Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “workforce of the future”

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 127 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2020

Strategic Perspectives on the Future of Systems Engineering at NASA

NASA’s Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Infusion and Modernization Initiative (MIAMI) chartered a strategy group comprising early to mid-career NASA subject matter experts with diverse experiences to look into the future of systems engineering at NASA. The purpose of the group was to provide a vision for the future state of systems engineering practices and to develop a strategic plan to enable the evolution of the art up to 20 years in the future. The group used a design thinking approach to gather ideas and obtained insight into current engineering processes and domain outlook by interviewing engineers of varying expertise and experiences who had worked on teams of different sizes for missions large and small. The group built a roadmap to highlight future needs, projected capabilities, and technology and competency gaps and developed a strategic plan to ensure the expedient introduction of these capabilities. The resulting strategic plan recommends capability development and workforce strategies and provides guidance for Agency-wide SE policy. Artifacts, details, and raw data from the strategy team’s work are contained in NASA/TM-20205002911/SUPPL, Strategic Perspectives on the Future of Systems Engineering at NASA: Supplemental Information: Appendixes A to K.

Anupa R Bajwa↗
NASA NTRS2003

Glenn's Strategic Partnerships With HBCUs and OMUs

NASA senior management has identified the need to develop a strategy for increased contracting with the historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) and other minority universities (OMUs). The benefits to the institutions, by partnering with NASA, include developing their industrial base via NASA-industry partnerships, strong competitive advantage in technology-based research opportunities, and improved research capabilities. NASA gains increased contributed value to the Agency missions and programs as well as potential future recruits from technology-trained students who also constitute a pool for the nation s workforce. This report documents synergistic links between Glenn Research Center research and technology programs and faculty expertise at HBCUs and OMUs. The links are derived, based on Glenn technologies in the various directorates, program offices, and project offices. Such links readily identify universities with faculty members who are knowledgeable or have backgrounds in the listed technologies for possible collaboration. Recommendations are made to use the links as opportunities for Glenn and NASA, as well as industry collaborators, to cultivate stronger partnerships with the universities. It is concluded that Glenn and its partners and collaborators can expect to mutually benefit from leveraging NASA s cutting-edge and challenging research and technologies; industry's high technology development, research and development facilities, system design capabilities and market awareness; and academia s expertise in basic research and relatively low overhead cost. Reduced cost, accelerated technology development, technology transfer, and infrastructure development constitute some of the derived benefits.

Kankam, M. David↗
NASA NTRS2002

U.S. Aerospace and Aviation Industry: A State-By-State Analysis

President George W. Bush and the Congress created the Commission on the Future of the United States Aerospace Industry to evaluate the current and future health of the industry as well as the challenges that lie ahead for the U.S. workforce and the economy. To accomplish our mission, we commissioned a study on the economic impact of the aerospace industry nationally and on a state-by-state basis, using the best available U.S. government data. This study sought to define the core of the aerospace industry. The resulting data represents that very core those jobs specifically tied to commercial and civilian aerospace. U.S. Aerospace and Aviation: A State-by-State Analysis examines the civilian and commercial aerospace and aviation industry by employment, wages, payroll, and establishments. The report found that the U.S. civilian and commercial aerospace and aviation industry employed over 2 million workers in 2001.

STATES (UNITED STATES)↗
DOE OSTI2023

US Department of Energy Better Plants Program’s Approach to Manufacturing Workforce Development

Multiple studies suggest that by 2030, millions of jobs may go unfilled because of a significant skills gap between the current manufacturing workforce and the workforce needed to support the shift toward advanced and sustainable manufacturing. According to US manufacturers, finding the right talent is more difficult now than in previous years. Developing a well-trained workforce will play a critical role in transforming the manufacturing sector into a net-zero contributor of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. To help reduce energy, water, waste, and greenhouse gas emissions as well as build a strong, sustainable manufacturing workforce, the US Department of Energy created the voluntary Better Plants program in 2011. This study discusses the program’s various workforce development activities, including in-plant trainings, virtual in-plant trainings, and in-person bootcamps. The target audiences, training objectives, and topics designed to upskill workers for a low-carbon manufacturing future are described. Feedback that was collected (e.g., new training topics, certifications, hands-on activities) while working with more than 270 US manufacturers for the past 12 years on workforce development are discussed. Finally, some strategies are proposed to address the feedback.

