: 1) sending payloads to its surface, 2) assembling the Gateway outpost in orbit, and 3) conducting the first human lunar landings since 1972. NASA’s Artemis program is implementing a multi-faceted and coordinated agency-wide approach with a focus on the lunar South Pole. The Artemis missions will demonstrate new technologies, capabilities and business approaches needed for future exploration, including Mars. Assessing options to accelerate development of systems, NASA is utilizing public-private engagements to develop and demonstrate capabilities that meet the agency’s human space exploration objectives while stimulating the commercial space industry. Utilizing efforts across mission directorates, the Artemis effort will benefit from programs such as the Science Mission Directorate’s Commercial Lunar Payloads Services program and the Space Technology Mission Directorate’s Tipping Point partnerships for Moon and Mars technologies. This paper will discuss the strategic landscape for NASA's exploration campaign, the agency's approach to accessing the lunar surface with an affordable human-rated landing system, current status and role of U.S. industry, and future plans.

Human landing system↗

Capabilities Development: From International Space Station and the Moon to Mars

The President of the United States, in signing Space Policy Directive-1, directed the NASA Administrator “to lead an innovative and sustainable program of exploration with commercial and international partners to enable human expansion across the solar system and to bring back to Earth new knowledge and opportunities. Beginning with missions beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO), the United States will lead the return of humans to the Moon for long-term exploration and utilization, followed by human missions to Mars and other destinations.” NASA is charged to land American astronauts on the lunar South Pole in 2024 and to continue a campaign of sustainable lunar surface exploration in order to develop necessary technologies and capabilities to enable initial human missions to Mars. NASA’s lunar surface exploration plans are part of a continuum of activities utilizing platforms in low Earth orbit (LEO), cislunar space, and the lunar surface to demonstrate advanced technologies, advance operations concepts, and develop countermeasures to lessen the impacts of the space environment and long duration exposure on the crew working in space. NASA is using a capability-driven approach to identify critical gaps to be addressed as part of a focused program to reduce risk for future deep space exploration missions building to eventual human missions to the surface of Mars. Teams of discipline experts from across NASA identify capability gaps between the current state of the art and the needs of proposed exploration missions and develop integrated strategies and roadmaps for filling those gaps. These inputs include assessment of platform needs for demonstration and testing of new capabilities. Generally, the International Space Station (ISS) and Gateway are needed for demonstration of capabilities for Mars transit, while Lunar surface activities focus on development of capabilities and operational protocols for Mars surface. This paper discusses the activities required to advance critical exploration capabilities, focusing on selection of demonstration and test location based upon the unique environments and characteristics of the ISS, Gateway, and potential lunar surface assets. The optimal strategy will be a combination of ISS/LEO, Gateway, and lunar surface testing; however, not all capabilities require a deep space exploration missions.

Boggs, Kathleen Gallagher↗

NASA’s Human Landing System: The Strategy for the 2024 Mission and Future Sustainability

In response to the 2018 White House Space Policy Directive- sustainable lunar exploration, and to the Vice President’s March 2019 direction to do so by 2024, NASA is working to establish humanity's presence on and around the Moon by: 1) sending payloads to its surface, 2) assembling the Gateway outpost in orbit and 3) demonstrating the first human lunar landings since 1972. NASA’s Artemis program is implementing a multi-faceted and coordinated agency-wide approach with a focus on the lunar South Pole. The Artemis missions will demonstrate new technologies, capabilities and business approaches needed for future exploration, including Mars. Assessing options to accelerate development of required systems, NASA is utilizing public-private engagements through the Human Exploration and Operations (HEO) Mission Directorate’s NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcements. The design, development and demonstration of the Human Landing System (HLS) is expected to be led by commercial partners. Utilizing efforts across mission directorates, the Artemis effort will benefit from programs from the Science Mission Directorate (SMD) and Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD). SMD’s Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) initiative will procure commercial robotic lunar delivery services and the development of science instruments and technology demonstration payloads. The Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) portfolio of technology advancements relative to HLS include lunar lander components and technologies for pointing, navigation and tracking, fuel storage and transfer, autonomy and mobility, communications, propulsion and power. In addition to describing the objectives and requirements of the 2024 Artemis mission, this paper will present NASA’s approach to accessing the lunar surface with an affordable human-rated landing system, current status and the role o a sustainable lunar presence.

