SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Organizational Objectives”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2007

A Comprehensive Plan for the Long-Term Calibration and Validation of Oceanic Biogeochemical Satellite Data

The primary objective of this planning document is to establish a long-term capability and validating oceanic biogeochemical satellite data. It is a pragmatic solution to a practical problem based primarily o the lessons learned from prior satellite missions. All of the plan's elements are seen to be interdependent, so a horizontal organizational scheme is anticipated wherein the overall leadership comes from the NASA Ocean Biology and Biogeochemistry (OBB) Program Manager and the entire enterprise is split into two components of equal sature: calibration and validation plus satellite data processing. The detailed elements of the activity are based on the basic tasks of the two main components plus the current objectives of the Carbon Cycle and Ecosystems Roadmap. The former is distinguished by an internal core set of responsibilities and the latter is facilitated through an external connecting-core ring of competed or contracted activities. The core elements for the calibration and validation component include a) publish protocols and performance metrics; b) verify uncertainty budgets; c) manage the development and evaluation of instrumentation; and d) coordinate international partnerships. The core elements for the satellite data processing component are e) process and reprocess multisensor data; f) acquire, distribute, and archive data products; and g) implement new data products. Both components have shared responsibilities for initializing and temporally monitoring satellite calibration. Connecting-core elements include (but are not restricted to) atmospheric correction and characterization, standards and traceability, instrument and analysis round robins, field campaigns and vicarious calibration sites, in situ database, bio-optical algorithm (and product) validation, satellite characterization and vicarious calibration, and image processing software. The plan also includes an accountability process, creating a Calibration and Validation Team (to help manage the activity), and a discussion of issues associated with the plan's scientific focus.

Hooker, Stanford B.↗

NASA NTRS1988

A flexible computer aid for conceptual design based on constraint propagation and component-modeling

The Rubber Airplane program, which combines two symbolic processing techniques with a component-based database of design knowledge, is proposed as a computer aid for conceptual design. Using object-oriented programming, programs are organized around the objects and behavior to be simulated, and using constraint propagation, declarative statements designate mathematical relationships among all the equation variables. It is found that the additional level of organizational structure resulting from the arrangement of the design information in terms of design components provides greater flexibility and convenience.

Kolb, Mark A.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Information sciences and human factors overview

An overview of program objectives of the Information Sciences and Human Factors Division of NASA's Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology is given in viewgraph form. Information is given on the organizational structure, goals, the research and technology base, telerobotics, systems autonomy in space operations, space sensors, humans in space, space communications, space data systems, transportation vehicle guidance and control, spacecraft control, and major program directions in space.

Holcomb, Lee B.↗

NASA NTRS1996

STS-77 Space Shuttle Mission Report

The STS-77 Space Shuttle Program Mission Report summarizes the Payload activities as well as the: Orbiter, External Tank (ET), Solid Rocket Booster (SRB), Reusable Solid Rocket Motor (RSRM), and the Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) systems performance during the seventy-seventh flight of the Space Shuttle Program, the fifty-second flight since the return-to-flight, and the eleventh flight of the Orbiter Endeavour (OV-105). STS-77 was also the last flight of OV-105 prior to the vehicle being placed in the Orbiter Maintenance Down Period (OMDP). In addition to the Orbiter, the flight vehicle consisted of an ET that was designated ET-78; three SSME's that were designated as serial numbers 2037, 2040, and 2038 in positions 1, 2, and 3, respectively; and two SRB's that were designated BI-080. The RSRM's, designated RSRM-47, were installed in each SRB and the individual RSRM's were designated as 360TO47A for the left SRB, and 360TO47B for the right SRB. The STS-77 Space Shuttle Program Mission Report fulfills the Space Shuttle Program requirement as documented in NSTS 07700, Volume VII, Appendix E. The requirement stated in that document is that each organizational element supporting the Program will report the results of their hardware (and software) evaluation and mission performance plus identify all related in-flight anomalies. The primary objectives of this flight were to successfully perform the operations necessary to fulfill the requirements of Spacehab-4, the SPARTAN 207/inflatable Antenna Experiment (IAE), and the Technology Experiments Advancing Missions in Space (TEAMS) payload. Secondary objectives of this flight were to perform the experiments of the Aquatic Research Facility (ARF), Brilliant Eyes Ten-Kelvin Sorption Cryocooler Experiment (BETSCE), Biological Research in Canisters (BRIC), Get-Away-Special (GAS), and GAS Bridge Assembly (GBA). The STS-77 mission was planned as a 9-day flight plus 1 day, plus 2 contingency days, which were available for weather avoidance or Orbiter contingency operations. The sequence of events for the STS-77 mission is shown in Table 1, and the Space Shuttle Vehicle Management Office Problem Tracking List is shown in Table 11. The Government Fumished Equipment/Flight Crew Equipment (GFE/FCE) Problem Tracking List is shown in Table II. Appendix A lists the sources of data, both formal and informal, that were used to prepare this report. Appendix B provides the definition of acronyms and abbreviations used throughout the report. All times during the flight are given in Greenwich mean time (G.m.t.) and mission elapsed time (MET). The six-person crew for STS-77 consisted of John H. Casper, Col., U. S. Air Force, Commander; Curtis L. Brown, Jr., Lt. Col., U. S. Air Force, Pilot; Andrew S. W. Thomas, Civilian, Ph.D., Mission Specialist 1; Daniel W. Bursch, CDR., U. S. Navy, Mission Specialist 2; Mario Runco, Jr., Civilian, Mission Specialist 3; and Marc Gameau, Civilian, PhD, Mission Specialist 4.

