National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Front Matter
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×

Summary

Success in executing future NASA space missions will depend on advanced technology developments that should already be underway. It has been years since NASA has had a vigorous, broad-based program in advanced space technology development, and NASA’s technology base is largely depleted. As noted in a recent National Research Council report on the U.S. civil space program:

Future U.S. leadership in space requires a foundation of sustained technology advances that can enable the development of more capable, reliable, and lower-cost spacecraft and launch vehicles to achieve space program goals. A strong advanced technology development foundation is needed also to enhance technology readiness of new missions, mitigate their technological risks, improve the quality of cost estimates, and thereby contribute to better overall mission cost management.… Yet financial support for this technology base has eroded over the years. The United States is now living on the innovation funded in the past and has an obligation to replenish this foundational element. (NRC, 2009, pp. 56-57)

NASA has developed a draft set of technology roadmaps to guide the development of space technologies under the leadership of the NASA Office of the Chief Technologist.1 The NRC appointed the Steering Committee for NASA Technology Roadmaps and six panels to evaluate the draft roadmaps, recommend improvements, and prioritize the technologies within each and among all of the technology areas as NASA finalizes the roadmaps. The steering committee is encouraged by the initiative NASA has taken through the Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT) to develop technology roadmaps and to seek input from the aerospace technical community with this study.

TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM RATIONALE AND SCOPE

In February 2011, NASA issued an updated strategic plan outlining agency goals and plans for achieving those goals in the 2011-2021 decade and beyond (NASA, 2011). The strategic plan highlights six strategic goals. Five of them relate directly to the scope of this study. The other one deals directly with the agency’s aeronautics mission, which, as mentioned in the preface, is outside the statement of task for this study. The 14 draft space technology roadmaps identify a number of critical enabling technologies that the steering committee and panels evaluated and prioritized. Together they represent a foundation upon which to build and achieve the strategic goals outlined in the 2011 NASA Strategic Plan:

image

1The draft space technology roadmaps are available at http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/strategic_integration/technology_roadmap.html

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×

1.    Extend and sustain human activities across the solar system.

2.    Expand scientific understanding of Earth and the universe in which we live.

3.    Create the innovative new space technologies for our exploration, science, and economic future.

4.    Advance aeronautics research for societal benefit.

5.    Enable program and institutional capabilities to conduct NASA’s aeronautics and space activities.

6.    Share NASA with the public, educators, and students to provide opportunities to participate in our Mission, foster innovation, and contribute to a strong national economy.

As part of the effort to develop a detailed plan for implementing the Space Technology Program, OCT developed a set of 14 draft technology roadmaps. These roadmaps establish time sequencing and interdependencies of advanced space technology research and development over the next 5 to 30 years for the following 14 technology areas (Tas):

•   TA01. Launch Propulsion Systems

•   TA02. In-Space Propulsion Technologies

•   TA03. Space Power and Energy Storage

•   TA04. Robotics, TeleRobotics, and Autonomous Systems

•   TA05. Communication and Navigation

•   TA06. Human Health, Life Support, and Habitation Systems

•   TA07. Human Exploration Destination Systems

•   TA08. Science Instruments, Observatories, and Sensor Systems

•   TA09. Entry, Descent, and Landing Systems

•   TA10. Nanotechnology

•   TA11. Modeling, Simulation, and Information Technology and Processing

•   TA12. Materials, Structures, Mechanical Systems, and Manufacturing

•   TA13. Ground and Launch Systems Processing

•   TA14. Thermal Management Systems

These draft roadmaps represented the starting point and point of departure for the steering committee to evaluate and prioritize technologies and recommend areas for improvement. The roadmaps are organized through a technology area breakdown structure, which in turn served as the structure for evaluating the technologies for this study. Level 1 represents the technology area (TA), which is the title of the roadmap. Each roadmap describes level 2 subareas and level 3 technologies.

TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION PROCESS AND CRITERIA

A set of criteria was established by the steering committee to enable the prioritization of technologies within each and, ultimately, among all of the technology areas of the NASA technology roadmaps. These criteria were chosen to capture the potential benefits, breadth, and risk of the various technologies and were used as a guide by both the panels and the steering committee to determine the final prioritization of the technologies.

Broad community input was solicited from a public website where more than 240 public comments were received on the draft roadmaps using the established steering committee evaluation criteria and other descriptive factors. The public and panels were given the same rubrics to evaluate the technologies so that the various inputs could be more fairly compared against each other.

