Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “printed”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Print-Consistency and Process-Interaction for Inkjet-Printed Copper on Flexible Substrate

Printed electronics is a fastest growing and emerging technology that have shown much potential in several industries including automotive, wearables, healthcare, and aerospace. Its applications can be found not only in flexible but also in large area electronics. The technology provides an effective and convenient method to additively deposit conductive and insulating materials on any type of substrate. Comparing with traditional manufacturing processes, which involves chemical etching, this technology also comes to be relatively environmental friendly. Despite its status, it is not without its challenges. Starting from the material being compatible in the printer equipment to the point of achieving fine resolutions, and with excellent properties are some of the challenges that printed electronics face. Among the myriad of printing technologies such as Aerosol Jet, micro-dispensing, gravure printing, screen printing, Inkjet printing, Inkjet has gained much attention due to its low-cost, low material consumption, and roll-to-roll capability for mass manufacturing. The technology has been widely used in home and office, but recently gained interest in printed electronics in a research and development setting. Conductive materials used in Inkjet printing generally comprises of metal Nanoparticles that need to be thermally sintered for it to be conductive. The preferred metal of choice has been mostly silver due to its excellent electrical properties and ease in sintering. However, silver comes to be expensive than its counterpart copper. Since copper is prone to oxidation, much focus has been given towards photonic sintering that involves sudden burst of pulsed light at certain energy to sinter the copper Nanoparticles. With this technique, only the printed material gets sintered in a matter of seconds without having a great impact on its substrate, due to which it is also preferred in low temperature applications. With all the knowledge, there is still a large gap in the process side with copper where it is important to look how the print process affects the resolution of the print along with the effect of post-print processes on electrical and mechanical properties. In this paper, a copper Inkjet ink is utilized for understanding the effect of Inkjet print parameters on the ejected droplet and its resolution. Post-print process is also quantified using a photonic sintering equipment for excellent electrical and mechanical properties. To demonstrate the complete process, commercial-off-the-shelf components will also be mounted on the additively printed pads via Inkjet. Statistically, control charting technique will be utilized to understand the capability of the Inkjet process.

printed electronics↗
NASA NTRS2014

Biomaterials Out of Thin Air: In Situ, On-Demand Printing of Advanced Biocomposites: A New Materials Design and Production Technique Using 3D-Printed Arrays of Bioengineered Cells

We have completed the proof of concept described in our Phase I proposal, a two-material array of nonstructural proteins. We created an implementation of each step in our technology concept and demonstrated its critical functionality. The biological chassis and printing hardware we created as part of this work can be re-used for future work by inserting a material coding region upstream of the fluorescent tag. Overall, we showed that our technology concept is sound. The mission benefit analyses, as described in our Phase I proposal, are complete and contained in this report. These calculations show that our technology can save hundreds of kilograms of upmass for a potential planetary human habit construction mission: the mass per habitat module can be reduced by approximately one third if the biomaterials are manufactured on Earth and included in the mission upmass, and the full 240 kg per module can be saved if the materials are derived entirely from in situ resources. Mass savings between these two extremes is expected for an actual mission, depending on the level of in situ resource extraction technology. We have shown that continued advancement of this technology concept for use in a space mission environment is justified. Our survey of future development pathways proved extremely informative in light of the lessons learned from our proof of concept work and mission scenario analyses. For example, we were able for the first time to distinguish between the levels of functionality provided by production of structural proteins, other polymers such as polysaccharides, and true organic-inorganic composites such as bone and mineralized shell. This new information represents a significant advance in formulating specific applications, and key enabling technologies, for our proposed concept. We surveyed potential collaborations with other projects and synergies with enabling technologies that are developing. We have received requests for collaboration from other institutions, including labs at Stanford University and Drexel University. We have also received visits from industry, including Organovo, a tissue engineering company, and Autodesk, a major 3D and materials design software company. Finally, we have been in touch with the team behind the 2013 NIAC Phase ll 'Super Ball Bot-Structures for Planetary Landing and Exploration' and are planning to develop our biomaterial printing technology with the goal of enabling tensegrity-based rovers such as theirs to use lighter, more robust materials. A smooth transition from TRL 2 to TRL 3 assumes that the implementations of the technology concept which demonstrate critical functionality are also pathways for future development; while this is the case for most hardware or software projects, the multidisciplinary nature of our project, particularly the biological aspect of it, means that this is not always true. For example, as part of this work we showed that although there are large number of known genetic parts that correspond to non-structural materials, this is not true for sequences for structural organic proteins, let alone biominerals. These realizations allowed us to further subdivide our concept into more detailed development areas, some of which are clearly established at TRL 3, others of which were newly identified sub-technologies moved from TRL 1 to TRL 2. Similarly, although a single feasibility /benefit analysis is sufficient for advancement from TRL 2 to TRL 3, not all potential benefits to a technology concept as broad in scope as ours are apparent at TRL 2. Both our future pathways survey and our proof of concept work highlighted that the true mass savings potential of our technology concept cannot be quantified without modification of existing materials modelling tools to take into account the possibility of positional materials properties customization. Therefore, we have simultaneously both advanced one potential set of applications of our technology concept from TRL 2 to TRL 3 and also identified a previously unknown set of applications and advanced it from TRL 1 to TRL 2. Overall, we have moved the original formulation of our concept forward from TRL 2 to TRL 3, and the expanded formulation of it presented in this document has been advanced from a combination of TRL 1 and early 1RL 2 to an overall late TRL 2. We have also identified the key areas necessary for both short-term and long-term advancement, and made recommendations for specific future work in the most promising directions. With future work on a 1-2 year timeframe to continue advancement to overall TRL 3, we will be well positioned to begin work on a specific space mission technology insertion path.

