SBIR 2023-I

NASA is interested in technologies for advanced in-space propulsion systems to reduce travel time, increase payload mass, reduce acquisition costs, reduce operational costs, and enable new science capabilities for exploration and science spacecraft. The future will require demanding propulsive performance and flexibility for more ambitious missions requiring high-duty cycles, more challenging environmental conditions, and extended operation. This focus area seeks innovations for NASA propulsion systems in chemical, electric, nuclear thermal, and advanced propulsion systems related to human exploration and science missions. Propulsion technologies will focus on a number of mission applications including ascent, descent, orbit transfer, rendezvous, station keeping, proximity operations, and deep space exploration

Scope Title:

Cryogenic Fluid Management (CFM)

Scope Description:

This subtopic seeks technologies related to cryogenic propellant (e.g., hydrogen, oxygen, methane) storage and transfer to support NASA's space exploration goals. This includes a wide range of applications, scales, and environments consistent with future NASA missions. Such missions include, but are not limited to, upper stages, ascent and descent stages, refueling elements or aggregation stages, nuclear thermal propulsion, and in situ resource utilization (ISRU).

This subtopic solicits proposals in the following areas, in order of priority:

1. Cryogenic flight weight valves (minimum Cv >50, goal to Cv of ~100) for low-pressure (<50 psi) liquid oxygen/methane/hydrogen with low internal (~10 sccm, goal of <1 sccm) and external (<1 sccm) leakage over multiple cycles (>100 cycles with a goal of 5,000 cycles) to maximize the lifetime of the valve. Proposals can include metallic or nonmetallic sealing elements. Proposals are encouraged, but not required, to consider additive manufacturing and/or compatibility with hypergolic propellants. If compatible with hypergolic propellants, valve should have minimum Cv <1.0, goal to Cv of ~15 for low-pressure (<250 psi), low internal (~1x10^-3 sccs, goal of <1x10^-4 sccs) and external (<1x10^-3 sccs) leakage over multiple cycles (>100 cycles with a goal of 5,000 cycles). Proposals should address the whole valve subsystem, including actuation and actuation mechanisms, with the goal of minimizing mass in Phase II. Phase I deliverable should be proof of concept of the valve with test data using liquid nitrogen, while the Phase II deliverable should be the valve.
2. Development of liquid hydrogen compatible composite tanks for reusable systems such as spacecraft, surface systems, and hydrogen aircraft for long-duration storage of liquid hydrogen. Development efforts should focus on liquid hydrogen compatibility, including minimization of permeation through the tank (<1x10^-3 sccm/m² of tank), capable of surviving >10,000 thermal cycles between 20 and 300 K, and >5,000 pressure cycles at cryogenic temperatures. Maximum expected operating pressures for tanks range from 25 to 50 psid. The inclusion of vacuum-jacketed composite tanks with thermal insulation capability included could also be considered. The vacuum jacket/insulation portion of the tank should be capable of maintaining vacuum pressures less than 10 millitorr for durations of several days with re-evacuation taking less than an hour. Key performance parameters such as mass compared to metallic tank and gravimetric index should be tracked to demonstrate tank benefits. Phase I efforts should provide initial material characterization for compatibility with hydrogen along with analysis demonstrating the thermal and pressure cycle capability of the tank. Phase II efforts should include tank characterization using liquid hydrogen.
3. Liquid hydrogen pumps for high pressure ratio applications. Two classes of pumps are envisioned: tank-mounted, electrically powered booster pumps; and high-pressure pumps that may be driven by a motor or engine shaft. The booster class of pumps will provide sufficient head to prevent cavitation in the high-pressure pump, as well as potentially be used to supply LH₂ to a heat exchanger for vaporization to provide pressurant gas in the onboard hydrogen tank during operations. A single booster pump should be capable of delivering LH₂ initially saturated at 20 psia at a pressure rise of not less than 25 psid and not more than 45 psid and a rate of 0.6 kg/s. The high-pressure pumps will receive subcooled LH₂ at not less than 44 psia and provide an increase in pressure at a ratio of not less than 15:1, with a goal of 20:1, at a flow rate of 0.6 kg/s. Goals for pump life, not to be verified as a part of this effort, are 7,500 hr and 3,000 start/stop cycles. Phase I efforts should provide preliminary pump design and analysis including estimated performance, mass, power, and life for the concept. Phase II efforts should include final design, build, and performance test of a prototype with liquid hydrogen. If a single offeror desires to propose for both classes of pump, a separate proposal should be submitted for each pump class.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 14 Thermal Management Systems
• Level 2 14.1 Cryogenic Systems

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Hardware
• Prototype
• Research

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I proposals should at minimum deliver proof of the concept, including some sort of testing or physical demonstration, not just a paper study. Phase II proposals should provide component validation in a laboratory environment, preferably with hardware deliverable to NASA. 

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

CFM is a crosscutting technology suite that supports multiple forms of propulsion systems (nuclear and chemical), including storage, transfer, and gauging, as well as liquefaction of ISRU-produced propellants. The Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) has identified that CFM technologies are vital to NASA's exploration plans for multiple architectures, whether hydrogen/oxygen or methane/oxygen systems, including chemical propulsion and nuclear thermal propulsion. Several recent Phase II projects have resulted from CFM subtopics, most notably for cryocoolers, cryocooler electronics, liquid acquisition devices, phase separators, broad area cooling, and composite tanks.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

STMD has identified CFM as a key capability within its "Go" thrust that enables multiple outcomes, including Human Earth-to-Mars Transportation Systems and Reusable, Safe Launch and In-Space Propulsion Systems. Additionally, the CFM activities support the In-Situ Propellant and Consumable capability within the “Live” thrust.

STMD strives to provide the technologies that are needed to enable exploration of the solar system, both manned and unmanned systems; CFM is a key technology to enable exploration. For both liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen/liquid methane systems, CFM will be required to store propellant for up to 5 years in various orbital environments. Transfer will also be required, whether to engines or other tanks (e.g., depot/aggregation), to enable the use of cryogenic propellants that have been stored. In conjunction with ISRU, oxygen will have to be produced, liquefied, and stored; liquefaction and storage are both CFM functions for the surface of the Moon or Mars. ISRU and CFM liquefaction drastically reduces the amount of mass that has to be landed.

References:

No references for this subtopic.

Scope Title:

Nuclear Electric Propulsion

Scope Description:

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 01 Propulsion Systems
• Level 2 01.2 Electric Space Propulsion

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware
• Research

Desired Deliverables Description:

Desired deliverables for this technology would include research that can be conducted to determine technical feasibility of the technology during Phase I and show a path toward a Phase II hardware demonstration. Testing the technology in a simulated (as close as possible) NEP operating environment as part of Phase II is preferred. Delivery of a prototype test unit at the completion of Phase II allows for follow-up testing by NASA.

Phase I Deliverables: Feasibility analysis and/or small-scale experiments proving the proposed technology to develop a given product (TRL 2 to 3). The final report includes a Phase II plan to raise the TRL. The Phase II plan includes a verification matrix of measurements to be performed at the end of Phase II, along with specific quantitative pass-fail ranges for each quantity listed.

Phase II Deliverables: A full report of component and/or breadboard validation measurements, including populated verification matrix from Phase I (TRL 3 to 5). Also delivered is a prototype of the proposed technology for NASA to do further testing if Phase II results show promise for NEP application. Opportunities and plans should also be identified and summarized for potential commercialization of the proposed technology. Unique government facilities can be used as part of Phase II.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

The NEP concept is a much larger scale system than any SEP system to date. The larger scale NEP has significant technology gaps to the required subsystems. Current space radiators do not operate at the required high temperatures needed for NEP. The kind of switch gear required for high-power NEP has been used for terrestrial systems but does not meet the requirements needed for use in space. PPUs for low-power EPSs have been used in the past, but there are no high-TRL PPUs for a high-power EPS. This scope is only addressing a few of the NEP gaps.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

STMD (Space Technology Mission Directorate) is supporting the SNP project to investigate and mature critical technologies needed for NTP and NEP.

Future mission applications:

• Human missions to Mars.
• Science missions to the outer planets.
• Planetary defense.

Some technologies may have applications for fission surface power systems.

References:

1. “Space Nuclear Propulsion for Human Mars Exploration,” A Consensus Study Report of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, February 2021. https://www.nationalacademies.org/news/2021/02/for-humans-to-reach-mars-advances-are-needed-in-space-nuclear-propulsion-technologies
2. “Independent Assessment of the Technical Maturity of Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) and Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) Systems,” NASA Engineering & Safety Center, June 2020.
3. NEP Technology Interchange Meetings (TIM), 2020-2021. NASA Technical Memorandum in process; notes for individual TIMs available through the Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) Project, NASA MSFC.
4. NEP Technology Maturation Plan (TMP) will be made available through SNP, NASA MSFC; likely publication date is late 2022/early 2023.

Scope Title:

High-Temperature, High-Voltage Electric Propulsion Harness Connectors and Cables

Scope Description:

In EP systems, power, commands, and telemetry are relayed between the power processing unit (PPU) and the thruster via dedicated electrical harness assemblies. These harnesses must support the voltage and current needs of the thruster, survive in-space conditions and the operational thermal environment, and not incur unacceptable line loss, radiated emissions, and mass and volume impacts to the spacecraft. Harnesses must also have sufficient flexibility and abrasion resistance, especially for thrusters that are integrated onto actuated gimbals. Individual EP technologies may have specific needs that must be addressed; for example, low-inductance harnesses are preferred in Hall-effect thrusters to reduce thruster discharge oscillations and to promote system stability.

Thermal management of EP systems is a persistent challenge and can be severe in both high-power (>10 kW) and high-power-density (e.g., compact sub-kilowatt) thrusters. This solicitation seeks advancements in connector and cable materials and designs to support harness assembly solutions addressing the following requirements set:

• Voltages (after derating) of at least 600 VDC; extensibility to support the full range of Hall-effect thruster (up to 800 VDC) and gridded-ion thruster (up to 2 kVDC) operations is desirable.
• Operating temperatures of at least 300 °C, survival temperatures down to at least -60 °C, and the ability to survive at least 10,000 on-off thermal cycles.
• Direct currents (after derating) of at least 10 A; extensibility to support high-power EP thrusters (up to to 200 A) is desirable.
• Deratings consistent with NASA Technical Standard MSFC-STD-3012A (Appendix A) for connectors and wiring.
• Low outgassing materials consistent with the guideline (i.e., maximum total mass loss (TML) of 1% and maximum collected volatile condensable material (CVCM) deposition of 0.1%) in NASA Technical Standard MSFC-SPEC-1443B.
• For connectors: features (e.g., venting of connectors and backshells) to mitigate Paschen or corona discharges due to materials or trapped volume outgassing at operating temperatures.
• For cables: available lengths, flexibility (e.g., bend radius), and abrasion resistance comparable to or better than SOA.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 01 Propulsion Systems
• Level 2 01.2 Electric Space Propulsion

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I:

1. Final report containing test data characterizing key properties that address the critical gaps as well as the design and test plan for a component or assembly-level solution to be implemented in Phase II.
2. Material samples that can be used for independent verification of claimed improvements over SOA.

Phase II:

1. Final report containing test data verifying key functional and environmental requirements of the solution, including a functional demonstration in an operating thruster environment (in which partnering with EP developers may be necessary).
2. Prototype harness component or assembly that can be used for independent verification of claimed improvements over SOA.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Recent NASA EP harnesses have utilized stranded, plated copper wiring with multilayer, crosslinked fluoropolymer (e.g., polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and ethylene tetrafluoroethylene (ETFE)) insulation consistent with MIL-W-22759/SAE Standard AS22759D. Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) wiring rated to 600 VDC and 1,000 VDC exists but is limited to temperatures below ~260 °C. Meanwhile, COTS electrical connectors (such as MIL-SPEC circular connectors) typically have even lower temperature limits.

Temperature derating requirements for electrical connectors mating to SOA EP thrusters have been challenging for recent NASA missions and have complicated mechanical retention and strain relief at the interface. Custom connector solutions or extensive component testing to relax derating requirements are possible approaches, but they are unattractive as increased development costs would be incurred for each mission. Harness material and design improvements that increase the maximum allowable harness temperature would improve the thermal margin for derating purposes on SOA thrusters and facilitate the development of thrusters with higher powers or power densities relative to SOA.

SOA EP harnesses frequently employ custom insulation wraps on COTS wiring in order to support high thruster operating voltages. Such wraps can be mechanically fragile and complicate harness handling and installation. Harness material and design improvements that increase the voltage rating are desirable to improve system reliability and to reduce life-cycle costs.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Both NASA's Science Mission Directorate (SMD) and Exploration System Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD) need spacecraft with demanding propulsive performance and greater flexibility for more ambitious missions requiring high duty cycles and extended operations under challenging environmental conditions. SMD spacecraft need the ability to rendezvous with, orbit, and conduct in situ exploration of planets, moons, and other small bodies (e.g., comets, asteroids, and near-Earth objects) in the solar system; mission priorities are outlined in the decadal surveys for each of the SMD divisions (https://science.nasa.gov/about-us/science-strategy/decadal-surveys). For ESDMD, higher power EP is a key element in supporting sustained crewed exploration of cislunar space and Mars.

This subtopic seeks innovations to meet future SMD and ESDMD propulsion requirements in EP systems related to such missions. The roadmap for such in-space propulsion technologies is covered under the 2020 NASA Technology Taxonomy (https://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/taxonomy/index.html), with supporting information archived in the 2015 NASA Technology Roadmap TA-2 (https://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/home/roadmaps/index.html).

References:

1. Goebel, D. M., and Katz, I., “Fundamentals of Electric Propulsion: Ion and Hall Thrusters,” https://descanso.jpl.nasa.gov/SciTechBook/SciTechBook.html
2. NASA Technical Standard MSFC-STD-3012A, “Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts Management and Control Requirements for MSFC Space Flight Hardware,” https://standards.nasa.gov/standard/msfc/msfc-std-3012
3. NASA Technical Standard MSFC-SPEC-1443B, “Outgassing Test for Nonmetallic Materials Associated with Sensitive Optical Surfaces in a Space Environment,” https://standards.nasa.gov/standard/msfc/msfc-spec-1443
4. NASA Technical Handbook NASA-HDBK-4007 (Change 3), “Spacecraft High-Voltage Paschen and Corona Design Handbook,” https://standards.nasa.gov/standard/nasa/nasa-hdbk-4007
5. U.S. Military Specification MIL-W-22759/SAE Standard AS22759D, “Wire, Electrical, Fluoropolymer-Insulated, Copper or Copper Alloy.”
6. Clark, S. D., et al., “BepiColombo Electric Propulsion Thruster and High Power Electronics Coupling Test Performances,” IEPC-2013-133, http://electricrocket.org/IEPC/e2cbw2a1.pdf
7. Pinero, L. R., “The Impact of Harness Impedance on Hall Thruster Discharge Oscillations,” IEPC-2017-023, http://electricrocket.org/IEPC/IEPC_2017_23.pdf

Scope Title:

Cost-Effective, Wear-Resistant Electrodes for High-Power, High-Performance Gridded Ion Thrusters

Scope Description:

Gridded ion thruster technology offers high efficiency, high specific-impulse capabilities, and has been used successfully to support NASA science missions as well as commercial Earth-orbiting applications. The primary life limiter for these devices is typically erosion of the accelerator electrode due to bombardment by charge-exchange ions. While NASA gridded ion thrusters have achieved the necessary lifetimes in the past by operating at derated current densities, there is interest in operation at higher thrust and power densities that would increase mission capture and allow for more compact thruster designs. Higher power and current densities result in increased erosion rates of the accelerator electrode, such that the refractory metals used on previous designs may no longer be sufficient to meet demanding lifetime requirements.

Carbon electrodes have shown promise by offering significantly higher erosion resistance compared to refractory metals. Innovative solutions are desired that would result in manufacturing processes for carbon-based electrodes that are cost-effective relative to prior efforts, making them competitive with SOA electrode manufacturing using refractory metals. Alternative materials besides carbon that allow for improvements in wear resistance over refractory metals such as molybdenum are also desired. These solutions must be capable of producing electrodes with the following geometries, operating voltages, and thermomechanical properties:

• Screen and accelerator electrode thicknesses of ~0.33 mm and ~0.50 to 0.75 mm, respectively.
• Screen and accelerator electrode open area fractions of ~70% and ~25%, respectively.
• Screen and accelerator aperture diameters of ~2 mm and ~1.25 mm, respectively.
• Gap between the screen and accelerator electrode of ~0.50 to 0.75 mm.
• A shallow spherical dome (i.e., dished) geometry for both screen and accelerator electrodes.

Note: Both dome and flat geometries are of interest to NASA. However, a dome geometry ensures sufficient electrode stiffness and first-mode natural frequency to withstand expected structural loading during launch as well as maintaining required electrode gaps and avoiding buckling due to compressive stresses caused by nonuniform temperature distributions along electrodes. Manufacturing solutions capable of producing only flat electrodes will also be considered but must demonstrate that structural loading during launch and potential buckling during operation will not be issues.

• Extensibility to beam extraction (i.e., perforated) diameters of 40 cm or larger.
• Tight tolerances on apertures’ locations (<0.1 mm) to facilitate proper alignment of apertures between screen and accelerator electrodes.
• Minimum voltage standoff capability between screen and accelerator electrodes of 2 kV.
• Peak operating temperatures of 450 °C.
• Coefficients of thermal expansion less than or equal to that of molybdenum (4.8 x 10^-6 K^-1).
• Low outgassing materials consistent with the guideline (i.e., maximum total mass loss (TML) of 1% and maximum collected volatile condensable material (CVCM) deposition of 0.1%) in NASA Technical Standard MSFC-SPEC-1443B.

Proposals are desired that offer solutions which are applicable for manufacturing of both screen and accelerator electrodes. However, proposals that focus only on accelerator electrodes will be considered if such solutions are shown to be compatible with screen electrodes made with heritage refractory metals.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 01 Propulsion Systems
• Level 2 01.2 Electric Space Propulsion

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I:

1. A final report detailing the material properties and the manufacturing processes for the electrodes, as well as an evaluation of the extensibility of the processes to sizes of interest (i.e., 40-cm perforated diameter or larger).
2. A scaled-down sample of each electrode (either screen and accelerator or accelerator only, depending on the approach) representative of typical electrode thickness and open area fraction to be delivered to NASA for independent assessment and tests.

Phase II:

1. A final report detailing final manufacturing processes and an updated evaluation of the extensibility of these processes to sizes of interest (i.e., 40-cm perforated diameter or larger).
2. Screen and accelerator electrodes (or accelerator electrode only, depending on the approach) at least 30 cm in diameter that can be hot-fire tested with a gridded ion thruster (in which partnering with EP developers may be necessary).

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

While extensive research and development of carbon electrodes have resulted in solutions that were technically adequate, the complexity and associated costs of manufacturing have been prohibitive toward widespread adoption into ion thruster technology. The material used for electrodes has historically been refractory metals, whose thermal and mechanical properties allow the electrodes to withstand the temperatures and launch loads they will experience while offering adequate erosion resistance. Fabrication using refractory metals such as molybdenum typically involves chemical etching to produce the apertures within the electrodes. Carbon-based solutions have been developed previously by several organizations and include carbon-carbon, amorphous graphite, and pyrolytic graphite (PG). Fabrication techniques for carbon electrodes have been rather varied and complex and have included methods such as chemical vapor deposition and carbonization. Apertures in carbon electrodes have been created using laser drilling, electric discharge machining (EDM), or conventional machining. As such, innovative solutions are desired that would result in manufacturing processes for carbon electrodes that are less complex and/or more cost effective than prior efforts. Alternatively, solutions are desired involving other materials that can provide improved erosion resistance while having comparable manufacturing cost or complexity compared to existing electrode materials such as molybdenum.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Both NASA's Science Mission Directorate (SMD) and Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD) need spacecraft with demanding propulsive performance and greater flexibility for more ambitious missions requiring high duty cycles and extended operations under challenging environmental conditions. SMD spacecraft need the ability to rendezvous with, orbit, and conduct in situ exploration of planets, moons, and other small bodies (e.g., comets, asteroids, and near-Earth objects) in the solar system; mission priorities are outlined in the decadal surveys for each of the SMD divisions (https://science.nasa.gov/about-us/science-strategy/decadal-surveys). For ESDMD, higher power EP is a key element in supporting sustained crewed exploration of cislunar space and Mars.

This subtopic seeks innovations to meet future SMD and ESDMD propulsion requirements in EP systems related to such missions. The roadmap for such in-space propulsion technologies is covered under the 2020 NASA Technology Taxonomy (https://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/taxonomy/index.html), with supporting information archived in the 2015 NASA Technology Roadmap TA-2 (https://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/home/roadmaps/index.html).

