Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 24
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science
2
Space Science and
the Integrated Technology Plan
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The NASA space science and applications program is described in Table
1, an encompassing statement of its scientific objectives. OSSA's focus is on
research objectives, rather than the technology that may be required to meet the
objectives. The six program objectives correspond loosely to the principal goals
of the science divisions that are part of the Office of Space Science and
Applications (OSSA): Astrophysics, Solar System Exploration, Space Physics,
Earth Sciences and Applications, Life Sciences, and Microgravity Sciences and
Applications. The Life Sciences Division contributes to both of the final two
objectives.
REPORT MENU
NOTICE
MEMBERSHIP
PREFACE
Table 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CHAPTER 1
OSSA'S STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES
CHAPTER 2
CHAPTER 3
CHAPTER 4
Observe the universe with high sensitivity and resolution across the
q
ACRONYMS
entire electromagnetic spectrum by completing the Great
BIOGRAPHIES
Observatories Program and conducting selected complementary
BIBLIOGRAPHY
measurements.
APPENDIX A
Complete the detailed scientific characterization of virtually all of the
q
APPENDIX B
solar system, including the terrestrial planets, typical primitive bodies
APPENDIX C
(asteroids and comets), and the solar system. Develop the scientific
APPENDIX D
foundation to support the planning of human exploration beyond
APPENDIX E
Earth by determining the nature of the environment and surfaces of
the Moon and Mars. Search for planetary systems around other stars.
Quantitatively describe the physical behavior of the Sun, the origins of
q
solar variability, the geospace environment, and the effects of solar
processes on the Earth, and extend these descriptions to Sun/planet
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (1 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 25
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
interactions, to the edge of the heliosphere, and into the interstellar
medium and galaxy beyond.
Establish a set of Earth-orbiting satellites and complementary
q
instruments to study the Earth system on a global scale, examine the
planet for evidence of global change, and eventually develop the
capability to model the Earth system to predict changes that will
occur, either naturally or as a result of human activity. OSSA's efforts
constitute a major contribution to the U.S. Global Change Research
Program.
Conduct and coordinate all aerospace medicine, medical support,
q
and life support activities within NASA. Determine human health, well-
being, and performance needs, and conduct research, both on Earth
and in space, to establish medical and life-support technology
requirements for those needs for human flight missions.
Study the nature of physical, chemical, and biological processes in a
q
low-gravity environment, and apply these studies to advance science
and applications in such fields as fluid physics, materials science,
combustion science, gravitational biology, medicine, and
biotechnology by exploiting the unique capabilities provided by the
Space Shuttle, Space Station Freedom, and other space-based
facilities.
OSSA has applied the set of principles that are given in Table 2 to its
pursuit of the above scientific objectives.
Table 2
OSSA'S STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES
Constant emphasis on excellence as a measure of scientific
q
leadership
Basic scientific goals and strategies defined by the scientific
q
community Use of scientific peer review in all aspects of the program
Balance among the various scientific disciplines Close
q
communication with external scientific and applications communities,
particularly through the advisory process
Strong support for universities to provide essential long-term research
q
talents
Effective use of the NASA centers in formulating and implementing
q
the OSSA program
Choice of an appropriate mission approach determined by scientific
q
and applications requirements
Attention to nurturing and enhancing educational opportunities, at all
q
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (2 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 26
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
levels, to serve national needs consistent with OSSA's overall goals
and missions.
Of particular importance is OSSA's declaration that it will use "scientific
peer review it all aspects of the program." In a recent Office of Technology
Assessment report1 peer review was defined as follows:
"Peer review" describes a family of methods used to make funding
decisions about research projects. It usually comprises a
multistaged process, where reviews of the proposal are solicited
from experts in the scientific subdiscipline of the proposal.
Reviewers are most often asked about the technical excellence of
the proposal, the competence of the researchers, and the
potential impact of the proposed project results on a scientific
discipline or interdisciplinary research area. Peers may also be
asked about the project's relevance to the objectives of the
funding program. The proposals and reviews may then be
considered by a panel of experts, and competing proposals
compared. The panel eventually ranks the proposals in the order
in which they think the proposed projects should be funded.
Peer review is not unique to the funding of research at academic institutions. The
same principles of external, peer scrutiny can be applied to the selection of tasks
to be carried out in a federal laboratory or industrial firm.
OSSA has a clear intent to employ peer review to guide its programs. In
OSSA, the external community helps choose programs and experiments and
contributes to their execution. Advisory panels help OSSA rank missions and
sharpen its decision processes. The extent to which peer review is incorporated
into the processes by which OSSA identifies technology needs and develops
technology is. less clear. Rigorous peer reviews are employed to select scientific
experimenters and instruments, and strong pressure is placed on the publication
of results in peer-reviewed journals. The quality of the scientific results profoundly
affects whether a mission is perceived as a success.
