NASA Space Technology Roadmaps and Priorities Revisited (2016) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Appendix C: 2012 Review and Prioritization Methodology
Appendix C: 2012 Review and Prioritization Methodology
Pages 78-92
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 78... ...
These descriptive factors were added to provide a complete picture of the panels' assessments of the technologies and assisted in the evaluations. Broad community input was solicited through a public website, where more than 240 public comments were received on the draft roadmaps using the established steering committee criteria and other descriptive factors.
|
From page 79... ...
Top Technical Challenges When the 2012 report was prepared, the NASA design reference missions were not available, so as a substitute the panels identified a number of challenges for each technology area that should be addressed for NASA to improve its capability to achieve its mission objectives.1 These top technical challenges were generated to provide some focus for technology development and 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.
|
From page 80... ...
Score: 9 Alignment with Non-NASA Aerospace Technology Needs: How does NASA research in this technology improve NASA ability to address non-NASA aerospace technology needs?
|
From page 81... ...
The technical risk associated with development of this technology is moderate to high, which is a good fit to NASA's level of risk tolerance for technology development, but the likely cost to NASA and the timeframe to complete technology development are expected to substantially exceed those of past efforts to develop comparable technologies. Score: 3 4.
|
From page 82... ...
By multiplying the panel grades by the criteria weighting factor and summing the results, a single score was calculated for each technology. The steering committee based the criteria weighting on the importance of the criteria to meeting NASA goals 's of technology advancement.
|
From page 83... ...
The panels also assessed which of the technologies have the greatest chance of meeting the identified top technical challenges. While many of the technologies within a technology area could potentially address one or more of the challenges, the panels only labeled those where investment would have a major or moderate impact.
|
From page 84... ...
This objective includes using the International Space Station (ISS) for technology advancement to support future human space exploration, providing opportunities for commercial companies to offer services to low Earth orbit and beyond, and developing the launch capability required for safe access to locations beyond low Earth orbit.
|
From page 85... ...
. Each one consists of 3 to 5 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)
|
From page 86... ...
Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) 9.1.1, Rigid Thermal Protection Systems 9.1.2, Flexible thermal Protection Systems 14.3.1, Ascent/Entry TPS Prioritizing Technologies Across Roadmaps Utilizing the panel results, which established a high degree of correlation between high-priority level 3 technologies and the respective technical challenges for each roadmap, the steering committee was able to relate high-priority technologies that aligned with each of the three technology objectives.
|
From page 87... ...
Pressure Garment 12.1.1 Materials: Lightweight Structure 6.5.4 Radiation Prediction 12.2.2 Structures: Design and Certification Methods 6.5.2 Radiation Mitigation 12.5.1 Nondestructive Evaluation and Sensors 6.4.2 Fire Detection and Suppression 12.3.4 Mechanisms: Design and Analysis Tools and Methods 6.1.1 Air Revitalization 12.3.1 Deployables, Docking, and Interfaces 6.2.2 EVA Portable Life Support System 12.3.5 Mechanisms: Reliability/Life Assessment/Health 6.4.4 Fire Remediation Monitoring 12.4.2 Intelligent Integrated Manufacturing and Cyber Physical TA 7 Human Exploration Destination Systems Systems 7.1.3 In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) Products/Production 7.2.1 Autonomous Logistics Management TA 14 Thermal Management Systems 7.6.2 Construction and Assembly 14.3.1 Ascent/Entry Thermal Protection Systems 7.6.3 Dust Prevention and Mitigation 14.1.2 Active Thermal Control of Cryogenic Systems 7.1.4 ISRU Manufacturing/Infrastructure Emplacement continiued
|
From page 88... ...
A1, Improved Access to Space B1, Improved Access to Space C1, Improved Access to Space A2, Space Radiation Health Effects B2, Precision Landing C2, New Astronomical Telescopes A3, Long-Duration Health Effects B3, Robotic Maneuvering C3, Lightweight Space Structures A4, Long-Duration ECLSS B4, Life Detection C4, Increase Available Power A5, Rapid Crew Transit B5, High-Power Electric Propulsion C5, Higher Data Rates A6, Lightweight Space Structures B6, Autonomous Rendezvous and Dock C6, High-Power Electric Propulsion A7, Increase Available Power B7, Increase Available Power C7, Design Software A8, Mass to Surface B8, Mass to Surface C8, Structural Monitoring A9, Precision Landing B9, Lightweight Space Structures C9, Improved Flight Computers A10, Autonomous Rendezvous and Dock B10, Higher Data Rates C10, Cryogenic Storage and Transfer
|
From page 89... ...
(6.3.2) Top Technical Challenge 1 Improved Access to Space 2 Space Radiation Health Effects 3 Long- Duration Health Effects 4 Long- Duration ECLSS 5 Rapid Crew Transit 6 Lightweight Space Structures 7 Increase Available Power 8 Mass to Surface 9 Precision Landing 10 Autonomous Rendezvous and Dock
|
From page 90... ...
(8.3.3) Top Technical Challenge 1 Improved Access to Space 2 Precision Landing 3 Robotic Surface Maneuvering 4 Life Detection 5 High-Power Electric Propulsion 6 Autonomous Rendezvous and Dock 7 Increase Available Power 8 Mass to Surface 9 Lightweight Space Structures 10 Higher Data Rates
|
From page 91... ...
Systems (8.1.3) Top Technical Challenge 1 Improved Access to Space 2 New Astronomical Telescopes 3 Lightweight Space Structures 4 Increase Available Power 5 Higher Data Rates 6 High-Power Electric Propulsion 7 Design Software 8 Structural Monitoring 9 Improved Flight Computers 10 Cryogenic Storage and Transfer
|
From page 92... ...
TABLE C.8 Final List of Highest-Priority Technologies, Ranked by Technology Objective, Comprising a Total of 16 Individual and Grouped Technologies, with 7 or 8 per Technology Objective Highest-Priority Technologies for Highest-Priority Technologies for Highest-Priority Technologies for Technology Objective A, Technology Objective B, Technology Objective C, Human Space Exploration In Situ Measurements Remote Measurements Radiation Mitigation for Human GN&C (X.4) Optical Systems (Instruments and Sensors)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.