Fricke, Robert W., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS1996

STS-78 Space Shuttle Mission Report

The STS-78 Space Shuttle Program Mission Report summarizes the Payload activities as well as the Orbiter, External Tank (ET), Solid Rocket Booster (SRB), Reusable Solid Rocket Motor (RSRM), and the Space Shuttle main engine (SSME) systems performance during the seventy-eighth flight of the Space Shuttle Program, the fifty-third flight since the return-to-flight, and the twentieth flight of the Orbiter Columbia (OV-102). In addition to the Orbiter, the flight vehicle consisted of an ET that was designated ET-79; three SSME's that were designated as serial numbers 2041, 2039, and 2036 in positions 1, 2, and 3, respectively; and two SRB's that were designated BI-081. The RSRM's, designated RSRM-55, were installed in each SRB and the individual RSRM's were designated as 360L055A for the left SRB, and 360L055B for the right SRB. The STS-78 Space Shuttle Program Mission Report fulfills the Space Shuttle Program requirement as documented in NSTS 07700, Volume 7, Appendix E. The requirement stated in that document is that each organizational element supporting the Program will report the results of their hardware (and software) evaluation and mission performance plus identify all related in-flight anomalies. The primary objective of this flight was to successfully perform the planned operations of the Life and Microgravity Spacelab experiments. The secondary objectives of this flight were to complete the operations of the Orbital Acceleration Research Experiment (OARE), Biological Research in Canister Unit-Block II (BRIC), and the Shuttle Amateur Radio Experiment II-Configuration C (SAREX-II). The STS-78 mission was planned as a 16-day, plus one day flight plus two contingency days, which were available for weather avoidance or Orbiter contingency operations. The sequence of events for the STS-78 mission is shown in Table 1, and the Space Shuttle Vehicle Management Office Problem Tracking List is shown in Table 2. The Government Furnished Equipment/Flight Crew Equipment (GFE/FCE) Problem Tracking List is shown in Table 3. The Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Problem Tracking List is shown in Table 4. Appendix A lists the sources of data, both formal and informal, that were used to prepare this report. Appendix B provides the definition of acronyms and abbreviations used throughout the report. All times during the flight are given in Greenwich mean time (G.m.t.) and mission elapsed time (MET).

Fricke, Robert W., Jr.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Space Sustainability Strategy: An Overview and a Conceptual Framework for Implementation