References:

1. Goebel, D. M., and Katz, I., "Fundamentals of Electric Propulsion: Ion and Hall Thrusters," https://descanso.jpl.nasa.gov/SciTechBook/SciTechBook.html
2. Sangregorio, M., Xie, K., Wang, N., Guo, N., and Zang, Z., "Ion engine grids: Function, main parameters, issues, configurations, geometries, materials and fabrication methods," Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, Vol. 31, No. 8, 2018, pp. 1635-1649.
3. Snyder, J. S., "Review of Carbon-based Grid Development Activities for Ion Thrusters," 39th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, AIAA-2003-4715, Huntsville, AL, July 20-23, 2003.
4. Haag, T., "Mechanical Design of Carbon Ion Optics," 41st AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, AIAA-2005-4408, Tucson, AZ, July 10-13, 2005.
5. De Pano, M. K., Hart, S. L., Hanna, A. A., and Schneider, A. C., "Fabrication and Vibration Results of 30-cm Pyrolytic Graphite Ion Optics," 40th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, AIAA-2004-3615, Fort Lauderdale, FL, July 11-14, 2004.
6. Polk, J. E., Goebel, D. M., Snyder, J. S., Schneider, A. C., Johnson, L. K., and Sengupta, A., "A high power ion thruster for deep space missions," Review of Scientific Instruments, Vol. 83, No. 7, 2012, pp. 073306-1–073306-14.
7. Wallace, N. C., and Corbett, M., "Optimization and Assessment of the Total Impulse Capability of the T6 Ion Thruster," 30th International Electric Propulsion Conference, IEPC-2007-231, Florence, Italy, September 17-20, 2007.
8. Wang, J., Polk, J., Brophy, J., and Katz, I., "Three-Dimensional Particle Simulations of NSTAR Ion Optics," 27th International Electric Propulsion Conference, IEPC-2001-085, Pasadena, CA, October 15-19, 2001.
9. Christensen, J. A., Freick, K. J., Hamel, D. J., Hart, S. L., Norenberg, K. T., Haag, T. W., Patterson, M. J., Rawlin, V. K., Sovey, J. S., Anderson, J. R., Becker, R. A., and Polk, J. E., "Design and Fabrication of a Flight Model 2.3 kW Ion Thruster for the Deep Space 1 Mission," 34th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, AIAA-1998-3327, Cleveland, OH, July 13-15, 1998.
10. NASA Technical Standard MSFC-SPEC-1443B, “Outgassing Test for Nonmetallic Materials Associated with Sensitive Optical Surfaces in a Space Environment,” https://standards.nasa.gov/standard/msfc/msfc-spec-1443
11. Snyder, J. S., Anderson, J. R., Van Noord, J. L., and Soulas, G. C. "Environmental Testing of NASA's Evolutionary Xenon Thruster Prototype Model 1 Reworked Ion Engine," Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2009, pp. 94-104.

Power is a ubiquitous technology need across many NASA missions, and new technologies are sought to improve and/or enable the generation, storage, and distribution of electrical power for both human and robotic missions. In space power, mission applications include planetary surface power, large-scale spacecraft prime power, and small-scale robotic probe power. Applicable technology development is sought for 1) efficient means of transmitting, connecting, and managing kilowatt-class power over long distances on planetary surfaces, 2) various power generation and storage technologies for planetary science missions, particularly in extreme environments. An overarching objective is to mature technologies from analytical or experimental proof-of-concept (TRL3) to breadboard demonstration in a relevant environment (TRL5). Successful efforts will transition into NASA Projects where the prototype deliverables will be incorporated into ground testbeds or flight demonstrations. Note that there are some similar power technology development needs at higher power levels for electrified aircraft propulsion which are covered in Focus Area 18, Air Vehicle Technology. 

Scope Title:

Energy Storage for Extreme Environments

Scope Description:

NASA's Planetary Science Division is working to implement a balanced portfolio, within the available budget and based on a decadal survey, that will continue to make exciting scientific discoveries about our solar system. This balanced suite of missions shows the need for low-mass/-volume energy storage that can effectively operate in extreme environments for future NASA Science missions.

Future science missions will require advanced primary and secondary battery systems capable of operating at temperature extremes and improved specific energy. Advancements to battery energy storage capabilities that address operation for one of the listed missions (Venus, deep space, or lunar) combined with high specific energy and energy density (cell-level goals: >250 Wh/kg and >500 Wh/L for secondary; >800 Wh/kg and >1,000 Wh/L for primary) are of interest. For deep space missions, operation to -200 °C and an operational duration of 30 to 60 days for environments such as Europa, Enceladus, and Titan are required. For Venus surface missions, operation from 460 to 500 °C and an operational duration of 30 to 60 days are required. For lunar surface applications, operation at a temperature range of -230 to +120 °C and during 14-day eclipses for lunar night survival and operations are required. Novel battery-pack-level designs and technologies that enhance battery reliability and safety as well as support improved thermal management are also of interest. Combinations of cell-level improvements and/or battery-system-level improvement for enhanced temperature capability will be considered.

Furthermore, missions that incorporate nonrechargeable (primary) batteries will benefit from instrumentation or modeling that can effectively determine state of charge to a high degree of accuracy and/or state of health: particularly those missions that use cell chemistries with discharge voltage profiles that are a weak function of state of charge or state of health, such as lithium carbon monofluoride (Li-CFx) cells. Technologies of interest include: (1) radiation-hardened (to 1 Mrad total ionizing dose) coulomb integration application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) or hybrid circuits, with >1% accuracy over 1 to 20 A, operating over 24 to 36 V; (2) computational models that can predict state of charge/state of health for primary cells; and (3) nondestructive instrumentation that can detect state of charge/state of health for primary and secondary cells.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 03 Aerospace Power and Energy Storage
• Level 2 03.2 Energy Storage

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Research

Desired Deliverables Description:

Research should be conducted to demonstrate technical feasibility in a final report for Phase I and show a path toward a Phase II, and when possible, deliver a demonstration unit for NASA testing at the completion of the Phase II contract. Phase II emphasis should be placed on developing and demonstrating the technology under relevant test conditions. Additionally, a path should be outlined that shows how the technology could be commercialized or further developed into science-worthy systems.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

State-of-the-art primary and rechargeable cells are limited in both capacity and temperature range. Typical primary Li-SO₂ and Li-SOCl₂ batteries operate within a maximum temperature range of -40 to 80 °C but suffer from capacity loss, especially at low temperatures. At -40 °C, the cells will provide roughly half the capacity available at room temperature. Similarly, rechargeable Li-ion cells operate within a narrow temperature range of -20 to 40 °C and also suffer from capacity loss at lower temperatures. The lower limit of temperature range of rechargeable cells can be extended through the use of low-temperature electrolytes, but with limited rate capability and concerns about lithium plating on charge. There is currently a gap that exists for high-temperature batteries, primary and rechargeable, that can operate at Venus atmospheric temperatures. In addition, there is a gap in the ability to accurately predict or measure the amount of usable capacity of primary battery cells, particularly after a long mission cruise with exposure to varying temperatures and ionizing radiation dose. This solicitation is aimed at the development of cells that can maintain performance at extreme temperatures to minimize or eliminate the need for strict thermal management of the batteries (which adds complexity and mass to the spacecraft) as well as instrumentation or modeling to predict state of charge/state of health of primary batteries for deep space missions.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

These batteries are applicable over a broad range of science missions. Low-temperature batteries are needed for potential NASA decadal missions to ocean worlds (Europa, Enceladus, Titan) and the icy giants (Neptune, Uranus). These batteries are also needed for science missions on the lunar surface. Low-temperature batteries developed under this subtopic would enhance these missions and could be potentially enabling if the missions are mass or volume limited. There is also significant interest in a Venus surface mission that will require primary and/or rechargeable batteries that can operate for 60+ days on the surface of Venus. A high-temperature battery that can meet these requirements is enabling for this class of missions.

References:

• NASA Science: https://science.nasa.gov/
• Solar Electric Propulsion: https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/space/sep/

Scope Title:

Photovoltaic Energy Conversion

Scope Description:

This subtopic is seeking photovoltaic cell and blanket technologies that lead to significant improvements in overall solar array performance for missions in areas of scientific interest including those of high-intensity, high-temperature (HIHT) such as near the Sun and at the inner planets; low-intensity, high-temperature (LIHT) like in the Venus atmosphere; low-intensity, low-temperature (LILT) at the outer planets, including at distances up to Saturn; and high-radiation environments like near the inner moons of Jupiter. Additionally sought are solar power systems that can provide high power in compactly stowed volumes for small spacecraft. The subtopic goal is to demonstrate a significant improvement of performance versus state-of-the-art (SOA) solar cell and array technologies for specific Science Mission locations.

These improvements may be achieved by optimizing the cell technology to operate in a specific environment (HIHT/LIHT/LILT), increasing end-of-life (EOL) performance, increasing photovoltaic cell efficiency above 35% at 1 AU, development of cells (including encapsulation) for mission-specific environments, and/or decreasing solar cell module/blanket stowed volume. Missions at distances of greater than 1 AU may include an inner-planetary flyby, as such technologies that optimize solar cell string length to account for the changes in power generation are also of interest. 

Advances in photovoltaic energy conversion may include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) photovoltaic cell and blanket technologies capable of LILT operation applicable to outer-planetary (low solar intensity) missions; (2) photovoltaic cell and blanket technologies capable of HIHT operation applicable to inner-planetary missions; (3) photovoltaic cell and blanket technologies that enhance and extend performance in lunar applications including orbital, surface, and transfer; and  (4) solar cell and blanket technologies to support missions in high-radiation, LILT environments near Jupiter and its moons. 

All proposals relevant to the scope described above would be eligible to be considered for award. For proposals featuring technologies intended for use in planetary science applications, this year a preference will be given to those proposals that would benefit in situ studies of icy ocean worlds, especially low-intensity low-temperature photovoltaic systems.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 03 Aerospace Power and Energy Storage
• Level 2 03.1 Power Generation and Energy Conservation

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables include detailed reports with proof of concept and key metrics of components tested and verified.

Phase II deliverables include detailed reports with relevant test data along with proof-of-concept hardware and components developed.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

SOA photovoltaic array technology consists of high-efficiency, multijunction cell technology on thick honeycomb panels and, as of late, lightweight blanket deployable systems. There are very limited demonstrated technologies for HIHT and LILT missions. A current solution for high-radiation intensity involves adding thick cover glass to the cells, which increases the overall system mass. 

Significant improvements in overall performance are needed to address the current gaps between the SOA and many mission requirements for photovoltaic cell efficiency >30%, array mass specific power >200 W/kg, decreased stowed volume, long-term operation in radiation environments, high-power arrays, and a wide range of environmental operating conditions.

Little work has been done to optimize solar cell and array technologies for these unique NASA missions, and programs have adapted SOA technologies through engineering methods and acceptance of decreased performance. 

Relevance / Science Traceability:

These technologies are relevant to any space science, Earth science, planetary surface, or other science mission that requires affordable high-efficiency photovoltaic power production for orbiters, flyby craft, landers, and rovers. Specific requirements can be found in the References but include many future Science Mission Directorate (SMD) missions. Specific requirements for orbiters and flybys to outer planets include: LILT capability (>38% at 10 AU and <140 °C), radiation tolerance (6×10¹⁵ 1 MeV e/cm²), high power (>50 kW at 1 AU), low mass (3× lower than the standard operating procedure (SOP)), low volume (3× lower than SOP), long life (>15 years), and high reliability. These technologies are relevant and align with any Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD), or Space Operations Mission Directorate (SOMD) mission that requires affordable high-efficiency photovoltaic power production.

"Expands Plans for Moon Exploration: More Missions, More Sciences," https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-outlines-new-lunar-science-human-exploration-missions

"NASA Science Missions," https://science.nasa.gov/missions-page?field_division_tid=All&field_phase_tid=3951

References:

• "Solar Power Technologies for Future Planetary Science Missions," https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/resources/548/solar-power-technologies-for-future-planetary-science-missions/
• NASA outlines New Lunar Science, Human Exploration Missions: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-outlines-new-lunar-science-human-exploration-missions
• "NASA Science Missions," https://science.nasa.gov/missions-page

Scope Title:

Dynamic and Solid-State Power Conversion

Scope Description:

NASA is developing thermoelectric and dynamic radioisotope power systems (DRPSs) for unmanned robotic missions to the Moon and other solar system bodies of interest. This technology directly aligns with the Science Mission Directorate (SMD) strategic technology investment plan for space power and energy storage and could be infused into a highly efficient RPS for missions to dark, dusty, or distant destinations where solar power is not practical. Current work in RPS is focused on advanced thermoelectric (TE) materials and dynamic cycle machines, including Stirling and Brayton convertors that would be integrated with one or more 250-W_th general-purpose heat source (GPHS) modules or 1-W_th lightweight radioisotope heater units (LWRHU) to provide high thermal-to-electric efficiency, low mass, long life, and high reliability for planetary spacecraft, landers, and rovers. Heat is transferred from the radioisotope heat source assembly to the power convertor hot end using conductive or radiative coupling. Power convertor hot-end temperatures would generally range from 300 to 500 °C for RHU applications and 500 to 1,000 °C for GPHS applications. Waste heat is removed from the cold end of the power convertor at temperatures ranging from 20 to 175 °C, depending on the application, using conductive coupling to radiator panels. The NASA projects target power systems able to produce a range of electrical power output levels based on the available form factors of space-rated fuel sources. These include a very low range of 0.5 to 2.0 W_e that would utilize one or more RHU, a moderate range of 40 to 70 W_e that would utilize a single GPHS Step-2 module, and a high range of 100 to 500 W_e that would utilize multiple GPHS Step-2 modules. For these power ranges, one or more power convertors could be used to improve overall system reliability. The current solicitation is focused on innovations that enable efficient and robust power conversion systems. Areas of interest include:

1. Robust, efficient, highly reliable, and long-life thermal-to-electric power convertors that would be used to populate a generator of a prescribed electric power output ranges.
2. Electronic controllers applicable to Stirling, Brayton, or Rankine power convertors.   
3. Multilayered metal insulation (MLMI) for minimizing environmental heat losses and maximizing heat transfer from the radioisotope heat source assembly to the power convertor.
4. Advanced dynamic power conversion components and RPS integration components, including efficient alternators able to survive extended exposure to 200 °C, robust high-temperature-tolerant Stirling regenerators, robust highly effective recuperators, integrated heat pipes, and radiators that improve system performance and improve the margin, reliability, and fault tolerance for existing components.
5. Advanced solid-state thermal-to-electric power conversion components and RPS integration components, including advanced thermoelectric and thermionic devices that advance performance, reliability, and efficiency; enable long life operation (greater than 20 years); and/or enhance manufacturing processes for materials and components.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 03 Aerospace Power and Energy Storage
• Level 2 03.1 Power Generation and Energy Conservation

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables: results of feasibility study, modeling, and/or component testing to demonstrate basic feasibility.  

Phase II deliverables: prototype hardware that has demonstrated basic functionality in a laboratory environment, the appropriate research and analysis used to develop the hardware, and maturation options for flight designs.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Radioisotope power systems are critical for long-duration NASA missions in dark, dusty, or harsh environments. Thermoelectric systems have been used on the very successful RPSs flown in the past, but are limited in efficiency. Advances in solid-state power conversion components are desired to increase performance, reliability, efficiency, and life for RPSs. Dynamic thermal energy conversion provides significantly higher efficiency, and through implementation of noncontacting moving components, can eliminate wear mechanisms and provide long life. Although high-efficiency performance of dynamic power convertors has been proven, reliable and robust systems tolerant of off-nominal operation are needed. In addition to convertors appropriate for GPHS RPSs, advances in much smaller and lower power dynamic power conversion systems are sought that can utilize RHUs for applications such as distributed sensor systems, small spacecraft, and other systems that take advantage of lower power electronics for the exploration of surface phenomenon on icy moons and other bodies of interest.  Although the power convertor advances are essential, to develop reliable and robust systems for future flight advances in convertor components as well as RPS integration components is also needed. These would include efficient and robust thermoelectric couple configurations, efficient alternators able to survive 200 °C; robust high-temperature-tolerant regenerators; robust high-efficiency recuperators; heat pipes for heat addition or rejection; radiators; and controllers applicable to Stirling flexure-bearing, Stirling gas-bearing, or Brayton convertors.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This technology directly aligns with the Science Mission Directorate, Planetary Science Division, for space power and energy storage. Investments in more mature technologies through the Radioisotope Power System Program is ongoing. This SBIR subtopic scope provides a lower TRL technology pipeline for advances in this important power capability that improves performance, reliability, and robustness.

References:

• NASA: "Radioisotope Power Systems," https://rps.nasa.gov/about-rps/overview/
• Oriti, Salvatore: "Dynamic Power Convertor Development for Radioisotope Power Systems at NASA Glenn Research Center," AIAA Propulsion and Energy 2018, AIAA 2018-4498.
• Wilson, Scott D.: "NASA Low Power Stirling Convertor for Small Landers, Probes, and Rovers Operating in Darkness," AIAA Propulsion and Energy 2018, AIAA 2018-4499.
• Wong, Wayne: "Advanced Stirling Convertor (ASC) Technology Maturation," AIAA Propulsion and Energy 2015, AIAA 2015-3806.
• Fleurial, Jean-Pierre, Bux, Sabah, and Caillat, Thierry: "Engineering of Novel Thermoelectric Materials and Devices for Next Generation, Long Life, 20% Efficient Space Power Systems," IECEC 2013, AIAA 2013-3927.

Scope Title:

Radiation-Tolerant, High-Voltage Converters for Lunar and Mars Missions

Scope Description:

NASA seeks technologies that will enable high-voltage power transmission on the lunar surface. While advancements in high-voltage, wide-bandgap devices have made great progress in terrestrial uses, we are finding that these new devices are particularly vulnerable to high-energy single-event upsets that are prevalent outside the Earth's protective Van Allen belts. As such, we seek development of high-voltage converters that are composed of proven, radiation-tolerant components. Converters of interest are bidirectional isolated 100-Vdc to 1,000-Vdc converters and bidirectional 100-Vdc to 3,000-Vdc converters in the 1- to 10-kW power range. Other important characteristics are wide temperature (-150 ºC to 150 ºC) operation, high power density (>2 kW/kg), and high efficiency (>96%).

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 03 Aerospace Power and Energy Storage
• Level 2 03.3 Power Management and Distribution

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Typically, deliverables under Phase I proposals are geared toward a technology concept with associated analysis and design. A final report of the high-fidelity design and analysis is a minimum requirement for Phase I, but selected component development and test results are preferred. Deliverables for Phase II should include hardware prototypes that prove performance and feasibility of the design for potential infusion into NASA technology testbeds and commercial landers.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

While high-power terrestrial distribution systems exist, there is no equivalent to a lunar or planetary base. Unique challenges must be overcome in order to enable a realistic power architecture for these future applications, especially when dealing with the environmental extremes that will be encountered. Operability in environments subject to temperature swings will be a critical requirement for any technology developed, from power converters to cabling or power-beaming concepts. In addition, proposals will have to consider lunar regolith and Mars dust storms. To enable a new Mars transportation capability for human exploration, new technology development must be started soon to address the unique needs of a mixed alternating current/direct current (AC/DC) space-rated power system to prove feasibility and provide realistic performance metrics for detailed vehicle design concepts and mission trade studies. 

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This subtopic would directly address a remaining technology gap in the lunar and Mars surface mission concepts and Mars human transportation needs. There are potential infusion opportunities with SMD, Commercial Lander Payload Services (CLPS), Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD), Space Operations Mission Directorate (SOMD), and Flexible Lunar Architecture for Exploration (FLARE). 

References:

• NASA Moon to Mars Objectives, May 2022: https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/update-nasa-seeks-comments-on-moon-to-mars-objectives-by-june-3
• The Global Exploration Roadmap, January 2018: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/ger_2018_small_mobile.pdf
• Space Policy Directive-1, Reinvigorating America's Human Space Exploration Program, December 11, 2017: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/12/14/2017-27160/reinvigorating-americas-human-space-exploration-program

Scope Title:

Low-Mass, Highly Conductive Power Transmission Cables for Lunar and Mars Missions

Scope Description:

• Low-mass, highly conductive wires and terminations that provide reliable small gauges for long-distance power transmission in the 1- to 10-kW range, low-mass insulation materials with increased dielectric breakdown strength and void reductions with 1,000- to 3,000-V or greater ratings, and low-loss/low-mass shielding.

• Electrical connectors that can survive the harsh lunar environments, such as extreme temperatures ranges (-150 ºC to 150 ºC); can be exposed to the lunar dust; and can be connected by either robots or astronauts (while wearing protective gloves). Primary power transmission lines can carry up to 50 kW of power at either (a) 1,000 Vdc or (b) 3.0 kVAC 3-phase (line to line) with a frequency of 1,000 Hz. 

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 03 Aerospace Power and Energy Storage
• Level 2 03.3 Power Management and Distribution

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Hardware
• Prototype
• Analysis
• Research

Desired Deliverables Description:

Typically, deliverables under Phase I proposals are geared toward a technology concept with associated analysis and design. A final report of the high-fidelity design and analysis is a minimum requirement for Phase I, but selected component development and test results are preferred. Deliverables for Phase II should include hardware prototypes that prove performance and feasibility of the design for potential infusion into NASA technology testbeds and commercial landers.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

While high-power terrestrial distribution systems exist, there is no equivalent to a lunar or planetary base. Unique challenges must be overcome in order to enable a realistic power architecture for these future applications, especially when dealing with the environmental extremes that will be encountered. Operability in environments subject to temperature swings will be a critical requirement for any technology developed, from power converters to cabling or power-beaming concepts. In addition, proposals will have to consider lunar regolith and Mars dust storms. To enable a new Mars transportation capability for human exploration, new technology development must be started soon to address the unique needs of a mixed alternating current/direct current (AC/DC) space-rated power system to prove feasibility and provide realistic performance metrics for detailed vehicle design concepts and mission trade studies. 