Guo, Wei↗
DOE OSTI2024

Nontraditional Sensors for Aqueous Separation Research & Workforce Development

Idaho National Laboratory’s (INL) nuclear fuel cycle capabilities enable the deployment of technologies that sustain the current reactor fleet, support demonstration and deployment of new advanced reactors, and facilitate management and disposition of existing and future radiological waste materials. INL focuses on deploying nuclear energy systems with confidence by decreasing proliferation risk through research that demonstrates process transparency and supports safeguards and security by design. An example of these capabilities is the Beartooth test bed, set to begin operations toward the end of fiscal year 2026. Beartooth will include a cascade of centrifugal contactors, glove box lines, and solidification and dissolution equipment to aid in the progression of novel separation techniques and to provide hands-on experience to cultivate and maintain a robust workforce of experts. To support Beartooth’s enhanced instrumentation and monitoring equipment needs, several nontraditional sensors are being considered for future deployment. The non-traditional sensors include accelerometers, acoustic microphones, and infrared cameras. These nontraditional sensors have the potential to not only help monitor the process but also enhance nuclear safeguards.

98 - NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Forging the Forge

As part of the NASA Johnson Space Center’s (JSC) effort to revitalize and recommit to our “Dare Unite Explore” vision for the future, the Center is exploring a new strategy to spread the innovation mindset and increase collaboration across the workforce. In order to maintain JSC’s leadership in human spaceflight, there is a need for working at the speed of commercial industry, breaking down silos between organizations, improving innovation and increasing workforce flexibility. Through brainstorming concepts and benchmarking other facilities, the leadership team evaluated several ideas, assessed constraints and derived that an “Innovation Team” was relatively easy to adopt. Modeled after productive teams like the Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s Innovation Foundry and Glenn Research Center's Compass team, JSC is laying the foundation of a new innovation team called the Forge. This team is as much about getting employees tempered in the ways of innovative thinking as it is about refining design studies and hammering out proposals. By the dictionary definition of the verb, forge can mean either to move ahead slowly and steadily or to move with a sudden increase of speed and power. Driving cultural change in a large government organization like NASA often involves slow perseverance with small injections of momentum to forge ahead. Leveraging lessons learned from the Innovation Foundry and Compass, this paper describes how the collaborative, concurrent engineering framework was tailored to JSC’s needs, as well as the aspects that were considered given JSC’s operation-focused, Program-driven landscape. Our process to drive cultural change, the steps taken, and challenges encountered are discussed. The first two pilots of the teaming framework are described with initial results presented in terms of employee engagement and fostering innovation. We also describe the planned future work and next steps to continue to push the initiative forward. Long has the Center been resting on its operations heritage, now we are forging a new path to Dare to expand frontiers, Unite with our partners and Explore space to benefit humanity.

Culture Change↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Models for Facilitating Government-Funded Activities in the Post-ISS LEO Ecosystem