Biology↗
NASA NTRS1985

Mod silver metallization: Screen printing and ink-jet printing

Basic material efforts have proven to be very successful. Adherent and conductive films were achieved. A silver neodecanoate/bismuth 2-ethylhexanoate mixture has given the best results in both single and double layer applications. Another effort is continuing to examine the feasibility of applying metallo-organic deposition films by use of an ink jet printer. Direct line writing would result in a saving of process time and materials. So far, some well defined lines have been printed.

Vest, R. W.↗
NASA NTRS2014

3D Printing In Zero-G ISS Technology Demonstration

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has a long term strategy to fabricate components and equipment on‐demand for manned missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. To support this strategy, NASA and Made in Space, Inc. are developing the 3D Printing In Zero‐G payload as a Technology Demonstration for the International Space Station (ISS). The 3D Printing In Zero‐G experiment ('3D Print') will be the first machine to perform 3D printing in space. The greater the distance from Earth and the longer the mission duration, the more difficult resupply becomes; this requires a change from the current spares, maintenance, repair, and hardware design model that has been used on the International Space Station (ISS) up until now. Given the extension of the ISS Program, which will inevitably result in replacement parts being required, the ISS is an ideal platform to begin changing the current model for resupply and repair to one that is more suitable for all exploration missions. 3D Printing, more formally known as Additive Manufacturing, is the method of building parts/objects/tools layer‐by‐layer. The 3D Print experiment will use extrusion‐based additive manufacturing, which involves building an object out of plastic deposited by a wire‐feed via an extruder head. Parts can be printed from data files loaded on the device at launch, as well as additional files uplinked to the device while on‐orbit. The plastic extrusion additive manufacturing process is a low‐energy, low‐mass solution to many common needs on board the ISS. The 3D Print payload will serve as the ideal first step to proving that process in space. It is unreasonable to expect NASA to launch large blocks of material from which parts or tools can be traditionally machined, and even more unreasonable to fly up multiple drill bits that would be required to machine parts from aerospace‐grade materials such as titanium 6‐4 alloy and Inconel. The technology to produce parts on demand, in space, offers unique design options that are not possible through traditional manufacturing methods while offering cost-effective, high‐precision, low‐unit on‐demand manufacturing. Thus, Additive Manufacturing capabilities are the foundation of an advanced manufacturing in space roadmap. The 3D Printing In Zero‐G experiment will demonstrate the capability of utilizing Additive Manufacturing technology in space. This will serve as the enabling first step to realizing an additive manufacturing, print‐on‐demand "machine shop" for long‐duration missions and sustaining human exploration of other planets, where there is extremely limited ability and availability of Earth‐based logistics support. Simply put, Additive Manufacturing in space is a critical enabling technology for NASA. It will provide the capability to produce hardware on‐demand, directly lowering cost and decreasing risk by having the exact part or tool needed in the time it takes to print. This capability will also provide the much‐needed solution to the cost, volume, and up‐mass constraints that prohibit launching everything needed for long‐duration or long‐distance missions from Earth, including spare parts and replacement systems. A successful mission for the 3D Printing In Zero‐G payload is the first step to demonstrate the capability of printing on orbit. The data gathered and lessons learned from this demonstration will be applied to the next generation of additive manufacturing technology on orbit. It is expected that Additive Manufacturing technology will quickly become a critical part of any mission's infrastructure.