OSSA's strategy is based on the principles in Table 2 and developed
through the five actions shown in Table 3.
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (3 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 27
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
Table 3
OSSA'S STRATEGIC ACTIONS
1. Establish a set of structural elements.
2. Establish a set of decision rules.
3. Establish a set of priorities for missions and programs within each
structural element.
4. Demonstrate that the strategy can yield a viable program.
5. Check the strategy for technology readiness and for consistency with
resource constraints, such as budget, manpower, facilities, and
launch vehicle availability.
The last of these actions, checking the strategy for technology readiness
and consistency with resource constraints, raises the issue of whether or not
technology is available to perform the missions linked to OSSA's strategy.
The decision rules that OSSA applies to its program are listed in Table 4.
The theme of technology readiness is reinforced in the last of these decision
rules, which calls for an investment to develop needed technologies.
Table 4
OSSA DECISION RULES
1. Complete the ongoing program.
2. Provide frequent access to space for each discipline through new and
expanded programs of small innovative missions.
3. Initiate a mix of intermediate/moderate profile missions to ensure a
continuous and balanced stream of scientific results.
4. Initiate flagship missions that provide scientific leadership and have
broad public appeal.
5. Invest in the future by increasing the research base to improve
program vitality and by developing needed future technologies.
Through the above processes, OSSA develops its desired strategy,
makes initial plans for programs and, in principle, derives a point of departure
from which its divisions determine their sets of required technologies.
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (4 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 28
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
OSSA Criteria for
the Evaluation of Technology Needs
Technology development projects at OSSA are individually selected and
undertaken by its divisions; there is no overarching OSSA technology
development program. Estimates by the divisions of their FY 1992 expenditures
in support of technology development are provided later in this chapter and
compiled in Appendix C.
In responding to OAST's request for information about OSSA technology
needs as part of the ITP preparation process, OSSA consolidated the technology
needs of its six science divisions into a single set. In doing so, OSSA reviewed
the inputs from each division, combined similar inputs from different divisions into
single need categories, and ranked these technology needs in three categories
("highest," "second highest," and "third highest") within three time frames ("near-
term," "mid-term," and "far-term"). The resulting matrices are presented in
Appendix E.
The criteria used during the OSSA consolidation and prioritization process
were as follows:
"Mission Urgency" (how necessary is the technology for an existing
mission);
"Commonality of Technology Requirements" (the prevalence of the
need among divisions);
"Balance Across Disciplines and Subdisciplines" (fairness in
distribution of requests for technology initiatives); and
"Relevance to Strategic Plan" (the Strategic Plan is OSSA's planning
document).
The technology needs criteria to be used by each division in the
preparation of their input to OSSA were as follows:
"Commitment to Ongoing Program" (can existing programs benefit
from this technology development);
"Urgency of Mission/Experiment" (how necessary is the technology for
a specific mission);
"Understanding of Requirement" (is the need sufficiently defined to
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (5 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 29
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
permit a sound development project);
"Technology Maturity" (is technology sufficiently mature for adoption
with reasonable risk);
"Projected Cost Reduction;"
"Commonality Across Division Instruments, Systems, Subsystems"
(how widespread is the need in the division).
These criteria are, in some cases, different from those in the processes
described by the science divisions in the next section of this chapter.
OSSA Divisions and Technology Development
The Committee found no evidence of the existence of an OSSA-wide
advanced technology strategy or plan prior to the activities leading to the ITP. Ad
hoc processes appear to be followed. The procedures employed by the science
divisions to choose technological development targets lack uniformity and, in
some cases, rigor. The ITP required an OSSA-level ranking of technology needs.
This activity was performed for OAST, rather than for OSSA internal planning.
Information on OSSA's FY 1992 budget is provided in Table 5. The
combined technology development expenditures of OSSA's divisions are small
(estimated by OSSA at about $48.8 million for FY 1992) in comparison to OSSA's
overall budget ($2.728 billion for FY 1992), and equal to about 40 percent of
OAST's estimate of its expenditure relevant to OSSA's technology needs. NASA
estimates the total OSSA technology budget and the portion of the OAST's
budget relevant to space science to be as much as $177 million (see Appendix
C). Whether NASA's current expenditure is adequate to reduce the development
risk of the OSSA missions is an open question that is addressed in the last
chapter of this report.
The following four sections—covering Astrophysics and Space Physics,
Earth and Planetary Sciences, Life Sciences, and Microgravity Science and
Applications—are based on the work of the Committee's four subcommittees.
They provide background information on each of OSSA's science divisions,
discuss the processes by which technology needs were determined by each
division, and present relevant findings and recommendations.