A series of public workshops were held to solicit input from the members of the community who were interested in contributing to the discussion of the technology roadmaps. The workshops were organized by the various panels, and all included speakers specifically invited by the panel members. The workshops were open to the public and included times for open discussion by all members of the audience. The views expressed during the workshops were considered by the panel members as they assessed the level 3 technologies.

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×

The panels identified a number of challenges for each technology area that should be addressed for NASA to improve its capability to achieve its strategic goals. These top technical challenges were generated to assist in the prioritization of the level 3 technologies. The challenges were developed to identify the general needs NASA has within each technology area, whereas the technologies themselves address how those needs will be met.

The individual panels were tasked with categorizing the individual level 3 technologies into high-, medium-, and low-priority groups. The panels generated a weighted decision matrix based on quality function deployment (QFD) techniques for each technology area. In this method, each criterion and sub-criterion was given a numerical weight by the steering committee. The steering committee based the criteria weighting on the importance of the criteria to meeting NASA’s goals of technology advancement.

HIGH-PRIORITY TECHNOLOGIES BY ROADMAP

The study panels produced an assessment of each roadmap that defined top technical challenges for that technical area; prioritized the level 3 technologies for the assigned roadmap into high, medium, and low categories; described the value of the high-priority technologies; identified gaps in the draft roadmaps; identified development or schedule changes of the technologies covered; and summarized the public workshop that focused on the draft roadmap. The results of the panels’ work are summarized in this report in 14 appendixes (D through Q; one for each roadmap). This input from the panels was then integrated by the steering committee and documented in the main body of this report.

The high-priority technologies identified by the panels are shown in Table S.1. The panels identified a total of 83 high-priority technologies from a total of 295 possible technologies. In subsequent prioritizations, the steering committee used only these 83 technologies from which to make its technology assessments.

TECHNOLOGY OBJECTIVES

The technology priorities recommended in this report were generated with an awareness of NASA’s current mission plans, but those priorities are not closely linked to any particular set of future NASA missions because the goals and schedules of individual missions frequently change. As described above, NASA’s 2011 strategic plan formed the foundation for the panel’s process of setting technology priorities, and defining top technical challenges was an important intermediate step for setting the panels’ technology priorities.

In selecting the highest-priority technologies among all 14 roadmaps, the steering committee took the additional step of established an organizing framework that addressed balance across NASA mission areas, relevance in meeting the highest-priority technical challenges, and expectations that significant progress could be made in the next 5 years of the 30-year window of the roadmaps. Furthermore, the steering committee constrained the number of highest-priority technologies to be included in the final list in the belief that in the face of probable scarce resources, focusing initially on a small number of the highest-priority technologies offers the best chance to make the greatest impact, especially given that agency mission areas, particularly in exploration, are being refined and can be shaped by technology options. Within this organizing framework, technology objectives were defined by the steering committee to address the breadth of NASA missions and group related technologies.

•   Technology Objective A: Extend and sustain human activities beyond low Earth orbit. Technologies to enable humans to survive long voyages throughout the solar system, get to their chosen destination, work effectively, and return safely.

•   Technology Objective B: Explore the evolution of the solar system and the potential for life elsewhere. Technologies that enable humans and robots to perform in situ measurements on Earth (astrobiology) and on other planetary bodies.

•   Technology Objective C: Expand our understanding of Earth and the universe in which we live. Technologies for remote measurements from platforms that orbit or fly by Earth and other planetary bodies, and from other in-space and ground-based observatories.

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×

TABLE S.1 The 83 High-Priority Level 3 Technologies Selected by the Panels

TA01 Launch Propulsion Systems
1.3.1 Turbine Based Combined Cycle (TBCC)
1.3.2 Rocket Based Combined Cycle (RBCC)
   
TA02 In-Space Propulsion Technologies
2.2.1 Electric Propulsion
2.4.2 Propellant Storage and Transfer
2.2.3 (Nuclear) Thermal Propulsion
2.1.7 Micro-Propulsion
   
TA03 Space Power and Energy Storage
3.1.3 Solar Power Generation (Photovoltaic and Thermal)
3.1.5 Fission Power Generation
3.3.3 Power Distribution and Transmission
3.3.5 Power Conversion and Regulation
3.2.1 Batteries
3.1.4 Radioisotope Power Generation
   