Chavers, Greg↗

Morphologic Parameters for Successful Lunar Landing Sites

The Moon, with its abundant resources, intriguing science questions, and vast unexplored surface area, is the most attainable and useful near-term target for future human exploration. In recognition of this fact, Presidential Space Policy Directive 1 (PSPD-1) has directed the United States to return to the Moon for “long-term exploration and utilization”, beginning with the 7th American human lunar landing by 2024 and building to sustainable surface presence by 2028.

Lawrence, S. J.↗

The Artemis Challenge: Another Revolution in Structural Dynamics

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on an exciting evolution in human exploration and spaceflight. Space Policy Directive (SPD) 1 provides the overarching narrative for returning humans to the Moon and then to Mars. We are challenged to “Lead an innovative and sustainable program with commercial and international partners to enable human expansion across the solar system and to bring back to Earth new knowledge and opportunities. Beginning with missions beyond low Earth orbit, the United States will lead the return of humans to the Moon for long-term exploration and utilization, followed by human missions to Mars and other destinations…” Here we explore some of the key technical challenges that this new era of human exploration brings with a focus on the challenges and opportunities in the structural dynamics discipline.

Structural Dynamics↗

NASA’s Initial and Sustained Artemis Human Landing Systems

On March 26, 2019, in keeping with President Trump’s Space Policy Directive-1, Vice President Pence charged NASA with landing the first woman and the next man on the South Pole of the Moon by 2024, followed by a sustained presence on and around the Moon by 2028. NASA’s Human Landing System (HLS) Program is responsible for the final mode of transportation in deep space that will carry humans to and from the surface of the Moon, to be designed and developed by American companies for NASA’s Artemis lunar exploration program. This paper examines the approach for Artemis human landing systems for both the initial missions and future sustained missions. While achieving the 2024 goal requires a focus on speed and the use of mature technologies, planning toward sustained operations to and from the lunar surface requires a focus on reliability and reusability. The two approaches, however, are not mutually exclusive, as demonstrated by the HLS prime contractors’ integrated lander system proposals. On April 30, 2020, NASA announced that Blue Origin of Kent, Washington, Dynetics (a Leidos company) of Huntsville, Alabama, and SpaceX of Hawthorne, California, were the awardees for NASA’s Human Landing System contracts under Appendix H of the NextSTEP-2 Broad Agency Announcement. The companies began work in a 10-month base period during which NASA teams worked with the companies to streamline the review of required products and to share the agency’s expertise in human spaceflight systems development. Following the base period, NASA will determine which company or companies will develop the human landers for the initial missions, including the 2024 landing, and which companies will develop landers for future sustained missions toward the end of the decade.

HLS↗

Overview of a NASA Centennial Challenges Prize Competition to Address Crew Nutritional Needs for Long-Duration Space Exploration Missions

Historically, competitions and prizes such as those executed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Centennial Challenges (CC) program have created broader avenues through which to spur innovation from unlikely sources. In 2005, Congress amended the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 to authorize NASA to create challenges through which prizes could be awarded to United States citizens or entities that succeeded in meeting challenge objectives. Over the past 15 years, the CC program has initiated more than 20 challenges in a variety of technology areas, including: propulsion, robotics, communications and navigation, human health, science instrumentation, nanotech, materials/structures and aerodynamics. This paper provides the background, status and ongoing plans by NASA’s CC program in developing a Deep Space Food Challenge (formerly the Lunar Nutrition Challenge) as one approach to fulfilling Space Policy Directive 1 (To the Moon, then Mars”).

Centennial Challenges↗

NASA's Initial and Sustained Artemis Human Landing Systems

On March 26, 2019, in keeping with President Trump’s Space Policy Directive-1, Vice President Pence charged NASA with landing the first woman and the next man on the South Pole of the Moon by 2024, followed by a sustained presence on and around the Moon by2028. NASA’s Human Landing System (HLS) Program is responsible for the final mode of transportation in deep space that will carry humans to and from the surface of the Moon, to be designed and developed by American companies for NASA’s Artemis lunar exploration program. This paper examines the approach for Artemis human landing systems for both the initial missions and future sustained missions. While achieving the 2024 goal requires a focus on speed and the use of mature technologies, planning toward sustained operations to and from the lunar surface requires a focus on reliability and reusability. The two approaches, however, are not mutually exclusive, as demonstrated by the HLS prime contractors’ integrated lander system proposals. On April 30, 2020, NASA announced that Blue Origin of Kent, Washington, Dynetics (a Leidos company) of Huntsville, Alabama, and SpaceX of Hawthorne, California, were the awardees for NASA’s Human Landing System contracts under Appendix H of the NextSTEP-2 Broad Agency Announcement. The companies began work in a 10-month base period during which NASA teams worked with the companies to streamline the review of required products and to share the agency’s expertise in human spaceflight systems development. Following the base period, NASA will determine which companies will develop the human landers for the initial missions, including the 2024 landing, and which companies will develop landers for future sustained missions toward the end of the decade.