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This subtopic would directly address a remaining technology gap in the lunar and Mars surface mission concepts and Mars human transportation needs. There are potential infusion opportunities with SMD, Commercial Lander Payload Services (CLPS), Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD), Space Operations Mission Directorate (SOMD), and Flexible Lunar Architecture for Exploration (FLARE). In addition, technologies developed could benefit other NASA missions, including Gateway. The power levels may be different, but the technology concepts could be similar, especially when dealing with temperature extremes.

References:

• The Global Exploration Roadmap, January 2018: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/ger_2018_small_mobile.pdf
• Space Policy Directive-1, Reinvigorating America's Human Space Exploration Program, December 11, 2017: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/12/14/2017-27160/reinvigorating-americas-human-space-exploration-program

Scope Title:

Innovative Ways to Transmit Power Over Long Distances for Lunar and Mars Missions

Scope Description:

• Power-beaming concepts to enable highly efficient flexible/mobile power transfer in the range of 100 to 1,000 W, including the fusion of power/communication/navigation.
• Wireless power transfer in a lunar environment in the range of 100 to 1,000 W.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 03 Aerospace Power and Energy Storage
• Level 2 03.3 Power Management and Distribution

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Typically, deliverables under Phase I proposals are geared toward a technology concept with associated analysis and design. A final report usually suffices in summarizing the work, but a prototype is preferred. Phase II hardware prototypes will have opportunities for infusion into NASA technology testbeds and commercial landers.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

While high-power terrestrial distribution systems exist, there is no equivalent to a lunar or planetary base. Unique challenges must be overcome in order to enable a realistic power architecture for these future applications, especially when dealing with the environmental extremes that will be encountered. Operability in environments subject to temperature swings will be a critical requirement for any technology developed, from power converters to cabling or power-beaming concepts. In addition, proposals will have to consider lunar regolith and Mars dust storms. To enable a new Mars transportation capability for human exploration, new technology development must be started soon to address the unique needs of a mixed alternating current/direct current (AC/DC) space-rated power system to prove feasibility and provide realistic performance metrics for detailed vehicle design concepts and mission trade studies. 

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This subtopic would directly address a remaining technology gap in the lunar and Mars surface mission concepts and Mars human transportation needs. There are potential infusion opportunities with SMD (Science Mission Directorate), Commercial Lander Payload Services (CLPS), Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD), Space Operations Mission Directorate (SOMD), and Flexible Lunar Architecture for Exploration (FLARE). In addition, technologies developed could benefit other NASA missions, including Gateway. The power levels may be different, but the technology concepts could be similar, especially when dealing with temperature extremes.

References:

• The Global Exploration Roadmap, January 2018: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/ger_2018_small_mobile.pdf
• Space Policy Directive-1, Reinvigorating America's Human Space Exploration Program, December 11, 2017: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/12/14/2017-27160/reinvigorating-americas-human-space-exploration-program

The exploration of space requires advanced technologies that will better enable both humans and robotic spacecraft to maintain a sustained lunar presence, support Mars exploration, operate in deep space, and explore other destinations in our solar system. Examples of such missions include robotic platforms like the Europa Lander or crewed missions with extended periods of dormancy such as Gateway. Gateway represents a vital component of NASA’s Artemis program, which will serve as a multi-purpose orbital lunar outpost that provides essential support for a long-term human return to the lunar surface. It will serve as a staging point for deep space exploration. Autonomous Systems technologies provide the means of migrating mission control from Earth to spacecraft, habitats, and robotic explorers. This is enhancing for missions in the Earth-Lunar neighborhood and enabling for deep space missions. Long communication delays, for example up to 42 minutes round-trip between Earth and Mars, do not permit time-critical control decisions to be made from Earth mission control centers. Rather, time-critical control decisions for spacecraft operating in deep space must be made by onboard humans, by autonomous systems, or by some combination of astronaut-automation teaming. 

Long-term crewed spacecraft and habitats, such as the International Space Station, are so complex that a significant portion of the crew's time is spent keeping it operational even under nominal conditions in low-Earth orbit, while still requiring significant real-time support from Earth. The considerable challenge is to migrate the knowledge and capability embedded in current Earth mission control, with tens to hundreds of human specialists ready to provide instant knowledge, to onboard automation that teams with astronauts to autonomously manage spacecraft and habitats. For outer planet robotic explorers, the technical challenge is to develop cognitive systems to provide astronauts with improved situational awareness and autonomous systems that can rapidly respond to dynamic environments.

Specific innovations being sought in this solicitation are described below: 

·       Neural net software pipelines and radiation hard neuromorphic processing hardware to support in-space autonomy and cognition. Advances in signal and data processing for neuromorphic processors promise to enable artificial intelligence and machine learning for autonomous spacecraft operations. 

·       Intelligent autonomous agent cognitive architectures are sought after as an onboard spacecraft capability to enable decision-making under uncertainty and to improve system performance through learning over time. 

·       Onboard fault management capabilities, such as onboard sensing, computing, algorithms, and models to improve the prognostic health management of future spacecraft. 

·       Multi-agent Cyber-Physical-Human (CPH) systems that operate autonomously from humans or under human direction. This capability will help to address the need for integrated data uncertainty management and a robust representation of “trustworthy and trusted” autonomy in space. 

·       Technologies for the control and coordination of swarms of planetary rovers, flyers, or in-space vehicles for future space missions. 

·       Autonomy and artificial intelligence technologies for Gateway operations and health management, for either fully autonomous or crew-supervised operations. 

The descriptions and references of each subtopic provide further detail to guide the development of proposals.

Scope Title:

Radiation Tolerant Neuromorphic Learning Hardware

Scope Description:

This hardware scope is for embedded radiation tolerant neuromorphic processors and neural net accelerators that provide hardware support for efficient adaptation and learning in the space environment. The adaptation can be deep learning, reinforcement learning, Hebbian learning, or other machine learning paradigms. To qualify, the hardware must be substantially more power-efficient at learning than central processing units (CPUs) and graphics processing units (GPUs) at comparable technology nodes. Efficiency is primarily measured through trillions of AI operations per watt, where an AI operation is typically a multiply-add. The arithmetic precision expected for digital deep learning is BFLOAT 16 or better, hardware proposals for other learning paradigms or analog hardware should justify their level of precision. The hardware needs to be qualifiable for the space environment, encompassing vibration, temperature extremes, RFI, as well as radiation tolerance for lunar, martian, and deep space missions. Radiation tolerance includes total ionizing dose (TID) immunity at or above 50 krad and no destructive latch up. Note that commercial unhardened devices (COTS) are typically rated below 10 krad. Single-event latch up or unrecoverable faults shall be rare outside of solar flares. The hardware shall be designed to detect and recover from most single event effects encountered in the space environment. Specifically, the number of uncorrected errors in the 90% worst-case GEO environment should be targeted for no more than 1×10^-5 uncorrected errors per device-day. In the rare event of an unrecoverable error, the hardware shall support fast reboots. The hardware needs to support the large number of write cycles for synaptic values expected during machine learning. Finally, the hardware needs to support neural net inference in addition to machine learning, preferably within an integrated AI paradigm for in situ adaptation during operations.

The innovation, as compared to terrestrial processors, is to incorporate the mechanisms for fault tolerance in an edge processor capable of machine learning with high power efficiency. Some type of redundancy will likely be needed. The reference for Johann Schumann’s incorporation of triple modular redundancy for Loihi is one example mechanism that masks faults, but at the expense of an overall 3x reduction in power efficiency. In a neuromorphic context with stochasticity, innovations for more efficient fault tolerance techniques might be developed.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 02 Flight Computing and Avionics
• Level 2 02.1 Avionics Component Technologies

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables shall include at the minimum hardware simulation at the Verilog level sufficient for proof of concept of throughput, expected energy efficiency, and redundancy mechanisms for radiation tolerance. Detailed simulations or a tape-out at coarser technology nodes would be a preferable Phase I proof of concept.

Phase II deliverables shall include a prototype processor whose fault tolerance is tested in ground facilities including TID and proton radiation. The prototype processor and its support circuitry shall be suitable to incorporate on an experimental CubeSat mission, in other words, the printed circuit board (PCB) should fit within 10 × 10 cm. The preference is for a prototype processor fabricated in a technology node suitable for the space environment, such as 22-nm FDSOI, which has become increasingly affordable.

The Phase II delivery should include a maturation plan for a ruggedized production processor fabricated at a competitive technology node with high performance metrics, that could be funded through some combination of outside capital and NASA post Phase II programs.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Neuromorphic and deep neural net computing is a broad field with many technology gaps for space avionics.  Through previous and ongoing research and development (R&D), especially under this Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) subtopic, the SOA in neuromorphic processors for space has advanced to include high throughput, low SWaP, and radiation tolerance—but for neural inference only.

Extended space missions need in situ adaptation and learning for autonomy, otherwise Earth operations are continually remotely updating software in response to unexpected and changing conditions. This adaptation, which characterizes biological systems, requires hardware support for machine learning. 

Relevance / Science Traceability:

• 02-10 (Radiation-tolerant Neuromorphic Machine Learning Processors)
• 02-11 (Radiation-tolerant High-performance Memory)
• 03-09a (Autonomous self-sensing)
• 04-23 (Robotic actuators, sensors, and interfaces)
• 10-04 (Integrated system fault/anomaly detection, diagnosis, prognostics)
• 10-05 (On-Board "thinking" autonomy)

References:

• Henessy, J., Patterson, D. A new golden age for computer architecture, domain-specific hardware/software co-design, enhanced security, open instruction sets, and agile chip development. 2017 ACM A.M. Turing Award. Lecture presented 45th ISCA, Los Angles 2018
• Bengio, Y., Lecun, Y., and Hinton, G. Deep Learning for AI. 2018 Turing Award. Communications of the ACM, 64(7) 58-65. (2021)
• Davies, M. et al. Loihi: A neuromorphic manycore processor with on-chip learning. IEEE Micro 38(1) 82-99. (2018)
• Davies, M. et al. Advancing neuromorphic computing with Loihi: A survey of results and outlook. Proceedings of the IEEE 109(5), 911-934. (2021)
• ACM digital library: proceedings for annual International Conference on Neuromorphic Systems (ICONS)
• Cognitive Communications for Aerospace Applications (CCAA) workshop papers available at: http://ieee-ccaa.com
• Alena, R. Mission Radiation Environment Modeling and Analysis Avionics Trade Study for Rad-Neuro. NASA Technical Memorandum 20220011775, August 2022
• Schumann, J. Radiation Tolerance and Mitigation for Neuromorphic Processors. NASA Technical Memorandum 20220013182, November 2022
• NASA short course: Radiation Hardness Assurance: Evolving for NewSpace available at: https://nepp.nasa.gov/
• Papers for annual NASA Electronics Technology Workshop (ETW) for NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program available at https://nepp.nasa.gov/pages/pubs.cfm
• Rolls, E. and Deco, G. The Noisy Brain 2010 Oxford University Press. Available for free download at: https://www.oxcns.org/b9_text.html

Scope Title:

Extreme Radiation Hard Neuromorphic Hardware

Scope Description:

There are two primary differences between this Scope, Extreme Radiation Hard Neuromorphic Hardware, and the Scope titled: Radiation Tolerant Neuromorphic Learning Hardware.

First, the processor is required to have greater radiation hardness. The goal is to develop a processor that is capable of operating through solar flares and the trapped radiation belts of planets such as Earth, Jupiter, and Saturn. This capability means, for example, that a lunar mission does not need to incorporate sheltering in place during a solar flare into its concept of operations. A lunar mission could count on the neuromorphic processor for critical phases, such as entry, descent, and landing (EDL), even during unexpected solar flares. It also enables missions to the outer planets and their scientifically interesting moons. In contrast to the first category, the processor needs to incorporate radiation mitigation measures that meet or exceed TID 200 krad and provide reliable embedded computation during solar flares in deep space. In deep space, the radiation flux during a solar flare can exceed 100 times the background radiation flux, and there are many more highly energetic protons and ion species that penetrate shielding—some up to 100 MeV. Specifically, the number of uncorrected errors should be no more than 1×10^-3 per device-minute, for the worst 5-minute period of the October 1989 design case flare in CRÈME 96. See the references on space radiation and electronic effects to calibrate this level of radiation hardness.

Second, the processor could be neural inference-only, relaxing the requirements to support in situ adaptation and learning. To qualify, the hardware must be significantly more power-efficient at inference than radiation hard CPUs, GPUs, and field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) at comparable technology nodes. Efficiency is primarily measured through trillions of AI operations per watt, where an AI operation is typically a multiply-add. The arithmetic precision expected for digital multiplies is Int8 or better, hardware proposals for analog inference should justify their level of precision. The hardware needs to be qualifiable for the space environment, encompassing vibration, temperature extremes, RFI, as well as radiation hardness for lunar, martian, and deep space missions during solar flares. Radiation tolerance includes TID support at or above 200 krad, and no destructive latch up even under the extreme environment of Jupiter and Saturn. Single-event latch up or unrecoverable faults shall be rare even during solar flares, and the hardware shall support fast reboots.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 02 Flight Computing and Avionics
• Level 2 02.1 Avionics Component Technologies

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables shall include at the minimum hardware simulation at the Verilog level sufficient for proof of concept of throughput, expected energy efficiency, and redundancy mechanisms for radiation hardness to single event effects. Detailed simulations or a tape-out at coarser technology nodes would be a preferable Phase I proof of concept. Simulation of radiation performance would enhance Phase I deliverables.

Phase II deliverables shall include a prototype processor whose fault tolerance is tested in ground facilities including TID, proton, and heavy ion. The prototype processor and its support circuitry shall be suitable to incorporate on an experimental GTO (GeoTransfer orbit) CubeSat mission, in other words, the PCB should fit within 10 × 10 cm. In a GTO mission, the CubeSat experiences daily transitions through the Van Allen belts—roughly comparable to the radiation during a solar flare. The preference is for a prototype processor fabricated in a technology node suitable for the space environment, such as 22-nm FDSOI, which has become increasingly affordable.

The Phase II delivery should include a maturation plan for a ruggedized production processor fabricated at a competitive technology node for radiation hard processors with high performance metrics, that could be funded through some combination of outside capital and NASA post Phase II programs.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Neuromorphic and deep neural net computing is a broad field with many technology gaps for space avionics. Through previous and ongoing R&D, especially under this SBIR subtopic, the SOA in neuromorphic processors for space has advanced to include radiation tolerance but not radiation hardness. 

Radiation hardness enables computing during extreme space environment and events such as solar flares. In order for neuromorphic processors to be used during critical mission phases such as EDL that cannot be postponed, a higher level of environmental robustness is needed. This also opens up these processors for missions such as icy moons of the outer planets. 

Radiation hardness could be addressed through techniques similar to radiation hardness for general purpose processors, but also through potentially new neuromorphic techniques. For example, Dual Interlocked Storage Cells (DICE) resist bit flips by requiring simultaneous transition of redundant memory elements, thus masking any radiation noise on one element. However, in a neuromorphic context with stochasticity, a more efficient radiation hardening technique might be to mask noise at the neural equivalent level.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

• 02-03 (Radiation-tolerant High Performance General Purpose Processors)
• 02-10 (Radiation-tolerant Neuromorphic Machine Learning Processors)
• 02-11 (Radiation-tolerant High-performance Memory)
• 03-09a (Autonomous self-sensing)
• 04-23 (Robotic actuators, sensors, and interfaces)
• 04-77 (Low SWaP, “End of arm” proximity range sensors)
• 10-05 (On-Board "thinking" autonomy)
• 10-16 (Fail operational robotic manipulation)

References:

• Henessy, J., Patterson, D. A new golden age for computer architecture, domain-specific hardware/software co-design, enhanced security, open instruction sets, and agile chip development. 2017 ACM A.M. Turing Award. Lecture presented 45th ISCA, Los Angles 2018
• Bengio, Y., Lecun, Y., and Hinton, G. Deep Learning for AI. 2018 Turing Award. Communications of the ACM, 64(7) 58-65. (2021)
• Davies, M. et al. Loihi: A neuromorphic manycore processor with on-chip learning. IEEE Micro 38(1) 82-99. (2018)
• Davies, M. et al. Advancing neuromorphic computing with Loihi: A survey of results and outlook. Proceedings of the IEEE 109(5), 911-934. (2021)
• ACM digital library: proceedings for annual International Conference on Neuromorphic Systems (ICONS)
• Cognitive Communications for Aerospace Applications (CCAA) workshop papers available at: http://ieee-ccaa.com
• Alena, R. Mission Radiation Environment Modeling and Analysis Avionics Trade Study for Rad-Neuro. NASA Technical Memorandum 20220011775, August 2022
• Schumann, J. Radiation Tolerance and Mitigation for Neuromorphic Processors. NASA Technical Memorandum 20220013182, November 2022
• NASA short course: Radiation Hardness Assurance: Evolving for NewSpace available at: https://nepp.nasa.gov/
• Papers for annual NASA Electronics Technology Workshop (ETW) for NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program available at: https://nepp.nasa.gov/pages/pubs.cfm
• Rolls, E. and Deco, G. The Noisy Brain 2010 Oxford University Press. Available for free download at: https://www.oxcns.org/b9_text.html

Scope Title:

Neuromorphic Software for Cognition and Learning for Space Missions

Scope Description:

This scope seeks integrated neuromorphic software systems that together achieve a space mission capability. Such capabilities include but are not limited to:

• Cognitive communications for constellations of spacecraft.
• Spacecraft health and maintenance from anomaly detection through diagnosis; prognosis; and fault detection, isolation, and recovery (FDIR).
• Visual odometry, path planning, and navigation for autonomous rovers.
• Science data processing from sensor denoising, through sensor fusion and super resolution, and finally output the generation of science information products such as planetary digital elevation maps.

In this scope, it is expected that a provider will pipeline together a number of neural nets from different sources to achieve a space capability. The first challenge is to achieve the pipelining in a manner that achieves high overall throughput and is energy efficient. The second challenge is to put together a demonstration breadboard integrated hardware/software system that achieves the throughput incorporating neuromorphic or neural net accelerators perhaps in combination with conventional processors such as CPUs, GPUs, and FPGAs. Systems on a chip (SOC), could be another demonstration hardware platform. In either case, the neural cores should do the heavy computational lifting, and the CPUs, GPUs, and FPGAs should play a supportive role. The total power requirements shall be commensurate with the space domain, for example, 10 W maximum for systems expected to operate on CubeSats 24/7 and even less wattage for lunar systems that need to operate on battery power over the 2-week-long lunar night.

The third optional challenge is to evolve the neural net individual applications and pipeline through adaptive learning over the course of a simulated mission.

Radiation tolerance and space environment robustness are not addressed directly through this scope. Rather, a provider is expected to use terrestrial grade processors and only after Phase II target radiation tolerant neuromorphic processors potentially developed under Scopes 1 or 2 or from another source. The goal is to achieve space mission capabilities that require system integration of individual neural nets together with minimal overhead conventional software. The continuous mission-long learning complements the capability of Earth operations to adapt software over the course of a mission.

As background, development of individual neural net software is now state of the practice, and a large number of neural net applications can be downloaded in standard formats such as pseudo-assembly level or programming languages such as Tensorflow^TM (Google Inc), PyTorch^TM (Linux Foundation), Nengo^TM (Applied Brain Research), Lava^TM ( Intel Cooporation), and others. Published neural nets for aerospace applications can be found, ranging from telescope fine-pointing control to adaptive flight control to medical support for astronaut health. In addition, there are many published neural nets for analogous terrestrial capabilities, such as autonomous driving. Transfer learning and other state-of-practice techniques enable adaptation of neural nets from terrestrial domains, such as image-processing for the image net challenge, to space domains such as Mars terrain classification for predicting rover traction.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 10 Autonomous Systems
• Level 2 10.2 Reasoning and Acting

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

The deliverables for Phase I should include at minimum the concept definition of a space capability that could be achieved through a dataflow pipeline/graph of neural nets and identification of at least a portion of the pipeline that can be achieved with existing neural nets that are either already suited for the space domain or provide an analogous capability from an Earth application. The pipeline should at a minimum be mocked up and characterized by parameterized throughput requirements for the individual neural nets, a description of the dataflow and control flow integration of the system of neural nets, and an assignment and mapping from the individual software components to the hardware elements, and an energy/power/throughput estimate for the entire pipeline. Enhanced deliverables for Phase I would include a partial demonstration of the pipeline on some terrestrial hardware platform. A report that illustrates a conceptual pipeline of neural nets for autonomous rovers can be found in the reference authored by Eric Barszcz.

The deliverables for Phase II should include at minimum a demonstration hardware system, using terrestrial grade processors and sensors, that performs a significant portion of the overall pipeline needed for the chosen space capability, together with filling in at least some of the neural net applications that needed to be customized, adapted, or developed from scratch. It is expected that the hardware system would include one or more terrestrial grade neuromorphic processors that do the primary processing, with support from CPUs, GPUs, and FPGAs. An alternative would be an SOC that incorporates a substantial number of neural cores. The demonstration shall include empirical measurement and validation of throughput and power. Enhanced deliverables for Phase II would be a simulation of continuous in situ mission-long adaptation and learning that exhibits significant evolution.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Neuromorphic and deep neural net software for point applications has become widespread and is state of the art. Integrated solutions that achieve space-relevant mission capabilities with high throughput and energy efficiency is a critical gap. For example, terrestrial neuromorphic processors such as Intels Cooporation's Loihi^TM, Brainchip's Akida^TM, and Google Inc's Tensor Processing Unit (TPU^TM) require full host processors for integration for their software development kit (SDK) that are power hungry or limit throughput. This by itself is inhibiting the use of neuromorphic processors for low SWaP space missions. 