Space sustainability is crucial for the continuation of humanity's exploration and utilization of space. NASA recognizes the imperative of maintaining a sustainable space operating environment to safeguard the future of space activities. On April 9, 2024, NASA released its first part of an integrated Space Sustainability Strategy focused on the domain of earth orbit, with future volumes to address impacts of space operations on earth itself; cislunar space, including the Lagrange points and the lunar surface; and deep space, including other celestial bodies. This commitment extends to ensuring the safety of astronauts conducting operations in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), as well as enabling missions to the Moon and Mars. Moreover, sustainable space practices are essential for the uninterrupted operation of NASA's robotic science missions, which monitor Earth's changes and probe the mysteries of the universe. The strategy sets out a set of goals, the first of which is to establish a framework for assessing space sustainability at NASA, addressing the absence of a universally accepted framework with key metrics that promotes understanding of how metrics are interconnected. This framework will provide a basis for evaluating the sustainability of orbital activities, with metrics informed by input from the domestic and international space community. Objectives under this goal include defining key parameters affecting space sustainability, determining tolerable levels of risk, and annually publishing NASA's effect on space sustainability, including compliance with orbital debris mitigation standards. The subsequent goals build upon this foundation, identifying effective actions for enhancing space sustainability, incentivizing adoption of these actions through technology development and policy changes, and ensuring coordination with the global space community. An organizational change within NASA is also proposed to facilitate day-to-day coordination and accountability for space sustainability efforts. By pursuing these goals, NASA aims to strengthen the technical foundations of and continue to set an example for sustainable space operations. Regular evaluation of NASA mission performance in context with meeting sustainability objectives will ensure alignment with evolving challenges in the space operating environment.

Matt Forsbacka↗

NASA NTRS2010

Aligning for Innovation - Alignment Strategy to Drive Innovation

With the sudden need for innovation that will help the country achieve its long-term space exploration objectives, the question of whether NASA is aligned effectively to drive the innovation that it so desperately needs to take space exploration to the next level should be entertained. Authors such as Robert Kaplan and David North have noted that companies that use a formal system for implementing strategy consistently outperform their peers. They have outlined a six-stage management systems model for implementing strategy, which includes the aligning of the organization towards its objectives. This involves the alignment of the organization from the top down. This presentation will explore the impacts of existing U.S. industrial policy on technological innovation; assess the current NASA organizational alignment and its impacts on driving technological innovation; and finally suggest an alternative approach that may drive the innovation needed to take the world to the next level of space exploration, with NASA truly leading the way.

Johnson, Hurel↗

NASA NTRS2024

NASA Risk Management Handbook: Version 2.0, Part 1

The purpose of this handbook is to provide an in-depth reference for the practice of risk management in NASA, updating the guidance offered in its original version, NASA/SP-2011-3422 (November 2011), and closely aligning the updated guidance with the current NASA Procedural Requirements for Agency Risk Management, NPR 8000.4, and the parent NASA Policy Directive for NASA Governance and Strategic Management, NPD 1000.0. NPD 1000.0 introduces with emphasis the concept of “Risk Leadership,” making it a fundamental tenet and pillar of the risk management culture that it advocates for the Agency. NPR 8000.4 applies this concept and establishes Risk Management (RM) requirements for the Agency as an integrated enterprise, as well as the RM requirements for portfolio elements within the enterprise. Such elements include the various programs and projects that contribute to the Agency’s objectives and the various institutional activities carried out by entities that contribute to mission support. The present version of the handbook also emphasizes the integration of risk management processes across activity and project life cycles and their coordination and interaction with day-to-day programmatic and organizational functions. Areas of application of risk assessment and management that were not covered with specific guidance in the preceding version are addressed in this version with in-depth examples. The handbook is structured into two parts, whose chapters are in turn organized in a sequential order intended to facilitate a gradual and progressive introduction of the reader to risk management principles and practices. Part 1 of the handbook is dedicated to the introduction of the basic foundations of the NASA integrated risk management framework, the related fundamental risk concepts, the description of the risk management and decision processes that are to be implemented within the framework, the discussion of the risk assessment techniques that should be utilized in support of such processes, and the management and organizational interactions and interfaces that should be enabled to implement an effective integration of risk management activities within the Agency. Part 2 provides self-contained, end-to-end examples of application of the processes and techniques introduced in Part 1, in the context of both programmatic (i.e., project and/or mission related) and institutional activities.