Lisa Watson-Morgan↗

Exploration Capabilities Data Analysis: An Integrated Approach

In preparation for humanity’s return to the Moon, it is necessary to advance technologies and capabilities that will allow for human sustainability on the lunar surface, as well as on eventual missions to send humans to Mars. Guided by Space Policy Directive-1 and through the National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA) Artemis program, the advancement and development of technologies on the lunar surface will be leveraged towards technologies and knowledge needed for humans to successfully and safely go to Mars and return. In order to understand the capability needs for lunar and Mars missions, the Capabilities Integration Team identifies integration approaches and overlaps between missions to develop strategies for advancing key capabilities that support those needs. Since 2013, the Capabilities Integration Team has reached out to subject matter experts, principal technologists, and system capability leadership teams throughout NASA to gather information about the critical technologies and capabilities needed in order to support the lunar and Mars exploration missions. To properly gather this data, the Capabilities Integration Team used a capability-driven approach to identify gaps between the current state of the art and the needs of proposed exploration missions, as well as activities that may close those gaps. These inputs are used to shape technology investment strategies and are incorporated in missions to the lunar and Mars surfaces. Data collected included: gap definitions and identifying information; gap closure information and metrics for success; mapping of gaps to elements of NASA's Artemis program and future exploration architecture. . The data collected, specifically from the technology gap list, has been used to support the NASA Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution processes, as well as the NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate Strategic Technology Plans. This paper discusses the integration approach used by the Capabilities Integration Team to identify current capability gaps for the Moon to Mars architecture and what capabilities exist or must be developed to support those architecture needs. In addition, this paper also details the performance, gap characterization, current capability gap closure opportunities, and risk impacts towards Artemis, and the overall Moon to Mars architecture.

Gregory Benjamin↗

Principles for a Practical Moon Base

NASA planning for the human space flight frontier is now coming into alignment with goals promoted by other planetary-capable national space agencies. US policy aims to achieve the “horizon goal” of Humans to Mars through significant learning about systems, operations, and partnerships in the cislunar and lunar-surface environment first. US Space Policy Directive 1 made this shift explicit: “the United States will lead the return of humans to the Moon for long-term exploration and utilization, followed by human missions to Mars and other destinations”. The stage is now set for sufficient public and private American investment in a wide range of lunar activities. Assumptions about Moon base architectures and operations are likely to drive the invention of requirements that will in turn govern development of systems, commercial-services purchase agreements, and priorities for technology investment. Yet some fundamental architecture-shaping lessons already captured in the literature are not evident drivers, and remain absent from most depictions of lunar base concepts. A prime example is general failure to recognize that most of the time (i.e., before and between intermittent human occupancy), a Moon base must be robotic: most of the activity, most of the time, must be implemented by robot agents rather than astronauts. This paper reviews key findings of a seminal robotic-base design-operations analysis commissioned by NASA in 1989. It culminates by discussing implications of these lessons for today’s Moon Village and SPD-1 paradigms: exploration by multiple actors; public-private partnership development and operations; cislunar infrastructure; production-quantity exploitation of volatile resources near the poles to bootstrap further space activities; autonomy capability that was frontier in 1989 but now routine within terrestrial industry. We need to engineer today’s generation of practical, justifiable, and inspirational Moon base concepts.

Sherwood, Brent↗

NASA’s Artemis Human Landing Systems: Enabling Lunar Exploration

On March 26, 2019, in keeping with Space Policy Directive-1, NASA was charged with landing the first woman and the next man on the South Pole of the Moon by 2024, followed by a sustained presence on and around the Moon by 2028. NASA’s Human Landing System (HLS) Program is responsible for the transportation in deep space to carry humans to and from the surface of the Moon, to be designed and developed by American companies for NASA’s Artemis lunar exploration program. On April 30, 2020, NASA announced the awardees for NASA’s Human Landing System contracts under Appendix H of the NextSTEP-2 Broad Agency Announcement: A Blue Origin-led team including Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, and Draper; Dynetics (a Leidos company); and SpaceX. The companies began work in a multi-month base period during which NASA teams will work with the companies to streamline requirements, to establish standards and methods, to review required products and to share the NASA’s expertise in human spaceflight systems development. Following the base period, which ends in the spring of 2021, NASA will determine which company or companies will develop Artemis human landing systems for the initial demonstration missions, including the goal of landing on the Moon in 2024.This paper examines how the Human Landing System program is at the center of NASA’s Artemis lunar exploration program, designed to yield groundbreaking science, develop and utilize lunar surface resources and leverage the Moon as a proving ground for future Mars missions. While achieving the 2024 goal requires a focus on speed and the use of mature technologies, planning toward sustained operations to and from the lunar surface requires a focus on reliability and reusability.