The system integration principles for integrated combinations of neuromorphic software is a critical gap that requires R&D, as well as the efficient mapping of integrated software to integrated avionics hardware. Challenges include translating the throughput and energy efficiency of neuromorphic processors from the component level to the system level, which means minimizing the utilization and processing done by supportive CPUs and GPUs.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

• 03-09a (Autonomous self-sensing)
• 04-15 (Collision avoidance maneuver design)
• 04-16 (Consolidated advanced sensors for relative navigation and autonomous robotics)
• 04-23 (Robotic actuators, sensors, and interfaces)
• 04-77 (Low SWaP, “End of arm” proximity range sensors)
• 04-89 (Autonomous Rover GNC for mating)
• 10-04 (Integrated system fault/anomaly detection, diagnosis, prognostics)
• 10-05 (On-Board "thinking" autonomy)
• 10-06 (Creation, scheduling and execution of activities by autonomous systems)
• 10-16 (Fail operational robotic manipulation)

References:

• Mead, C. Neuromorphic electronic systems. Proceedings of the IEEE 78(10) 1629-1636. (1990)
• Henessy, J., Patterson, D. A new golden age for computer architecture, domain-specific hardware/software co-design, enhanced security, open instruction sets, and agile chip development. 2017 ACM A.M. Turing Award. Lecture presented 45th ISCA, Los Angles 2018
• Bengio, Y., Lecun, Y., and Hinton, G. Deep Learning for AI. 2018 Turing Award. Communications of the ACM, 64(7) 58-65. (2021)
• Davies, M. et al. Loihi: A neuromorphic manycore processor with on-chip learning. IEEE Micro 38(1) 82-99. (2018)
• Davies, M. et al. Advancing neuromorphic computing with Loihi: A survey of results and outlook. Proceedings of the IEEE 109(5), 911-934. (2021)
• ACM digital library: proceedings for annual International Conference on Neuromorphic Systems (ICONS)
• Cognitive Communications for Aerospace Applications (CCAA) workshop papers available at: http://ieee-ccaa.com
• Alena, R. Mission Radiation Environment Modeling and Analysis Avionics Trade Study for Rad-Neuro. NASA Technical Memorandum 20220011775, August 2022
• Barszcz, E. Neural Network Pipelines for Autonomous Rovers in Space Applications. NASA Technical Memorandum 20220013240, November 2022
• NASA short course: Radiation Hardness Assurance: Evolving for NewSpace available at: https://nepp.nasa.gov/
• Papers for annual NASA Electronics Technology Workshop (ETW) for NASA Electronic Parts and Packaging (NEPP) Program available at: https://nepp.nasa.gov/pages/pubs.cfm
• Rolls, E. and Deco, G. The Noisy Brain 2010 Oxford University Press. Available for free download at: https://www.oxcns.org/b9_text.html

Scope Title:

Spacecraft Autonomous Agent Cognitive Architectures for Human Exploration

Scope Description:

Autonomous and partially-autonomous systems promise the opportunity for a future with self-driving automobiles, air taxis, packages delivered by unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and more revolutionary Earth applications. At the same time, it is expected that future NASA deep space missions will happen at distances that put significant communication barriers between the spacecraft and Earth, including lag due to light distance and intermittent loss of communications. As a result, it will be difficult to control every aspect of spacecraft operations from an Earth-based mission control, and thus, the crews will be required to manage, plan, and execute the mission and to respond to unanticipated system failure and anomaly more autonomously. Similarly, there is also opportunity for unmanned vehicles on Earth to benefit from autonomous, cognitive agent architectures that can respond to emergent situations without the aid of human controllers. For this reason, it is advantageous for operational functionality currently performed by external human-centric control stations (e.g., mission control) to be migrated to the vehicle and crew (if piloted). Since spacecraft operations will consist of a limited number of crewmembers who each operate with a limited performance capacity (in terms of both cognition and tasks), it will be necessary for the spacecraft to have assistive, autonomous, and semi-autonomous agents to be responsible for a large proportion of spacecraft operations so as not to overburden the crew.

Cognitive agents could provide meaningful help for many tasks performed by humans. Novel operational capabilities required by deep space missions, such as spacecraft and systems health, crew health, maintenance, consumable management, payload management, and activities such as food production and recycling could benefit from the assistance of autonomous agents, which could interface directly with the crew and onboard systems, reducing cognitive load and scheduling time on the crew. Additionally, cognitive agents could contribute to many general operational tasks in collaboration with the crew, such as training, inspections, and mission planning. Finally, autonomous agents could increase the mission’s resilience to hazardous events, both by directly responding to certain events (e.g., ones which unfold too quickly for the crew to catch, or which immobilize the crew) and by providing assistive services (e.g., fault diagnosis, contingency analysis, and mission replanning).

However, implementing these cognitive agents presents significant challenges to the underlying software architecture. First, these agents will need to be able to take a significant amount of responsibility for mission operations while still operating under crew directives. Additionally, agents with different dedicated roles will need to share resources and hardware and may have differing goals and instructions from human operators that need to be managed and coordinated. Such agents will, thus, need to be able to take these actions autonomously while enabling (1) effective crew (or vehicle occupant) control of the vehicle even when the agent is operating autonomously (meaning, the agents should not be acting in unexpected ways and should report when the situation has changed enough to justify a change in operations), (2) direct crew control of the task when manual intervention is needed, and (3) autonomous and manual coordination/deconfliction of agent goals and tasks. Second, for NASA space missions, long-duration spaceflight is likely to uncover new challenges during the mission that require some level of adaptation. Whether this is because of known low-probability hazardous events or because of “unknown unknown” situations that were not planned for, cognitive agents will need to have a capacity for “graceful extensibility.” This concept is not unique to space missions—Earth-based vehicles will also need to be able to respond to similar types of events in-time given the highly variable and heterogenous environments they will likely encounter when operated at scale. As a result, the architecture of the cognitive agent will need to be able to learn (both from taught examples and from the environment) and reconfigure itself (in collaboration with the crew) to perform new tasks. Finally, these capabilities need to be implemented with the high level of assurance required by mission operations, meaning that learned and autonomous behavior must be transparent, predictable, and verifiable using traditional software assurance techniques.

This subtopic solicits intelligent autonomous agent cognitive architectures that are open, modular, make decisions under uncertainty, interact closely with humans, incorporate diverse input/data sources, and learn such that the performance of the system is assured and improves over time. This subtopic will enable small businesses to develop the underlying learning/knowledge representation, methods for enabling the required behavior (e.g., operations and interactions), and necessary software architectures required to implement these technologies within the scope of cognitive agents that assist operators in managing vehicle operations. It should be feasible for cognitive agents based on these architectures to be certified or licensed for use on deep space missions to act as liaisons that interact with the mission control operators, the crew, and vehicle subsystems. With such a cognitive agent that has access to all onboard data and communications, the agent could continually integrate this dynamic information and advise the crew and mission control accordingly by multiple modes of interaction including text, speech, and animated images. This agent could respond to queries and recommend to the crew courses of action and direct activities that consider all known constraints, the state of the subsystems, available resources, risk analyses, and goal priorities. Cognitive architectures capable of being certified for crew support on spacecraft are required to be open to NASA with interfaces open to NASA partners who develop modules that integrate with the agent, in contrast to proprietary black-box agents. It should be noted that fulfilling this requirement would additionally make the cognitive agent suitable for a wide variety of Earth applications where a high level of assurance is needed (e.g., autonomous vehicles and aircraft).

An effective cognitive architecture would be capable of integrating a wide variety of knowledge sources to perform a wide variety of roles depending on mission requirements. For example, an effective prognostics and health management (PHM) agent would need to be able to take sensor data, interpret this data to diagnose the current state of the system using learned artificial intelligence (AI) models, digital twin simulations and data, and user input, and project out potential contingencies to plan optimal maintenance and/or fault avoidance operations under uncertainty. These operations would need to be modifiable in operations, for example, if a hazardous event occurs, there are changes to the mission, or there is a learnable change in behavior that reduces arising projection errors. This agent would need to be able to conduct operations autonomously for low-level inspection and maintenance operations while enabling safe human intervention throughout the process. It would finally need to communicate with crews for planning and performance of maintenance operations, to report/escalate potential hazardous contingencies, and for modification of operations (e.g., learning). This communication could include producing human-interpretable visual dashboards, communicating directly via speech, and direct manipulation of hardware (e.g., to teach/learn certain operations). Agents like this (with functionality appropriate to the given task) would be needed to perform a variety of roles in the spacecraft, including low-level tasks like state estimation, hardware control, and subsystem management and high-level tasks like mission planning and scheduling. Agents with independent responsibilities will furthermore need to be managed and coordinated to enable functional and resilient overall operations.

Well-constructed proposals will focus on developing a prototype cognitive agent(s) in the context of a limited test. This agent will need to embody a cognitive architecture that can be readily applied to a wide variety of roles and tasks throughout a mission that embodies the desired capabilities of autonomous and semi-autonomous operations, modifiable and/or learned behaviors, data/model fusion for decision-making under uncertainty, advanced user interaction, and assurance/transparency. This architecture could then be able to be extended to a wider scope in a more advanced mission in future phases of the project. This project and the agent architecture will need to be thoroughly documented and demonstrated to enable the understanding (e.g., capabilities and limitations) of this technology.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 10 Autonomous Systems
• Level 2 10.3 Collaboration and Interaction

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

For Phase I, the expectation is to develop (1) a preliminary cognitive architecture with trades study/requirements analysis supporting the selection of the architecture in a desired mission (e.g., Human Exploration of Mars Design Reference Mission: https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/373665main_NASA-SP-2009-566.pdf), (2) early feasibility prototypes of architecture features and conceptual description (e.g., in SysML) for a cognitive agent(s) in that mission, and (3) a detailed implementation plan for full architecture with technical risks identified and managed.

For Phase II, the implementation plan will be executed, resulting in a functional prototype of the agent capable of performing the desired roles/tasks for the mission chosen that passes the preliminary tests required to meet mission requirements. Ideally, this functional prototype will be suitable for a flight demonstration in a relevant operational context (e.g., the International Space Station (ISS)). At this phase, it will also be necessary to provide comprehensive documentation of cognitive architecture and final prototype of the agent(s), including architectural/process/interaction diagrams (e.g., SysML), reporting regarding the implementation and design process, and the flowdown of prototype tests (with results included) from high-level requirements. It is also desired that the software developed (both the agent prototype and the underlying architecture modules/library) will be releasable as open-source software that can be improved, modified, and adapted to new missions.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Long-term crewed spacecraft, such as the ISS, are so complex that a significant portion of the crew's time is spent keeping it operational even under nominal conditions in low Earth orbit (LEO) and still require significant real-time support from Earth. Autonomous agents performing cognitive computing can provide crew support for future missions beyond cislunar by providing them robust, accurate, and timely information, and perform tasks enabling the crew more time to perform the mission science. The considerable challenge is to migrate the knowledge and capability embedded in current Earth mission control, with tens to hundreds of human specialists ready to provide instant knowledge, to onboard agents that team with flight crews to autonomously manage a spaceflight mission.

Most Apollo missions required the timely guidance of mission control for success, typically within seconds of an off-nominal situation. Outside of cislunar space, the time delays will become untenable for Earth to manage time-critical decisions as was done for Apollo. The emerging field of cognitive computing is a vast improvement on previous information retrieval and integration technology and is likely capable of providing this essential capability. This subtopic is directly relevant to the Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD) and Space Operations Mission Directorate (SOMD) Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) domain: Foundational Systems - Autonomous Systems and Operations.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

There is growing interest in NASA to support long-term human exploration missions to the Moon and eventually to Mars. Human exploration up to this point has relied on continuous communication with short delays. To enable missions with intermittent communication with long delays while keeping crew sizes small, new artificially intelligent technologies must be developed. Technologies developed under this subtopic are expected to be suitable for testing on Earth analogues of deep space spacecraft, as well as the Deep Space Gateway envisioned by NASA.

References:

Zhou, J., Zhou, Y., Wang, B., & Zang, J. (2019). Human–cyber–physical systems (HCPSs) in the context of new generation intelligent manufacturing. Engineering, 5(4), 624636.

Woods, D. D. (2018). The theory of graceful extensibility: basic rules that govern adaptive systems. Environment Systems and Decisions, 38(4), 433457.

Thomaz, A. L., & Breazeal, C. (2008). Teachable robots: Understanding human teaching behavior to build more effective robot learners. Artificial Intelligence, 172(67), 716-737.

Kotseruba, I., & Tsotsos, J. K. (2020). 40 years of cognitive architectures: core cognitive abilities and practical applications. Artificial Intelligence Review, 53(1), 1794.

Tang, L., Kacprzynski, G. J., Goebel, K., Saxena, A., Saha, B., & Vachtsevanos, G. (2008, October). Prognostics enhanced automated contingency management for advanced autonomous systems. In 2008 international conference on prognostics and health management (pp. 19). IEEE.

Scope Title:

Development, Design, and Implementation of Fault Management Technologies

Scope Description:

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 10 Autonomous Systems
• Level 2 10.2 Reasoning and Acting

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Analysis
• Prototype
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

The aim of the Phase I project should be to demonstrate the technical feasibility of the proposed innovation and thereby bring the innovation closer to commercialization. Note, however, the research and development (R&D) undertaken in Phase I is intended to have high technical risk, and so it is expected that not all projects will achieve the desired technical outcomes.

The required deliverable at the end of an SBIR Phase I contract is a Final Report that summarizes the project’s technical accomplishments. As noted above, it is intended that proposed efforts conduct an initial proof of concept, after which successful efforts would be considered for follow-on funding by Science Mission Directorate (SMD) missions as risk-reduction and infusion activities. Research should be conducted to demonstrate technical feasibility and NASA relevance during Phase I and show a path toward a Phase II prototype demonstration.

The Phase I Final Report should thoroughly document the innovation, its status at the end of the effort, and as much objective evaluation of its strengths and weaknesses as is practical. The report should include a description of the approach along with foundational concepts and operating theory, mathematical basis, and requirements for application. Results should include strengths and weaknesses found and the measured performance in tests where possible.

Additional deliverables may significantly clarify the value and feasibility of the innovation. These deliverables should be planned to demonstrate retirement of development risk, increasing maturity, and targeted applications of particular interest. Although the wide range of innovations precludes a specific list, some possible deliverables are listed below:

• For innovations that are algorithmic in nature, this could include development code or prototype applications, demonstrations of capability, and results of algorithm stress testing.
• For innovations that are procedural in nature, this may include sample artifacts such as workflows, model prototypes and schema, functional diagrams, examples, or tutorial applications.
• Where a suitable test problem can be found, documentation of the test problem and a report on test results should illustrate the nature of the innovation in a quantifiable and reproducible way. Test reports should discuss maturation of the technology, implementation difficulties encountered and overcome, and results and interpretation.

Phase II proposals require at minimum a report describing the technical accomplishments of the Phase I award and how these results support the underlying commercial opportunity.  Describing the commercial potential is best done through experiment:  Ideally the Phase II report should describe results of a prototype implementation to a relevant problem, along with lessons learned and future work expected to adapt the technology to other applications.  Further demonstration of commercial value and advantage of the technology can be accomplished through steps such as the following:
 

• Delivery of the technology in software form, as a reference application, or through providence of trial or evaluation materials to future customers.
• Technical manuals, such as functional descriptions, specifications, and user guides.
• Conference papers or other publications.
• Establishment of a preliminary performance model describing technology metrics and requirements.

Each of these measures represents a step taken to mature the technology and further reduce the difficulty in reducing it to practice.  Although it is established that further development and customization will continue beyond Phase II, ideally at the conclusion of Phase II a potential customer should have access to sufficient materials and evidence to make informed project decisions about technology suitability, benefits, and risks.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Many recent SMD missions have encountered major cost overruns and schedule slips due to difficulty in implementing, testing, and verifying FM functions. These overruns are invariably caused by a lack of understanding of FM functions at early stages in mission development and by FM architectures that are not sufficiently transparent, verifiable, or flexible enough to provide needed isolation capability or coverage. In addition, a substantial fraction of SMD missions continue to experience failures with significant mission impact, highlighting the need for better FM understanding early in the design cycle, more comprehensive and more accurate FM techniques, and more operational flexibility in response to failures provided by better visibility into failures and system performance. Furthermore, SMD increasingly selects missions with significant operations challenges, setting expectations for FM to evolve into more capable, faster-reacting, and more reliable onboard systems.

The SBIR program is an appropriate venue because of the following factors:

• Traditional FM design has plateaued, and new technology is needed to address emerging challenges. There is a clear need for collaboration and incorporation of research from outside the spaceflight community, as fielded FM technology is well behind the state of the art and failing to keep pace with desired performance and capability.
• The need for new FM approaches spans a wide range of missions, from improving operations for relatively simple orbiters to enabling entirely new concepts in challenging environments. Development of new FM technologies by SMD missions themselves is likely to produce point solutions with little opportunity for reuse and will be inefficient at best compared to a focused, disciplined research effort external to missions.
• SBIR level of effort is appropriately sized to perform intensive studies of new algorithms, new approaches, and new tools. The approach of this subtopic is to seek the right balance between sufficient reliability and cost appropriate to each mission type and associated risk posture. This is best achieved with small and targeted investigations, enabled by captured data and lessons learned from past or current missions, or through examination of knowledge capture and models of missions in formulation. Following this initial proof of concept, successful technology development efforts under this subtopic would be considered for follow-on funding by SMD missions as risk-reduction and infusion activities. Research should be conducted to demonstrate technical feasibility and NASA relevance during Phase I and show a path toward a Phase II prototype demonstration.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

References:

• NASA's approach to FM and the various needs are summarized in the NASA FM Handbook: https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/636372main_NASA-HDBK-1002_Draft.pdf
• Additional information is included in the talks presented at the 2012 FM Workshop: 
  • https://www.nasa.gov/offices/oce/documents/2012_fm_workshop.html 
  • Particularly, https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/637595main_day_1-brian_muirhead.pdf
• Another resource is the NASA Technical Memorandum "Introduction to System Health Engineering and Management for Aerospace (ISHEM),"
   https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20060003929.pdf
  • This is greatly expanded on in the following publication: Johnson, S. (ed): System Health Management with Aerospace Applications, Wiley, 2011, https://www.wiley.com/en-us/System+Health+Management+with+Aerospace+Applications-p-9781119998730
• FM technologies are strongly associated with autonomous systems as a key component of situational awareness and system resilience.  A useful overview was presented at the 2018 SMD Autonomy Workshop, archiving a number of talks on mission challenges and design concepts: https://science.nasa.gov/technology/2018-autonomy-workshop

Scope Title:

Codesign and Development of Autonomous Systems for Persistent Operations

Scope Description:

Space operations are on the cusp of a revolutionary new operational paradigm that leverages modular systems and recurring robotic visits to “persistent platforms” enabling platform assembly, maintenance, repair, and enhancement. Persistent platforms require persistent operations, and persistent operations require a paradigm shift in how we approach system design, development, and operations. Persistent platforms include, but are not limited to, telecommunication platforms; Earth-observing science platforms;  deep space telescopes; and planetary surface systems that support missions such as human outposts, science stations, and in-situ resource utilization systems. These persistent platforms will be autonomously and robotically constructed, maintained, enhanced, and reconfigured in situ as needed to prepare for and support human occupation, maintain critical infrastructure, upgrade with new technology, adapt to changing mission needs, etc.

Beyond the platforms themselves, integrated human-machine and autonomous machine-machine systems for mission planning and execution will be critical to NASA's success in building a lunar economy and a persistent presence on Mars. To achieve this, we must develop innovative function-allocation strategies and solutions that move us away from the traditional human-centric approaches to mission management (with machines as decision-support tools) and toward approaches that empower machines to make decisions. This could be instantiated as teams with humans and machines as equal partners as well as machine-only teams capable of collaborating and making decisions with and without human input. Co-design of the robotics, autonomy, and human-machine function allocation will be critical to achieving intuitive and efficient processes. For example, retrofitting a function-allocation approach onto an autonomous robot built without the system in mind will likely produce a suboptimal product. History has proven that bolting the human operator or teammate onto a system built without roles and responsibilities in mind often fails in the field because invalid assumptions have been made about human interaction, crew preferences, exposed/hidden information, and real-world operations.

To achieve the required performance at a system level, subsystems must be co-designed with a mission(s) in mind and evolve cooperatively during the development process to achieve an optimized system. Robotics systems that retroactively add autonomy will not be optimal systems. Autonomous systems built without a robot and/or mission in mind will not achieve peak performance. This optimization includes the human as manager, operator, inhabitant, etc., functioning as part of a human-machine team with consideration given to function allocation across multiple-asset systems that may change over the lifetime of a mission or across mission phases. For example, the function allocation required for dormant operations of a habitat versus crew occupancy will utilize the same systems but likely not the same roles and responsibilities across team members. Further, teaming is a paradigm shift away from traditional decision-support tools (DSTs) that assist human decision making to machine systems that are capable of and empowered to make decisions (within constraints) in the absence of human intervention or with human supervision.