Werkheiser, Niki↗
NASA NTRS2024

3D Printed Materials Characterization for Rapid Prototyping and Plant Growth

Through KSC IRTD funding in 2022, this project brought a list of 18, 3D printed filaments into formal characterization testing to provide a reference for their behaviors under relevant applications. The project format set up a series of tests to expose 3D printed specimens. A total of 1,989 individual 3D printed test specimens were sent across KSC to be scrutinized by three laboratories to fulfill a multidisciplinary assessment of each material TRL. Testing started with 18 materials. Initially, seed germination assays in the PPA, sample materials were enclosed in petri dishes with lettuce seeds on damp germination paper. No significant impacts on lettuce seed germination were observed in this testing. Next, sample coupons were printed and sent for materials testing to the KSC Analysis/Mechanical and Environmental Testing Laboratory, where they were subjected to 14- and 30-day soak periods in solutions used to provide nutrients to plants or to sanitize hardware before and after use. Following a long soak typical of a 30-day plant growout in Hoagland’s solution, 14 materials gained more than 10% of their own mass. This indicated an increased potential for leaching or providing conditions that are not food safe. Materials that exceeded 15% absorption by mass were eliminated from further testing. Based off this result, the team continued with a core list of nine filaments to fulfill Tensile, Flexural, Biofilm formation, and plant growth testing. Those materials were PLA (Raise3D), ABS (Raise3D), PETG (PolyethyleneTerephthalate Glycol) (Raise3D), ASA (Acrylonitrile Styrene Acrylate) (Raise3D), PC (Polycarbonate) (Raise3D), TPU (Thermoplastic polyurethane)-95 (Raise3D), PLA Copper (Gizmodorks), PP (Polypropylene) (Braskem), and HIPS (High Impact Polystyrene) (Gizmodorks). Testing also quantified the spectral impact of using different color 3D printed surfaces in a growth chamber. The material used for spectral testing was PLA. Printing employed a standard surface texture representative of all materials. It was shown through Tensile Testing (ASTM D638-22) that the breaking force of a 3D printed part greatly varied depending on layer orientation. This is common through all materials, and demonstrates that the strength of a 3D printed component can be maximized by layering the material normal to the primary force on the part. Four-point flexural testing (ASTM D790) provided quantities of interest, Flexural modulus, Flexural strength, Flexural stress, and strain at break within a 5% strain limit from each of nine materials. Biofilm formation testing was conducted in the Molecular and Microbiological Laboratory. Testing completed on specimens from each material showed equal formation on the surface. Additional plant growth testing was conducted in the PPA beyond the initial germination testing. The final assessment documents that three materials (PLA, ABS, and PC) have reached TRL 6 through extensive testing, and ultimate end-to-end applied use in experimental or testing conditions (flight and ground). TRL 5 materials (ASA, TPU-95, PLA Copper, PP, PETG, and HIPS) have all been successfully applied in Research and Development for crop growth applications and are ready to be applied in formal testing. TRL 4 materials Nylon910, PLA Carbon Fiber, PPA CF, PPA Glass Fiber (GF), NinjaFlex, and P-filament 721 are materials that were able to be printed and tested, but have yet to show data meeting applied requirements. TRL 3 NylonX, Flex TPE-185, and Nylon were unable to be reliably printed to fulfill testing. These results provide researchers with reference for materials to use during plant growth experimentation, and also set a standard for future characterization work applying 3D printing and materials to testing, research, and experimentation.

