Thermoplastics Development for Exploration Applications (TDEA) Project: Programmatic and Technical Overview
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Thermoplastic composites↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Programmatic”
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.
Thermoplastic Development for Exploration Applications (TDEA) Project Programmatic and Technical Overview
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Sandi Miller↗
Payload specialist station study. Volume 1: Executive summary
The results of the Payload Specialist Station study are summarized. An optimum aft flight deck (AFD) controls and displays (C&D) configuration concept for payload operations within the Shuttle Orbiter were studied. The concept derived satisfied the large majority of identified payload C&D requirements through the 1980's, was cost effective, and utilized existing technology. The results are directly applicable to Phase C/D activities. Programmatic analyses, phase C/D program definition and schedules, and economic analyses were completed; and estimated phase C/D costs were identified. The AFD control and display concept was defined via panel layouts, CEI specifications, and programmatics for phase C/D. The study plan included the following six phases: (1) derive control and display requirements; (2) perform functional analyses; (3) perform system synthesis; (4) perform trade studies; (5) perform preliminary design; and (6) provide programmatics.
Source record↗
Fission Surface Power for the Exploration and Colonization of Mars
The colonization of Mars will require abundant energy. One potential energy source is nuclear fission. Terrestrial fission systems are highly developed and have the demonstrated ability to safely produce tremendous amounts of energy. In space, fission systems not only have the potential to safely generate tremendous amounts of energy, but could also potentially be used on missions where alternatives are not practical. Programmatic risks such as cost and schedule are potential concerns with fission surface power (FSP) systems. To be mission enabling, FSP systems must be affordable and programmatic risk must be kept acceptably low to avoid jeopardizing exploration efforts that may rely on FSP. Initial FSP systems on Mars could be "workhorse" units sized to enable the establishment of a Mars base and the early growth of a colony. These systems could be nearly identical to FSP systems used on the moon. The systems could be designed to be safe, reliable, and have low development and recurring costs. Systems could also be designed to fit on relatively small landers. One potential option for an early Mars FSP system would be a 100 kWt class, NaK cooled system analogous to space reactors developed and flown under the U.S. "SNAP" program or those developed and flown by the former Soviet Union ("BUK" reactor). The systems could use highly developed fuel and materials. Water and Martian soil could be used to provide shielding. A modern, high-efficiency power conversion subsystem could be used to reduce required reactor thermal power. This, in turn, would reduce fuel burnup and radiation damage .effects by reducing "nuclear" fuels and materials development costs. A realistic, non-nuclear heated and fully integrated technology demonstration unit (TDU) could be used to reduce cost and programmatic uncertainties prior to initiating a flight program.
Houts, Mike↗
The NASA "PERS" Program: Solid Polymer Electrolyte Development for Advanced Lithium-Based Batteries
In fiscal year 2000, The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) established a collaborative effort to support the development of polymer-based, lithium-based cell chemistries and battery technologies to address the next generation of aerospace applications and mission needs. The ultimate objective of this development program, which was referred to as the Polymer Energy Rechargeable System (PERS), was to establish a world-class technology capability and U.S. leadership in polymer-based battery technology for aerospace applications. Programmatically, the PERS initiative exploited both interagency collaborations to address common technology and engineering issues and the active participation of academia and private industry. The initial program phases focused on R&D activities to address the critical technical issues and challenges at the cell level. Out of a total of 38 proposals received in response to a NASA Research Announcement (NRA) solicitation, 18 proposals (13 contracts and 5 grants) were selected for initial award to address these technical challenges. Brief summaries of technical approaches, results and accomplishments of the PERS Program development efforts are presented. With Agency support provided through FY 2004, the PERS Program efforts were concluded in 2005, as internal reorganizations and funding cuts resulted in shifting programmatic priorities within NASA. Technically, the PERS Program participants explored, to various degrees over the lifetime of the formal program, a variety of conceptual approaches for developing and demonstrating performance of a viable advanced solid polymer electrolyte possessing the desired attributes, as well as several participants addressing all components of an integrated cell configuration. Programmatically, the NASA PERS Program was very successful, even though the very challenging technical goals for achieving a viable solid polymer electrolyte material or the overall envisioned long-term, program objectives were not met due to funding reductions. The NASA PERS Program provided research opportunities and generated and disseminated a wealth of new scientific knowledge and technical competencies within the polymer electrolyte area.