TA04 Robotics, TeleRobotics, and Autonomous Systems
4.6.2 Relative Guidance Algorithms
4.6.3 Docking and Capture Mechanisms/Interfaces
4.5.1 Vehicle System Management and FDIR
4.3.2 Dexterous Manipulation
4.4.2 Supervisory Control
4.2.1 Extreme Terrain Mobility
4.3.6 Robotic Drilling and Sample Processing
4.2.4 Small Body/Microgravity Mobility
   
TA05 Communication and Navigation
5.4.3 Onboard Autonomous Navigation and Maneuvering
5.4.1 Timekeeping and Time Distribution
5.3.2 Adaptive Network Topology
5.5.1 Radio Systems
   
TA06 Human Health, Life Support, and Habitation Systems
6.5.5 Radiation Monitoring Technology
6.5.3 Radiation Protection Systems
6.5.1 Radiation Risk Assessment Modeling
6.1.4 Habitation
6.1.3 Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) Waste Management
6.3.2 Long-Duration Crew Health
6.1.2 ECLSS Water Recovery and Management
6.2.1 Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Pressure Garment
6.5.4 Radiation Prediction
6.5.2 Radiation Mitigation
6.4.2 Fire Detection and Suppression
6.1.1 Air Revitalization
6.2.2 EVA Portable Life Support System
6.4.4 Fire Remediation
   
TA07 Human Exploration Destination Systems
7.1.3 In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) Products/Production
7.2.1 Autonomous Logistics Management
7.6.2 Construction and Assembly
7.6.3 Dust Prevention and Mitigation
7.1.4 ISRU Manufacturing/Infrastructure etc.
7.1.2 ISRU Resource Acquisition
7.3.2 Surface Mobility
7.2.4 Food Production, Processing, and Preservation
7.4.2 Habitation Evolution
7.4.3 Smart Habitats
7.2.2 Maintenance Systems
   
TA08 Science Instruments, Observatories, and Sensor Systems
8.2.4 High-Contrast Imaging and Spectroscopy Technologies
8.1.3 Optical Systems (Instruments and Sensors)
8.1.1 Detectors and Focal Planes
8.3.3 In Situ Instruments and Sensors
8.2.5 Wireless Spacecraft Technology
8.1.5 Lasers for Instruments and Sensors
8.1.2 Electronics for Instruments and Sensors
   
TA09 Entry, Descent, and Landing (EDL) Systems
9.4.7 GN&C Sensors and Systems (EDL)
9.1.1 Rigid Thermal Protection Systems
9.1.2 Flexible Thermal Protection Systems
9.1.4 Deployment Hypersonic Decelerators
9.4.5 EDL Modeling and Simulation
9.4.6 EDL Instrumentation and Health Monitoring
9.4.4 Atmospheric and Surface Characterization
9.4.3 EDL System Integration and Analysis
   
TA10 Nanotechnology
10.1.1 (Nano) Lightweight Materials and Structures
10.2.1 (Nano) Energy Generation
10.3.1 Nanopropellants
10.4.1 (Nano) Sensors and Actuators
   
TA11 Modeling, Simulation, and Information Technology and Processing
11.1.1 Flight Computing
11.1.2 Ground Computing
11.2.4a Science Modeling and Simulation
11.3.1 Distributed Simulation
   
TA12 Materials, Structures, Mechanical Systems, and Manufacturing
12.2.5 Structures: Innovative, Multifunctional Concepts
12.2.1 Structures: Lightweight Concepts
12.1.1 Materials: Lightweight Structure
12.2.2 Structures: Design and Certification Methods
12.5.1 Nondestructive Evaluation and Sensors
12.3.4 Mechanisms: Design and Analysis Tools and Methods
12.3.1 Deployables, Docking, and Interfaces
12.3.5 Mechanisms: Reliability/Life Assessment/Health Monitoring
12.4.2 Intelligent Integrated Manufacturing and Cyber Physical Systems
   
TA14 Thermal Management Systems
14.3.1 Ascent/Entry Thermal Protection Systems
14.1.2 Active Thermal Control of Cryogenic Systems

NOTE: Technologies are listed by roadmap/technology area (TA01 through TA14; there are no high-priority technologies in TA13). Within each technology area, technologies are listed by the QFD score assigned by the panels, in descending order. This sequencing may be considered a rough approximation of the relative priority of the technologies within a given technology area.

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×

The technology objectives are not independent, and more than one objective may be addressed by a single mission, such as a human mission to explore planetary bodies, and some technologies support more than one of these objectives. Furthermore, these three technology objectives helped categorize similar technologies with similar drivers (i.e., technologies driven by keeping humans alive, productive, and transported; in situ measurements; and remote measurements) and enabled prioritization among diverse technologies on a meaningful basis.