Table 5 FY 1992 Budgets of the OSSA Science Divisions, their Research and
Analysis Budget and Estimated Technology Development Expenditures
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (6 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 30
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
Technology
Research and Development
Division Budget Analysis Budget Expenditure
OSSA Division ($ million) ($ million) ($ million)
Astrophysics 683.7 35.5 11.3
Earth Science and 747.5 175.1 10
Applications
Life Sciences 148.9 50.7 5
Microgravity Science and 120.8 16.6 ~8
Applications
Solar System Exploration 534.5 90.7 5.5
Space Physics 275.6 35.0 3.5
Source: NASA
THE ASTROPHYSICS AND SPACE PHYSICS DIVISIONS
There is a strong interdependence between science and technology.
Scientific advances frequently enable new technologies while new technology is
often the basis for scientific discoveries. Over the past three decades initial
exploratory missions have been followed by more sophisticated investigations
and have yielded a new view of a dynamic Sun, giant planetary magnetospheres,
and an extended heliosphere, all driven by complex plasma processes.
Observations in the electromagnetic spectrum from low-frequency radio to high-
energy gamma rays led to the awareness of a universe far more dynamic than
previously thought. Background radiation from the beginning of the universe has
challenged pre-existing theories. Understanding newly discovered processes and
phenomena, within our solar system and on a galactic scale, will require classes
of observation beyond our present capabilities. The dependence of astrophysics
and space physics on new technologies is likely to grow.
Background: Astrophysics Division
The Astrophysics Division has the goal to "conduct a comprehensive
exploration of the universe." The themes of its research in astronomy—"What is
the nature of planets,. stars and galaxies?"; cosmology-"What is the origin and
fate of the Universe?"; and physics—"What are the laws of physics in the
extreme conditions of astrophysical objects?", encompass profound questions
that have been of interest to human beings for millennia.
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (7 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 31
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
Research sponsored by the division is performed through the use of a
variety of robotic or automated spacecraft in Earth orbit above the filtering and
scattering effects of the atmosphere. Recently, its emphasis has been on the
"Great Observatories," four Earth-orbiting satellites. The Compton Gamma Ray
Observatory (GRO), the Advanced X-Ray Astrophysics Facility (AXAF), the
Hubble Space Telescope (HST), and the Space Infrared Telescope Facility
(SIRTF) are designed to study astronomical objects by gathering data throughout
a wide portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. The Astrophysics Division has
identified technology needs in five major areas: sensors, optics, interferometers,
observatory systems, and information systems. The Astrophysics Division has an
Advanced Programs Branch containing an Advanced Technology Program, and
estimates its FY 1992 expenditures in support of technology development at
$11.3 million.
Technology Needs Compilation and Evaluation
The process by which the Astrophysics Division determines its technology
needs is highly developed, institutionalized, and intimately tied to its Astrotech 21
Program.
The Astrotech 21 Program, initiated by the Astrophysics Division in 1989
and managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), is a major effort involving
hundreds of active scientists and engineers from all constituent groups of the
astrophysics community. It is aimed at identifying the technology needs of future
astrophysics missions. The results of the Astrotech 21 Program have been
reviewed by the scientific discipline advisory groups and science working groups.
More specifically, the Astrotech 21 Program has conducted a series of workshops
to:
Define science goals and objectives.
Develop "point design" mission concepts. Identify technology
development needs.
Develop technology development plans to meet those needs. Develop
technology development priorities.
Develop technology development plans for each future mission and for
each subdiscipline.
Priorities for technology development within the Astrophysics Division are
based on the following criteria, in order of importance:
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (8 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 32
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
Urgency—When is the technology needed?
Criticality—Is the technology enabling or enhancing the mission?
Difficulty—How much effort is required compared to the state of the
art?
Background: Space Physics Division
Space Physics encompasses the study of the Sun, interplanetary space,
the magnetospheres and upper atmospheres of planets, and interstellar space.
The goals of the Space Physics Division are to pursue the study of the
heliosphere as one system, and achieve an understanding of the physics of:
The Sun and the solar wind, and their interactions with the upper
atmospheres, ionospheres, and magnetospheres of the planets and comets;
energetic particles; and the interstellar medium.
The effects of energetic particles and solar variability upon the Earth's
environment, and human operations in space.
Space Physics missions use orbiting spacecraft and spacecraft on
interplanetary missions to gather data from different regions within the solar
system (heliosphere). The Space Physics Division has an Advanced Programs
Branch and estimates its FY 1992 expenditures in support of technology
development at $3.5 million. These funds are primarily spent at or through NASA
field centers to advance approved space physics missions.