Baldwin, Richard S.↗
Benefits of Using a Mars Forward Strategy for Lunar Surface Systems
This paper identifies potential risk reduction, cost savings and programmatic procurement benefits of a Mars Forward Lunar Surface System architecture that provides commonality or evolutionary development paths for lunar surface system elements applicable to Mars surface systems. The objective of this paper is to identify the potential benefits for incorporating a Mars Forward development strategy into the planned Project Constellation Lunar Surface System Architecture. The benefits include cost savings, technology readiness, and design validation of systems that would be applicable to lunar and Mars surface systems. The paper presents a survey of previous lunar and Mars surface systems design concepts and provides an assessment of previous conclusions concerning those systems in light of the current Project Constellation Exploration Architectures. The operational requirements for current Project Constellation lunar and Mars surface system elements are compared and evaluated to identify the potential risk reduction strategies that build on lunar surface systems to reduce the technical and programmatic risks for Mars exploration. Risk reduction for rapidly evolving technologies is achieved through systematic evolution of technologies and components based on Moore's Law superimposed on the typical NASA systems engineering project development "V-cycle" described in NASA NPR 7120.5. Risk reduction for established or slowly evolving technologies is achieved through a process called the Mars-Ready Platform strategy in which incremental improvements lead from the initial lunar surface system components to Mars-Ready technologies. The potential programmatic benefits of the Mars Forward strategy are provided in terms of the transition from the lunar exploration campaign to the Mars exploration campaign. By utilizing a sequential combined procurement strategy for lunar and Mars exploration surface systems, the overall budget wedges for exploration systems are reduced and the costly technological development gap between the lunar and Mars programs can be eliminated. This provides a sustained level of technological competitiveness as well as maintaining a stable engineering and manufacturing capability throughout the entire duration of Project Constellation.
Mulqueen, Jack↗
Commercially Hosted Government Payloads: Lessons from Recent Programs
In a commercially hosted operational mode, a scientific instrument or operational device is attached to a spacecraft but operates independently from the spacecraft s primary mission. Despite the expected benefits of this arrangement, there are few examples of hosted payload programs actually being executed by government organizations. The lack of hosted payload programs is largely driven by programmatic challenges, both real and perceived, rather than by technical challenges. Partly for these reasons, NASA has not sponsored a hosted payload program, in spite of the benefits and visible community interest in doing so. In the interest of increasing the use of hosted payloads across the space community, this paper seeks to alleviate concerns about hosted payloads by identifying these programmatic challenges and presenting ways in which they can be avoided or mitigated. Despite the challenges, several recent hosted payload programs have been successfully completed or are currently in progress. This paper presents an assessment of these programs, with a focus on acquisition, costs, schedules, risks, and other programmatic aspects. The hosted payloads included in this study are the Federal Aviation Administration's Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) payloads, United States Coast Guard's Automatic Identification System (AIS) demonstration payload, Department of Defense's IP Router In Space (IRIS) demonstration payload, the United States Air Force's Commercially Hosted Infrared Payload (CHIRP), and the Australian Defence Force's Ultra High Frequency (UHF) payload. General descriptions of each of these programs are presented along with issues that have been encountered and lessons learned from those experiences. A set of recommended approaches for future hosted payload programs is presented, with a focus on addressing risks or potential problem areas through smart and flexible contracting up front. This set of lessons and recommendations is broadly applicable to future hosted payload programs, whether they are technology demonstrations, communications systems, or operational sensors. Additionally, we present a basic cost model for commercial access to space for hosted payloads as a function of payload mass
Andraschko, Mark A.↗
Space Environments and Spacecraft Effects Concept: Transitioning Research to Operations and Applications