The International Space Station National Lab (ISSNL) was established through Congressional authority in 2005 and has been managed by a nonprofit called the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space (CASIS) since 2011 to support research, development, education, and commercial activities in low-Earth orbit (LEO). NASA leadership is considering next steps for microgravity and orbital activities in LEO in preparation for the retirement of the International Space Station (ISS) and transition to Commercial LEO Destinations (CLDs) in the 2030 timeframe. Specifically, our study team within the NASA Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy addressed the question: What are potential models for an ISS National Lab facilitating government-funded or subsidized activities on a commercial LEO platform after the transition of the ISS to one or more private platforms? To inform the trade space of potential models, we conducted over 40 discussions with stakeholders internal and external to NASA and reviewed over 35 documents related to LEO legislation, commercialization, models, and activities. Following the extensive literature review and discussions with diverse stakeholders, we defined and evaluated six models, in addition to the current ISSNL model. We assessed each model across three possible future scenarios (dynamic, steady, and limited growth of the commercial LEO market and activities) and across five stakeholder-driven model evaluation criteria (ability to meet NASA’s needs, adaptability, opportunity for collaboration, market sustainability, and equity and accessibility). The six models in the future trade space were: • Government Research Broker: Customizable research efforts on transport vehicles and CLDs • Innovation Campus: Modern terrestrial campus with workforce focus • Anchor Tenant: Long-term, substantial agreement for leasing space on a single CLD • Fee for Service: Free market approach with NASA-sponsored grants and service/data buys • Matchmaker: Neutral third-party connecting users to platforms • Institute Network: Network of separate but related efforts to enable commercial scaling The Government Research Broker model performed best across the scenarios, followed by Innovation Campus, Anchor Tenant, and Fee for Service. While Matchmaker and Institute Network exhibited positive aspects, the two models performed most favorably in future scenarios with well-established communities and markets. The six models presented in this study are representative of the potential trade space and are illustrative examples. NASA leadership can adjust models as desired to align to their priorities more closely by using combinations of the unique model features provided in our analysis. The optimal model is likely a combination of features from multiple models. Building upon this work to best position NASA and the diverse stakeholders of LEO activities for success post-ISS, further work will explore the near-term impact of preparing for the transition of the ISS to CLDs by identifying opportunities for modifying the current ISSNL-CASIS partnership. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank the many reviewers and discussants, internal and external to NASA, that contributed to the work.

Erica Rodgers↗
DOE OSTI2020

Energy Storage Grand Challenge: Energy Storage Market Report

As part of the Department of Energy's (DOE) Energy Storage Grand Challenge (ESGC), DOE intends to synthesize and disseminate best available energy storage data, information, and analysis to inform decision-making and accelerate technology adoption. The ESGC Roadmap provides options for addressing technology development, commercialization, manufacturing, valuation, and workforce challenges to position the United States for global leadership in the energy storage technologies of the future. This report provides a baseline understanding of the numerous, dynamic energy storage markets that fall within the scope of the ESGC via an integrated presentation of deployment, investment, and manufacturing data from the best, publicly-available sources. This report covers the following energy storage technologies: lithium ion batteries, lead acid batteries, pumped storage hydropower, comrpessed air energy storage, redox flow batteries, hydrogen, building thermal energy storage, and select long duration energy storage technologies. Not all energy storage technologies and markets could be addressed in this report. Due to the wide array of energy technologies, market niches, and data availability issues, this market report only included a select group of technologies. For example, thermal energy storage technologies are very broadly defined and cover a wide range of potential markets, technology readiness levels, and primary energy sources. In other areas, data scarcity necessitates a greater understanding of future applications and emerging science. Future efforts will update data presented in this report and be expanded to include other energy storage technologies. This data-driven assessment of the current status of energy storage markets is essential to track progress toward the goals described in the Energy Storage Grand Challenge and inform the decision-making of a broad range of stakeholders. At the same time, gaps identified through the development of this report can point to areas where further data collection and analysis could provide an even greater level of understanding of the full range of markets and technologies. Finally, numerous complementary analyses are planned, underway, or completed that will provide a deeper understanding of the specific technologies and markets covered at a high-level in this report.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2023

Advanced Reactor Supply Chain Assessment (GAIN Report)