Balance

One of the steering committee’s basic assumptions was that NASA would continue to pursue a balanced space program across its mission areas of human exploration, space science, space operations, space technology, and aeronautics. Therefore, since OCT’s technology program should broadly support the breadth of the agency’s missions and serve to open up options for future missions, the steering committee established priorities in each of the three technology objective areas, A, B, and C, independently. No one technology objective area was given priority over another.

TOP TECHNICAL CHALLENGES

With the three technology objectives defined, the steering committee evaluated the top technical challenges from the panels’ prioritized list of challenges for each roadmap TA01 through TA14. The top 10 technical challenges for each of the three technology objectives are described in Table S.2.

HIGHEST-PRIORITY LEVEL 3 TECHNOLOGIES ACROSS ALL ROADMAPS

Using the panel results, which established a high degree of correlation between high-priority level 3 technologies and the respective technical challenges for each roadmap (see the correlation matrices in the third figure in each of the Appendixes D through Q), the steering committee was able to relate high-priority technologies that aligned with each of the three technology objectives.

The steering committee determined that, in several instances, technologies on the original list of 83 high-priority technologies were highly coupled. During the prioritization process, these highly coupled technologies were grouped together and considered as one unit. There are a total of five unified technologies (designated X.1 through X.5). Each one consists of three to five original technologies as follows:

•   X. 1 Radiation Mitigation for Human Spaceflight

6.5.1 Radiation Risk Assessment Modeling

6.5.2 Radiation Mitigation

6.5.3 Radiation Protection Systems

6.5.4 Radiation Prediction

6.5.5 Radiation Monitoring Technology

•   X.2 Lightweight and Multifunctional Materials and Structures

10.1.1 (Nano) Lightweight Materials and Structures

12.1.1 Materials: Lightweight Structures

12.2.1 Structures: Lightweight Concepts

12.2.2 Structures: Design and Certification Methods

12.2.5 Structures: Innovative, Multifunctional Concepts

•   X.3 ECLSS

6.1.1 Air Revitalization

6.1.2 ECLSS Water Recovery and Management

6.1.3 ECLSS Waste Management

6.1.4 Habitation

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×

TABLE S.2 Top Technical Challenges by Technology Objective

Top Technical Challenges for Technology Objective A: Extend and sustain human activities beyond low Earth orbit. Top Technical Challenges for Technology Objective B: Explore the evolution of the solar system and the potential for life elsewhere (in situ measurements). Top Technical Challenges for Technology Objective C: Expand our understanding of Earth and the universe in which we live (remote measurements).
A1) Improved Access to Space: Dramatically reduce the total cost and increase reliability and safety of access to space. B1) Improved Access to Space: Dramatically reduce the total cost and increase reliability and safety of access to space. C1) Improved Access to Space: Dramatically reduce the total cost and increase reliability and safety of access to space.
A2) Space Radiation Health Effects: Improve understanding of space radiation effects on humans and develop radiation protection technologies to enable long-duration space missions. B2) Precision Landing: Increase the ability to land more safely and precisely at a variety of planetary locales and at a variety of times. C2) New Astronomical Telescopes: Develop a new generation of astronomical telescopes that enable discovery of habitable planets, facilitate advances in solar physics, and enable the study of faint structures around bright objects by developing high-contrast imaging and spectroscopic technologies to provide unprecedented sensitivity, field of view, and spectroscopy of faint objects.
A3) Long-Duration Health Effects: Minimize the crew health effects of long-duration space missions (other than space radiation). B3) Robotic Maneuvering: Enable mobile robotic systems to autonomously and verifiably navigate and avoid hazards and increase the robustness of landing systems to surface hazards. C3) Lightweight Space Structures: Develop innovative lightweight materials and structures to reduce the mass and improve the performance of space systems such as (1) launch vehicle and payload systems; (2) space and surface habitats that protect the crew, including multifunctional structures that enable lightweight radiation shielding, implement self-monitoring capability, and require minimum crew maintenance time; and (3) lightweight, deployable synthetic aperture radar antennas, including reliable mechanisms and structures for large-aperture space systems that can be stowed compactly for launch and yet achieve high-precision final shapes.
A4) Long-Duration ECLSS: Achieve reliable, closed-loop Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS) to enable long-duration human missions beyond low Earth orbit. B4) Life Detection: Improve sensors for in-situ analysis to determine if synthesis of organic matter may exist today, whether there is evidence that life ever emerged, and whether there are habitats with the necessary conditions to sustain life on other planetary bodies. C4) Increase Available Power: Eliminate the constraint of power availability for space missions by improving energy generation and storage with reliable power systems that can survive the wide range of environments unique to NASA missions.
A5) Rapid Crew Transit: Establish propulsion capability for rapid crew transit to and from Mars or other distant targets. B5) High-Power Electric Propulsion: Develop high-power electric propulsion systems along with the enabling power system technology. C5) Higher Data Rates: Minimize constraints imposed by communication data rate and range.
A6) Lightweight Space Structures: Develop innovative lightweight materials and structures to reduce the mass and improve the performance of space systems such as (1) launch vehicle and payload systems; (2) space and surface habitats that protect the crew, including multifunctional structures that enable lightweight radiation shielding, implement self-monitoring capability, and require minimum crew maintenance time; and (3) lightweight, deployable synthetic aperture radar antennas, including reliable mechanisms and structures for large-aperture space systems that can be stowed compactly for launch and yet achieve high-precision final shapes. B6) Autonomous Rendezvous and Dock: Achieve highly reliable, autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations, and capture of free-flying space objects. C6) High-Power Electric Propulsion: Develop high-power electric propulsion systems along with the enabling power system technology.
A7) Increase Available Power: Eliminate the constraint of power availability for space missions by improving energy generation and storage with reliable power systems that can survive the wide range of environments unique to NASA missions. B7) Increase Available Power: Eliminate the constraint of power availability for space missions by improving energy generation and storage with reliable power systems that can survive the wide range of environments unique to NASA missions. C7) Design Software: Advance new validated computational design, analysis, and simulation methods for design, certification, and reliability of materials, structures, and thermal, EDL, and other systems.
A8) Mass to Surface: Deliver more payload to destinations in the solar system. B8) Mass to Surface: Deliver more payload to destinations in the solar system. C8) Structural Monitoring: Develop means for monitoring structural health and sustainability for long-duration missions, including integration of unobtrusive sensors and responsive on-board systems.
A9) Precision Landing: Increase the ability to land more safely and precisely at a variety of planetary locales and at a variety of times. B9) Lightweight Space Structures: Develop innovative lightweight materials and structures to reduce the mass and improve the performance of space systems such as (1) launch vehicle and payload systems; (2) space and surface habitats that protect the crew, including multifunctional structures that enable lightweight radiation shielding, implement self-monitoring capability, and require minimum crew maintenance time; and (3) lightweight, deployable synthetic aperture radar antennas, including reliable mechanisms and structures for large-aperture space systems that can be stowed compactly for launch and yet achieve high-precision final shapes. C9) Improved Flight Computers: Develop advanced flight-capable devices and system software for real-time flight computing with low-power, radiation-hard, and fault-tolerant hardware that can be applied to autonomous landing, rendezvous, and surface hazard avoidance.
A10) Autonomous Rendezvous and Dock: Achieve highly reliable, autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations, and capture of free-flying space objects. B10) Higher Data Rates: Minimize constraints imposed by communication data rate and range. C10) Cryogenic Storage and Transfer: Develop long-term storage and transfer of cryogens in space using systems that approach near-zero boil-off.
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×
Top Technical Challenges for Technology Objective A: Extend and sustain human activities beyond low Earth orbit. Top Technical Challenges for Technology Objective B: Explore the evolution of the solar system and the potential for life elsewhere (in situ measurements). Top Technical Challenges for Technology Objective C: Expand our understanding of Earth and the universe in which we live (remote measurements).
A6) Lightweight Space Structures: Develop innovative lightweight materials and structures to reduce the mass and improve the performance of space systems such as (1) launch vehicle and payload systems; (2) space and surface habitats that protect the crew, including multifunctional structures that enable lightweight radiation shielding, implement self-monitoring capability, and require minimum crew maintenance time; and (3) lightweight, deployable synthetic aperture radar antennas, including reliable mechanisms and structures for large-aperture space systems that can be stowed compactly for launch and yet achieve high-precision final shapes. B6) Autonomous Rendezvous and Dock: Achieve highly reliable, autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations, and capture of free-flying space objects. C6) High-Power Electric Propulsion: Develop high-power electric propulsion systems along with the enabling power system technology.
A7) Increase Available Power: Eliminate the constraint of power availability for space missions by improving energy generation and storage with reliable power systems that can survive the wide range of environments unique to NASA missions. B7) Increase Available Power: Eliminate the constraint of power availability for space missions by improving energy generation and storage with reliable power systems that can survive the wide range of environments unique to NASA missions. C7) Design Software: Advance new validated computational design, analysis, and simulation methods for design, certification, and reliability of materials, structures, and thermal, EDL, and other systems.
A8) Mass to Surface: Deliver more payload to destinations in the solar system. B8) Mass to Surface: Deliver more payload to destinations in the solar system. C8) Structural Monitoring: Develop means for monitoring structural health and sustainability for long-duration missions, including integration of unobtrusive sensors and responsive on-board systems.
A9) Precision Landing: Increase the ability to land more safely and precisely at a variety of planetary locales and at a variety of times. B9) Lightweight Space Structures: Develop innovative lightweight materials and structures to reduce the mass and improve the performance of space systems such as (1) launch vehicle and payload systems; (2) space and surface habitats that protect the crew, including multifunctional structures that enable lightweight radiation shielding, implement self-monitoring capability, and require minimum crew maintenance time; and (3) lightweight, deployable synthetic aperture radar antennas, including reliable mechanisms and structures for large-aperture space systems that can be stowed compactly for launch and yet achieve high-precision final shapes. C9) Improved Flight Computers: Develop advanced flight-capable devices and system software for real-time flight computing with low-power, radiation-hard, and fault-tolerant hardware that can be applied to autonomous landing, rendezvous, and surface hazard avoidance.
A10) Autonomous Rendezvous and Dock: Achieve highly reliable, autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations, and capture of free-flying space objects. B10) Higher Data Rates: Minimize constraints imposed by communication data rate and range. C10) Cryogenic Storage and Transfer: Develop long-term storage and transfer of cryogens in space using systems that approach near-zero boil-off.
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×