Lisa Watson-Morgan↗

Probabilistic Modeling of a Three-Stage Human Landing System Architecture

Space Policy Directive-1 has led to NASA partnerships with commercial entities on procurement which includes the development of the Human Landing System (HLS) [1]. With the goal of delivering human crew to the lunar surface by 2024, system uncertainties become an important obstacle to the maturation of multiple new, driving technologies and mission concepts of the HLS program. As unmitigated uncertainties have previously led to failed development programs, these risks and their impacts must be understood and handled to ensure program success [2]. Sources of uncertainty include novel engine designs and configurations, increased reliance on cryogenic fluid management(CFM), and refueling technologies—which propagate as high-level performance metrics such as overall propellant mass and engine performance. Also, the occurrence of operational uncertainties—e.g. launch conditions or need to abort during the mission—can cause cascading effects on the rest of the mission that are difficult to definitively quantify, and are outside the scope of control. These concrete examples and other occurrences can be categorized as either epistemic or aleatory uncertainties.Epistemic uncertainty arises due to a lack of knowledge and can be alleviated with design and program maturation. Aleatory uncertainty is due to the inherent randomness of the system and cannot be directly reduced, unlike epistemic uncertainty. Robust design and probabilistic methods can compensate for aleatory effects. A taxonomy of uncertainty is referred to for this work [3]. In this paper, a probabilistic methodology to handle uncertainties has been demonstrated on a three-element HLS concept [1, 4], which allows tracking of current best estimates of the concept and assessment of concept design robustness against uncertainties. A sample case has been completed for this abstract, and an expansion on the methodology will be included in the final paper. This methodology has two key parts: first, the creation of a dynamic architecture model of a three-element HLS concept; and second, its use with surrogate modeling and range estimating techniques to capture and propagate uncertainties. This abstract will cover the basics of the approach used, and further details and justifications will be in the final paper.The mission profile associated with this three-element concept (Fig 1) was modeled as a set of mission events that facilitated mass changes, idles, or spacecraft maneuvers. The mission profile scope starts with each element’s NRHO orbit insertion and aggregation and ends at post-sortie rendezvous with Orion. More detail on the mission profile will be in the final paper. The DYnamic Rocket EQuation Tool (DYREQT), a space systems synthesis and sizing framework used by NASA, was used as the physics framework to model the HLS architecture for applying the probabilistic methodology [5, 6]. Specifically, a parametric representation of the lander, ascent, and transfer elements and the mission profile of each element was established, with vehicle and mission parameters available as inputs to allow for a dynamic model. Each vehicle stage was modeled with high-level performance metrics, using Isp and propellant mass fraction (PMF) to remain parametric. For the probabilistic analysis, uncertainties of interest within the HLS concept were enumerated and represented as parameters within the DYREQT model as inputs for vehicle stages or mission profile events. These parameters were frozen at their nominal values for the purposes of baselining architecture performance and sizing the vehicle appropriately based on reference documentation [1]. Range estimating—a probabilistic method that combines Monte Carlo sampling, focus on critical parameters, and heuristics to assess risk and opportunities—is traditionally used with Mass Equipment Lists (MELs), but has been adapted with operational parameters as well as vehicle parameters in theDYREQT model to capture mission uncertainty alongside vehicle uncertainty [7, 3]. This method was selected due to its application and insight on a system from a bottom-up perspective, independence from historical rules of thumb, and ability to generate sensitivities based on design decisions and uncertainties. As a sample case for the abstract, the boiloff rates of the vehicle elements and the loiter times during the mission (simulating launch time variations and changing window of opportunities) were used with range estimating to provide preliminary results. To perform the range estimation portion of this methodology (depicted in Fig. 3, further details in final paper), the DYREQT model was sampled using a Design of Experiments (DoE) to efficiently explore the architecture design space with respect to the sample set of uncertainty parameters; 5,000 cases via Latin Hypercube Sampling were computed on the DYREQT architecture model. Then, the results were used to create surrogate models, multivariate regressions that can visualize hypercube trends in the design space, of the architecture with respect to the uncertainty parameters. Range estimating was applied to the surrogates instead of the actual models, which saves computational expense due to the bulk of cases needed for the Monte Carlo simulation as part of range estimating. Uncertainty parameters were sampled independently from triangular distributions using the DoE ranges as ‘min’ and ‘max’, and the nominal value as ‘most likely’. Based engineering intuition, some uncertainty parameters are correlated—e.g. if the main propellant has a high boil-off rate, the oxidizer should follow suit as both are related to CFM technology.While a Monte Carlo simulation samples all inputs as independent, the results would show model correlations; thus, it is efficient to sample the inputs as correlated. Using a correlation matrix constructed for the uncertainty parameters, previously independent samples were transformed to perform a Correlated Monte Carlo. A table for the DoE ranges and probability distribution parameters is shown in Table 1, and more details on Correlated Monte Carlo Simulations will be discussed in the final paper. The model’s resulting DoE showed that multivariate polynomial equations fit via least squares method captured its behavior accurately for the sample case. For the Correlated Monte Carlo Simulation, a positive correlation between fuel and oxidizer boiloff rates was used as a demonstration. 10,000 cases were computed with the surrogates and the launched masses for each vehicle element was collated. The results can be displayed in a probability density function (PDF), showing the impact of the uncertainty parameters chosen. Integrating the PDFs will yield a cumulative distribution function (CDF) that shows the cumulative probability of a given value on the x-axis. For the sample case, the elements’ launch mass margin was calculated and represented in as CDFs, as a demonstrated representation of figures of merit for the HLS concept. For the lander and ascent elements, the NRHO mass insertion limit is 16t; the transfer element has a limit of 30t [1]. It can be seen with Figure 2 that this probabilistic methodology can provide insight into mass margin with respect to the uncertainties being modeled. Currently, the results show that the lander (descent) vehicle element has the most restrictive design space; it is the only element to show a 10% probability of negative margin. Further analysis on the Monte Carlo results will show sensitivities for driving constraints and parameters for architecture feasibility, which can lead to establishing potential mission rules.The combination of range estimating with a parametric architecture model for HLS demonstrated the capability of this probabilistic methodology in a sample case. As the HLS development progresses, this methodology has the potential for keeping current best estimates of architecture performance for awarded concepts due to the flexibility in DYREQT’s modeling framework and its parametric nature. Concept maturation and increased epistemic knowledge can be injected into the model probabilistic modeling, and thus continue to track probability of mission success.