Technology Needs Compilation and Evaluation
In 1991 the Space Physics Division conducted a workshop to identify its
technology needs. This workshop was attended primarily by NASA field center
and aerospace industry representatives. Its results, published in July 1991,
defined the division's technology needs. Some modifications have since been
made, but without broad community concurrence or a rigorous review such as the
Astrophysics Division's Astrotech 21 Program. The division's decision rules to
develop its technology needs are:
"Urgency—Does project provide essential or significant benefits to a
core science mission or experiment?"
"Commonality—Is it applicable to multiple missions, instruments, and
systems?"
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (9 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 33
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
"Cost—Will it result in significant project cost reduction?"
"Timing—Can it be planned and implemented in an acceptable time
frame?"
FINDINGS
While there does appear to be a strong ongoing program in the
development of infrared and submillimeter detectors, there are critical gaps in the
OSSA technology needs plan and matrix for astrophysics and space physics
which are, to some extent, generic. These gaps are: 1) the need for technology
development to design, build, launch, and operate spacecraft for astrophysics
and space physics research in a faster and less costly manner; 2) the need to
develop a large range of radiation-hardened electronic components and
subsystems; and 3) the need to support a broad spectrum of smaller innovative
technology developments in photon and non-photon sensors as well as other
subsystems.
The Committee could find few instances of transferring technology from
other NASA developers or from the OAST Base Program to astrophysics or
space physics programs. One of OAST's critical functions is to develop non-
mission-specific advanced space technology in its Base Program. The base
technology program is managed and its objectives set as an internal NASA
program. Opportunities for introducing important novel initiatives from outside
NASA are limited, even though the funding itself may go to outside communities.
Although OAST has estimated that it spends 12 percent of its space
technology budget at universities, only about $15 million (five percent) is
specifically targeted to bring external academic expertise into OAST through its
"University Space Engineering Research Centers" and "University Research
Programs." The vast technical resources of the nation's universities and other
research organizations could make a greater contribution to NASA's technical
capabilities, including those related to astrophysics and space physics, if they
were supported to a greater extent by OAST's space technology program.
RECOMMENDATIONS
NASA should continue to work to improve cooperation between OSSA
and OAST in technology for astrophysics and space physics. This might take the
form of a formal partnership to identify goals, objectives, and a clear path to
transfer technology from the OAST base and focused programs to OSSA. OSSA
should continue to use its resources on near-term programs, and OAST should
continue to concentrate on long-range technology needs. However, both parties
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (10 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 34
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
should specifically agree on the points at which technology development projects
will be transferred from OAST to OSSA.
The OAST R&T base program and its individual projects in support of
space science should be subjected to more visible external review on a regular
basis. OSSA representatives should be included in the review team. This could
contribute to a sense of "ownership" of the OAST base technology program in
those it aims to serve and facilitate the ultimate transfer of new technology to
users.
The technology gaps addressed above should be added to the OSSA
technology needs matrix. The Committee also recommends technology
development projects to foster a broad range of innovative capabilities for smaller
missions.
THE EARTH SCIENCE AND APPLICATIONS AND
SOLAR SYSTEM EXPLORATION DIVISIONS
Background: Earth Science and Applications Division
The place of the Earth Science and Applications Division in OSSA is
unique. Its goal, "to establish the scientific basis for national and international
policymaking relating to natural and human-induced changes in the global Earth
system," is of a different nature than any of the other divisions. It does not by
definition specify research inherently related to space or space flight. However,
its objectives are analogous to the goals of the other divisions. Its objectives are
to:
1. Establish an integrated, comprehensive, and sustained program to
document the Earth system on a global scale;
2. Conduct a program of focused and exploratory studies to improve
understanding of the physical, chemical, biological, and social processes that
influence Earth system changes and trends on global and regional scales; and
3. Develop integrated, conceptual, and predictive Earth system models on
global and regional scales.2
The Earth Science and Applications Division has its own mandate as part
of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (an integrated effort by 11 U.S.
government agencies). It is also part of the international effort to study the climate
and environmental conditions of the Earth by the space and other scientific
agencies of more than a dozen nations. As such, its technology requirements are
not derived from a small community of researchers or based on the needs of
purely scientific research projects, but stem from national and international policy
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (11 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 36
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
Planetary Evolution and State
Obtain an in-depth understanding of the planetary bodies in our solar
system and their evolution over the age of the solar system.
Evidence of Life
Search for evidence of life in our own and other planetary systems,
and understand the origin and evolution of life on Earth and other planets.
Robotic and Human Exploration
Conduct scientific exploration of the Moon and Mars, and utilize the
Moon as a base of scientific study in participation with NASA's Mission from
Planet Earth.