Uncertainty↗

NASA NTRS1991

Facilities maintenance handbook

This handbook is a guide for facilities maintenance managers. Its objective is to set minimum facilities maintenance standards. It also provides recommendations on how to meet the standards to ensure that NASA maintains its facilities in a manner that protects and preserves its investment in the facilities in a cost-effective manner while safely and efficiently performing its mission. This handbook implements NMI 8831.1, which states NASA facilities maintenance policy and assigns organizational responsibilities for the management of facilities maintenance activities on all properties under NASA jurisdiction. It is a reference for facilities maintenance managers, not a step-by-step procedural manual. Because of the differences in NASA Field Installation organizations, this handbook does not assume or recommend a typical facilities maintenance organization. Instead, it uses a systems approach to describe the functions that should be included in any facilities maintenance management system, regardless of its organizational structure. For documents referenced in the handbook, the most recent version of the documents is applicable. This handbook is divided into three parts: Part 1 specifies common definitions and facilities maintenance requirements and amplifies the policy requirements contained in NMI 8831. 1; Part 2 provides guidance on how to meet the requirements of Part 1, containing recommendations only; Part 3 contains general facilities maintenance information. One objective of this handbook is to fix commonality of facilities maintenance definitions among the Centers. This will permit the application of uniform measures of facilities conditions, of the relationship between current replacement value and maintenance resources required, and of the backlog of deferred facilities maintenance. The utilization of facilities maintenance system functions will allow the Centers to quantitatively define maintenance objectives in common terms, prepare work plans, and develop management information in order to statistically identify and analyze variances from those plans. It will also add credibility to the NASA facilities maintenance budgeting process. The key to a successful maintenance program is the understanding and support of the senior Center managers.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1975

Personnel techniques necessary to maximize bio-barrier integrity at a Martian receiving laboratory

The planning of biological isolation measures for the Mars Surface Sample Return Mission is discussed in terms of personnel and organizational management. Deficiencies in past operation of the Lunar Receiving Laborator are analyzed. It was found that the failure to clearly define relationship among the government agencies involved and to effectively integrate their objectives and responsibilities was a major cause of Laboratory deficiencies. Possible solutions to these problems are presented for application to future missions.

Michaelson, G. S.↗

NASA NTRS2005

An Assessment of the Effectiveness of the AGATE Program Management Model

This report describes the collaborative program model chosen to implement an aeronautics research and technology program from 1994 through 2001: the Advanced General Aviation Transport Experiments (AGATE) Program. The Program had one primary objective: to improve the ability of the General Aviation industry to adopt technology as a solution to fulfill public benefit objectives. The primary objective of this report is to assess the program s ability to meet a combination of "effectiveness measures" from multiple stakeholders. The "effectiveness" of any model forms the foundation of legitimate questions for policy makers and professional federal managers. The participants rated AGATE as achieving its primary objectives and rating well on effectiveness in most areas, with high measures for relevance, cost, speed and public benefit, but lower measures for institutional fit and flexibility at dealing with the larger NASA organizational structure. This pattern mirrors private sector surveys and represents a tradeoff between the benefits of tailoring a program using partnering, versus the changes necessary within the institutional structure to support such tailoring.

Warner, Timothy P.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Modeling and Simulation Verification, Validation and Accreditation (VV&A): A New Undertaking for the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate

and Accreditation (VV&A) session audience, a snapshot review of the Exploration Space Mission Directorate s (ESMD) investigation into implementation of a modeling and simulation (M&S) VV&A program. The presentation provides some legacy ESMD reference material, including information on the then-current organizational structure, and M&S (Simulation Based Acquisition (SBA)) focus contained therein, to provide a context for the proposed M&S VV&A approach. This reference material briefly highlights the SBA goals and objectives, and outlines FY05 M&S development and implementation consistent with the Subjective Assessment, Constructive Assessment, Operator-in-the-Loop Assessment, Hardware-in-the-Loop Assessment, and In Service Operations Assessment M&S construct, the NASA Exploration Information Ontology Model (NExIOM) data model, and integration with the Windchill-based Integrated Collaborative Environment (ICE). The presentation then addresses the ESMD team s initial conclusions regarding an M&S VV&A program, summarizes the general VV&A implementation approach anticipated, and outlines some of the recognized VV&A program challenges, all within a broader context of the overarching Integrated Modeling and Simulation (IM&S) environment at both the ESMD and Agency (NASA) levels. The presentation concludes with a status on the current M&S organization s progress to date relative to the recommended IM&S implementation activity. The overall presentation was focused to provide, for the Verification, Validation,