•    X.4 GN&C

4.6.2 Relative Guidance Algorithms

5.4.3 Onboard Autonomous Navigation and Maneuvering

9.4.7 GN&C Sensors and Systems (EDL)

•    X.5 EDL TPS

9.1.1 Rigid Thermal Protection Systems

9.1.2 Flexible Thermal Protection Systems

14.3.1 Ascent/Entry TPS

To develop as short a list as is reasonable in the face of anticipated constrained budgets, several rounds of prioritization were conducted to determine the highest-priority technologies to emphasize over the next 5 years. The resulting short list of the highest-priority technologies to emphasize over the next 5 years is shown in ranked order in Table S.3 (three columns with 16 different technologies). Again, the steering committee assumes NASA will pursue enabling technology related to all three objectives in a balanced approach, and the steering committee does not recommend or advocate support for one objective over another.

Finally, the steering committee reasoned that this intentionally limited set of recommended high-priority technologies comprised a scope that could reasonably be accommodated within the most likely expected funding level available for technology development by OCT (in the range of $500 million to $1 billion annually). Also considered within the scope of a balanced technology development program is the importance of low technology readiness level (TRL; 1 and 2) exploratory concept development and high-TRL flight demonstrations. The steering committee consensus is that low-TRL, NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts-like funding should be on the order of 10 percent of the total, and that the research should quickly weed out the least competitive concepts, focusing on those that show the greatest promise in addressing the top technical challenges. At the high-TRL end of the spectrum, flight demonstrations, while expensive, are sometimes essential to reach a readiness level required for transition of a technology to an operational system. Such technology flight demonstrations are considered on a case-by-case basis when there is ample “pull” from the user organization, including a reasonable level of cost sharing. Also, there were two technologies, Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generators and On-Orbit Cryogenic Storage and Transfer, that the steering committee considered to be at a “tipping point,” meaning that a relatively small increase in the research effort could produce a large advance in its technology readiness.

Recommendation. Technology Development Priorities. During the next 5 years, NASA technology development efforts should focus on (1) the 16 identified high-priority technologies and associated top technical challenges, (2) a modest but significant investment in low-TRL technology (on the order of 10 percent of NASA’s technology development budget), and (3) flight demonstrations for technologies that are at a high TRL when there is sufficient interest and shared cost by the intended user.

Recommendation. Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generators. The NASA Office of the Chief Technologist should work with the Science Mission Directorate and the Department of Energy to help bring Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator-technology hardware to flight demonstration on a suitable space mission beyond low Earth orbit.