Solar system exploration is conducted in three distinct stages: 1.
reconnaissance, involving flyby missions; 2. exploration, generally conducted with
orbiting spacecraft, hard landers, and atmospheric probes; and 3. intensive study,
involving soft landers, sample returns, and human exploration. The essential part
of this exploration is a core science program of balanced missions and research
that stresses continuity, commonality, cost-effectiveness, and the use of existing
technology. Future programs envision completing the reconnaissance phase for
all planets, completing the exploration phase of the inner solar system and small
bodies, advancing the exploration phase of the outer planets, and conducting in-
depth studies of Mars and a comet or asteroid.6
Technology Need Compilation and Evaluation
The Solar System Exploration Division's technology planning strategy is
as follows:
Step 1: Derive a set of technology themes consistent with the division's (and
OSSA's) strategic perspective.
Step 2: Identify a set of decision rules and a process for eliciting technology needs
and priorities.
Step 3: Identify and synthesize the division's technology needs.
Step 4: Establish the priorities.
Step 5: Integrate needs and priorities with OAST, iterating as necessary.
Step 6: Continue to evolve understanding of technology requirements and update
plans to reflect advancements/setback and programmatic exigencies.
Step 7: Implement and coordinate technology plans with OAST, the Solar System
Exploration Division, and supporting organizations.
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (13 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 37
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
According to the division's representative, the process was initially
informal, and implemented primarily at the headquarters level, but the planetary
community has now become aware of, and committed to, these planning
principles.
The Solar System Exploration Division contributed 21 technology needs
to the final OSSA technology needs matrix presented to OAST. The Solar
System Exploration Division has an Advanced Studies Branch and estimates its
FY 1992 expenditures in support of technology development at $5.5 million.
FINDINGS
The technology needs submitted by the Earth Sciences and
Applications Division and the Solar System Exploration Division for inclusion in
the ITP do not reflect their respective communities' need for increased access to
space through smaller, quicker, more flexible, and less expensive missions. For
example, the Solar System Exploration Division has shifted its emphasis from a
few big missions to more frequent access to space and more flexible missions.
This shift was not reflected in the ITP or the OAST briefings to the Committee.
Similarly, the Earth Sciences and Applications Division recently modified its EOS
program and does not appear to have requested help from OAST regarding its
shift in paradigm from large to smaller spacecraft.
The Committee believes that an effective discussion has occurred
between OAST and the Earth Science and Applications and Solar System
Exploration Divisions in developing the current ITP, but it is not clear that the
divisions have requested technological assistance with their most basic
problems. With respect to the earth and planetary sciences, the weaknesses in
the ITP lie in what is not there rather than what is. The Earth Sciences and
Applications Division's submission to OAST of only nine technology needs does
not correspond to its significant technology-dependent responsibilities. For
example, the division has not identified technologies to support orbital debris
mitigation or very high altitude observations as needs. The Solar System
Exploration Division has not identified in situ resource utilization despite its
potential to reduce the cost of large-scale planetary exploration.
Avoidance of risk at NASA has been elevated to such a position that
innovation in the development of technology for earth and planetary sciences has
suffered. For the last decade or longer, programs in these areas have generally
been very expensive and very large, and only initiated after years of
deliberations. NASA's culture, organization, and past experiences seem to have
made the establishment of new ways of doing business very difficult. Studies and
program plans seem to have flourished at the expense of scientific innovation,
innovative technology development, and actual projects. The preparation of the
ITP appears to have started a wholesome process to correct these problems, but
efforts need to continue.
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (14 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 38
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
While the Committee was often reminded that OSSA and OAST
managers were determined to communicate to ensure an effective development
process, there was little actual evidence of science users in earth and planetary
sciences and technology developers teaming to produce a tangible result.
RECOMMENDATIONS
NASA's Earth Sciences and Applications and Solar System
Exploration Divisions should act to increase their programs' vitality through the
development of less expensive platforms for Earth observation and planetary
probes, e.g., micro- and mini-satellites, and remote-controlled aircraft for
sustained access to very high altitudes. Long-term needs in this area should
appear in both lists of technology needs.
The objective of easier access to space should be explicit in OSSA's
inputs to OAST, and in the formulation of technology development projects at
each office.
As both divisions improve their programs through the use of new or
improved technologies, emphasis should be placed on technologies with the
potential to reduce end-to-end mission costs, as savings in the real costs of
programs can contribute to more frequent and less complicated access to space.
OSSA and OAST should act to improve communication between the
Earth Sciences and Applications Division, the Solar System Exploration Division,
both division's scientific communities, and those able to contribute to the
development of their technology needs. OSSA and QAST should emphasize a
team approach to problem solving both at NASA headquarters and where the
work actually takes place, including NASA centers.