This subtopic seeks integrated robot/autonomy/human solutions for mission planning, mission execution, and function allocation for systems ranging from full autonomy with oversight to supervised autonomy to human-in-the-loop teaming. Human-machine teaming elevates the machine from a decision-support tool for humans to use while making decisions to a member of the team who is empowered to make decisions, capable of communicating rationale and situation awareness (SA) with other team members (whether human or machine), and participating in collaborative decision making and operations.

Proposal elements of interest include, but are not limited to:

• Autonomous systems for dexterous robots.
• Mission-planning tools.
• Modeling and simulation environments for gaming out mission scenarios and function allocation.
  • ModSim for design, development, test, evaluation
  • Digital Twin
• Human-machine teaming and/or modalities of human-machines interfaces (HMIs).

within the context of a design reference mission (DRM) such as construction and/or operation of a large space telescope, lunar infrastructure, and lunar habitats/safe havens, where "construction" is a broad term that includes assembly, repair, maintenance, cable routing, cable mating/demating, etc.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 1 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 10 Autonomous Systems
• Level 2 10.3 Collaboration and Interaction

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

A minimally successful Phase I proposal should deliver a feasibility study of the proposed subsystem, including modularity assessment and expected interoperability with external systems, where the subsystem could be:

• Defined ConOps
• Mission planning tools
• Mission/asset prognostic capabilities
• Autonomous robotic systems capable of operating under multiple human-machine function allocation assignments
• Innovative approaches to human-machine teaming and/or modalities

and must include evidence of codesign/development with related subsystems around a specific concept of operations. Phase I deliverables that include a demonstration are preferred.

A Phase II deliverable should include a working prototype (hardware and software) and associated system-level feasibility study focused on a specific design reference mission. End-to-end demonstrations via software- and/or hardware-in-the-loop simulation environments are preferred.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

The state of the art (SOA) for mission planning and operations is human-centric with machine DSTs for scheduling and monitoring. The current paradigm enables the addition of the DSTs into the traditional planning and operation model but was not designed and has not evolved with delegation of responsibility and decision-making authority away from the human. 

There is no SOA or standard operating procedure for human-machine teaming (HMT) and mission planning. There are currently abstract concepts that are a challenge to instantiate as a system.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This scope represents an enabling approach to technology development for persistent reliable operations for in-space and on-surface autonomous systems. Examples include robotic in-space servicing, assembly, and manufacturing (ISAM), on-orbit Gateway (science utilization, logistics management, payload handling, maintenance, etc.), as well as robotic manipulation in support of lunar surface infrastructure assembly and robotic in-space assembly and outfitting.

Autonomous manipulation, inspection, and utilization, supported by the perception technologies in scope, directly support NASA’s Moon-to-Mars objectives to “(LI-4) Demonstrate technologies supporting cislunar orbital/surface depots […] and support systems needed for continuous human/robotic presence,” and “(OP-9) Demonstrate the capability of integrated robotic systems to support and augment the work of crewmembers on the lunar surface, and in orbit around the Moon.”

References:

• Doggett et al., "Persistent Assets in Zero-G and on Planetary Surfaces: Enabled by Modular Technology and Robotic Operations," AIAA SPACE Forum, 2018. https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/pdf/10.2514/6.2018-5305 
• "Digital Twins and Living Models at NASA," ASME Digital Twin Summit, Keynote Address, 2021.
  https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20210023699/downloads/ASME%20Digital%20Twin%20Summit%20Keynote_final.pdf
• "Serious Gaming for Building a Basis of Certification for Trust and Trustworthiness of Autonomous Systems," AIAA Aviation Forum, 2018.
  https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/pdf/10.2514/6.2018-3844
• Kelley et al., "A Persistent Simulation Environment for Autonomous Systems," AIAA Aviation Forum, 2018.
  https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/pdf/10.2514/6.2018-4015
• "OSAM: Autonomy and Dexterous Robots," NASEM DMMI Workshop, 2021.
  https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20210016860/downloads/NASEM%20Workshop%20June2021%20Allen0608.pdf

This focus area includes the development of robotic systems and technologies (hardware and software) that will enable and enhance future space exploration, science, and service missions.  In the coming decades, robotic systems will continue to change the way space is explored.  Robots will be used in all mission phases:  as independent explorers operating in environments too distant or hostile for humans, as precursor systems operating before crewed missions, as crew assistants working alongside and supporting humans, as caretakers of assets left behind, and as remote agents servicing and assembling critical space instruments and infrastructure.

As science and exploration activities reach further into the solar system and humans continue to work and live in space, establishing a sustainable presence on the moon and progressing on to Mars, there will be an increased reliance on intelligent and versatile robots capable of performing a variety of tasks in remote settings under dynamic mission conditions.  Technologies are needed to improve robotic mobility across extreme surface terrains, on and around small bodies, and in challenging environmental conditions.  This includes hazard detection, sensing/perception, robotic navigation, grappling/anchoring, actuation, novel locomotion paradigms, and innovative technologies to enhance situational awareness and user interfaces for the semi-autonomous command and control of remote robotic systems.  Robotic manipulation likewise provides a critical capability for servicing and assembling equipment in space, for sample collection and handling, science utilization in the absence of the crew, and as a means to free crew from mundane logistics management tasks or augment crew performance to increase efficiency and maximize useful work in situ.  Effective affordance recognition and scene understanding, grasp planning, robotic end-effectors, force control, task primitives/task parameterization, approaches to human-robot interaction for supervised autonomy, and robust, fail-operational designs are all relevant technologies needed to accomplish robotic manipulation tasks internal to space vehicles and habitats, on the lunar surface, while interacting with orbital assets, and on distant planetary bodies.  New technologies are desired to enable or enhance robotic docking and refueling operations, lunar surface site preparation, and the mobile dexterous manipulation required to handle tools, interfaces, and materials not specifically designed for robots in support of establishing, maintaining, and utilizing science and exploration infrastructure.

Advances beyond our current robotic capabilities can be realized through new component technologies, the development and integration of novel robotic systems, ground testing of potential solutions, advances in software and simulation tools, and flight demonstration of new robots and robotic task performance.  Hardware and software, both onboard remote robots and contributing to improved human-robot interaction and supervisory control by remote operators, will improve safety and increase the complexity of tasks robots can efficiently and effectively perform in support of NASA’s Moon to Mars objectives, the broader space economy, and an array of terrestrial applications with comparable technology needs.  Relevant overlap exists with other focus areas targeting advances in autonomy and hardware suited for the extreme environments of space destinations, as technologies are sought to enable productive, sustainable robotic science and exploration in remote, and evermore challenging, reaches of the solar system.

Scope Title:

Robotic Mobility, Manipulation, and Sampling

Scope Description:

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 04 Robotics Systems
• Level 2 04.3 Manipulation

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Hardware, software, and designs for component robotic systems:

• Phase I: proof of concept to include research and analysis, along with design, in a final report. Technical feasibility and value should be demonstrated. 
• Phase II: prototype with test results. A full capability unit of at least TRL 4 should be delivered. 

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Scoops, powder drills, and rock core drills and their corresponding handling systems have been developed for sample acquisition on missions to Mars and asteroids. Nonflight systems have been developed for sampling on comets, Venus, Enceladus, Titan, and Earth's Moon.  Some of these environments still present risk and have gaps that need to be addressed.  Ocean worlds exploration presents new environments and unique challenges not met by existing mobility and sampling systems.  New mobility, manipulation, and sampling technologies are needed to enable new types of missions and missions to different and challenging environments. Very lightweight, compact, low power avionics components are needed for surface mobility systems of all kinds and for aerial mobility systems on bodies with atmospheres, including inertial measurement units (IMUs), processors, radios, and altimeters. High-power batteries with good specific energy are needed for aerial mobility systems.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This subtopic supports multiple programs within the Science Mission Directorate (SMD). The Mars program has had infusion of technologies such as a force-torque sensor in the Mars 2020 mission. Recent awards would support the Ocean Worlds program with surface and deep drills. Sample-return missions could be supported such as from Ceres, comets, and asteroids. Products from this subtopic have been proposed for New Frontiers program missions. With renewed interest in return to Earth's Moon, the mobility and sampling technologies could support future robotic missions to the Moon. The NASA Decadal Survey for the 2023-2032 decade identifies various future missions that require these technologies including missions to Ceres, comets, asteroids, Enceladus, Venus, Mars, and Earth's Moon.

References:

• Mars Exploration—Program and Missions: https://mars.nasa.gov/programmissions/
• Solar System Exploration: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/
• Ocean Worlds: https://www.nasa.gov/specials/ocean-worlds/
• Ocean Worlds article: https://science.nasa.gov/news-articles/ocean-worlds

Scope Title:

Modular Autonomous Robotic Docking and Mating Interfaces

Scope Description:

NASA requests novel conceptual designs for an autonomous direct-dock system for small satellites that enables advanced science and exploration missions and addresses STMD roadmap gaps. There is a need to reduce the system size, weight, and power requirements of existing docking and grapple technologies so they can be applicable for small satellites. The current state of the art includes CubeSat docking systems (e.g., the CubeSat Proximity Operations Demonstration (CPOD) mission includes autonomous docking in low Earth orbit (LEO)). Servicing applications require expanded capabilities to larger small satellites* (e.g., Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) Secondary Payload Adapter (ESPA) class) and in multiple orbital domains, including LEO, geosynchronous Earth orbit (GEO), and beyond.

*Note: "Larger small satellites" are intended to be ESPA-class small satellites and similar-sized small satellites. The state of the art is referenced for CubeSats that are typically from 1U (10 cm x 10 cm x 10 cm) up to 12U (20 cm x 20 cm x 30 cm). ESPA-class small satellites are less than 160 kg, while ESPA-Grande small satellites are less than 320 kg.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 04 Robotics Systems
• Level 2 04.1 Sensing and Perception

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables include:

• Background research and feasibility studies.
• Modeling to demonstrate feasibility.
• Conceptual design, trade studies, and description of proposed solution.
• Demonstrations of subsystems or key technologies.
• Pathfinder technology demonstrations.
• Brassboard docking interface.
• Concept for low-cost flight demonstration.

Phase II deliverables include:

• Demonstration using the brassboard docking interface.
• Environmental testing of key components.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

The current state of the art includes CubeSat docking systems (e.g., the CPOD mission includes autonomous docking in LEO). Servicing applications require expanded capabilities for small satellites larger than CubeSats (e.g., ESPA class) and in multiple orbital domains, including LEO, GEO, Lagrange points, and beyond.

In addition to providing an enabling capability for innovative planetary science mission concepts, this scope also addresses two relevant STMD gaps:

1. Small satellites that can perform inspection of higher value assets, assist with sample returns, and optimize resupply logistics.
2. The need for vehicle/module mating systems. Autonomous small-satellite docking can potentially reduce crew time for orbital operations.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

NASA is studying mission concepts that require dispensing multiple science spacecraft and having them return to the host spacecraft for relocation to another science location.

References:

On-Orbit Satellite Servicing Study Project Report. October 2010. https://sspd.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/NASA_Satellite%20Servicing_Project_Report_0511.pdf

CubeSat Proximity Operations Demonstration (CPOD). https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/small_spacecraft/cpod_project.html

Scope Title:

Refueling and Storable Fluid Transfer

Scope Description:

Near-continuous, liquid-free microgravity venting is essential for the efficient and timely servicing of satellites (existing critical-asset and heritage satellites as well as newly deployed satellites) with propellant management device (PMD)-style propellant tanks that are not the positive displacement variety. A prototype design that is ready for microgravity testing with simulant fluids is of interest. The current state of the art for microgravity liquid-gas separation is surface tension screens or vanes that reside in propellant tanks to manage the propellant, along with short-duration, liquid-free venting following settling burns. These existing devices ensure liquid outflow in microgravity; however, this proposal is to ensure only pneumatic gas (and propellant vapor) outflow during venting required before refill. System-level solutions are sought involving, but not limited to, leverage from strategic internal tank design, revised concept of operations (ConOps), and add-on vent-line phase-separation devices. Development solutions may be extensible from bipropellant (MMH/NTO) to multiple two-phase commodity in-space replenishment efforts on other storables (including green propellants) and cryogenics.

The transfer of xenon gas up to and including its supercritical and/or cryogenic phase is required for future space missions. A prototype design able to meet the launch and spaceflight environment is of interest to enable highly mass-efficient and timely xenon fluid transfers up to hundreds of kilograms. The current state of the art for efficient and timely on-orbit transfer of xenon fluid in large quantities is nonexistent. Previous attempts have been made to design and build hardware for mechanically assisted subsystem-level transfer, but to date, none have been successful for high cycle/highly reliable use in a microgravity environment. Lessons learned can be leveraged from these past efforts to make improvements for efficiency, reliability, and power needs for an advanced prototype for testing.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 01 Propulsion Systems
• Level 2 01.X Other Propulsion Systems

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Deliverables include a ground-based demonstration of a liquid-free tank while venting without reliance on gravity. Prototypes should be designed for integration into a microgravity experiment on an aircraft or suborbital rocket.  

Phase I deliverables include:

• Background research and feasibility studies.
• Modeling to demonstrate feasibility.
• Conceptual design, trade studies, and description of proposed solution.
• Demonstrations of subsystems or key technologies.
• Pathfinder technology demonstrations.
• Prototype tank-venting device.
• Xenon transfer up to and within supercritical pressures using design, fabrication, and testing of prototype unit with Xe [government furnished equipment (GFE)] at typical spacecraft pressures. (Note: Target goals of >90% mass transferred from supply tank at pressures up to 3,000 psi at minimum of 10 kg/hr scalable to 500 kg/hr with high reliability and less than 500 W maximum power draw.)

Phase II deliverables include:

• Advancement of the design to a flight engineering development unit.
• Demonstration using the tank-venting prototype on a microgravity flight.
• Environmental testing of key components.
• Further advancement of the unit for the spaceflight and launch environments (vibration, shock, thermal vacuum, electromagnetic interference and emissions, etc.).
• Demonstration using the xenon compressor in a thermal vacuum chamber.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

The existing state of the art for microgravity liquid-gas separation consists of surface tension screens or vanes that reside in propellant tanks to manage the propellant, along with short-duration, liquid-free venting.

There are currently no known compressors to perform an on-orbit transfer of xenon. Technologies to transfer xenon in space include (but are not limited to) cryogenic transfer, compressors/pumps, and thermal transfer. There are also potential system-level solutions with integrated subsystem-level heat exchangers, etc. Advances need to be made to significantly reduce mass, improve mass transfer efficiency (with reasonable required power and timeline), and address design changes necessary to allow these components and systems to operate in microgravity. Each method has challenges, such as achieving high efficiency with the thermodynamic/thermal pumping approach and supercritical fluid transfer with a compressor/pump.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Microgravity venting is relevant to missions such as On-orbit Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing 1 (OSAM-1), OSAM-2, International Space Station (ISS), sample return missions, Gateway, Artemis, and Human Landing System (HLS), along with other cislunar programs. Extendable use of technologies for green propellant systems will enhance infusion on new NASA and military satellites and for in situ resource utilization (ISRU)-related programs.

Xenon is the current propellant of choice for electric propulsion, and future science and deep space missions require the ability to perform a xenon transfer in space, including sample return missions, Gateway, Artemis, and HLS, along with other cislunar platforms and Mars spacecraft.

References:

NASA’s Exploration & In-Space Services (NExIS). Propellant Transfer Technologies. https://nexis.gsfc.nasa.gov/propellant_transfer_technologies.html

Coll, G.T., et al. Satellite Servicing Projects Division Restore-L Propellant Transfer Subsystem Progress 2020. AIAA-2020-3795. AIAA Propulsion and Energy Forum. August 24, 2020.

Scope Title:

Ground Simulation of Servicing and Assembly Applications

Scope Description:

NASA is currently using commercial robot manipulators in hardware-in-the-loop ground testbeds for simulating on-orbit operations. In many simulation scenarios, the ground robots interact with very stiff environments (typically metal surfaces), which can impose large forces or cause instability when actively compliant control is being used. Space robots, however, are typically not nearly as stiff as ground robots, which tends to mitigate these effects.

The goal of this solicitation is to develop a mechanical spring-damper device that can be mounted aft of the robot end-effector to reduce the effective stiffness of the ground robot.  The purpose of this device is thus twofold: (1) enable the ground robot to replicate the stiffness and damping properties of the flight robot at the point of interaction, and (2) help stabilize an actively compliant controller by adding damping to mitigate the effects of time delay and reducing the environmental stiffness seen by the force sensor. The stiffness and damping properties of the device should be tunable to accommodate a large range of impedance parameters to simulate flight robots and/or stabilize an active compliance control loop.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 04 Robotics Systems
• Level 2 04.X Other Robotic Systems

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables include:

• Background research and feasibility studies.
• Modeling to demonstrate feasibility.
• Conceptual design, trade studies, and description of proposed solution.
• Construction of a prototype.

Phase II deliverables include:

• Demonstrations of concept on industrial robot or other motion platform.
• Analysis on data collected during the demonstration.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Many industries are failing to take advantage of active compliance control in robotic assembly tasks because it is difficult to tune and stabilize the controller. The main reason for this deficiency is that the high stiffness of the contact surfaces in combination with time delays in the controller cause significant phase lags that lead to instability. However, using compliance control can significantly increase the speed at which tasks are performed (typically tenfold) through reduction of the contact forces during assembly. In traditional position-controlled robots, these forces can only be reduced by slowing down the task (because the forces build up much more quickly) or by building in passive compliance in the tool. However, passive compliance does not work well alone because it is traditionally limited to direction only, and any misalignments can cause significant forces in the other directions. Moreover, passive compliance is traditionally achieved with spring flexures and dampers that can only be tuned for one task at a time.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

The concepts developed will enable more accurate and less expensive system simulations of ISAM missions, Artemis missions, and asteroid- and comet-sampling missions.

References:

On-Orbit Satellite Servicing Study Project Report. October 2010. https://sspd.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/NASA_Satellite%20Servicing_Project_Report_0511.pdf

Brannan, J.C., Carignan, C.R., and Roberts, B.J. Hybrid Strategy for Evaluating On-orbit Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing Technologies. AIAA 2020-4194. ASCEND 2020, virtual, 16-18 November 2020.

Scope Title:

Sensing and Perception Software for Autonomous Manipulation and Utilization Tasks

Scope Description:

Accurate sensing and perception is critical for achieving the autonomous manipulation and task performance capabilities required for future lunar missions (both on Gateway and on the lunar surface). Limited situational awareness, time delay, data latencies, etc., prevent direct, real-time, human-in-the-loop control from the ground at efficient operational cadences and necessitate greater on-board autonomy for remote robots in situ. Like those developed for terrestrial applications, perception algorithms and approaches for in-space manipulation require improvements in a variety of technical areas, but with the added challenge of being compatible with current-generation space-rated computing, sensors, etc. Solutions must also be suitable for use within the intravehicular activity (IVA)/EVA environment and relevant mission operation constraints.

Technology areas of interest include, but are not limited to:

• Affordance recognition.
• Object/obstacle detection and segmentation.
• Object classification and/or registration.
• Pose estimation.
• Semantic SLAM (simultaneous localization and mapping).
• Grasp detection and planning.

Proposals to improve performance and advance current capabilities in areas of interest are encouraged, but technologies must also present a viable path to deployment on board space robots using current-generation computers and sensing suitable for the environment. Improving the speed and efficiency of sensor data processing and perception algorithm performance is desired, and novel techniques to translate state-of-the-art (or better) terrestrial performance to flight robotic manipulation is specifically sought.

Technologies must be applicable to IVR, lunar surface, or other in-space activities, such as:

• Assembly and maintenance (e.g., mating/demating power, data, and fluid connections; opening/closing panels; installation, stowage, and handling of cables and fluid lines; manipulation of softgoods).
• Science utilization (e.g., moving samples between cold storage and instruments; experiment monitoring and caretaking; small tool use; manipulation of buttons, switches, levers, etc.).
• Habitat mobility (e.g., hatch opening/closing, handrail and seat track grasping).
• Logistics management (e.g., payload handling, packing/unpacking bags, kitting items).

Dual-use technologies with broad applicability to both space and terrestrial applications are encouraged, but a clear infusion path to NASA missions must be demonstrated. To facilitate infusion, proposals are encouraged, but not required, to:

• Target near-term integration and testing on relevant NASA robots (e.g., International Space Station (ISS) Astrobee Facility, Valkyrie) or in coordination with ongoing NASA development efforts.
• Limit dependence on third-party proprietary technologies that might complicate NASA adoption of the technology.
• Use industry-standard hardware and software interfaces, architectures, and frameworks that align with relevant NASA robotic development efforts to reduce future integration effort (e.g., Robot Operating System (ROS)/ROS2/SpaceROS).
• Demonstrate technology advances in the context of relevant manipulation or utilization task performance.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 4 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 04 Robotics Systems
• Level 2 04.1 Sensing and Perception

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables include:

• Background research and feasibility studies.
• Conceptual design, trade studies, and description of proposed solution.
• In some instances, an initial proof-of-concept implementation and/or testing (using either hardware or simulation).