Prill, Mark E.↗

NASA NTRS2024

NASA Risk Management Handbook: Version 2.0, Part 2

The purpose of this handbook is to provide an in-depth reference for the practice of risk management in NASA, updating the guidance offered in its original version, NASA/SP-2011-3422 (November 2011), and closely aligning the updated guidance with the current NASA Procedural Requirements for Agency Risk Management, NPR 8000.4, and the parent NASA Policy Directive for NASA Governance and Strategic Management, NPD 1000.0 (January 2020). NPD 1000.0 introduces with emphasis the concept of “Risk Leadership,” making it a fundamental tenet and pillar of the risk management culture that it advocates for the Agency. NPR 8000.4 applies this concept and establishes Risk Management (RM) requirements for the Agency as an integrated enterprise, as well as the RM requirements for portfolio elements within the enterprise. Such elements include the various programs and projects that contribute to the Agency’s objectives and the various institutional activities carried out by entities that contribute to mission support. The present version of the handbook also emphasizes the integration of risk management processes across activity and project life cycles and their coordination and interaction with day-to-day programmatic and organizational functions. Areas of application of risk assessment and management that were not covered with specific guidance in the preceding version are addressed in this version with in-depth examples. The handbook is structured into two parts, whose chapters are in turn organized in a sequential order intended to facilitate a gradual and progressive introduction of the reader to risk management principles and practices. Part 1 of the handbook is dedicated to the introduction of the basic foundations of the NASA integrated risk management framework, the related fundamental risk concepts, the description of the risk management and decision processes that are to be implemented within the framework, the discussion of the risk assessment techniques that should be utilized in support of such processes, and the management and organizational interactions and interfaces that should be enabled to implement an effective integration of risk management activities within the Agency. Part 2 provides self-contained, end-to-end examples of application of the processes and techniques introduced in Part 1, in the context of both programmatic (i.e., project and/or mission related) and institutional activities.

Risk Leadership↗

NASA NTRS2016

Toward Improved Predictions of Slender Airframe Aerodynamics Using the F-16XL Aircraft

A coordinated project has been underway to improve computational fluid dynamics predictions of slender airframe aerodynamics. The work is focused on two flow conditions and leverages a unique flight data set obtained with an F-16XL aircraft. These conditions, a low-speed high angle-of-attack case and a transonic low angle-of-attack case, were selected from a prior prediction campaign wherein the computational fluid dynamics failed to provide acceptable results. In this paper, the background, objectives, and approach to the current project are presented. The work embodies predictions from multiple numerical formulations that are contributed from multiple organizations, and the context of this campaign to other multicode, multi-organizational efforts is included. The relevance of this body of work toward future supersonic commercial transport concepts is also briefly addressed.

Luckring, James M.↗

NASA NTRS1996

CROSS: A GDSS for the Evaluation and Prioritization of Engineering Support Requests and Advanced Technology Projects at NASA

Objective evaluation and prioritization of engineering support requests (ESRs) is a difficult task at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Shuttle Project Engineering Office. The difficulty arises from the complexities inherent in the evaluation process and the lack of structured information. The purpose of this project is to implement the consensus ranking organizational support system (CROSS), a multiple criteria decision support system (DSS) developed at KSC that captures the decision maker's beliefs through a series of sequential, rational, and analytical processes. CROSS utilizes the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), subjective probabilities, entropy concept, and maximize agreement heuristic (MAH) to enhance the decision maker's intuition in evaluation ESRs. Some of the preliminary goals of the project are to: (1) revisit the structure of the ground systems working team (GWST) steering committee, (2) develop a template for ESR originators to provide more comple and consistent information to the GSWT steering committee members to eliminate the need for a facilitator, (3) develop an objective and structured process for the initial screening of ESRs, (4) extensive training of the stakeholders and the GWST steering committee to eliminate the need for a facilitator, (5) automate the process as much as possible, (6) create an environment to compile project success factor data on ESRs and move towards a disciplined system that could be used to address supportability threshold issues at the KSC, and (7) investigate the possibility of an organization-wide implementation of CROSS.

Tavana, Madjid↗

NASA NTRS2017

Digital Model-Based Engineering: Expectations, Prerequisites, and Challenges of Infusion