Several net-zero scenario evaluations predict a rapid ramp up of nuclear energy in the coming decades. If this materializes, it will most likely strain the supply chains associated with the potential advanced reactor concepts awaiting deployment. To help assess the current and potential capacities of the various advanced reactor supply chains, the Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (GAIN) conducted a survey of companies able to produce components for advanced reactors in the near future (namely for sodium, gas-cooled, and molten salt reactors). Using an aggressive nuclear deployment scenario, the objective was to assess the ability of the various supply chains to meet the considerable demand projections for certain key components (vessels, heat exchangers, pumps, graphite, and sensors) and identify potential challenges. While individual companies were unable to meet the most optimistic nuclear deployment rate projections, it was found that on aggregate, a United States-based supply chain projected that expansion could be ramped up to meet a larger future demand of these components. However, meeting projected demand for several more complex items (namely gas or salt heat exchangers) was found to be more challenging. Deploying new reactors at scale necessitates the production of more and more supply chain components, requiring a ramp up in production. Supply chain companies were surveyed, and respondents appeared less able to meet short term demand (next year) versus longer-term demand projections (5 and 10 years). This reflects the need to obtain orders with adequate lead times (can range from 3 to 30 months). Future demand will need to be met by expanding existing capacity. These expansions will require suppliers to raise capital or secure other types of support (federal loans or grants) to invest in facilities, equipment, and workforce. Individual suppliers indicated financial investments could be in the range of $\$ $100 million to $\$ $1 billion for their own facilities (depending on the type of facility). The biggest risk, according to respondents, related to general uncertainties surrounding the future nuclear industry and whether the potential demand projections will materialize into real demand that is actionable from a business perspective. Businesses do not seem willing to take investments risks without clear orders. If businesses are not able to invest to expand the supply, it will either delay the deployment of advanced nuclear technology, or the supply chain will be met by suppliers outside of the United States. This report only focuses on the domestic supply chain’s ability to meet the various projections stipulated here for the specific assessed components (vessels, heat exchangers, pumps, graphite, and sensors). The report does not cover all reactor designs or all components that may ultimately be needed for any one reactor design. It also does not address whether any specific aspect of the supply chain will be cost competitive in the global market, nor how potential state-backed entities could affect the expansion of a United States-based supply chain. The largest challenges in ramping up capacity among respondents appear to be workforce related. This includes workforce availability, experience, training, and turnover. In addition to facility investment, suppliers will also need to invest heavily in long-term workforce training to meet production goals. This issue is not nuclear-specific, and the expansion of any supply chain will likely face similar challenges. While suppliers evaluated expected normal business demand from other markets outside of nuclear, it is possible that other market segments could expand more than predicted and compete for the same suppliers. One potential market that may compete for the same supplier resources is the United States military, as many of these suppliers support both the commercial nuclear sector as well as the Navy with reactors and components. In summary, suppliers in the United States believe that there is a way to increase production in order to begin meeting the demand which will exist for advanced reactors—as long as appropriate investments can be made in the supply chain in an appropriate timeframe. Based on the capacity projections and lead times, investment will be needed to meet the 5-year and 10-year production targets. Therefore, if significant nuclear deployment is to occur in the 2030s, investment and ramp up of the advanced nuclear supply chain will need to begin in the near future for the United States to successfully deploy these advanced reactors with domestic supply chains.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Autonomous experimentation systems for materials development: A community perspective

Solutions to many of the world's problems depend upon materials research and development. However, advanced materials can take decades to discover and decades more to fully deploy. Humans and robots have begun to partner to advance science and technology orders of magnitude faster than humans do today through the development and exploitation of closed-loop, autonomous experimentation systems. This review discusses the specific challenges and opportunities related to materials discovery and development that will emerge from this new paradigm. Our perspective incorporates input from stakeholders in academia, industry, government laboratories, and funding agencies. We outline the current status, barriers, and needed investments, culminating with a vision for the path forward. We intend the article to spark interest in this emerging research area and to motivate potential practitioners by illustrating early successes. We also aspire to encourage a creative reimagining of the next generation of materials science infrastructure. To this end, we frame future investments in materials science and technology, hardware and software infrastructure, artificial intelligence and autonomy methods, and critical workforce development for autonomous research.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
NASA NTRS2019