Gioia Massa↗
NASA NTRS2017

NASA Centennial Challenge: Three Dimensional (3D) Printed Habitat, Phase 2

The NASA Centennial Challenges: 3D-Printed Habitat Challenge seeks to develop the fundamental technologies necessary to manufacture an off-world habitat using mission recycled materials and/or local indigenous materials. The vision is that autonomous habitat manufacturing machines will someday be deployed to the Moon or Mars to construct shelters for human habitation. NASA and Bradley University, are holding a new US$ 2.5 million competition to design and build a 3-D printed habitat for deep space exploration, including the agency's journey to Mars. The multi-phase 3-D Printed Habitat Challenge, part of NASA's Centennial Challenges program, is designed to advance the additive construction technology needed to create sustainable housing solutions for Earth and beyond. The first phase of the competition ran through Sept. 27, 2015. This phase, a design competition, called on participants to develop state-of-the-art architectural concepts that take advantage of the unique capabilities 3-D printing offers. The top 3 prizes with a prize purse of $40,000 were awarded at the 2015 World Maker Faire in New York. The second phase of the competition is called the Structural Member Competition and it is divided into three levels happening in the spring and summer of 2017. The Compression Test Competition (Level 1) focuses on the fabrication technologies needed to manufacture structural components from a combination of indigenous materials and recyclables, or indigenous materials alone. For Level 1, teams will develop 3D printable materials, build a 3D printing machine, and print two specimens: a truncated cone and a cylinder. The Level 2 Beam Member Competition is the second of three sub-competitions within the overall Structural Member Competition. For Level 2, teams will print a beam that will be tested. The Level 3 Head to Head Competition is the third of three sub-competitions within the overall Structural Member Competition. For Level 3, teams will develop 3D printable materials, use a 3D printing machine, and print three compression specimens of the elected material, three flexural specimens of the elected material, and one dome structure. Tests conducted on the specimens and the dome structure will determine Level 3 scores and awards. On Earth these same habitat manufacturing capabilities could be used to produce housing wherever affordable housing is needed and access to conventional building materials and skills is limited. Terrestrially, it is envisioned that local indigenous materials (dirt, clay, sand, etc.) could be combined with readily available recyclable materials and used to construct semi-permanent shelters against environmental elements for human habitation. The goal of the 3D-Printed Habitat Challenge is to foster the development of new technologies necessary to additively manufacture a habitat using local indigenous materials with, or without, recyclable materials. This paper will summarize the Level 2 results of this NASA Centennial Challenge competition and it will discuss related technology advancement.

3D printing↗
NASA NTRS2013

Conductive Carbon Nanotube Inks for Use with Desktop Inkjet Printing Technology

Inkjet printing is a common commercial process. In addition to the familiar use in printing documents from computers, it is also used in some industrial applications. For example, wire manufacturers are required by law to print the wire type, gauge, and safety information on the exterior of each foot of manufactured wire, and this is typically done with inkjet or laser printers. The goal of this work was the creation of conductive inks that can be applied to a wire or flexible substrates via inkjet printing methods. The use of inkjet printing technology to print conductive inks has been in testing for several years. While researchers have been able to get the printing system to mechanically work, the application of conductive inks on substrates has not consistently produced adequate low resistances in the kilohm range. Conductive materials can be applied using a printer in single or multiple passes onto a substrate including textiles, polymer films, and paper. The conductive materials are composed of electrical conductors such as carbon nanotubes (including functionalized carbon nanotubes and metal-coated carbon nanotubes); graphene, a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (e.g., pentacene and bisperipentacene); metal nanoparticles; inherently conductive polymers (ICP); and combinations thereof. Once the conductive materials are applied, the materials are dried and sintered to form adherent conductive materials on the substrate. For certain formulations, increased conductivity can be achieved by printing on substrates supported by low levels of magnetic field alignment. The adherent conductive materials can be used in applications such as damage detection, dust particle removal, smart coating systems, and flexible electronic circuitry. By applying alternating layers of different electrical conductors to form a layered composite material, a single homogeneous layer can be produced with improved electrical properties. It is believed that patterning alternate layers of different conductors may improve electrical pathways through alignment of the conductors and band gap optimization. One feature of this innovation is that flexible conductive traces could be accomplished with a conductive ink having a surface resistivity of less than 10 ohms/square. Another result was that a composite material comprising a mixture of carbon nanotubes and metallic nanoparticles could be applied by inkjet printing to flexible substrates, and the resulting applied material was one to two orders of magnitude more conductive than a material made by printing inks containing carbon nanotubes alone.