Phase II deliverables include:

• Software source code, user manual/instructions, documentation.
• Test and/or performance data.
• Demonstration of software prototype on robot hardware.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Current state-of-the-art approaches rely on computing performance far greater than current space-rated systems, external equipment or sensors not suitable for the IVR or in-space environments, significant cloud computing resources, or large external data sets. Increased accuracy and speed are needed for improved reliability during task performance and to expand the range of manipulation and utilization tasks possible with autonomous robots. Perception suitable for fine dexterous manipulation is limited in the field. Improved processing efficiency and a reduced reliance on external resources is needed to facilitate deployment on board space robotic systems and mitigate the lack of direct user interaction during remote operations.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This scope represents an enabling technology for IVR operations on Gateway (science utilization, logistics management, payload handling, maintenance, etc.) and, more generally, for remote robotic manipulation in support of lunar surface infrastructure assembly and robotic in-space servicing.

Autonomous manipulation, inspection, and utilization supported by the perception technologies in scope directly support NASA’s Moon-to-Mars objectives to “(LI-4) Demonstrate technologies supporting cislunar orbital/surface depots […] and support systems needed for continuous human/robotic presence,” and “(OP-9) Demonstrate the capability of integrated robotic systems to support and augment the work of crewmembers on the lunar surface, and in orbit around the Moon.”

References:

• “The Robot Operating System (ROS).” https://www.ros.org/
• “What is Astrobee?” https://www.nasa.gov/astrobee
• https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-outlines-lunar-surface-sustainability-concept
• J. Crusan, et al. 2018. "Deep space gateway concept: Extending human presence into cislunar space." In Proceedings of IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT.
• “NASA’s Gateway.” https://www.nasa.gov/gateway
• M. Deans, et al. 2019. "Integrated System for Autonomous and Adaptive Caretaking (ISAAC)." Presentation, Gateway Intra-Vehicular Robotics Working Group Face to Face, Houston, TX; NASA Technical Reports Server. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20190029054
• M. Bualat, et al. 2018. "Astrobee: A new tool for ISS operations." In Proceedings of AIAA SpaceOps, Marseille, France. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20180006684
• “NASA’s Plans for Commercial LEO Development.” https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9172512
• N. Radford, et al. 2015. “Valkyrie: NASA's First Bipedal Humanoid Robot.” In Journal of Field Robotics, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 397-419, 2015.

Scope Title:

Improved Robot Hardware for In-Space Manipulation

Scope Description:

The goals of maximizing science return and establishing a sustainable exploration infrastructure, highlighted in NASA’s Moon-to-Mars objectives, require extensive robotic operations in lunar orbit and on the lunar surface. Much of this work is needed during uncrewed periods of operation; precursor missions; and initial deployment, assembly, and outfitting of equipment. Effective assembly and maintenance of in-space assets and sustained utilization of equipment, instruments, and experiments require high-performance robotic manipulation to interact with existing interfaces, tools, and components. Fine manipulation to perform dexterous tasks traditionally reserved for the human hands of crew is a particular challenge in the space environment and would significantly improve mission capability if further advanced.

IVR on board Gateway is one immediate application for improved robot manipulation hardware, but novel designs and new technology in this area have wide applicability to in-space servicing, assembly, and manufacturing (ISAM) and surface asset/infrastructure outfitting as well.

Novel hardware designs with improved manipulation performance are specifically sought for a range of IVR, lunar surface, and in-space servicing tasks, including:

• Assembly and maintenance (e.g., mating/demating power, data, and fluid connections; opening/closing panels; installation, stowage, and handling of cables and fluid lines; manipulation of softgoods).
• Science utilization (e.g., moving samples between cold storage and instruments; experiment monitoring and caretaking; small tool use; manipulation of buttons, switches, levers, etc.).
• Habitat mobility (e.g., hatch opening/closing, handrail and seat track grasping).
• Logistics management (e.g., payload handling, packing/unpacking bags, kitting items).

Technology areas of interest include, but are not limited to:

• End effector design (with specific emphasis on adaptability and fine grasp dexterity).
• Compact, low-mass robotic actuation and manipulators with human-scale force and manipulation capability.
• Embedded force and tactile sensing for manipulation.
• Fault tolerance, redundancy, or fail-operational designs.
• Reliability, robustness, and repeatability.

All technologies must provide a demonstrable advance over current state-of-the-art solutions and present a viable path toward use in the IVA or EVA environment. Dual-use technologies with broad applicability to both space and terrestrial applications are encouraged, as are both system- and component-level technology proposals, but a clear infusion path to NASA mission applications must be demonstrated. To facilitate infusion, proposals are encouraged, but not required, to:

• Target near-term integration and testing on relevant NASA robots (e.g., ISS Astrobee facility, Valkyrie) or in coordination with ongoing NASA development efforts.
• Limit dependence on third-party proprietary technologies that might complicate NASA adoption of the technology.
• Use industry standard hardware and software interfaces, architectures, and frameworks that align with relevant NASA robotic development efforts to reduce future integration effort (e.g., ROS/ROS2/SpaceROS).
• Demonstrate technology advances in the context of relevant manipulation or utilization task performance.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 4 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 04 Robotics Systems
• Level 2 04.3 Manipulation

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables include:

• Background research and feasibility studies.
• Conceptual design, trade studies, and description of proposed solution.
• Initial concept of operation and demonstrated progress toward a significant improvement over state-of-the-art robotic solutions, rather than just an incremental enhancement.

Phase II deliverables include:

• Hardware prototype with supporting software, design information, and documentation.
• Test and/or performance data.
• Demonstration of robot hardware performing a relevant task.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

State-of-the-art manipulation hardware is largely seen in industry-targeted “cooperative robots” for factory-floor applications and early Technology Readiness Level (TRL) dexterous robots. Improving on these systems and transitioning to flight applications is desired. Existing flight systems are limited in dexterity and are significantly larger than fine manipulation tasks require.

Critical gaps exist in the demonstrated performance of key use cases, particularly fine manipulation tasks such as mating/demating connectors designed for human-hand manipulation. Low-size, low-mass solutions are needed that can nevertheless withstand human-scale forces. Compact embedded sensing integrated into robot manipulators (arm and/or end effectors) is needed to reduce robot size and eliminate the need for external support equipment during manipulation tasks.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This scope represents an enabling technology for IVR operations on Gateway (science utilization, logistics management, payload handling, maintenance, etc.) and, more generally, for remote robotic manipulation in support of lunar surface infrastructure assembly and robotic in-space servicing.

Autonomous manipulation, inspection, and utilization supported by the novel hardware technologies targeted directly support NASA’s Moon-to-Mars objectives to “(LI-4) Demonstrate technologies supporting cislunar orbital/surface depots […] and support systems needed for continuous human/robotic presence,” and “(OP-9) Demonstrate the capability of integrated robotic systems to support and augment the work of crewmembers on the lunar surface, and in orbit around the Moon.”

References:

• “The Robot Operating System (ROS).” https://www.ros.org/
• “What is Astrobee?” https://www.nasa.gov/astrobee
• https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-outlines-lunar-surface-sustainability-concept
• J. Crusan, et al. 2018. "Deep space gateway concept: Extending human presence into cislunar space." In Proceedings of IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT.
• “NASA’s Gateway.” https://www.nasa.gov/gateway
• M. Deans, et al. 2019. "Integrated System for Autonomous and Adaptive Caretaking (ISAAC)." Presentation, Gateway Intra-Vehicular Robotics Working Group Face to Face, Houston, TX; NASA Technical Reports Server. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20190029054
• M. Bualat, et al. 2018. "Astrobee: A new tool for ISS operations." In Proceedings of AIAA SpaceOps, Marseille, France. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20180006684
• “NASA’s Plans for Commercial LEO Development” https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9172512
• N. Radford, et al. 2015. “Valkyrie: NASA's First Bipedal Humanoid Robot.” In Journal of Field Robotics, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 397-419, 2015.

Scope Title:

Supervised Autonomy for Cislunar Space and Lunar Surface Robotics

Scope Description:

Robotic operations in cislunar space and on the lunar surface require different operational paradigms than currently used in low Earth orbit (where real-time human-in-the-loop control by crew or the ground is often reasonable) or on Mars (where the lack of human crew, limited interaction dynamics, and a relatively static environment allow for slow, preplanned operations). Supporting NASA’s Moon-to-Mars science and exploration objectives necessitates both greater onboard autonomy for cislunar and lunar surface robots, and more efficient control modalities, interfaces, and task-planning/execution integration for remote operators. Faster, human-scale operational cadences must be achieved; robotic tasks on board Gateway, throughout cislunar space, or in support of lunar surface operations will require significantly more manipulation/interaction with equipment and the environment; and the complexity of these tasks will be higher to effectively utilize science equipment in the absence of crew or to service, maintain, or assemble surface and orbital assets.

Advances in supervisory control, shared control, autonomy for remote operations, and tools or technologies that efficiently balance the strengths of an in situ robot and a remote operator during real-time task planning and execution are desired. Technology areas of interest include, but are not limited to:

• Task primitives/task parameterization.
• User interfaces for efficient supervisory control.
• Control techniques and onboard autonomy to accommodate intermediate time delays, data latencies, and unreliable/intermittent communication.
• Fault/failure detection, mitigation, and response during remote robotic tasks.
• Improved autonomy for planning, scheduling, and execution.
• Coordinated mobility and manipulation control.

All technologies must provide a demonstrable advance over current state-of-the-art solutions and have immediate applicability to the performance of robotic tasks relevant to the NASA IVR, lunar surface, or cislunar environment, such as:

• Assembly and maintenance (e.g., mating/demating power, data, and fluid connections; opening/closing panels; installation, stowage, and handling of cables and fluid lines; manipulation of softgoods).
• Science utilization (e.g., moving samples between cold storage and instruments; experiment monitoring and caretaking; small tool use; manipulation of buttons, switches, levers, etc.).
• Habitat mobility (e.g., hatch opening/closing, handrail and seat track grasping).
• Surface mobility (e.g., high-progress-rate navigation, sample collection, excavation).
• Logistics management (e.g., payload handling, packing/unpacking bags, kitting items).

Dual-use technologies with broad applicability to both space and terrestrial applications are encouraged, but where applicable, technologies for deployment on remote robot hardware should be appropriate to the hardware/computing limitations imposed by the cislunar and/or lunar surface IVA/EVA environment. An emphasis on interoperability, modularity, and compatibility with multiple robots and existing control architectures/frameworks is strongly encouraged to facilitate infusion and the development of fully integrated human-machine supervisory control solutions. To this end, proposals are encouraged, but not required, to:

• Target near-term integration and testing on relevant NASA robots (e.g., ISS Astrobee Facility, Valkyrie) or in coordination with ongoing NASA development efforts.
• Limit dependence on third-party proprietary technologies that might complicate NASA adoption of the technology.
• Use industry-standard hardware and software interfaces, architectures, and frameworks that align with relevant NASA robotic development efforts to reduce future integration effort (e.g., ROS/ROS2/SpaceROS).
• Demonstrate technology advances in the context of relevant remote manipulation or utilization task performance.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 4 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 04 Robotics Systems
• Level 2 04.4 Human-Robot Interaction

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables include:

• Background research and feasibility studies.
• Conceptual design, trade studies, and description of proposed solution.
• In some instances, an initial proof-of-concept implementation and/or testing (using either hardware or simulation).

Phase II deliverables include:

• Software source code, user manual/instructions, documentation.
• Test and/or performance data.
• Demonstration with robot hardware.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Current state of the art includes the control of recent robotic demonstrations on board ISS (e.g., Astrobee, Robonaut 2) as well as numerous terrestrial applications that demonstrate the control of remote robotic assets (military, undersea, etc.).  Advancements are needed to improve remote operator situational awareness and understanding of robot actions, provide more efficient means of high-level task commanding, and leverage onboard autonomy for real-time task performance and coordination between operator and robot over intermediate time delays and intermittent/unreliable communication.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This scope represents an enabling technology for IVR operations on Gateway (science utilization, logistics management, payload handling, maintenance, etc.) and, more generally, for remote robotic operations in cislunar space and on the lunar surface.

Integrated human-robot systems leveraging novel supervisory control technology for remote operations; improvements in onboard robot autonomy and shared control paradigms; and established approaches to interoperability, modularity, and coordination will directly support NASA’s Moon-to-Mars objectives to “(TH-9/TH-10) Develop integrated human and robotic systems with inter-relationships that enable maximum science return from the lunar/Mars surface and from lunar/Mars orbit,” and “(OP-10) Demonstrate the capability to remotely operate robotic systems that are used to support crew members on the Lunar or Martian surface, from the Earth or from orbiting platforms.” Advancing these objectives has additional relevance to achieving the wide array of autonomous infrastructure activities further envisioned in Agency objectives.

References:

• “The Robot Operating System (ROS).” https://www.ros.org/
• “What is Astrobee?” https://www.nasa.gov/astrobee
• https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-outlines-lunar-surface-sustainability-concept
• J. Crusan, et al. 2018. "Deep space gateway concept: Extending human presence into cislunar space." In Proceedings of IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT.
• “NASA’s Gateway.” https://www.nasa.gov/gateway
• M. Deans, et al. 2019. "Integrated System for Autonomous and Adaptive Caretaking (ISAAC)." Presentation, Gateway Intra-Vehicular Robotics Working Group Face to Face, Houston, TX; NASA Technical Reports Server. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20190029054
• M. Bualat, et al. 2018. "Astrobee: A new tool for ISS operations." In Proceedings of AIAA SpaceOps, Marseille, France. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20180006684
• “NASA’s Plans for Commercial LEO Development.” https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9172512
• N. Radford, et al. 2015. “Valkyrie: NASA's First Bipedal Humanoid Robot.” In Journal of Field Robotics, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 397-419, 2015.

NASA seeks proposals to produce innovative technologies in the communications and navigation discipline to support Exploration, Operations, Science, and Space Technology missions, including the eventual return of humans to the Lunar surface. Missions are generating ever-increasing data volumes that require increased performance from communications systems while minimizing spacecraft impact. This requires communications systems to have higher peak throughput along with lower cost, mass, and power per bit transmitted.  Missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond will require reliable and secure communications systems operating in the radio frequency bands and optical wavelengths to reduce mission operations burden and support for data-intensive operations. These missions will rely on enhanced autonomous navigation techniques to support rendezvous and docking; on-orbit servicing, assembly, and manufacturing; and precision landing. This focus area supports the development of novel communications and navigation technologies that can provide a significant improvement over the current state of the art, including ultra-fast, robust optical communications systems; positioning, timing, guidance, navigation, and control techniques; and space-based applications of 3GPP technologies, waveforms, and modeling for future Lunar surface communications infrastructure.

Scope Title:

Free-Space Optical Communications Technologies

Scope Description:

This Free-space Long Range Optical Communications subtopic seeks innovative technologies for advancing free-space optical communications by pushing future data volume returns to and from space missions in multiple domains. Modulation and signaling techniques for long range optical communications should serve multiple functions that include the laser beams serving as (i) high-rate data carriers, (ii) high precision range and range-rate monitoring, and (iii) time-transfer. 

Specific metrics are return data rates >100 Gb/s (cislunar, i.e., geosynchronous equatorial orbit (GEO) or lunar orbit to ground), >10 Gb/s (Earth-Sun L1 and L2), >1 Gb/s per astronomical units squared (AU²) (deep space), and >1 Gb/s (planetary lander to orbiter and/or interspacecraft). Ground-to-space forward data rates >25 Mb/s to farthest Mars ranges. High-precision centimeter to subcentimeter ranging, and picosecond-level time transfer.

Systems to satisfy the goals above require agile; cost-effective; low size, weight, and power (SWaP); and space-qualified optical transceivers with auxiliary assemblies for laser beam pointing control and thermal control. The ability to easily integrate the transceivers to diverse space platforms is highly desired. Interoperability by conforming to emerging signaling standards is also sought for the communications signaling.

NASA-validated optical communications architectures include ground transceivers that transmit and receive laser signals to and from space. Cost-effective technologies for ground assets that can point to and collect signal efficiently, as well as instrumentation for these ground transceivers including robust lasers transmitters and receivers, with considerations for mitigating atmospheric turbulence are required. This subtopic is broadly divided between Flight and Ground technologies for Free Space Optical Communications (FSOC). Innovation priorities are listed in order below:

FLIGHT TECHNOLOGIES:

1. Lowering SWaP.
2. Solutions for pointing narrow laser beams from space platforms.
3. Technology choices that ease space qualification for radiation, random vibrations, and thermal-vacuum.

GROUND TECHNOLOGIES:

1. Innovations leading to large aperture diameters for collecting faint optical signals through atmospheric turbulence while operating under daytime conditions.  
2. Kilowatt-class ground laser transmitter with narrow pulses and high repetition rate.
3. Partial- or full-correcting aberrations of laser signals traversing Earth's turbulent atmosphere.
4. Coherent receivers for multi-Gb/s data rates for space-to-ground optical links.

FLIGHT LASER TRANSCEIVERS:

Low-mass, high-Effective Isotropic Radiated Power (EIRP) laser transceivers for links over planetary distances with:

• 30- to 50-cm clear aperture diameter telescopes for laser communications.
• Targeted mass of opto-mechanical assembly per aperture area, less than 200 kg/m².
• Cumulative wave-front error and transmission loss not to exceed 2 dB.
• Advanced thermo-mechanical designs to withstand planetary launch loads and spaceflight thermal environments, at least -20 to 70 °C operational range.
• Design to mitigate stray light while pointing transceivers 3° from the edge of Sun.
• Survive direct Sun pointing for extended duration (few hours to days).

Transceivers fitting the above characteristics should support robust link acquisition tracking and pointing characteristics, including point-ahead implementation from space for beacon-assisted and/or "beaconless" architectures.

• Acquisition, tracking, and pointing architectures that can operate with dim laser beacons (irradiance of a few picowatts per square meter at entrance of flight aperture) from Mars farthest ranges.
• Pointing loss allocations not to exceed 1 dB (pointing errors associated loss of irradiance at target less than 20%).
• Vibration isolation/suppression systems that can be integrated to the optical transceiver in order to reject high-frequency base disturbance by at least 50 dB.
• Receiver field-of-view (FOV) of at least 1-mrad angular radius for beacon-assisted acquisition, tracking, and pointing.
• As a goal, additional focal plane with wider FOV (>10 mrad) to support onboard astrometry is desired.
• Beaconless pointing subsystems for space-to-ground operations.
• Assume integrated spacecraft microvibration angular disturbance of 150 µrad (<0.1 to ~500 Hz).
• Integrated launch lock and latching mechanism.

Low-complexity small-footprint agile laser transceivers for bidirectional optical links:

• >1 to 10 Gb/s at a nominal link range of 1,000 to 20,000 km for planetary lander/rover-to-orbiter.
• >10 to 100 Gb/s at a nominal link range of 1,000 to 40,000 km for space-to-Earth optical links.
•  10 to 100 Gb/s space-to-space crosslinks.
• Disruptive low-SWaP technologies for space or planetary/lunar surface over extended mission duration.

HIGH WALL-PLUG EFFICIENCY FLIGHT LASER TRANSMITTERS:

High-Gb/s laser transmitters:

• 1,550-nm wavelength.
• Lasers, electronics, and optical components ruggedized for extended space operations.
• Build-in redundancy and other fail-safe measures.
• High rate 10 to 100 Gb/s for cislunar.
• 1 Gb/s for deep space.
• Integrated modem functions conforming to emerging optical communications Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) standards.

• High-photon-efficiency lasers for planetary distances with high peak-to-average power for regular or augmented M-ary pulse position modulation (PPM) with M = 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, and 256 operating at near-infrared (NIR) wavelengths, preferably 1,550 nm, with average powers from 5 to 50 W.

• Subnanosecond pulse.
• Low-pulse jitter (<25 ps).
• Long lifetime and reliability operating in space environment (>5 years and as long as 20 years).
• High modulation extinction ratio (>30 dB).
• High polarization extinction ratio (>20 dB).
• 1- to 10-GHz linewidth.
• Integrated modem functions.

• >10% wall-plug efficiency, direct current (DC)-to-optical, including support electronics with description of approach for stated efficiency of space-qualifiable lasers. Multiwatt to 20 W Erbium Doped Fiber Amplifier (EDFA), or alternatives, with high-gain bandwidth (>30 nm, 0.5-dB flatness) concepts will be considered.
• Operational thermal range 0 - 50 °C.
• Storage -15 to 65 °C.
• Radiation tolerance greater than 100 krad is required (including resilience to photodarkening).

RECEIVERS/SENSORS:

Space-qualified high-speed receivers and low-light-level sensitive acquisition, tracking, and pointing detectors and detector arrays.

• NIR wavelengths: 1,064 and/or 1,550 nm.
• Sensitive to low irradiance incident at flight transceiver aperture (~ femtowatts per square meter to picowatts per square meter) detection.
• Low subnanosecond timing jitter and fast rise time.
• Novel hybridization of optics and electronic readout schemes with built-in preprocessing capability.
• Characteristics compatible with supporting time-of-flight or other means of processing laser communication signals for high-precision range and range-rate measurements.
• Tolerant to space radiation effect (total dose >100 krad), displacement damage and single-event effects.

NOVEL TECHNOLOGIES AND ACCESSORIES:

• Center wavelength (CWL) 1,064 or 1,550 nm.
• Space-qualified, 0.1 to 1.3 nm, noise equivalent bandwidth with ~90% throughput, large spectral range out-of-band blocking (~40 dB).
• Reliable tuning over limited range.
• Thermally stable with well characterized temperature dependence of passband.