THE LIFE SCIENCES DIVISION
The goals of the Life Sciences Division are to "ensure the health, safety,
and productivity of humans in space" and to "acquire fundamental scientific
knowledge concerning space biological sciences." The division aims to "expand
our understanding of life in the universe; develop an understanding of the role of
gravity on living systems; provide for the health and productivity of humans in
space; and promote the application of life sciences research to improve the
quality of life on Earth".7 The Committee considered the division's goals and
programs and identified the following scientific constituencies covering the
division's research areas: life support, integrative physiology, operational
medicine, space biology, human/systems interaction, and exobiology.
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (15 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 39
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
Since 1981, the Life Sciences Division has carried out the bulk of its
space-based research on the Space Shuttle. The division's experiments are
generally conducted using biomedical devices or animal, plant, or cell
maintenance or growth facilities that are specially designed or specially modified
for space flight and integrated into the Shuttle mid-deck or the Spacelab module.
Devices used in space life sciences research require various levels of crew
interaction. Some need little or no crew contact during nominal performance,
while others are literally connected to the crew, monitoring and recording
physiological functions. Most space life sciences hardware is used in the
pressurized volume of the Shuttle and must meet stringent safety and other
requirements (e.g., noise). Technologies related to exobiology, which includes
the search for life or its precursors outside of Earth and the study of the effects of
extraterrestrial environments on living organisms, have different standards
because they can be employed on robotic spacecraft or other sites not in direct
contact with crewmembers.
The space life sciences research community is small in comparison to the
overall biological and biomedical research communities and has depended on
proven technologies to a large extent. A widespread need of this community is to
be able to adapt off-the-shelf laboratory technology quickly and safely for use in
space. The kinds of technology needed for biomedical experiments in space are
generally readily available for similar studies on Earth. The primary difficulties of
conducting research in space have been associated with the difficulty of
qualifying hardware for space flight and the paucity of space flight opportunities.
Operational or technology problems related to low-gravity, or other inherently
space-related phenomena, have been secondary to organizational,
programmatic, logistical, and other non-scientific constraints to research. These
deficiencies have constrained the space life science as a discipline. The flight
hardware available for space flight has driven scientific research rather than the
reverse. The absence of adequate technology and flight opportunities has led to
an overabundance of descriptive and anecdotal observations of astronauts'
physiological responses to microgravity instead of peer-reviewed research
results. Important hypotheses have not been fully tested and mechanisms
partially revealed have not been explored. As a result, the biomedical community
has not fully accepted the discipline.
The Space Shuttle missions on which life sciences research has taken
place have primarily been dedicated to other purposes although one mission
wholly dedicated to life sciences, and a few having life sciences as a major
emphasis, have been flown. Several wholly or partially dedicated missions are
planned for the remainder of the 1990s. Space Station Freedom is considered
the primary future site for life sciences research in space.
The division has estimated its FY 1992 expenditure for technology
development at $5 million. The Life Sciences Division does not have a dedicated
advanced technology development gram.
Technology Need Compilation and Evaluation
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (16 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 40
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
The processes associated with the identification and evaluation of the Life
Sciences Division technology needs begin with the division requesting that its
affiliated project offices at NASA field centers (Johnson Space Center, Ames
Research Center, and Kennedy Space Center) and flight programs and science
branches at NASA headquarters identify and forward technology need
requirements and candidates.8 Cost estimates for candidate technology needs
are requested.
Candidate technology needs are categorized and ranked by the Life Sciences
Division Technology Coordinator, who puts each technology need into one of
three priority levels based on the program or mission enabled, synergy with Life
Sciences Division objectives, and cost.
Before they are forwarded to OSSA, the technology needs are reviewed
and approved by division management, which ensures that they are aligned with
Life Sciences Division objectives and its strategic plan. Once approved,
technology needs are forwarded to OSSA for incorporation into its technology
needs matrix.
In the 1992 process, the Life Sciences Division contributed 25 technology
needs to the OSSA technology needs matrix presented to OAST.
FINDINGS
The division has not adequately included the prospective users of new
technologies in the scientific community (both internal and external) for the space
life sciences into its technology need gathering and evaluation processes.
The division has placed little emphasis on determining its bona fide
technology needs, and there is little correlation between the division's strategic
plan and the technology needs submitted to OSSA and forwarded to OAST. The
current life sciences technology needs contained in the OSSA technology needs
matrix are not, as a group, matched to recognized plans or clear priorities. The
relevant categories in the OSSA matrix, and the inputs from the Division to the
matrix, are often vague or confused to the point that some items in the matrix
defy evaluation or quantitative assessment.
The Committee considers it premature to diagnose the gaps between
the OAST program and the OSSA inputs to OAST because the Life Sciences
Division inputs to OSSA, as a group, have limited legitimacy.