Digital model-based engineering (DMbE) is the use of digital artifacts, digital environments, and digital tools in the performance of engineering functions. DMbE is intended to allow an organization to progress from documentation-based engineering methods to digital methods that may provide greater flexibility, agility, and efficiency. The term 'DMbE' was developed as part of an effort by the Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Infusion Task team to identify what government organizations might expect in the course of moving to or infusing MBSE into their organizations. The Task team was established by the Interagency Working Group on Engineering Complex Systems, an informal collaboration among government systems engineering organizations. This Technical Memorandum (TM) discusses the work of the MBSE Infusion Task team to date. The Task team identified prerequisites, expectations, initial challenges, and recommendations for areas of study to pursue, as well as examples of efforts already in progress. The team identified the following five expectations associated with DMbE infusion, discussed further in this TM: (1) Informed decision making through increased transparency, and greater insight. (2) Enhanced communication. (3) Increased understanding for greater flexibility/adaptability in design. (4) Increased confidence that the capability will perform as expected. (5) Increased efficiency. The team identified the following seven challenges an organization might encounter when looking to infuse DMbE: (1) Assessing value added to the organization. Not all DMbE practices will be applicable to every situation in every organization, and not all implementations will have positive results. (2) Overcoming organizational and cultural hurdles. (3) Adopting contractual practices and technical data management. (4) Redefining configuration management. The DMbE environment changes the range of configuration information to be managed to include performance and design models, database objects, as well as more traditional book-form objects and formats. (5) Developing information technology (IT) infrastructure. Approaches to implementing critical, enabling IT infrastructure capabilities must be flexible, reconfigurable, and updatable. (6) Ensuring security of the single source of truth (7) Potential overreliance on quantitative data over qualitative data. Executable/ computational models and simulations generally incorporate and generate quantitative vice qualitative data. The Task team also developed several recommendations for government, academia, and industry, as discussed in this TM. The Task team recommends continuing beyond this initial work to further develop the means of implementing DMbE and to look for opportunities to collaborate and share best practices.

Hale, J. P.↗

NASA NTRS2002

Advanced Space Propulsion: A Research Perspective

This viewgraph presentation provides information on spacecraft propulsion research. The organizational and management principals needed for the research are stated. The presentation recommends a space propulsion research program. It also states some of the factors which drive research in the field, as well as the desired goals, objectives, and focus of the research.

Litchford, Ron↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Computationally Guided Development of Components for High Energy Density Solid-State Lithium-Sulfur Batteries

All electric vertical take-off and landing vehicles (eVTOL) for urban air mobility (UAM) concepts face numerous challenging technical barriers before their introduction into the consumer marketplace. The most challenging of these technical barriers to overcome is developing an energy storage system capable of meeting the rigorous aerospace safety and performance criteria1. The performance metrics for eVTOL craft, such as specific energy, specific power, and safety, exceed those of electric automobiles by a factor of two to four. Current state-of-the-art (SOA) lithium-ion batteries are incapable of meeting the key performance criteria of energy and safety for eVTOL. Therefore, next generation advanced chemistries and designs must be developed to meet required performance metrics for electric aviation2. Beyond lithium-ion chemistries, such as lithium-sulfur, show promise in their high energy, while limitations exist in their power and cyclability due to low electrical conductivity and high intermediate solubility in organic liquid electrolytes. Several strategies to overcome the low electrical conductivity involve the use of selenium as a dopant in the active sulfur material, along with the incorporation of 2-dimensional electron-conducting holey-graphene to improve the composite cathodes electronic conductivity. Furthermore, combining this chemistry with a solid-electrolyte avoids the components’ dissolution issues3. However, the development of composite solid-state cathodes is non-trivial as several components must be intimately mixed so that the active component has sufficient access to both electrons and lithium ions to undergo full electrochemical conversion. Mathematical modeling of battery components can assist experimental design through a robust and rigorous combination of computational modeling techniques covering multiple length scales. The objective is to leverage modern computational materials methods combined with battery multiphysics tools to develop radically advanced compatible cathode and electrolyte materials, build and test solid state lithium-sulfur cells and packs. A NASA-based cross-organizational team of high-powered experts combined integrated computational predictive modeling, fundamental chemistry analysis, advanced material science, and battery cell development to tackle this very challenging, multidisciplinary problem. This presentation will show a multiscale computational modeling approach that has produced a novel particle dynamics method called Solid Electrolyte Sphere Approximation Model (SESAM). SESAM modeling targets the 1-10 µm scale structures and provides electromechanical and grain interactions for predictive design guidelines for the manufacturing of solid-state components. Parameters such as particle size and volume fraction of the constituent materials were modeled and experimentally fabricated to optimize electrochemical performance through improved microstructure design. Experimental feedback was provided through ionic and electronic conductivity assessment and structural analysis of developed materials and cell components.

battery↗