Novel Photonics Integrated Circuit (PIC) devices targeting space applications with the objective of reducing SWaP of modulators without sacrificing performance. Proposed PIC solutions should allow improved integration and efficient coupling to discrete optics, when needed.

Concepts for offering redundancy to laser transmitters in space.

• Low-loss, high-power multiplexing devices that can handle up to 20 W of optical power per channel and tens to 100 W of optical power output.
• Optical fiber routing of high average powers (tens of watts) and high peak powers (1 to 10 kW).
• Redundancy in actuators and optical components.
• Reliable optical switching.
• Innovative applications of machine learning to ease flight operations of Deep Space Optical Communications (DSOC) transceivers, for example, to achieve improved pointing performance from space.

GROUND ASSETS FOR OPTICAL COMMUNICATIONS:

Low-cost large-aperture receivers for faint optical communication signals from deep space subsystem technologies:

• Demonstrate innovative subsystem technologies for >10-m-diameter deep space ground collector.
• Capable of operating to within 3° of solar limb.
• Better than 10-µrad spot size (excluding atmospheric seeing contribution).
• Desire demonstration of low-cost primary mirror segment fabrication to meet a cost goal of less than $35K per square meter.
• Low-cost techniques for segment alignment and control, including daytime operations.
• Partial adaptive correction techniques for reducing the FOV required to collect signal photons under daytime atmospheric "seeing" conditions.
• Adaptive optics for uplink laser transmission in order to be able to transmit low-beam divergence lasers with near diffraction limited performance.
• Innovative adaptive techniques not requiring a wave-front sensor and deformable mirror of particular interest.
• Mirror cleanliness monitor and control systems.
• Active metrology systems for maintaining segment primary figure and its alignment with secondary optics.
• Large-core-diameter multimode fibers with low temporal dispersion for coupling large optics to detectors remote (30 to 100 m) from the large optics.

1,550-nm sensitive photon counting detector arrays compatible with large-aperture ground collectors with a means of coupling light from large aperture diameters to reasonably sized detectors/detector arrays, including optical fibers with acceptable temporal dispersion.

• Integrated time tagging readout electronics for >5 gigaphotons/s incident rate.
• Time resolution <50 ps, 1-sigma.
• Highest possible single-photon detection efficiency, at least 50% at highest incident photon-flux rates.
• Total detector active area >0.3 to 1 mm².
• Integrated dark rate <3 megacounts/s.

Optical filters.

• Subnanometer noise equivalent bandwidths.
• Tunable in a limited range in the 1,550-nm spectral region.
• Transmission losses <0.5 dB.
• Clear aperture >25 mm and acceptance angle >40 mrad or similar etendue.
• Out-of-band rejection of >50 dB at 0.7 to 1.8 µm.

Multikilowatt laser transmitters for use as ground beacon and uplink laser transmitters.

• NIR wavelengths in 1.0- or 1.55-µm spectral region.
• Narrow linewidths <0.3 nm.
• Capable of modulating with nanosecond and subnanosecond rise times.
• Low timing jitter and stable operation.
• High-speed real-time signal processing of serially concatenated PPM operating at a few bits per photon with user-interface outputs.
• 15- to 60-MHz repetition rates.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 05 Communications, Navigation, and Orbital Debris Tracking and Characterization Systems
• Level 2 05.1 Optical Communications

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

For all technologies, lowest cost for small volume production (5 to 20 units) is a driver. Research must convincingly prove technical feasibility (proof of concept) during Phase I, ideally with hardware deliverables that can be tested and/or compelling simulations, to validate performance claims, with a clear path to demonstrating and delivering functional hardware meeting all objectives and specifications in Phase II.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

The state of the art (SOA) for FSOC can be subdivided into near-Earth (extending to cislunar and translunar distances) and planetary ranges with the Lagrange points falling in between.

Near-Earth FSOC technology has matured through a number of completed and upcoming technology demonstrations from space. Transition from technology demonstration to an operational service demands low-SWaP, novel high-speed (10 to 100 Gbps) space-qualified laser transmitters and receivers. Transmitters and receivers servicing near-Earth applications can possibly be repurposed for deep space proximity links, such as landed assets on planetary surfaces to orbiting assets with distances of 5,000 to 100,000 km or intersatellite links. Innovative lightweight space-qualified modems for handling multiple optical-modulation schemes. Emerging photonics technologies that can benefit space FSOC applications are sought.

Deep space FSOC is motivated by NASA's initiative to send humans to Mars. Critical gaps following a successful technology demonstration will be lightweight 30- to 50-cm optical transceivers with a wide operational temperature range -20 to 70 °C over which wave-front error and focus is stable; high peak-to-average power space-qualified lasers with average powers of 20 to 50 W; and single photon-sensitive radiation-hardened flight detectors with high detection efficiency, fast rise times, and low timing jitter. The detector size should be able to cover 1-mrad FOV with an instantaneous FOV comparable to the transmitted laser beam width. Laser pointing control systems that operate with dim laser beacons transmitted from Earth or use celestial beacon sources. For DSOC, ground laser transmitters with high-average power (kilowatt class) but narrow linewidths (<0.25 nm) and high-variable repetition rates are required. Innovative optical coatings for large-aperture mirrors that are compatible with near-Sun pointing applications for efficiently collecting the signal and lowering background and stray light. Reliability through space-qualified materials and component selection and implementation of redundancy are highly sought after to enable sending humans to planetary destinations, as well as enable higher resolution science instruments. Deriving auxiliary optimetrics from the FSOC signals to support laser ranging and time transfer will also be critical for providing services to future human missions to Mars. High-rate uplink from the ground to Mars with high-modulation-rate high-power lasers are also currently lacking.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

A number of FSOC-related NASA projects are ongoing with launch expected in the 2021 to 2024 timeframe. The Laser Communication Relay Demonstration (LCRD) is an Earth-to-geostationary satellite relay demonstration that launched in 2021. The Illuma-T Project will follow to extend the relay demonstration to include a low Earth orbit (LEO) node on the International Space Station (ISS). In 2023, the Optical to Orion (O2O), Artemis II, demonstration will transmit data from the Orion crewed capsule as it performs a translunar trajectory and returns to Earth.

In 2022, the DSOC Project technology demonstration will be hosted by the Psyche Mission spacecraft extending FSOC links to AU distances.

These missions are being funded by NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) Technology Demonstrations Missions (TDM) program and Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD) and Space Operations Mission Directorate (SOMD) Space Communications Navigation (SCaN) program.

Of the 6 technologies recently identified by NASA for sending humans to Mars, laser communications was identified (https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/6_Technologies_NASA_is_Advancing_to_Send_Humans_to_Mars)

References:

Laser Communications Relay Demonstration (LCRD) using two ground nodes and GEO space asset

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/tdm/lcrd/index.html

Integrated LCRD Low-Earth Orbit User Modem and Amplifier Terminal (ILLUMA-T) from ISS-to-GEO and ISS-to-Ground

https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/heo/scan/opticalcommunications/illuma-t

Optical to Orion (O2O) optical communications DTO from on Artemis II  with crewed Orion

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/nasa-laser-communications-to-provide-orion-faster-connections

Deep Space Optical Communications (DSOC), first demonstration of optical communications from planetary distances

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/tdm/dsoc/index.html

Small Satellite Conference, 2019, NASA’s Terabyte Infrared Delivery (TBIRD) Program: Large-Volume Data Transfer from LEO 

https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/smallsat/2019/all2019/107/

Scope Title:

Advanced Techniques for Trajectory Design and Optimization

Scope Description:

NASA seeks innovative advancements in trajectory design and optimization for cislunar and interplanetary missions, including:

• Low-thrust trajectories in a multibody dynamical environment.
• Multiple small-body (moons, asteroids, and comets) exploration.
• Solar sail trajectories.
• Anytime abort (return to Earth) for crewed spaceflight missions (e.g., from the lunar surface, or a near rectilinear halo orbit).

NASA is seeking innovative techniques for optimization of trajectories that account for:

• System uncertainties (i.e., navigation errors, maneuver execution errors, missed maneuvers, etc.).
• Spacecraft and operational constraints (power, communications, thermal, etc.).
• Trajectory constraints imposed by navigational, crew safety, and/or science observation requirements.

Trajectory design for complex space missions can take weeks or months to generate a single reference trajectory. Providing algorithms and software to speed up this process will enable missions to explore trade spaces more fully and more quickly respond to changes in the mission. Thus, NASA seeks innovative techniques that allow rapid exploration of mission design trade spaces, address high-dimensionality optimization problems (i.e., multimoon/multibody tours; low thrust), and/or provide initial guesses that can be used to improve convergence of complex trajectories in existing tool suite.

Proposals that leverage state-of-the-art capabilities already developed by NASA, or that can  integrate with those packages, such as the General Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT); Collocation Stand Alone Library and Toolkit (CSALT); Copernicus; Evolutionary Mission Trajectory Generator (EMTG); Mission Analysis Low-Thrust Optimization (MALTO); Mission Analysis, Operations, and Navigation (MONTE); and Optimal Trajectories by Implicit Simulation (OTIS), or other available software tools are highly encouraged. Proposers who contemplate licensing NASA technologies are highly encouraged to coordinate with the appropriate NASA technology transfer offices prior to submission of their proposals.

Disclaimer: Technology Available (TAV) subtopics may include an offer to license NASA Intellectual Property (NASA IP) on a nonexclusive, royalty-free basis, for research use under the SBIR award. When included in a TAV subtopic as an available technology, use of the available NASA IP is strictly voluntary. Whether or not a firm uses available NASA IP within their proposal effort will not in any way be a factor in the selection for award.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 15 Flight Vehicle Systems
• Level 2 15.2 Flight Mechanics

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I research should demonstrate technical feasibility, with preliminary software being delivered to NASA, as well as show a plan towards Phase II integration.

Phase II new technology development efforts shall deliver components at Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) 5 to 6 to NASA, with mature algorithms and software components complete and preliminary integration and testing in an operational environment.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Trajectory optimization techniques that account for, or even minimize, spacecraft and trajectory uncertainties are not widely available in current trajectory design software. The incorporation of these uncertainties into optimization frameworks that also include constraints imposed by spacecraft, operational, and science requirements would result in more robust trajectory designs. Moreover, trajectory design for complex missions or in sensitive dynamical regimes is frequently a human in-the-loop process that relies upon the intuition of experienced engineers. While this approach can suffice for the design of a single reference trajectory, it is highly inefficient for processes that necessitate the generation of thousands of trajectories, e.g., the exploration of a trade space or a missed thrust analysis. Processes that reduce the person-hours required to generate optimal trajectories within these complex trade spaces are needed. 

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Relevant missions include:

• Artemis—Lunar Gateway.
• Europa Clipper.
• Lucy.
• Psyche.
• Dragonfly.
• Roman Space Telescope.
• Deep Atmosphere Venus Investigation of Noble gases, Chemistry, and Imaging (DAVINCI).
• Venus Emissivity Radio science, InSAR, Topography, and Spectroscopy (VERITAS).
• SmallSat and CubeSat class missions, such as Lunar IceCube.

References:

Scope Title:

Autonomous Onboard Spacecraft Navigation, Guidance, and Control

Scope Description:

Future human and robotic lunar and Mars missions require landing within a 50-m radius of the desired surface location to land near features of interest or other vehicles. Also, future exploration and On-orbit Servicing, Assembly and Manufacturing (OSAM) missions require rendezvous, formation flying, proximity operations, noncooperative object capture, and coordinated spacecraft operations in Earth orbit, cislunar space, libration orbits, and deep space. Furthermore, the next generation of human spaceflight missions in cislunar space (e.g., Artemis, Human Landing Systems (HLS), and Gateway) will require very complex trajectories with a wide range of possible abort and contingency scenarios that must be accounted for. These missions all require a high degree of autonomy.

The subtopic seeks advancements in autonomous, onboard trajectory design, spacecraft navigation and guidance algorithms and software for application in Earth orbit, lunar, cislunar, libration, and deep space to reduce dependence on ground-based tracking, and orbit determination, including:

• Advanced, computationally tractable algorithms and software for safe, precision landing on small bodies, planets, and moons, including real-time 3D terrain mapping, autonomous hazard detection and avoidance, and terrain relative navigation algorithms that leverage active lidar-based imaging, or methods with limited or no reliance on a priori maps.
• Computer vision techniques to support optical/terrain relative navigation and/or spacecraft rendezvous/proximity operations in low and variable lighting conditions, including artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) algorithms.
• Onboard relative and proximity navigation (relative position, velocity and attitude, and/or pose) algorithms and software, which support cooperative and collaborative space operations.
• Autonomous onboard mission design and trajectory planning for crewed missions. In a loss-of-comm scenario in cislunar space, potentially complex multi-burn transfer trajectory solutions will be required in order to return to Earth without inputs from ground controllers. This may include onboard trajectory optimization, analytical or semi-analytical methods to seed optimization or guidance algorithms, as well as machine learning (ML) algorithms to produce results from a complex abort space.
• High accuracy (1-meter level), local positioning concepts for surface operations (i.e., astronauts and rovers on the moon) within a local area of up to 10 km.

Proposals that leverage state-of-the-art capabilities already developed by NASA, or that can integrate with those packages, such as the Goddard Enhanced Onboard Navigation System (GEONS), Navigator NavCube, autoNGC, core Flight System (cFS), AutoNav, or other available NASA hardware and software tools are highly encouraged. Proposers who contemplate licensing NASA technologies are highly encouraged to coordinate with the appropriate NASA technology transfer offices prior to submission of their proposals.

Disclaimer: Technology Available (TAV) subtopics may include an offer to license NASA Intellectual Property (NASA IP) on a nonexclusive, royalty-free basis, for research use under the SBIR award. When included in a TAV subtopic as an available technology, use of the available NASA IP is strictly voluntary. Whether or not a firm uses available NASA IP within their proposal effort will not in any way be a factor in the selection for award.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 17 Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C)
• Level 2 17.2 Navigation Technologies

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I research should demonstrate technical feasibility, determine expected system performance and assess computational resource requirements, with preliminary software being delivered to NASA, as well as show a plan towards Phase II integration.

Phase II new technology development efforts shall deliver components at the TRL 5 to 6 level to NASA, with mature algorithms and software components with complete and preliminary integration and testing in an operational environment.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Currently navigation, guidance, and control functions rely heavily on the ground for tracking data, data processing, and decision making. As NASA operates farther from Earth and performs more complex operations requiring coordination between vehicles, round-trip communication time delays make it necessary to reduce reliance on Earth for navigation solutions and maneuver planning. For example, spacecraft that arrive at a planetary surface may have limited ground inputs and no surface or orbiting navigational aids, and may require rapid navigation updates to feed autonomous trajectory guidance updates and control. NASA currently has only limited navigational, trajectory, and attitude flight control technologies that permit fully autonomous approach, proximity operations, and landing without navigation support from Earth-based resources.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Relevant missions and projects include:

• Artemis (Lunar Gateway, Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle, HLS).
• OSAM.
• LunaNet.
• Autonomous Navigation, Guidance, and Control (autoNGC).

These complex, deep space missions require a high degree of autonomy. The technology produced in this subtopic enables these kinds of missions by reducing or eliminating reliance on the ground for navigation and maneuver planning. The subtopic aims to reduce the burden of routine navigational support and communications requirements on network services, increase operational agility, and enable near real-time replanning and opportunistic science. It also aims to enable classes of missions that would otherwise not be possible due to round-trip light time constraints.

References:

1. Goddard Enhanced Onboard Navigation System (GEONS): https://software.nasa.gov/software/GSC-14687-1, https://goo.gl/TbVZ7G
2. Navigator: http://itpo.gsfc.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/gsc_14793_1_navigator.pdf
3. NavCube: https://goo.gl/bdobb9
4. core Flight System (cFS): https://cfs.gsfc.nasa.gov/
5. On-orbit Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing (OSAM): https://nexis.gsfc.nasa.gov/osam/index.html
6. LunaNet: https://esc.gsfc.nasa.gov/news/_LunaNetConcept
7. autonomous Navigation, Guidance and Control (autoNGC): https://techport.nasa.gov/view/94817
8. Bhaskaran, S., “Autonomous Navigation for Deep Space Missions,” Proceedings of the SpaceOps 2012 Conference, AIAA 20212-1267135, Stockholm, Sweden, June 11-15, 2012.

Scope Title:

Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis (CARA)

Scope Description:

The U.S. Space Surveillance Network currently tracks more than 22,000 objects larger than 10 cm, and the number of objects in orbit is steadily increasing, which causes an increasing threat to spacecraft in the near-Earth environment. The NASA CARA team is responsible for protecting NASA assets from collision with other objects by submitting owner/operator trajectory information on the protected spacecraft, including predicted maneuvers, to the 18th Space Control Squadron (SPCS) at Vandenberg Space Force Base in California. The trajectories are screened against the catalog of space objects, and information about predicted close approaches between NASA satellites and other space objects is sent back to CARA. CARA then determines the risk posed by those events and works with the spacecraft owner/operator to develop an appropriate mitigation strategy. The ability to perform risk assessment more accurately and rapidly will improve space safety for all near-Earth operations and cislunar (Earth + 2 million kilometers) operations.

In addition, there are also an increasing number of spacecraft orbiting other solar system bodies, such as the Moon and Mars. The corresponding risk assessment process to CARA for satellites in deep space is called MADCAP (Multimission Automated Deepspace Conjunction Assessment Process). These spacecraft are not tracked by the Space Surveillance Network, and all trajectory data for them must be provided by their respective navigation teams, which compute orbits based on tracking data obtained from a suitable deep space antenna operated by NASA’s Deep Space Network and from some foreign space agencies.

Because neither CARA nor MADCAP produces ephemeris data for the NASA-protected assets or the catalogued objects, the orbit determination aspect of the problem is not of interest in this subtopic. Additionally, CARA does not control the screening process and is therefore not looking for solutions in that area. Only the conjunction assessment (CA) risk assessment aspect is within the scope of this call.

This subtopic seeks innovative technologies to improve the risk assessment process, including the following specific areas (see Reference 1 for the 2020 NASA Technology Taxonomy (TX) areas TX05.6.4, TX10.1.4, TX10.1.5, and TX10.1.6):

• Alternative risk assessment techniques and parameters. The Probability of Collision (Pc) is the standard metric for assessing collision likelihood. Its use has substantial advantages over the previous practice of using standoff distances. The Pc considers the uncertainties in the predicted state estimates at the time of closest approach (TCA) so it provides a probabilistic statement of risk. A number of concerns with the use of the Pc, however, have been identified, including “diluted” probability (see Reference 2) and “false confidence” (see Reference 3). Special consideration will be directed to approaches that explicitly avoid extreme conservatism but instead enable taking prudent measures, at reasonable cost, to improve safety of flight, without imposing an undue burden on mission operations and the balancing required to improve safety while allowing largely unencumbered space mission operations.
• Innovative approaches to characterizing the uncertainties in the hard-body radius and object covariances (see Reference 4) that account for all the uncertainties in the inputs to the Pc calculation in order to emerge with a range or Probability Density Function (PDF) of possible collision probabilities, or some other parameter that takes account of these uncertainties. Although NASA is open to entirely different constructs and approaches, CARA does not control the orbit determination process and cannot change the state estimation/propagation and uncertainty representation paradigm.
• New or improved techniques or algorithms that use information available in a Conjunction Data Message (CDM) and historical information of a given space object to predict event severity in either a singular event or an ensemble risk assessment for contiguous close approaches for several events including those using artificial intelligence (AI) or machine learning (ML) are sought.
• New or improved techniques are sought to increase the speed of risk analysis of conjunction events that also retain the ability to screen the planned trajectory via the 18 SPCS process. A semiautomatic approach for risk analysis could involve preliminary analysis on the severity levels of a given conjunction as a form of triage.
• Novel, efficient methods for locating the minimum distance and location of the closest approach between objects with reduced run times and/or increased accuracy. Due to limitations in the availability of formal trajectory uncertainty covariances for spacecraft in orbit at Mars and the Moon, MADCAP currently analyzes conjunctions by comparing minimum orbit distances, among other attributes. For spacecraft with noncoplanar orbits, the minimum orbit distance is located at the orbit crossing locations, which are relatively simple to find. However, the search for minimum orbit distances is less straightforward when the orbits are coplanar.  MADCAP currently utilizes a brute force algorithm to find the minimum orbit distance locations. Solutions that assume elliptical orbits are acceptable, but those which allow for hyperbolic orbits are preferred. An efficient method that applies universally to noncoplanar orbits could also be beneficial if quick and accurate, as it would eliminate the need to check for coplanarity and switch algorithms.
• Conjunction event visualizations are an effective method of improving understanding of conjunction geometry. To date, these visualizations have been set up manually when conjunctions of interest arise. It would be beneficial to be able to automatically produce an image showing the visualization of a close approach (state information in various coordinate/reference frames, covariance, variable hard-body radius information, approach angles, and other pertinent information using data from CDMs) when high-risk conjunctions are reported. These images would be sent out with email warnings of the high-risk event.

Disclaimer: Technology Available (TAV) subtopics may include an offer to license NASA Intellectual Property (NASA IP) on a nonexclusive, royalty-free basis, for research use under the SBIR award. When included in a TAV subtopic as an available technology, use of the available NASA IP is strictly voluntary. Whether or not a firm uses available NASA IP within their proposal effort will not in any way be a factor in the selection for award.