Stephanie Y Zhu↗

Off Earth Landing and Launch Pad Construction – A Critical Technology for Establishing a Long-Term Presence on Extraterrestrial Surfaces

Space Policy Directive 1 has refocused the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to lead the return of humans to the Moon for long-term exploration and utilization. A long-term presence on the moon will require numerous lunar landings and launches to build up surface assets, rotate crew, and deliver resources to/from the moon. Interactions between landing/launch plumes and the unprepared surface cause regolith to be eroded and ejected at high velocities from beneath the vehicle. The associated ejecta elevates mission risks by obscuring sensors and human vision during landing; cratering/modifying the surface that the vehicle will land upon; and subjecting the vehicle, surrounding assets, and potentially orbital assets to impacts from high velocity dust particles. A method to mitigate risks stemming from landing/launch plume ejecta is to construct reusable landing/launch pads. A landing/launch pad can provide a known landing/launch surface, minimize ejecta, protect assets from liberated particles, and provide protection in case of a landing/launch anomaly. This presentation will summarize previous work towards construction of off-Earth landing/launch pads and identify key technology gaps. Additionally, this presentation establishes metrics for comparison of pad construction technologies and trades current approaches. The overall objective of this paper is to baseline the state of the art of off-Earth landing/launch pad construction technologies and serve as the starting point for further technical development.