RECOMMENDATIONS
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (17 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 41
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
The Life Sciences Division should do the following:
Create a division plan for technology that is integrated with its strategic
plan, consistent with its programs, and approved by its director.
Empower its scientific discipline working groups to identify technology
needs and to review recommendations from other sources. The division should
take special efforts to ensure that discipline working group membership includes
scientists with recent experience in the development of complex flight
experiments.
Cooperate more closely with OAST on projects relevant to the
division's mission.
Revise its decision rules and criteria to permit objective and consistent
evaluation of technology needs.
Rank technology needs using critical path analyses, i.e., plan the
development of technologies for a particular scientific area mindful of the
sequence in which they are projected to be needed. Address basic questions
before esoteric ones.
Formalize technology planning responsibilities to identify, coordinate,
and report relevant work within the division.
THE MICROGRAVITY SCIENCE
AND APPLICATIONS DIVISION
The low-gravity environments aboard orbiting spacecraft and on some
extraterrestrial bodies offer unique conditions for scientific inquiry and also
present challenging problems and opportunities for the development of mission-
enabling technologies. In the following circumstances, the role of gravity in
physical phenomena is uniquely important:
1. As a driving force for convection in fluids;
2. As a driving force for phase separation;
3. As a force that helps to determine the free surface morphology of
fluids;
4. Near a critical point;
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (18 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 42
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
5. In the presence of very weak binding forces;
6. In the presence of very large masses or for very long times; and
7. In structural members or over very long distances.
To date, most microgravity experiments have been focused on exploring
the first two circumstances above. These experiments have included studies of
crystal growth in fluids, fundamental phenomena in crystal growth, convection
phenomena, measurement of the transport properties of fluids, combustion
phenomena, fire safety aboard spacecraft, and immiscible alloys and multiphase
solids.9
The goals of the Microgravity Sciences and Applications Division are to
1. Develop a comprehensive research program in biotechnology,
combustion, fluid dynamics and transport phenomena, materials science, and
selected investigations of other gravity-dependent phenomena;
2. Foster the growth of an interdisciplinary community to conduct the
research and to disseminate the results;
3. Enable the research by the development of a suitable experiment
apparatus and by choosing the carrier most appropriate for the experiment;
4. Promote U.S. commercial involvement and investment in the
application of space research for the development of new, commercially viable
products, services, and markets resulting from research in the space
environment;
5. Foster international cooperation and coordination in conducting low-
gravity research of mutual benefit, while maintaining the United States'
competitive commercial position.10
The division's goals involve pure science, and the development of
technology for science, but are also operations-oriented. Research into
combustion and other processes occurring in microgravity are of interest for their
potential effects on future spacecraft, flight hardware, and crew safety and
operations, as well as for the purely scientific insights and the potential earth
applications they may generate. Goals 4 and 5 are distinct due to their national
policy implications.
Microgravity research involves diverse disciplines and is in the process of
developing a distinct scientific community. In 1991 the division, recognizing this
situation, requested that the Space Studies Board's Committee on Microgravity
Research perform a study to help develop its long-term research strategy. The
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (19 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 43
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
SSB recently published a report based on a review initiated in 1989 to this end.
Entitled Towards a Microgravity Research Strategy, it is currently being assessed
by the division.
Most Microgravity Science and Applications Division space-based
research is currently performed using the Space Shuttle mid-deck and Spacelab
module. But unlike the Life Sciences Division, which also uses these resources,
experiments in a number of scientific areas of interest to the division can be
performed on orbiting unmanned spacecraft. Such spacecraft could be man-
tended, i.e., occasionally visited by astronauts who would retrieve samples and
initiate additional experiments. The division performs experiments requiring
shorter durations in low-gravity conditions (up to a few minutes) through the use
of suborbital rockets with automated, retrievable payloads. To date, one Space
Shuttle mission entirely dedicated to microgravity sciences and a few with the
microgravity sciences as a major emphasis have been conducted. Several wholly
or partially dedicated missions are planned for the remainder of the 1990s. The
Life Sciences and Microgravity Sciences and Applications Divisions are expected
to be NASA's primary scientific users of Space Station Freedom's pressurized
volume.
The Microgravity Science and Applications Division contributed 11
technology needs to the final OSSA technology matrix presented to OAST. The
division has a distinct Advanced Programs Branch and Advanced Technology
Development Program and estimates its FY 1992 expenditures in support of
technology development at $8.0 million. The projects funded by the Advanced
Technology Development Program are limited to origination at NASA centers and
annual funding of under $200,000 each; provisions exist to involve academia and
industry. Projects sponsored by the program are not to be on the critical path of
any flight project. In FY 1992, the program funded 11 projects at JPL, the Langley
Research Center, the Lewis Research Center, and the Marshall Space Flight
Center.