Roberson, Luke↗
NASA NTRS2023

Machine Learning to Increase the Quality and Repeatability of 3D Printing - Workflow

The imprecise nature of three-dimensional (3D) printing limits the technology’s use beyond prototyping. For production of end-use parts, such as those for aerospace applications, improvements are needed to enhance quality and repeatability. Much of the difficulty in obtaining high quality printed parts lies in finding optimum printing parameters. Currently, this requires trial and error performed by an expert. Finding the optimum printing parameters is also obfuscated by the variation in optimum parameters throughout the part due to part geometry and printer effects. To allow for locally optimized printing parameters, one can envision a machine learning algorithm that could take in an object, predict the best printing parameters, and communicate these parameters to a printer. With this scenario in mind, we developed a tool that can predict and implement locally optimized printing parameters in 3D printing. This tool consists of elements designed to detect errors in a printed part, predict the probability of local flaws occurring at each point in the part, and select the optimal local parameters for the highest quality part given hardware limitations. The results of this work were highlighted in Advanced Materials Technologies. In this paper, we will discuss in greater depth the workflow and algorithms involved with this tool that were not detailed in the journal publication.

additive manufacturing↗
NASA NTRS2019

NASA Centennial Challenge: 3D Printed Habitat, Phase 3 Final Results

NASA's Centennial Challenges program uses prize competitions with the goal of accelerating innovation in the aerospace industry. Competitions in the Centennial Challenges portfolio have previously focused on advancements in space robotics, regolith excavation, bio-printing, astronaut suit design, small satellites, and solar-powered vehicles. NASA's Three Dimensional (3D) Printed Habitat Centennial Challenge represents a partnership between NASA and the non-profit partner: Bradley University, with co-sponsors Caterpillar, Bechtel, Brick and Mortar Ventures, the American Concrete Institute, and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) to spur development in automated additive construction technologies. The challenge asks teams to design and construct a scaled and simulated Martian habitat using indigenous materials and large scale 3D automated printing systems. Phase 1 of the competition, held in 2015, was an architectural design competition for habitat concepts that could be 3D printed. Phase 2, completed in 2017, asked teams to develop feedstocks from indigenous materials and hydrocarbon polymer recyclables, and demonstrate automated printing systems to manufacture these feedstocks into test specimens to assess mechanical strength. This paper will discuss the Phase 3 competition, focusing on technology outcomes that can potentially be infused into both terrestrial and planetary construction applications. The Phase 3 competition was divided into two sub-competitions: 1) virtual construction, where teams created a high fidelity building information model (BIM) of their 3D-printed habitat design and 2) the construction competition, which required teams to 3D print a structural foundation and subject materials samples to freeze/thaw testing and impact testing (level 1), produce a habitat element and complete a hydrostatic test (level 2), and additively manufacture a 1:3 scale habitat onsite in a head to head competition at Caterpillar, inc.'s Edwards Demonstration & Learning Center near Peoria, Illinois over the course of three days (level 3). While the Phase 2 competition focused primarily on the development of novel feedstocks and robotic printing systems, Phase 3 emphasized the scale-up of these systems and autonomous operation (demonstrating the capability to operate systems on precursor missions prior to the arrival of crew, or terrestrially in field operation settings where human tending of a manufacturing system may be limited). The Phase 3 virtual construction levels yielded a number of novel habitat designs, including both modular habitats and vertically-oriented habitat concepts. The Phase 3 construction competition also challenged teams to autonomously place penetrations and interfacing elements in additively manufactured structures. The paper will emphasize potential applications for the new materials and technologies developed under the umbrella of the competition within NASA's portfolio and in Earth-based applications such as disaster response and infrastructure improvement.