Building a Field: The Future of Astronomy with Gravitational Waves

Harnessing the sheer discovery potential of GW Astronomy will require bold, deliberate,and sustained efforts to train and develop the requisite workforce. The next decaderequires a strategic plan to build - from the ground up - a robust, open, andwell-connected GW Astronomy community with deep participation from traditionalastronomers, physicists, data scientists, and instrumentalists. This basic infrastructure issorely needed as an enabling foundation for research. We outline a set ofrecommendations for funding agencies, universities, and professional societies to helpbuild a thriving, diverse, and inclusive new field.

Holley-Bockelman, Kelly↗
DOE OSTI2022

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for Bioenergy Research: Opportunities and Challenges

The integration of artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) with automated experimentation, genomics, biosystems design, and bioprocessing technologies is poised to revolutionize scientific investigation and, particularly, bioenergy research. To identify the opportunities and challenges in this emerging research area, the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Biological and Environmental Research program (BER) and Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) held a joint virtual workshop on AI/ML for Bioenergy Research (AMBER) on August 23–25, 2022. These interests have since been amplified in a September 2022 Executive Order, “Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe, and Secure U.S. Bioeconomy,” to promote a whole-of government approach to biotechnology development (White House 2022). Approximately 50 scientists with various backgrounds and expertise from academia, industry, and DOE national laboratories met to discuss the opportunities and challenges of AI/ML for bioenergy research. Workshop participants were tasked with assessing the potential for AI/ML and laboratory automation to advance biological understanding and engineering in general. They particularly examined how integrating AI/ML tools with laboratory automation could accelerate biosystems design and optimize biomanufacturing. Discussions included the data and computational infrastructure needed to augment biosystems design applications and the expertise and workforce development efforts urgently required to shift integrated systems toward bioenergy research more broadly. Participants discussed many existing and future applications of AI/ML for biosystems design ranging from enzymes to plants and microbes, microbiomes, and bioprocess development. They also identified three key categories of scientific and technical opportunities and challenges: high-quality data, AI/ML algorithms, and laboratory automation. Several main takeaways emerged from the workshop: 1. Numerous AI/ML and automated experimentation applications exist for a variety of DOE mission needs in energy and the environment; 2. Exemplary research grand challenges for which AI/ML could provide solutions include: building microbes and microbial communities to specifications, developing closed-loop autonomous design and control for biosystems design, and advancing scale-up and automation; 3. Lack of sufficient high-quality, annotated data hinders the development of AI/ML applications; 4. New and improved AI/ML tools are needed, particularly those meeting the specific needs of the BER and BETO research communities; 5. Trade-offs in performance, cost, and reliability exist between deploying commercially available versus building custom-developed instrumentation and software for automated or autonomous experimentation; translation of manual to automated or autonomous methods is often a nontrivial endeavor; 6. Training a new generation of young scientists who can develop and apply AI/ML tools is needed to solve long-standing scientific challenges in bioenergy research. The integration of AI/ML tools and automated experimentation represents a new data-driven research paradigm complementary to the traditional hypothesis-driven research paradigm. This paradigm accelerates design and optimization of biological systems and processes for a variety of DOE mission needs in energy and the environment. The AMBER workshop broadly explored the potential of this new paradigm for bioenergy research, of particular interest to BER and BETO, and identified key challenges and opportunities that DOE can address in the coming years by leveraging its unique capabilities and resources.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Advancing Energy Justice in Alaska

NREL works with remote and rural communities across Alaska and the world to develop energy and building technologies that enhance culture, strengthen economies, and improve resilience in a changing environment. Alaska and Arctic communities not only face one of the harshest climates on earth; they also pay some of the highest energy and housing costs in the nation. NREL's Alaska Campus collaborates with communities and tribes to develop affordable, culturally appropriate homes and buildings that combine traditional knowledge and twenty-first century technology. Demonstration homes deployed all over Alaska prove out new technologies in energy efficiency, foundations, indoor air quality, and clean energy. Local workforce development is incorporated into every project: new homes are built by local workers, often including the home's future occupant. With the Arctic warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet, coastal erosion and thawing permafrost are wreaking havoc on roads, buildings, and infrastructure across Alaska. With an inclusive approach to R&D, NREL is helping communities adapt to a changing environment and advancing energy justice in the world's extremes.