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a course to expand human presence beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) while expanding its mission to explore the solar system. Destinations such as Near Earth Asteroids (NEA), Mars and its moons, and the outer planets are but a few of the mission targets. NASA has established numerous organizations specializing in specific space environments disciplines that will serve to enable these missions. To complement these existing discipline organizations, a concept is presented focusing on the development of a space environment and spacecraft effects organization. This includes space climate, space weather, natural and induced space environments, and effects on spacecraft materials and systems. This space environment and spacecraft effects organization would be comprised of Technical Working Groups (TWG) focusing on, for example: a) Charged Particles (CP), b) Space Environmental Effects (SEE), and c) Interplanetary and Extraterrestrial Environments (IEE). These technical working groups will generate products and provide knowledge supporting four functional areas: design environments, environment effects, operational support, and programmatic support. The four functional areas align with phases in the program mission lifecycle and are briefly described below. Design environments are used primarily in the mission concept and design phases of a program. Environment effects focuses on the material, component, sub-system and system-level selection and the testing to verify design and operational performance. Operational support provides products based on real time or near real time space weather observations to mission operators to aid in real time and near-term decision-making. The programmatic support function maintains an interface with the numerous programs within NASA and other federal agencies to ensure that communications are well established and the needs of the programs are being met. The programmatic support function also includes working in coordination with the program in anomaly resolution and generation of lesson learned documentation. The goal of this space environment and spacecraft effects organization is to develop decision-making tools and engineering products to support the mission phases of mission concept through operations by focusing on transitioning research to application. Products generated by this space environments and spacecraft effects organization are suitable for use in anomaly investigations. This paper will describe the organizational structure for this space environments and spacecraft effects organization, and outline the scope of conceptual TWG's and their relationship to the functional areas.
Edwards, D. L.↗
Space Environments and Spacecraft Effects Organization Concept
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a course to expand human presence beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) while also expanding its mission to explore the solar system. Destinations such as Near Earth Asteroids (NEA), Mars and its moons, and the outer planets are but a few of the mission targets. Each new destination presents an opportunity to increase our knowledge of the solar system and the unique environments for each mission target. NASA has multiple technical and science discipline areas specializing in specific space environments disciplines that will help serve to enable these missions. To complement these existing discipline areas, a concept is presented focusing on the development of a space environments and spacecraft effects (SENSE) organization. This SENSE organization includes disciplines such as space climate, space weather, natural and induced space environments, effects on spacecraft materials and systems and the transition of research information into application. This space environment and spacecraft effects organization will be composed of Technical Working Groups (TWG). These technical working groups will survey customers and users, generate products, and provide knowledge supporting four functional areas: design environments, engineering effects, operational support, and programmatic support. The four functional areas align with phases in the program mission lifecycle and are briefly described below. Design environments are used primarily in the mission concept and design phases of a program. Engineering effects focuses on the material, component, sub-system and system-level selection and the testing to verify design and operational performance. Operational support provides products based on real time or near real time space weather to mission operators to aid in real time and near-term decision-making. The programmatic support function maintains an interface with the numerous programs within NASA, other federal government agencies, and the commercial sector to ensure that communications are well established and the needs of the programs are being met. The programmatic support function also includes working in coordination with the program in anomaly resolution and generation of lessons learned documentation. The goal of this space environment and spacecraft effects organization is to develop decision-making tools and engineering products to support all mission phases from mission concept through operations by focusing on transitioning research to application. Products generated by this space environments and effects application are suitable for use in anomaly investigations. This paper will describe the scope of the TWGs and their relationship to the functional areas, and discuss an organizational structure for this space environments and spacecraft effects organization.