Technology Need Compilation and Evaluation
The Microgravity Sciences and Applications Division has identified a six-
step technology needs compilation and evaluation process. In step one,
candidate technologies are selected from prior reports and inputs are sought from
a survey of division program and project scientists and engineers at NASA
centers and headquarters. In step two, candidate technologies are organized into
a decision matrix according to science discipline, facility or experiment, mission
or carrier, and projected flight date. In step three, the candidate technology needs
are scored on the Microgravity Sciences and Applications Division technology
need scale, which has five levels: A - Must have to succeed; B - Important, but
not critical for success; C - Would use if available (enables new experiments); D -
Mildly interested in using technology; and E - No interest or not applicable.
In step four, the technology needs are reviewed by division program and
project scientists and engineers at NASA centers and headquarters. Reviewers
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (20 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 44
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
who fill out a decision matrix and some inputs are sought from experiment
principal investigators. In step five, the technology needs evaluation scores are
compiled and given a final review by division personnel. After review, a summary
technology needs matrix is submitted to OSSA for integration into the OSSA
Technology Needs Matrix.11
FINDINGS
The ITP process has fostered communication between OAST and the
OSSA Microgravity Sciences and Applications Division.
Although opinions may differ on specific priorities and microgravity
research technology needs identified in the OSSA technology needs matrix, the
items listed are significant and merit attention.
OAST does not have a history of developing technologies for the
microgravity sciences, and there is no OAST constituency in microgravity. OSSA
projects at the Lewis Research Center and Marshall Space Flight Center seem
disconnected from OAST.
Microgravity research has agency-wide relevance. Many physical
processes that could be affected by microgravity considerations are important in
space-based technologies and relevant to activities throughout NASA. Examples
are power systems, thermal management devices and systems, fire hazard
management, multiphase flow, cryogenic engines, physical and chemical life
support systems, and user support systems such as toilets and refrigerators.12
OAST should also consider the effects on technology exerted by
forces other than gravity, perhap including forces so weak that they are generally
considered insignificant. Research into a variety of micro- or nanoforces (e.g.,
magnetic and electrostatic) that may have significance in orbit, but are negligible
in comparison to gravity on the ground, could also enrich the Microgravity
Sciences and Applications Division.
The Microgravity Sciences and Applications Division does not appear
to be seeking help from OAST in areas of OAST expertise such as fluid
mechanics, heat transfer, and computational fluid dynamics, where OAST/OSSA
cooperation might contribute to NASA-wide advances. There is also no indication
that OAST has sought out the Microgravity Science and Applications Division's
expertise to help advance relevant technology.
RECOMMENDATIONS
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (21 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 45
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
The recent improvements in the OAST/OSSA interaction in
microgravity sciences at NASA headquarters should be enhanced and elevated
to the highest levels. Liaison groups, including staff from NASA centers, should
be encouraged to identify and focus on crucial, feasible joint projects.
OAST and the Microgravity Sciences and Applications Division should
establish a joint working group in microgravity (with membership drawn from
NASA, universities, industry, and government laboratories) to focus on
microgravity sciences and space technology. The working group should be
charged to consider relevant aspects of the CAST In-Space Technology
Experiment Program (INSTEP) and the possible formulation of a new applied
research program for applied microgravity sciences within OAST.
Microgravity effects should be carefully considered during the
development of space technology for OSSA and other NASA offices.
Many mission-enabling technologies involve transport phenomena
which are significantly influenced by the lack of gravity. Therefore, it is essential
that advancements in microgravity research be well understood by OAST and
that OAST support microgravity research directly related to space technologies.
NOTES
1. OTA, Federally Funded Research: Decisions for a Decade
2. Division presentation to Committee, June 22, 1992
3. Based on 1991 OSSA Strategic Plan
4. 1991 OSSA Strategic Plan
5. 1991 OSSA Strategic Plan
6. 1991 OSSA Strategic Plan
7. Division June 22, 1992 briefing to Committee
8. Division June 22, 1992 presentation to Committee
9. SSB Committee report: Toward a Microgravity Research Strategy, p 2
10. Division June 23, 1992 presentation to Committee
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (22 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
OCR for page 46
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 2)
11. Division June 23, 1992 presentation to Committee
12. Ostrach, Simon. 1992. White Paper on NASA-Wide Microgravity Research, p
14
Last update 7/10/00 at 12:36 pm
Site managed by Anne Simmons, Space Studies Board
The National Academies Current Projects Publications Directories Search Site Map Feedback
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch2.htm (23 of 23) [6/18/2004 11:38:44 AM]