Alaska housing prototypes↗
NASA NTRS2018

Thermal Protection Systems Technology Transfer from Apollo and Space Shuttle to the Orion Program

This paper describes how the Orion program is utilizing the Thermal Protection System (TPS) experience from the Apollo and Space Shuttle programs to reduce program risk and improve affordability to meet NASA's future manned exploration missions. The Orion program successfully completed the Exploration Flight Test (EFT-1) mission in 2014 and is currently assembling, integrating, and testing the next spacecraft for the Exploration Mission (EM-1) to meet the flight test objectives of an unmanned orbital mission to the moon and return to earth in 2019. The Orion spacecraft production operations are located in the Neil Armstrong Operations and Checkout (O&C) facility at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) providing an affordable and seamless delivery approach of vehicles directly to the launch site eliminating spacecraft transportation and additional checkout testing. Innovative vehicle design, manufacturing and test operations approaches are maturing and evolving with each Orion vehicle build to support the challenging NASA exploration mission requirements beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) while reducing program cost and schedule impacts. An example of Orion's evolution is the incorporation of an improved heat shield design, assembly and testing approach to meet the higher re-entry velocities for a lunar return for the EM-1 mission. The EFT- 1 heat shield was based on the Apollo heat shield manufacturing processes and was assembled at a supplier location and then transported to KSC for final integration. The EM-1 heat shield is now manufactured, assembled, tested, and installed into the spacecraft at the O&C facility reducing program cost and production schedules. The transition of the Space Shuttle TPS capabilities has enabled Orion to provide a human rated capsule design using proven materials and processes established over years of orbiter re-entry missions. The Orion Crew Module (CM) TPS configuration is derived from the Apollo CM approach utilizing improved materials and processes developed from the Space Shuttle program. The Orion EFT-1 heat shield utilized the Avcoat ablative material from Apollo which was injected into a honeycomb substrate and has been updated for EM-1 incorporating a block configuration bonded to a composite shell structure. This approach utilizes the proven Avcoat material for the heat shield ablator and is utilizing derived bonding and inspection methods and techniques from the Space Shuttle tile experience. The Orion back shell TPS configuration is based on Space Shuttle tile designs using proven tile materials and coatings. The Orion forward bay cover utilizes the high temperature tiles similar to the back shell tiles and low temperature blankets derived from the Space Shuttle program reducing weight impacts. Space Shuttle Multi-Layer Insulation (MLI) is installed in the Orion capsule to control the interior temperature environment providing a light weight design. These TPS design approaches have performed successfully on the Orion first flight test on EFT-1 and are incorporated in the configuration for the next flight test for EM-1. Completion of these two flight tests will certify the TPS for the Orion program for human rated exploration missions and has reduced the development cost to the Orion program. In addition to transitioning the Space Shuttle TPS design configurations to Orion, the supporting manufacturing infrastructure, manufacturing processes, and inspection methods are also incorporated into the Orion assembly operations at KSC. This has avoided significant startup schedule and costs impacts of new capabilities and development of support operations necessary to fabricate, install, inspect, and validate the TPS installations for the Orion spacecraft. The Thermal Protection System Facility (TPSF) which supported the Space Shuttle program provides the heat shield Avcoat blocks and the back shell AETB-8 tiles for Orion program. Extending the existing Space Shuttle TPS operations at KSC provides onsite support to the Orion spacecraft assembly operations. A significant benefit to the Orion program is the transition of the Space Shuttle technician work force at KSC. This highly skilled workforce was able to transition to the Orion program and immediately support the TPS installation operations. They brought with them the human rated manufacturing and assembly operations culture that was critical to the Space Shuttle success avoiding the retraining cost and schedule impacts of a new workforce to Orion. The technician skills certification program from the Space Shuttle was found to be compatible with the Lockheed Martin technician certification programs enabling a seamless training process utilizing process similarity avoiding the cost of retraining the work force to Orion standards. The existing workforce is certificated for multiple processes enabling reassignment of technicians to other tasks in the Orion AI&P operations reducing the overall touch labor manpower requirements. Additional benefits of using the Space Shuttle workforce is the incorporation of the lessons learned from Space Shuttle processes to improve the Orion TPS processes. This has resulted in a continuous evolution of TPS processes to improve the producibility and reduce the program cost for the TPS for the Orion program. Transitioning the Apollo and Space Shuttle TPS designs, processes, and technician workforce has been instrumental in enabling Orion to successfully meet the program challenges for NASA's exploration missions of the future.