Edwards, David L.↗
An Overview of the Space Environments and Spacecraft Effects Organization Concept
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a course to expand human presence beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) while also expanding its mission to explore our Earth, and the solar system. Destinations such as Near Earth Asteroids (NEA), Mars and its moons, and the outer planets are but a few of the mission targets. Each new destination presents an opportunity to increase our knowledge on the solar system and the unique environments for each mission target. NASA has multiple technical and science discipline areas specializing in specific space environments fields that will serve to enable these missions. To complement these existing discipline areas, a concept is presented focusing on the development of a space environment and spacecraft effects (SESE) organization. This SESE organization includes disciplines such as space climate, space weather, natural and induced space environments, effects on spacecraft materials and systems, and the transition of research information into application. This space environment and spacecraft effects organization will be composed of Technical Working Groups (TWG). These technical working groups will survey customers and users, generate products, and provide knowledge supporting four functional areas: design environments, engineering effects, operational support, and programmatic support. The four functional areas align with phases in the program mission lifecycle and are briefly described below. Design environments are used primarily in the mission concept and design phases of a program. Environment effects focuses on the material, component, sub-system, and system-level response to the space environment and include the selection and testing to verify design and operational performance. Operational support provides products based on real time or near real time space weather to mission operators to aid in real time and near-term decision-making. The programmatic support function maintains an interface with the numerous programs within NASA, other federal government agencies, and the commercial sector to ensure that communications are well established and the needs of the programs are being met. The programmatic support function also includes working in coordination with the program in anomaly resolution and generation of lessons learned documentation. The goal of this space environment and spacecraft effects organization is to develop decision-making tools and engineering products to support all mission phases from mission concept through operations by focusing on transitioning research to application. Products generated by this space environments and effects application are suitable for use in anomaly investigations. This paper will describe the scope and purpose of the space environments and spacecraft effects organization and describe the TWG's and their relationship to the functional areas.
Edwards, David L.↗
Management Approach for NASA's Earth Venture-1 (EV-1) Airborne Science Investigations
The Earth System Science Pathfinder (ESSP) Program Office (PO) is responsible for programmatic management of National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Science Mission Directorate's (SMD) Earth Venture (EV) missions. EV is composed of both orbital and suborbital Earth science missions. The first of the Earth Venture missions is EV-1, which are Principal Investigator-led, temporally-sustained, suborbital (airborne) science investigations costcapped at $30M each over five years. Traditional orbital procedures, processes and standards used to manage previous ESSP missions, while effective, are disproportionally comprehensive for suborbital missions. Conversely, existing airborne practices are primarily intended for smaller, temporally shorter investigations, and traditionally managed directly by a program scientist as opposed to a program office such as ESSP. In 2010, ESSP crafted a management approach for the successful implementation of the EV-1 missions within the constructs of current governance models. NASA Research and Technology Program and Project Management Requirements form the foundation of the approach for EV-1. Additionally, requirements from other existing NASA Procedural Requirements (NPRs), systems engineering guidance and management handbooks were adapted to manage programmatic, technical, schedule, cost elements and risk. As the EV-1 missions are nearly at the end of their successful execution and project lifecycle and the submission deadline of the next mission proposals near, the ESSP PO is taking the lessons learned and updated the programmatic management approach for all future Earth Venture Suborbital (EVS) missions for an even more flexible and streamlined management approach.