Landing & Launch Pad↗

NASA Centennial Challenges Deep Space Food Challenge Competition to Incentivize Innovation in Food Systems for Long-Duration Space Exploration Missions

The Centennial Challenges (CC) program, currently part of NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), is one of the vehicles NASA uses to develop and execute public prize competitions. Since opening its first challenge in 2005, the CC program has initiated more than 20 challenges in a variety of technology areas. This paper provides the background, development and execution of the Deep Space Food Challenge as one approach to fulfilling NASA’s Space Policy Directive 1 (“To the Moon, then Mars”). Specifics about the CC program’s accomplishments will also be discussed. The Deep Space Food Challenge (DSF) was developed in collaboration with the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) to create novel food production technologies with minimal inputs, and maximum safe, nutritious, palatable food outputs for long-duration space missions, which have potential to benefit people on Earth. When humans return to the lunar surface in the mid-2020s, the early missions will use prepackaged foods similar to those in use on the International Space Station (ISS) today. However, extending the duration of lunar missions requires reducing resupply dependency on Earth. Testing a sustainable system on the Moon that meets lunar crews’ needs is a fundamental step for lunar sustainability and future Mars exploration. NASA and CSA are focused on how to furnish crew members with a viable food system for long duration space missions that provides all daily nutritional needs through a variety of palatable, safe food with limited resource requirements and no dependency on resupply from Earth; and enables acceptable, safe and quick preparation methods. On Earth, technology solutions for food systems could also be used to produce nutritional sources for urban and rural environments; potentially leading to a reduced impact on our Earth’s resources. Challenges, such as the DSF, are an embodiment of NASA’s continuing commitment to technological advancement and innovation through non-traditional programs.

Centennial Challenges↗

Distributed Lunar Data Platform with Advanced Machine Learning Capabilities in Support of Lunar Science and Exploration

The United States 2020 Space Policy directive declares that NASA, in cooperation with private industry, will “extend human economic activity into deep space by establishing a permanent human presence on the Moon”. This goal will require advanced data management, as well as analysis, modeling and representation of lunar information in order to prepare for Artemis human missions, lunar science investigations and exploration. To meet this requirement, we conceptualize and present an implementation strategy for a distributed platform for lunar data retrieval, inferencing and analysis, which will be based on federated learning and the NASA Celestial Mapping System (CMS). In addition to demonstrating the imperative of enabling lunar-borne data to remain in-situ but still accessible, this presentation will also include examples of how third parties could contribute both datasets and new functionality into this platform using an AI-based data import pipeline and a plug-in architecture respectively.

Artificial Intelligence↗

NASA Plans for In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) Development, Demonstration, and Implementation

The United States (US) National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Artemis Moon to Mars program has four major goals: (1) Returning Americans to the Moon: 1st Woman & 1st Person of Color, (2) Learning to live and work on the Moon, (3) Translating lessons learned so that the United States has capabilities and operational experience for a mission to Mars, and (4) Inspires the next generation of explorers, researchers, scientists, and engineers worldwide. Overarching all of this, the NASA Artemis program also continues to follow Space Policy Directive One (SPD-1) which directs the US to lead an innovative and sustainable exploration program with commercial and international partners. A major objective to achieve the Artemis program goals and SPD-1 is to understand and characterize the resources that exist at these destinations, and to learn how to utilize these resources for sustained human exploration and the commercialization of space. This ability, commonly known as In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), involves any hardware or operation that harnesses and utilizes local resources to create products and services for robotic and human explo-ration. The NASA ISRU program is focused on the production of mission consumables and com-modities to enable sustained human exploration, such as rocket propellants, life support consuma-bles, fuel cell reactants, feedstock for manufacturing and construction, and nutrients for food and plant growth. In particular, propellants make up a significant fraction of the mass launched from Earth, are critical to mission success, and can reduce the cost for reusable transportation. Important for enabling long term surface stays, greater independence from Earth, and growing lunar infra-structure are the abilities to perform construction and manufacturing from in situ-derived metals and materials to create and expand on the infrastructure and reduce the logistical resupply needed for sustained surface and space operations. To achieve these ISRU capabilities, NASA, in partner-ship with industry, academia, and international partners has initiated a multi-faceted program which involves (i) Determining Customer Needs (Type and Quantity of Commodities), (ii) supporting ground Development of Hardware and Systems until Ready for Lunar Flight, (iii) utilize Commer-cial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) flights to fly resource assessment missions with the Science Mission Directorate (SMD), and public-private partnership (PPP) ISRU demonstrations of critical technologies and processes, and (iv) performing commercial-led end-to-end ‘Pilot’ Plant production of commodities and demonstration of usage at a scale and duration that minimizes or eliminates risk for full implementation of ISRU-derived commodities in mission critical applications. This paper will discuss the technologies, mission studies, and accomplishments achieved to date for the ISRU multi-faceted program, and plans for continued ground development and flight missions to reduce the risk of full ISRU implementation.

In situ resource utilization↗