Finding. Plutonium-238. Consistent with findings of previous National Research Council reports on the subject of plutonium-238 (NRC 2010, 2011), restarting the fuel supply is urgently needed. Even with the successful development of Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generators, if the funds to restart the fuel supply are not authorized and appropriated, it will be impossible for the United States to conduct certain planned, critical deep-space missions after this decade.

Recommendation. Cryogenic Storage and Handling. Reduced-gravity cryogenic storage and handling technology is close to a “tipping point,” and NASA should perform on-orbit flight testing and flight demonstrations to establish technology readiness.

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×

TABLE S.3 Final Prioritization of the Top Technologies, Categorized by Objective

Highest-Priority Technologies for Technology Objective A Highest-Priority Technologies for Technology Objective B Highest-Priority Technologies for Technology Objective C
Radiation Mitigation for Human Spaceflight (X.1) GN&C (X.4) Optical Systems (Instruments and Sensors) (8.1.3)
Long-Duration Crew Health (6.3.2) ECLSS (X.3) Solar Power Generation (Photovoltaic and Thermal) (3.1.3) High-Contrast Imaging and Spectroscopy Technologies (8.2.4)
ECLSS (X.3) Electric Propulsion (2.2.1) Detectors and Focal Planes (8.1.1)
GN&C (X.4) Fission Power Generation (3.1.5) Lightweight and Multifunctional Materials and Structures (X.2)
(Nuclear) Thermal Propulsion (2.2.3) EDL TPS (X.5) Active Thermal Control of Cryogenic Systems (14.1.2)
Lightweight and Multifunctional Materials and Structures (X.2) In Situ Instruments and Sensors (8.3.3) Electric Propulsion (2.2.1)
Fission Power Generation (3.1.5) Lightweight and Multifunctional Materials and Structures (X.2) Solar Power Generation (Photovoltaic and Thermal) (3.1.3)
EDL TPS (X.5) Extreme Terrain Mobility (4.2.1)

CROSSCUTTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In reviewing and evaluating the draft roadmaps and considering the purpose and strategic goals for the advanced technology development program managed by OCT, the steering committee formed some general observations concerning the program as a whole and reached some conclusions on how the effectiveness of the program can be maintained or enhanced. The topics dealt with tend to address multiple roadmaps.

Recommendation. Systems Analysis. NASA’s Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT) should use disciplined system analysis for the ongoing management and decision support of the space technology portfolio, particularly with regard to understanding technology alternatives, relationships, priorities, timing, availability, down-selection, maturation, investment needs, system engineering considerations, and cost-to-benefit ratios; to examine “what-if” scenarios; and to facilitate multidisciplinary assessment, coordination, and integration of the roadmaps as a whole. OCT should give early attention to improving systems analysis and modeling tools, if necessary to accomplish this recommendation.

Recommendation. Managing the Progression of Technologies to Higher Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs). OCT should establish a rigorous process to down select among competing technologies at appropriate milestones and TRLs to assure that only the most promising technologies proceed to the next TRL.

Recommendation. Foundational Technology Base. OCT should reestablish a discipline-oriented technology base program that pursues both evolutionary and revolutionary advances in technological capabilities and that draws upon the expertise of NASA centers and laboratories, other federal laboratories, industry, and academia.

Recommendation. Cooperative Development of New Technologies. OCT should pursue cooperative development of high-priority technologies with other organizations to leverage resources available for technology development.

Recommendation. Flight Demonstrations and Technology Transition. OCT should collaborate with other NASA mission offices and outside partners in defining, advocating, and where necessary co-funding flight demonstrations of technologies. OCT should document this collaborative arrangement using a technology transition plan or similar agreement that specifies success criteria for flight demonstrations as well as budget commitments by all involved parties.

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×

Finding. Facilities. Adequate research and testing facilities are essential to the timely development of many space technologies. In some cases, critical facilities do not exist or no longer exist, but defining facility requirements and then meeting those requirements fall outside the scope of NASA’s OCT (and this study).

Finding. Program Stability. Repeated, unexpected changes in the direction, content, and/or level of effort of technology development programs have diminished the programs’ productivity and effectiveness. In the absence of a sustained commitment to address this issue, the pursuit of OCT’s mission to advance key technologies at a steady pace will be threatened.

Recommendation. Industry Access to NASA Data. OCT should make the engineering, scientific, and technical data that NASA has acquired from past and present space missions and technology development more readily available to U.S. industry, including companies that do not have an ongoing working relationship with NASA and that are pursuing their own commercial goals apart from NASA’s science and exploration missions. To facilitate this process in the future, OCT should propose changes to NASA procedures so that programs are required to archive data in a readily accessible format.