Guillory, Anthony R.↗
NASA's Space Launch System Transitions From Design To Production
NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) successfully completed its Critical Design Review (CDR) in 2015, a major milestone on the journey to an unprecedented era of exploration for humanity. CDR formally marked the program's transition from design to production phase just four years after the program's inception and the first such milestone for a human launch vehicle in 40 years. While challenges typical of a complex development program lie ahead, CDR evaluators concluded that the design is technically and programmatically sound and ready to press forward to Design Certification Review (DCR) and readiness for launch of Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1) in the 2018 timeframe. SLS is prudently based on existing propulsion systems, infrastructure and knowledge with a clear, evolutionary path as required by mission needs. In its initial configuration, designated Block 1, SLS will a minimum of 70 metric tons (t) (154,324 pounds) of payload to low Earth orbit (LEO). It will evolve to a 130 t (286,601 pound) payload capacity by upgrading its engines, boosters, and upper stage, dramatically increasing the mass and volume of human and robotic exploration while decreasing mission risk, increasing safety, and simplifying ground and mission operations. CDR was the central programmatic accomplishment among many technical accomplishments that will be described in this paper. The government/industry SLS team successfully test-fired a flight-like five-segment solid rocket motor, as well as seven hotfire development tests of the RS-25 core stage engine. The majority of the major test article and flight barrels, rings, and domes for the core stage liquid oxygen, liquid hydrogen, engine section, intertank, and forward skirt were manufactured at NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans, Louisiana. Renovations to the B-2 test stand for stage green run testing were completed at NASA's Stennis Space Center (SSC), near Bay St. Louis, Mississippi. Core stage test stands are reaching completion at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. The modified Pegasus barge for core stage transportation from manufacturing to testing and launch sites was delivered to SSC. The Interim Cryogenic Propulsion System test article was also completed. This paper will discuss these and other technical and programmatic successes and challenges over the past year and provide a preview of work ahead before the first flight of this new capability.
Askins, Bruce R.↗
NASA's Space Launch Transitions: From Design to Production
NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) successfully completed its Critical Design Review (CDR) in 2015, a major milestone on the journey to an unprecedented era of exploration for humanity. CDR formally marked the program's transition from design to production phase just four years after the program's inception and the first such milestone for a human launch vehicle in 40 years. While challenges typical of a complex development program lie ahead, CDR evaluators concluded that the design is technically and programmatically sound and ready to press forward to Design Certification Review (DCR) and readiness for launch of Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1) in the 2018 timeframe. SLS is prudently based on existing propulsion systems, infrastructure and knowledge with a clear, evolutionary path as required by mission needs. In its initial configuration, designated Block I, SLS will a minimum of 70 metric tons (t) of payload to low Earth orbit (LEO). It can evolve to a 130 t payload capacity by upgrading its engines, boosters, and upper stage, dramatically increasing the mass and volume of human and robotic exploration while decreasing mission risk, increasing safety, and simplifying ground and mission operations. CDR was the central programmatic accomplishment among many technical accomplishments that will be described in this paper. The government/industry SLS team successfully test fired a flight-like five-segment solid rocket motor, as well as seven hotfire development tests of the RS-25 core stage engine. The majority of the major test article and flight barrels, rings, and domes for the core stage liquid oxygen, liquid hydrogen, engine section, intertank, and forward skirt were manufactured at NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility. Renovations to the B-2 test stand for stage green run testing were completed at NASA Stennis Space Center. Core stage test stands are rising at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. The modified Pegasus barge for core stage transportation from manufacturing to testing and launch sites was delivered. The Interim Cryogenic Propulsion System test article was also completed. This paper will discuss these and other technical and programmatic successes and challenges over the past year and provide a preview of work ahead before the first flight of this new capability.
Askins, Bruce↗
Status of NASA's Space Launch System
NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) continued to make significant progress in 2015 and 2016, completing hardware and testing that brings NASA closer to a new era of deep space exploration. Programmatically, SLS completed Critical Design Review (CDR) in 2015. A team of independent reviewers concluded that the vehicle design is technically and programmatically ready to move to Design Certification Review (DCR) and launch readiness in 2018. Just five years after program start, every major element has amassed development and flight hardware and completed key tests that will lead to an accelerated pace of manufacturing and testing in 2016 and 2017. Key to SLS' rapid progress has been the use of existing technologies adapted to the new launch vehicle. The existing fleet of RS-25 engines is undergoing adaptation tests to prove it can meet SLS requirements and environments with minimal change. The four-segment shuttle-era booster has been modified and updated with a fifth propellant segment, new insulation, and new avionics. The Interim Cryogenic Upper Stage is a modified version of an existing upper stage. The first Block I SLS configuration will launch a minimum of 70 metric tons (t) of payload to low Earth orbit (LEO). The vehicle architecture has a clear evolutionary path to more than 100t and, ultimately, to 130t. Among the program's major 2015-2016 accomplishments were two booster qualification hotfire tests, a series of RS-25 adaptation hotfire tests, manufacturing of most of the major components for both core stage test articles and first flight tank, delivery of the Pegasus core stage barge, and the upper stage simulator. Renovations to the B-2 test stand for stage green run testing was completed at NASA Stennis Space Center. This year will see the completion of welding for all qualification and flight EM-1 core stage components and testing of flight avionics, completion of core stage structural test stands, casting of the EM-1 solid rocket motors, additional testing of RS-25 engines and flight engine controllers This paper will discuss these and other technical and programmatic successes and challenges over the past year and provide a preview of work ahead before the first flight of this new capability.