Construction↗
NASA NTRS2019

Nasa Centennial Challenge: Three Dimensional (3d) Printed Habitat, Phase 3

NASA's Centennial Challenges program uses prize competitions with the goal of accelerating innovation in the aerospace industry. Competitions in the Centennial Challenges portfolio have previously focused on advancements in space robotics, regolith excavation, bio-printing, astronaut suit design, small satellites, and solar-powered vehicles. NASA's Three Dimensional (3D) Printed Habitat Centennial Challenge represents a partnership between NASA and the non-profit partner: Bradley University, with co-sponsors Caterpillar, Bechtel, Brick and Mortar Ventures, the American Concrete Institute, and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) to spur development in automated additive construction technologies. The challenge asks teams to design and construct a scaled and simulated Martian habitat using indigenous materials and large scale 3D automated printing systems. Phase 1 of the competition, held in 2015, was an architectural design competition for habitat concepts that could be 3D printed. Phase 2, completed in 2017, asked teams to develop feedstocks from indigenous materials and hydrocarbon polymer recyclables, and demonstrate automated printing systems to manufacture these feedstocks into test specimens to assess mechanical strength. This paper will discuss the Phase 3 competition, focusing on technology outcomes that can potentially be infused into both terrestrial and planetary construction applications. The Phase 3 competition was divided into two sub-competitions: 1) virtual construction, where teams created a high fidelity building information model (BIM) of their 3D-printed habitat design and 2) the construction competition, which required teams to 3D print a structural foundation and subject materials samples to freeze/thaw testing and impact testing (level 1), produce a habitat element and complete a hydrostatic test (level 2), and additively manufacture a 1:3 scale habitat onsite in a head to head competition at Caterpillar, inc.'s Edwards Demonstration & Learning Center near Peoria, Illinois over the course of three days (level 3). While the Phase 2 competition focused primarily on the development of novel feedstocks and robotic printing systems, Phase 3 emphasized the scale-up of these systems and autonomous operation (demonstrating the capability to operate systems on precursor missions prior to the arrival of crew, or terrestrially in field operation settings where human tending of a manufacturing system may be limited). The Phase 3 virtual construction levels yielded a number of novel habitat designs, including both modular habitats and vertically-oriented habitat concepts. The Phase 3 construction competition also challenged teams to autonomously place penetrations and interfacing elements in additively manufactured structures. The paper will emphasize potential applications for the new materials and technologies developed under the umbrella of the competition within NASA's portfolio and in Earth-based applications such as disaster response and infrastructure improvement.

Centennial challenge↗
NASA NTRS2016

3D Printing in Zero G Technology Demonstration Mission: Summary of On-Orbit Operations, Material Testing, and Future Work

Human space exploration to date has been limited to low Earth orbit and the moon. The International Space Station (ISS), an orbiting laboratory 200 miles above the earth, provides a unique and incredible opportunity for researchers to prove out the technologies that will enable humans to safely live and work in space for longer periods of time and venture farther into the solar system. The ability to manufacture parts in-space rather than launch them from earth represents a fundamental shift in the current risk and logistics paradigm for human spaceflight. In particularly, additive manufacturing (or 3D printing) techniques can potentially be deployed in the space environment to enhance crew safety (by providing an on-demand part replacement capability) and decrease launch mass by reducing the number of spare components that must be launched for missions where cargo resupply is not a near-term option. In September 2014, NASA launched the 3D Printing in Zero G technology demonstration mission to the ISS to explore the potential of additive manufacturing for in-space applications and demonstrate the capability to manufacture parts and tools on-orbit. The printer for this mission was designed and operated by the company Made In Space under a NASA SBIR (Small Business Innovation Research) phase III contract. The overarching objectives of the 3D print mission were to use ISS as a testbed to further maturation of enhancing technologies needed for long duration human exploration missions, introduce new materials and methods to fabricate structure in space, enable cost-effective manufacturing for structures and mechanisms made in low-unit production, and enable physical components to be manufactured in space on long duration missions if necessary. The 3D print unit for fused deposition modeling (FDM) of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) was integrated into the ISS Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG) in November 2014 and phase I printing operations took place from November through December of that year. Phase I flight operations yielded 14 unique parts (21 total specimens) that could be directly compared against ground-based prints of identical geometry manufactured using the printer prior to its launch to ISS. The 3DP unit functioned safely and produced specimens necessary to advance the understanding of the critical design and operational parameters for the FDM process as affected by the microgravity environment. From the standpoint of operations, 3DP demonstrated the ability to remove parts from the build-tray on-orbit, teleoperate the printer from the ground, perform critical maintenance functions within defined human factors limits, produce a functional tool that could be evaluated for form/fit/function, and uplink a new part file from the ground and produce it on the printer. The flight parts arrived at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama in April 2015, where they underwent months of testing in the materials and processes laboratory. Ground and flight prints completed the following phases of testing: photographic/visual inspection, mass and density evaluation, structured light scanning, XRay and CT, mechanical testing, optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and chemical analysis. This presentation will discuss the results of this testing as well as phase II operations for the printer, which took place in June and July of 2016. Lessons learned from the tech demo and their impacts on the design and development of the second generation 3D printer for ISS, the Additive Manufacturing Facility (AMF) by Made In Space will also be presented. In addition, progress in other elements of NASA's In Space Manufacturing (ISM) initiative such as the on-demand ISM utilization catalog, in-space Recycler ISS Technology Demonstration development, launch packaging recycling, in-space printable electronics, development of higher strength polymeric materials for 3D printing and Additive Construction by Mobile Emplacement (ACME) will also be addressed.