Stewart, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2023

Understanding Workforce Agility at NASA Kennedy Space Center

NASA leads the world in space research and provides other government agencies, educational institutions, and companies opportunities to explore, launch, and conduct research in and around space. NASA has 11 formal locations based around the United States, and each has different goals and objectives to help NASA meet its overall mission. 2004, President George Bush announced a new vision for the Space Exploration program. During his grand announcement, he discussed that the Space Shuttles would retire due to the 2003 Space Shuttle Columbia accident, where the crew and the space vehicle were lost. The Kennedy Space Center (KSC) would no longer manage the day-to-day operations of maintaining the US Space Shuttle fleet. Our NASA teams would continue working to finish the Space Shuttle program's mission to build the International Space Station. Afterward, NASA would transition to develop and test a new spacecraft, the Crew Exploration Vehicle. The third goal was to return to the moon by 2020 as the launching point for missions beyond, to get humans from lower Earth orbit to the moon and Mars. (Secretary, 2004) The KSC engineering workforce had to prepare to transition from Operational support of the Space Shuttle program to the design and development of over 50 subsystems for the future SLS and Orion Launch Systems at the Kennedy Space Center. These subsystems developed at the Kennedy Space Center Engineering Directorate followed a comprehensive design process that required several different product deliverables during various phases for each subsystem. (Schafer et al., 2013) What allowed these systems to be successful? What enabled NASA KSC to complete over 130 Artemis 1 Design Certification and System Acceptance Reviews, closing over 21,656 Requirements to deem the Artemis 1 rocket ready for launch? Little is known about the NASA engineering workforce agility characteristics that enabled the organization to transition from the Space Shuttle program that ended in 2011 and launch the Artemis Program's SLS rocket on November 16, 2022.

Workforce Agility↗
DOE OSTI2025

From Structured Solvents to Hybrid Materials (SS2HM) for Chemically Selective Capture and Electromagnetic Release of CO 2 : Mechanisms, Stability and Interfaces (Final Report)

The goal of this research program was to develop high capacity sorbents amenable for alternative regeneration approaches for direct air capture (DAC) of CO 2 . In particular, the research aimed to develop an understanding of CO 2 binding mechanism, thermal and oxidative stability, and regeneration energetics of functionalized ionic liquids (ILs), deep eutectic solvents (DESs), and porous materials. ILs and DESs are high-dielectric solvents with structural tunability that permits the rational-design for energy-efficient regeneration approaches based on electromagnetic (EM) field and moisture-swing. By further incorporating these solvents into polymeric capsules and other structural supports, multi-scale interfaces for targeted CO 2 and energy transfers were achieved. Aspects related to CO 2 capacity, selectivity, stability, dielectric properties, and binding energies were examined through experimental and computational design to identify molecular descriptors to inform future design of structured solvents and hybrid materials for DAC. Enclosed final report details the key findings, science advancements, and workforce development efforts from this project.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2025