Honeycutt, John↗
Challenges and Potential Solutions to Develop and Fund NASA Flagship Missions
Large, strategic "Flagship" missions have unique characteristics that lead to challenging developmental difficulties for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Missions such as the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), and the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) had technical and programmatic challenges that led to significant schedule delays and subsequent cost growth. Although NASA has instituted policies that have reduced cost growth for more "typical" NASA science missions, NASA Flagship missions remain a distinct challenge due to their requirement to provide unprecedented science or tackle bold exploration goals, typically while concurrently developing new technologies. The unique challenges presented by Flagship missions make it extremely difficult to fully predict cost and schedule given that the technical and programmatic advances needed to meet performance requirements are unprecedented. This paper addresses why Flagship missions are unique and proposes a new programmatic approach to develop and fund Flagship missions.
Develop↗
Challenges and Potential Solutions to Develop and Fund NASA Flagship Missions
Large, strategic "Flagship" missions have unique characteristics that lead to challenging developmental difficulties for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Missions such as the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), and the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) had technical and programmatic challenges that led to significant schedule delays and subsequent cost growth. Although NASA has instituted policies that have reduced cost growth for more "typical" NASA science missions, NASA Flagship missions remain a distinct challenge due to their requirement to provide unprecedented science or tackle bold exploration goals, typically while concurrently developing new technologies. The unique challenges presented by Flagship missions make it extremely difficult to fully predict cost and schedule given that the technical and programmatic advances needed to meet performance requirements are unprecedented. This paper addresses why Flagship missions are unique and proposes a new programmatic approach to develop and fund Flagship missions.
flagship missions↗
Heliophysics Environmental & Radiation Measurement Experiment Suite (HERMES): A Small External Payload for Gateway with Big Challenges
Currently scheduled for liftoff in 2024, Gateway will be an outpost orbiting the moon for astronauts headed to and from the lunar surface and will serve as a staging point for deep space exploration. In January 2020, NASA Headquarters contacted Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) with a request that they provide a Heliophysics instrumentation package for Gateway. This package would later become known as the Heliophysics Environmental & Radiation Measurement Experiment Suite (HERMES). HERMES consists of four high-heritage instruments – a Miniaturized Electron pRoton Telescope (MERIT), an Electron Electrostatic Analyzer (EEA), a Solar Probe Analyzer-Ions (SPAN-I), and Noise Eliminating Magnetometer Instrument in a Small Integrated System (NEMISIS), which consists of one fluxgate and two magneto-inductive magnetometers. Launching HERMES with Gateway would provide an opportunity to conduct early science experiments on Gateway, but the plan to develop HERMES concurrently with Gateway and launch with the co-manifested vehicle brought numerous technical challenges for the pathfinder payload. HERMES was intended to be a low-cost, tailored Class-D mission, and maintaining that programmatic position proved difficult as the technical challenges grew. The effects of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) were not factored in from the beginning and also created programmatic challenges. This paper will discuss what’s being done to overcome the technical and programmatic challenges to put HERMES on track for a 2024 Launch Readiness Date (LRD).
Joe Burt↗