Recommendation. NASA Investments in Commercial Space Technology. While OCT should focus primarily on developing advanced technologies of high value to NASA’s own mission needs, OCT should also collaborate with the U.S. commercial space industry in the development of precompetitive technologies of interest to and sought by the commercial space industry.

Finding. Crosscutting Technologies. Many technologies, such as those related to avionics and space weather beyond radiation effects, cut across many of the existing draft roadmaps, but the level 3 technologies in the draft roadmaps provide an uneven and incomplete list of the technologies needed to address these topics comprehensively.

Recommendation. Crosscutting Technologies. OCT should review and, as necessary, expand the sections of each roadmap that address crosscutting level 3 technologies, especially with regard to avionics and space weather beyond radiation effects. OCT should assure effective ownership responsibility for crosscutting technologies in each of the roadmaps where they appear and establish a comprehensive, systematic approach for synergistic, coordinated development of high-priority crosscutting technologies.

In summary, the draft set of 14 roadmaps produced by NASA contained 320 level 3 technologies. The panels assessed the technology area breakdown structure of the 14 roadmaps and developed a revised structure containing 295 level 3 technologies. Of those 295 technologies, 83 were considered high priority by the panels. The steering committee then evaluated those 83 technologies. Through an organizing framework relating objectives, challenges, and individual technologies, the prioritization process across all roadmaps identified 7 or 8 technologies for each of three independent technology objectives, for a total of 16 unique technologies that this report recommends be emphasized over the next 5 years of the 5- to 30-year window of the technology roadmaps.

Technological breakthroughs have been the foundation of virtually every NASA success. The Apollo landings on the Moon are now an icon for the successful application of technology to a task that was once regarded as a distant dream. NASA science missions that continue to unlock the secrets of our solar system and universe, and human and robotic exploration of the solar system are inherently high-risk endeavors and require new technologies, new ideas, and bold applications of technology, engineering, and science to create the required vehicles, support systems, and space operations infrastructure. NASA has led in the development and application of many critically important space technologies. In addition, technological advances have yielded benefits far beyond space itself in down-to-Earth applications.

The technologies needed for the Apollo program were generally self-evident and driven by a clear and well-defined goal. In the modern era, the goals of the country’s broad space mission include multiple objectives, extensive involvement from both the public and private sectors, choices among multiple paths to different destinations,

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×

and very limited resources. As the breadth of the country’s space mission has expanded, the necessary technological developments have become less clear, and more effort is required to evaluate the best path for a forward-looking technology development program. NASA has now entered a transitional stage, moving from the past era in which desirable technological goals were evident to all to one in which careful choices among many conflicting alternatives must be made. This report provides specific guidance and recommendations on how the effectiveness of the technology development program managed by NASA’s Office of the Chief Technologist can be enhanced in the face of scarce resources by focusing on the highest-priority technologies.

REFERENCES

NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration). 2011. 2011 NASA Strategic Plan. NASA Headquarters, Washington, D.C. Available at http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/516579main_NASA2011StrategicPlan.pdf.

NRC (National Research Council). 2009. America’s Future in Space: Aligning the Civil Space Program with National Needs. The National

Academies Press, Washington, D.C. NRC. 2010. Radioisotope Power Systems: An Imperative for Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Space Exploration. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.

NRC. 2011. Vision and Voyages for Planetary Science in the Decade 2013-2022. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.

Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×
Page 1
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×
Page 2
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×
Page 3
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×
Page 4
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×
Page 5
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×
Page 6
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×
Page 7
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×
Page 8
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×
Page 9
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×
Page 10
Suggested Citation:"Summary." National Research Council. 2012. NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13354.
×
Page 11
Next: 1 Introduction »
NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities: Restoring NASA's Technological Edge and Paving the Way for a New Era in Space Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $38.00 Buy Ebook | $30.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

NASA's Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT) has begun to rebuild the advanced space technology program in the agency with plans laid out in 14 draft technology roadmaps. It has been years since NASA has had a vigorous, broad-based program in advanced space technology development and its technology base has been largely depleted. However, success in executing future NASA space missions will depend on advanced technology developments that should already be underway. Reaching out to involve the external technical community, the National Research Council (NRC) considered the 14 draft technology roadmaps prepared by OCT and ranked the top technical challenges and highest priority technologies that NASA should emphasize in the next 5 years. This report provides specific guidance and recommendations on how the effectiveness of the technology development program managed by OCT can be enhanced in the face of scarce resources.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!