Prater, Tracie↗
NASA NTRS2018

Zero Launch Mass Three Dimensional Print Head

NASA's strategic goal is to put humans on Mars in the 2030's. The NASA Human Spaceflight Architecture Team (HAT) and NASA Mars Design Reference Architecture (DRA) 5.0 has determined that in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) is an essential technology to accomplish this mission. Additive construction technology using in-situ materials from planetary surfaces will reduce launch mass, allow structures to be three dimensionally (3D) printed on demand, and will allow building designs to be transmitted digitally from Earth and printed in space. This will ultimately lead to elimination of reliance on structural materials launched from Earth (zero launch mass of construction consumables). The zero launch mass (ZLM) 3D print head project addressed this need by developing a system that 3D prints using a mixture of in-situ regolith and polymer as feedstock, determining the optimum mixture ratio and regolith particle size distribution, developing software to convert g-code into motion instructions for a FANUC robotic arm, printing test samples, performing materials testing, and printing a reduced scale habitable structure concept. This paper will focus on the ZLM 3D Print Head design, materials selection, software development, and lessons learned from operating the system in the NASA KSC Swamp Works Granular Mechanics & Regolith Operations (GMRO) Laboratory.

3D print↗
NASA NTRS2018

Zero Launch Mass Three Dimensional Print Head

NASA's strategic goal is to put humans on Mars in the 2030s. The NASA Human Spaceflight Architecture Team (HAT) and NASA Mars Design Reference Architecture (DRA) 5.0 has determined that in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) is an essential technology to accomplish this mission. Additive construction technology using in-situ materials from planetary surfaces will reduce launch mass, allow structures to be three dimensionally (3D) printed on demand, and will allow building designs to be transmitted digitally from Earth and printed in space. This will ultimately lead to elimination of reliance on structural materials launched from Earth (zero launch mass of construction consumables). The zero launch mass (ZLM) 3D print head project addressed this need by developing a system that 3D prints using a mixture of in-situ regolith and polymer as feedstock, determining the optimum mixture ratio and regolith particle size distribution, developing software to convert g-code into motion instructions for a FANUC robotic arm, printing test samples, performing materials testing, and printing a reduced scale habitable structure concept. This paper will focus on the ZLM 3D Print Head design, materials selection, software development, and lessons learned from operating the system in the NASA KSC Swamp Works Granular Mechanics & Regolith Operations (GMRO) Laboratory.