Construction Methodology Transformation for the Benefit of Workforce Development

Construction is a key economic engine driving both national and global economies. While manual, onsite construction methods dominate the U.S. construction industry, a major shift towards offsite methods has been underway due to its efficiency, speed, and potential cost savings. The workforce necessary for offsite construction growth does not exist in its current form because of the focus on onsite methodologies and the lack of exposure to offsite building methods at all levels of a student’s learning journey. The growth of the U.S. construction industry and competitiveness in an increasingly global construction market over the coming decades can only be supported by a dramatic increase in the use of offsite methods, which requires ramping up workforce training for certain skillsets. The goal of Construction Methodology Transformation for the Benefit of Workforce Development was to understand the opportunities and barriers in both education and industry and to identify best practices for offering curriculum and training to educators, industry, and students that would support skills needed for careers in offsite construction. Our team proposed combining three offsite construction workforce development needs: content development, exposure and training, and job placement - under a single Platform model that would increase experience and career opportunities for students and help match them with potential industry members. Through our proposed solution we expected to see: developed offsite curriculum being utilized by educators and students; an increase in the identification of construction technology and offsite construction methods; an average increase in knowledge gain of at least 25% after participation in pilots; better equipped candidates who are prepared for jobs in offsite construction; and a beta workforce development platform that helps build more pathways for students looking for careers in offsite construction. The two pilots included almost 250 students and resulted in an average knowledge gain of 37 percent. Our research has identified areas of opportunity, for both education and industry to make collaborative training programs more efficient and successful. The chosen techniques for this program are extremely effective when both the school and factory have solid processes and cultures in place to accept students into training programs. This project serves as an important stepping stone to industrywide collaboration to move workforce development for offsite construction forward across the country. With continued collaboration programs like this can provide much needed early exposure and training in offsite construction and we can begin to fill important positions for the future of construction.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
NASA NTRS2013

US Rocket Propulsion Industrial Base Health Metrics

The number of active liquid rocket engine and solid rocket motor development programs has severely declined since the "space race" of the 1950s and 1960s center dot This downward trend has been exacerbated by the retirement of the Space Shuttle, transition from the Constellation Program to the Space launch System (SLS) and similar activity in DoD programs center dot In addition with consolidation in the industry, the rocket propulsion industrial base is under stress. To Improve the "health" of the RPIB, we need to understand - The current condition of the RPIB - How this compares to past history - The trend of RPIB health center dot This drives the need for a concise set of "metrics" - Analogous to the basic data a physician uses to determine the state of health of his patients - Easy to measure and collect - The trend is often more useful than the actual data point - Can be used to focus on problem areas and develop preventative measures The nation's capability to conceive, design, develop, manufacture, test, and support missions using liquid rocket engines and solid rocket motors that are critical to its national security, economic health and growth, and future scientific needs. center dot The RPIB encompasses US government, academic, and commercial (including industry primes and their supplier base) research, development, test, evaluation, and manufacturing capabilities and facilities. center dot The RPIB includes the skilled workforce, related intellectual property, engineering and support services, and supply chain operations and management. This definition touches the five main segments of the U.S. RPIB as categorized by the USG: defense, intelligence community, civil government, academia, and commercial sector. The nation's capability to conceive, design, develop, manufacture, test, and support missions using liquid rocket engines and solid rocket motors that are critical to its national security, economic health and growth, and future scientific needs. center dot The RPIB encompasses US government, academic, and commercial (including industry primes and their supplier base) research, development, test, evaluation, and manufacturing capabilities and facilities. center dot The RPIB includes the skilled workforce, related intellectual property, engineering and support services, and supply chain operations and management. This definition touches the five main segments of the U.S. RPIB as categorized by the USG: defense, intelligence community, civil government, academia, and commercial sector.

Doreswamy, Rajiv↗