Regolith↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of Additive Manufacturing Technologies for 3D Printing of Spacecraft Heat Shields

Introduction: Ablative heat shields are an enabling technology for entry into planetary atmospheres. From the PICA heatshields used for several Mars rovers to the carbon phenolic material used for Galileo’s Jupiter entry probe, the heat shield manages the heat load transferred to the payload, protecting the sensitive scientific instruments carried on entry probes. The Additive Manufacturing of Thermal Protection Systems (AMTPS) project, an Early Career Initiative (ECI) funded by NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate and led by NASA Johnson Space Center, seeks to develop materials and processes for 3D printing ablative heat shields for spacecraft. Current methods for producing ablative heat shields are extremely labor intensive and re-quire extensive hands-on processes and quality control characterization. Additive manufacturing (AM) offers the possibility of reduced production times, improved reliability, and enhanced performance via graded compositions. Costs will also be reduced by reducing the time and labor required for heat shield production. Direct integration of the heat shield onto the structure during processing simplifies integration and reduces risk. Material Development: A critical challenge for the project is development of a material system that can (1) be printed in a near-net shape process and (2) perform well as an ablator. Achieving printability requires the material to flow under applied pressure, but maintain its shape once extruded from the printer nozzle. Ablative performance is measured by a multitude of markers, including char yield, char strength, thermal conductivity, and recession rate. Furthermore, there are several mechanical and thermal property considerations for vehicle integration including coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) and residual stress. AM technology will be leveraged to grade the material formulation and properties through the thickness of the heat shield, an architecture not possible with current manufacturing processes. To this end, “robust” material formulations have been pre-pared with higher density for use on the surface where most ablation will occur. “Insulative” material formulations, with lower density and lower thermal conductivity, are prepared for use in the depth of the heat shield. This graded architecture will re-duce the overall mass of the heat shield and reduce costs and/or increase scientific payload capacities. To achieve a material system with the required properties, multiple resins have been investigated in collaboration with NASA Ames Research Center. To tune printability and performance, resin additives were studied to improve flexibility of the cured material while maintaining acceptable ablative performance. Material coupons were printed and studied via a suite of mechanical and thermal characterization methods. Arc jet testing was conducted at NASA Ames Research Center to evaluate ablative performance and thermal protection under conditions expected in atmospheric entry. Manufacturing Scale-Up: A partnership with Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) aims to enable full-scale fabrication of a 3D printed heat shield. Leveraging expertise in manufacturing and 3D printing at ORNL, a mid-scale manufacturing demonstration unit will be built and tested, using a dual-layer ablative system printed directly onto the titanium structure. Work on robotic system integration is ongoing and efforts to scale up material mixing with a material compound will ensure accurate and homogenous composition. Flight Test: A hypersonic sub-orbital flight test will provide a rigorous test of material performance ranging from ablation, thermal management, and mechanical integrity. Design of the capsule has taken place in collaboration with the University of Kentucky. Data collected from the flight will inform future design efforts in material formulation, printing methodology, and heat shield-capsule integration.

additive manufacturing↗
NASA NTRS2014

3D Printing in Zero-G ISS Technology Demonstration

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has a long term strategy to fabricate components and equipment on-demand for manned missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. To support this strategy, NASA and Made in Space, Inc. are developing the 3D Printing In Zero-G payload as a Technology Demonstration for the International Space Station. The 3D Printing In Zero-G experiment will be the first machine to perform 3D printing in space. The greater the distance from Earth and the longer the mission duration, the more difficult resupply becomes; this requires a change from the current spares, maintenance, repair, and hardware design model that has been used on the International Space Station up until now. Given the extension of the ISS Program, which will inevitably result in replacement parts being required, the ISS is an ideal platform to begin changing the current model for resupply and repair to one that is more suitable for all exploration missions. 3D Printing, more formally known as Additive Manufacturing, is the method of building parts/ objects/tools layer-by-layer. The 3D Print experiment will use extrusion-based additive manufacturing, which involves building an object out of plastic deposited by a wire-feed via an extruder head. Parts can be printed from data files loaded on the device at launch, as well as additional files uplinked to the device while on-orbit. The plastic extrusion additive manufacturing process is a low-energy, low-mass solution to many common needs on board the ISS. The 3D Print payload will serve as the ideal first step to proving that process in space. It is unreasonable to expect NASA to launch large blocks of material from which parts or tools can be traditionally machined, and even more unreasonable to fly up specialized manufacturing hardware to perform the entire range of function traditionally machining requires. The technology to produce parts on demand, in space, offers unique design options that are not possible through traditional manufacturing methods while offering cost-effective, high-precision, low-unit on-demand manufacturing. Thus, Additive Manufacturing capabilities are the foundation of an advanced manufacturing in space roadmap.

Johnston, Mallory M.↗