See section 1.6 for additional details on TAV requirements.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 05 Communications, Navigation, and Orbital Debris Tracking and Characterization Systems
• Level 2 05.6 Networking and Ground Based Orbital Debris Tracking and Management

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I research should demonstrate technical feasibility, with preliminary software being delivered to NASA, as well as show a plan toward Phase II integration.

Phase II new technology development efforts shall deliver components at the TRL 5 to 6 level to NASA, with mature algorithms and software components complete and preliminary integration and testing in a quasi-operational environment.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

The number of conjunction events is expected to continually increase with the increase of resident space objects from large constellations, the ability to track smaller objects, the increasing numbers of CubeSat/SmallSats, and the proliferation of space debris. Thus, CARA and MADCAP have identified the following challenges to which we are actively looking for solutions: efficient ways to perform conjunction analysis and assessments such as methods for bundling events and performing ensemble risk assessment, middle-duration risk assessment (longer duration than possible for discrete events but shorter than decades-long analyses that use gas dynamics assumptions), improved conjunction assessment (CA) event risk evolution prediction, ML/AI applied to CA risk assessment parameters and/or event evolution. The decision space for collision avoidance relies on not only the quality of the data (state and covariance) but also the tools and techniques for CA.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This technology is relevant and needed for all human spaceflight and robotic missions in the near-Earth, cislunar, lunar, and other solar system body environments. The ability to perform CARA more accurately will improve space safety for all operations involving orbiting spacecraft, improve operational support by providing more accurate and longer-term predictions, and reduce propellant usage for collision avoidance maneuvers.

References:

1. 2020 NASA Technology Taxonomy: 2020_nasa_technology_taxonomy_lowres.pdf
2. Alfano, Salvatore. "A numerical implementation of spherical object collision probability." The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences 53, no. 1 (2005): 103-109.
3. Balch, Michael Scott, Martin, Ryan, and Ferson, Scott, "Satellite conjunction analysis and the false confidence theorem." Proceedings of the Royal Society A 475, no. 2227 (2019): 20180565.
4. Frigm, Ryan C., Hejduk,Matthew D., Johnson, Lauren C., and Plakalovic, Dragan, "Total probability of collision as a metric for finite conjunction assessment and collision risk management." Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance Technologies Conference, Wailea, Maui, Hawaii. 2015.
5. NASA Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis (CARA) Office: https://www.nasa.gov/conjunction-assessment
6. NASA Orbital Debris Program Office: https://www.orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/
7. Newman, Lauri, K., "The NASA robotic conjunction assessment process: Overview and operational experiences," Acta Astronautica, Vol. 66, Issues 7-8, Apr-May 2010, pp. 1253-1261, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094576509004913
8. Newman, Lauri K., et al., "Evolution and Implementation of the NASA Robotic Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis Concept of Operations." (2014). https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20150000159
9. Newman, Lauri K., et al., “NASA Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis Updated Requirements Architecture,” AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, Portland, ME, AAS 19-668, (2019).
10. Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, “NASA Procedural Requirements for Limiting Orbital Debris and Evaluating the Meteoroid and Orbital Debris Environments,” NPR 8715.6, https://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayDir.cfm?t=NPR&c=8715&s=6B
11. NASA Interim Directive (NID) 7120.132: Collision Avoidance for Space Environment Protection: NID_7120_132_.pdf (nasa.gov)
12. NASA Spacecraft Conjunction Assessment and Collision Avoidance Best Practices Handbook: OCE_50.pdf (nasa.gov)
13. Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) Recommended Standard for Conjunction Data Messages: https://public.ccsds.org/Pubs/508x0b1e2c2.pdf
14. Tarzi, Zahi, Berry, David, and Roncoli, Ralph “ An Updated Process for Automated Deepspace Conjunction Assessment,” Paper AAS 14-373, 25th International Symposium on Space Flight Dynamics, Munich, Germany, October 2015.

Scope Title:

Lunar 3GPP Capability Development

Scope Description:

Terrestrially, substantial investments have been made in the Third Generation Partnership Project  (3GPP) standards and technology over the past several decades of 3G/4G/5G development and operation. NASA is seeking to leverage this extensive development for the deployment of cost-effective and highly capable networking systems within the lunar communications architecture. However, operating in the lunar environment can be drastically different than operating terrestrially. This subtopic is being proposed to encourage development that is needed to translate terrestrial 3GPP technologies into a format suitable for the lunar environment, whether in terms of hardware (radiation hardening), software (lunar analysis tools), modeling (lunar regolith propagation and scattering), etc. This technology is urgently needed to close gaps in the lunar communications architecture and support the mission objectives of the Artemis program. 

NASA’s Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) program seeks innovative approaches to leverage terrestrial cellular technologies, standards, and architectures to establish and grow an adaptable and interoperable lunar communications infrastructure capable of supporting a wide range of future lunar mission users through lunar surface assets as well as orbiting relay constellations. The Lunar Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Applications subtopic specifically focuses on 3GPP-compatible hardware that can operate in space and on the lunar surface, channel modeling pertinent to operation of 3GPP networks on the lunar surface, advances in 3GPP waveforms beneficial to deployment of lunar networks, and demonstration of capabilities for Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN) applicable to use from lunar orbit to lunar surface.

NASA’s Artemis program is committed to landing and establishing a sustained presence for American astronauts on the Moon in collaboration with our commercial partners. In support of this goal, a flexible, interoperable communications network that can grow as demand and number of lunar mission users establish a presence on the lunar surface is critical. Currently, NASA is already supporting demonstrations of 4G LTE (Long Term Evolution) hardware and protocol performance on the lunar surface in 2023. In the 2025 timeframe, the first crewed landing of Artemis III will look to conduct additional demonstrations of 5G communications systems on the lunar surface. In preparation of these and other future activities, the study and development of lunar surface/space-based applications of 3GPP technologies, waveforms, and modeling will lay the foundation for the future lunar surface communications infrastructure. Examples of specific research and/or technology development areas of interest include:

• Development of 3GPP-compliant hardware for long-term survivability in the lunar environment (surface and orbit), including radiation and thermal characteristics across a lunar day/night cycle.
• Path-to-standardization development/modification of 3GPP standards/waveforms to address the unique lunar surface environment (e.g., high multipath) and/or space-based environment (e.g., high Doppler, high latency).
• Interoperability between lunar surface architecture and orbiting relay architecture, including delay tolerant networking (DTN) to bridge the gap between ad hoc surface networks and highly scheduled Earth-relay networks. DTN functionality may be demonstrated as compatibility/operational use with the DTN layer of other services, as opposed to independent implementation of DTN.
• Development of unique capabilities supporting lunar exploration that can operate within the 3GPP framework (e.g., precision Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) services, sidelink capability, etc.).
• Development of channel models to support analysis of 3GPP performance in lunar environments.
• Development of coverage planning and capacity analysis tools that take into account the unique properties of the lunar environment (e.g., lunar radius, regolith RF transparency, lunar topography, lunar geology, propagation through dust clouds, accumulation of dust layer on devices, etc.).
• Sidelink architectures for mission-critical suit-to-suit communication in disconnected environments, including 5G ProSe/V2X and multi-protocol (e.g., 5G + Wi-Fi) solutions.

Proposals to this subtopic should consider application to a lunar communications architecture consisting of surface assets (e.g., astronauts, science stations, robotic rovers, vehicles, and surface relays), lunar communication relay satellites, Gateway, and ground stations on Earth. The lunar communication relay satellites require technology with low size, weight, and power (SWaP) suitable for small satellite (e.g., 50 kg) or CubeSat operations and 3GPP waveforms capable of withstanding relatively high Doppler rates (when considering NTN links). Proposed solutions should highlight advancements to provide the needed communications capability while minimizing use of onboard resources, such as power and propellant. Proposals should consider how the technology can mature into a successful demonstration in the lunar architecture. If a proposal suggests or implies modification of 3GPP standards, the proposer should demonstrate a familiarity/history of participation in the relevant standard-making bodies and successful contributions to those organizations. The intent of this subtopic is to leverage existing terrestrial technologies and standards only the minimum customization necessary for space/lunar usage, while acknowledging that there do exist fundamental differences that need to be addressed (e.g. lunar surface propagation modeling).

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 4 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 05 Communications, Navigation, and Orbital Debris Tracking and Characterization Systems
• Level 2 05.3 Internetworking

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware
• Analysis
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I will study technical feasibility, infusion potential for lunar operations, and clear/achievable benefits, and show a path towards a Phase II implementation. Phase I deliverables include a feasibility assessment and concept of operations of the research topic, simulations and/or measurements, validation of the proposed approach to develop a given product (Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) 3 to 4), and a plan for further development of the specific capabilities or products to be performed in Phase II. Early development, integration, test, and delivery prototype hardware/software is encouraged.

Phase II will emphasize hardware/software/waveform/model development with delivery of specific product for NASA targeting future demonstration missions. Phase II deliverables include a working prototype (engineering model) of the proposed product/platform or software, along with documentation of development, capabilities, and measurements, and related documents and tools, as necessary, for NASA to modify and use the capability or hardware component(s) and evaluate performance in the lunar architecture for greater infusion potential. Hardware prototypes shall show a path towards flight demonstration, such as a flight qualification approach and preliminary estimates of thermal, vibration, and radiation capabilities of the flight hardware. Software prototypes shall be implemented on platforms that have a clear path to a flight qualifiable platform. Algorithms and channel models must be implemented in software and should be ready to be run on an appropriate general-purpose processor.

Opportunities and plans should be identified for technology commercialization. Software applications and platform/infrastructure deliverables shall be compliant with the latest NASA standards. The deliverable shall be demonstrated in a relevant emulated environment and have a clear path to Phase III flight implementation on a SWaP-constrained platform.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

NASA’s Draft LunaNet Interoperability Specification has baselined 3GPP release 16 or later for short-to-medium range wireless networking with mobility and roaming.

The technology need for the lunar communication architecture includes:

• SWaP-efficient 3GPP hardware deployable as hosted payloads on lunar missions (habitats, rovers), surface assets (CLPS landers), or orbital assets.
• Connectivity between surface and orbital assets for trunk links, continuous coverage of the lunar South Pole and far side, as well as potential direct-to-handheld orbital 5G links.
• Effective characterization of 3GPP network performance in the lunar environment through channel modeling and emulation.
• Efficient use of lunar communication spectrum while avoiding the generation of interference (e.g. sensitive radio astronomy science concerned with very low out of band emissions).

Critical gaps between the state of the art and the technology need include:

• Space qualification of terrestrial 3GPP hardware and standards such as radiation hardening and survivability at extreme temperatures (-180 °C to +130 °C on the lunar surface, RF front end only).
• Implementation of 3GPP-capable systems on SWaP-constrained platforms.
• Operation of 3GPP networks in GPS denied environments.
• Direct-to-handheld (DTH) connectivity including tolerance for high Doppler and high latency from lunar orbit.
• Device-to-device connectivity when one or more devices cannot see a 5G tower.
• Precision PNT over the surface link to augment availability and precision of overhead navigation assets.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Leveraging the vast investment in terrestrial 3GPP technologies over the past several decades is a critical opportunity for NASA’s lunar communications architecture to deploy highly capable, reliable technologies at reasonable cost, but the feasibility of operation in the lunar environment must be demonstrated, and due consideration must be given to the unique challenges of operating in the lunar environment. As activity in the lunar vicinity increases through NASA’s Artemis program as well as through international and commercial partnerships, deployment of scalable and efficient networks is essential to mitigate complexity and reduce operational cost.

References:

Several related reference documents include:

• 2020 NASA Technology Taxonomy:
  https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/2020_nasa_technology_taxonomy.pdf
• LunaNet Interoperability Specification:
  https://esc.gsfc.nasa.gov/static-files/Draft%20LunaNet%20Interoperability%20Specification%20Final.pdf
• International Communications System Interoperability Standards (ICSIS):
  https://nasasitebuilder.nasawestprime.com/idss2/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/10/communication_reva_final_9-2020.pdf
• IOAG Future Lunar Communications Architecture Report:
  https://www.ioag.org/Public%20Documents/Lunar%20communications%20architecture%20study%20report%20FINAL%20v1.3.pdf
• Space Frequency Coordination Group Recommendation SFCG 32-2R3:
  https://www.sfcgonline.org/Recommendations/REC%20SFCG%2032-2R4%20(Freqs%20for%20Lunar%20Region).pdf
• CCSDS 883.0-B-1:
  https://public.ccsds.org/Pubs/883x0b1.pdf

Scope Title:

Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) Sensors and Actuators

Scope Description:

NASA seeks innovative, groundbreaking, and high-impact developments in spacecraft guidance, navigation, and control (GNC) technologies in support of future science and exploration mission requirements. This subtopic covers mission-enabling technologies that have significant size, weight, power, cost, and performance (SWaP-CP) improvements over the state-of-the-art commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) capabilities in the areas of (1) spacecraft attitude determination and control systems, (2) absolute and relative navigation systems, (3) pointing control systems, and (4) radiation-hardened GNC hardware.

Component technology developments are sought for the range of flight sensors and actuators required to provide these improved capabilities. Technologies that apply to most spacecraft platform sizes will be considered.

Advances in the following areas are sought:

1. Spacecraft attitude determination and control systems: Sensors and actuators that enable <0.1-arcsec-level pointing knowledge and arcsecond-level control capabilities for large space telescopes, with improvements in SWaP requirements.
2. Absolute and relative navigation systems: Autonomous onboard flight navigation sensors incorporating both spaceborne and ground-based absolute and relative measurements. Special considerations will be given to relative navigation sensors enabling precision formation flying, astrometric alignment of a formation of vehicles, and other GNC technologies for enabling the collection of distributed science measurements. In addition, flight sensors that support onboard terrain-relative navigation for landing and sample return capabilities are of interest.
3. Pointing control systems: Mechanisms that enable milliarcsecond-class pointing performance on any spaceborne pointing platforms. Active and passive vibration isolation systems, innovative actuation feedback, or any such technology that can be used to enable other areas within this subtopic applies.
4. Radiation-hardened GNC hardware: GNC sensors that could operate in a high-radiation environment, such as the Jovian environment. 
5. Increasing the fundamental precision of gyroscopes and accelerometers that utilize optical cavities could benefit autonomous navigation and open up new science possibilities. Two strategies may be pursued to increase the precision. First, can the scale factor be increased without a concomitant increase in the quantum noise? Possible approaches include, but are not limited to: (a) the use of fiber optics to increase cavity length without increasing SWaP, and (b) exploitation of the degeneracies known as exceptional points (EPs) that occur in non-Hermitian systems. Prominent examples of such systems include parity-time symmetric systems and cavities containing a fast-light medium. It remains to be seen, however, whether the boost in scale factor near an EP can result in increased precision or is entirely counteracted by additional quantum noise. Proposals are sought that seek to answer this question through theoretical or experimental means in passive and active systems, including continuous-wave and pulsed lasers. Second, can the quantum noise be reduced without a concomitant reduction in scale factor? The frequency measurement in a laser gyro or accelerometer only involves the uncertainty in phase. Therefore, the relevant quantum noise might be reduced by squeezing. Proposals are sought that investigate and utilize squeezing, for example, via the propagation of quantum solitons, for the improvement of inertial sensors.

Proposals should show an understanding of one or more relevant science or exploration needs and present a feasible plan to fully develop a technology and infuse it into a NASA program.

This subtopic is for all mission-enabling GNC technology in support of Science Mission Directorate (SMD) missions and future mission concepts. Proposals for the development of hardware and supporting software is preferred. The specific applications could range from CubeSats/SmallSats, to ISS payloads, to flagship missions. For proposals featuring technologies intended for use in planetary science applications, this year a preference will be given to those proposals that would benefit radiation-hard electronics needed for in situ studies of icy ocean worlds. 

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 4 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 17 Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C)
• Level 2 17.X Other Guidance, Navigation, and Control

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Prototype hardware/software, documented evidence of delivered TRL (test report, data, etc.), summary analysis, supporting documentation:

• Phase I research should be conducted to demonstrate technical feasibility as well as show a plan towards Phase II integration and component/prototype testing in a relevant environment as described in a final report.
• Phase II technology development efforts shall deliver a component/prototype at the NASA SBIR/STTR TRL 5 to 6 level. Delivery of final documentation, test plans, and test results are required. Delivery of a hardware component/prototype under the Phase II contract is preferred.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Capability area gaps:

• Spacecraft GNC sensors—highly integrated, low-power, low-weight, and radiation-hard component sensor technologies and multifunctional components.
• Spacecraft GNC attitude estimation and control algorithms—sensor fusion, autonomous proximity operations algorithm, robust distributed vehicle formation sensing, and control algorithms.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Mission capability requirements in the SMD program areas of Heliophysics, Earth Science, Astrophysics, and Planetary Science:

• Spacecraft GNC sensors—optical, radio-frequency (RF), inertial, and advanced concepts for onboard sensing of spacecraft attitude and orbit states.
• Spacecraft GNC estimation and control algorithms—innovative concepts for onboard algorithms for attitude/orbit determination and control for single spacecraft, spacecraft rendezvous and docking, and spacecraft formations.

The relevant technology taxonomy items include:

• TX04.1.1 Sensing for Robotic Systems
• TX04.1.4 Object, Event, and Activity Recognition
• TX04.5.1 Relative Navigation Sensors
• TX04.5.4 Capture Sensors
• TX05.1.4 Pointing, Acquisition, and Tracking (PAT)
• TX05.1.6 Optimetrics
• TX05.1.7 Innovative Signal Modulations
• TX05.4.1 Timekeeping and Time Distribution
• TX05.4.2 Revolutionary Position, Navigation, and Timing Technologies
• TX05.5.3 Hybrid Radio and Optical Technologies
• TX05.X   Other Communications, Navigation, and Orbital Debris Tracking and Characterization Systems
• TX09.4.7 Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) for EDL
• TX17.1.1 Guidance Algorithms
• TX17.1.2 Targeting Algorithms
• TX17.2.3 Navigation Sensors
• TX17.2.4 Relative Navigation Aids
• TX17.2.5 Rendezvous, Proximity Operations, and Capture Sensor Processing and Processors
• TX17.3.1 Onboard Maneuvering/ Pointing/ Stabilization/Flight Control Algorithms
• TX17.3.1 Onboard Maneuvering/Pointing/Stabilization/ Flight Control Algorithms
• TX17.3.3 Ground-based Maneuvering/ Pointing/ Stabilization/Flight Control Algorithms
• TX17.3.4 Control Force/ Torque Actuators
• TX17.3.5 GN&C actuators for 6DOF Spacecraft Control During Rendezvous, Proximity Operations, and Capture
• TX17.4.1 Onboard Attitude/ Attitude Rate Estimation Algorithms
• TX17.4.1 Onboard Attitude/Attitude Rate Estimation Algorithms
• TX17.4.2 Ground- Based Attitude Determination/ Reconstruction Algorithm Development
• TX17.4.3 Attitude Estimation Sensors
• TX17.5.2 GN&C Fault Management/Fault Tolerance/Autonomy
• TX17.5.3 GN&C Verification and Validation Tools and Techniques
• TX17.5.9 Onboard and Ground-Based Terrain and Object Simulation, Mapping, and Modeling Software
• TX17.X   Other Guidance, Navigation, and Control

Consequently, improvements supporting this GNC subtopic have broader impacts, increasing the return on investment for this individual topic.

References:

• 2020 NASA Technology Taxonomy: https://go.nasa.gov/3hGhFJf
• 2017 NASA Strategic Technology Investment Plan: https://go.usa.gov/xU7sE 

Scope Title:

Star-Tracker Technologies for CubeSats

Scope Description:

CubeSats are increasingly being used to perform remote sensing of the Earth’s atmosphere and surface. However, their mass, size, and power limitations often prohibit the use of spinning or scanning antennas, especially if such antennas are large relative to the size of the spacecraft (e.g., deployable antennas). A solution is to spin the spacecraft itself; however, spacecraft attitude control and Earth-based geolocation of measurements in this situation requires the use of an onboard star tracker that itself spins or otherwise maintains a consistent frame of reference, or can process star observations quickly enough to update attitude information about the spinning CubeSat. Thus, star trackers capable of providing accurate attitude information to a rapidly spinning CubeSat would significantly benefit future NASA Earth Science CubeSat missions.

The scope of this subtopic is the development of a CubeSat-ready star tracker that can provide accurate attitude information to a rapidly spinning CubeSat hosting an Earth-observing instrument. A CubeSat-ready star tracker that itself spins or maintains a consistent frame of reference while its host CubeSat spins, or one that can process observations significantly faster than the current state of the art (SOA), is a critical enabling technology for CubeSat-based Earth observations that normally would require a spinning antenna (e.g., ocean winds).

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 17 Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C)
• Level 2 17.4 Attitude Estimation Technologies

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Prototype hardware/software, documented evidence of delivered TRL (test report, data, etc.), summary analysis, and supporting documentation:

• Phase I research should be conducted to demonstrate technical feasibility as well as show a plan towards Phase II integration and component/prototype testing in a relevant environment as described in a final report.
• Phase II technology development efforts shall deliver a component/prototype at the NASA SBIR/STTR TRL 5 to 6 level. Delivery of final documentation, test plans, and test results are required. Delivery of a laboratory-tested to space-qualified hardware prototype of a star tracker capable of providing accurate attitude information to a rapidly spinning CubeSat (~tens of revolutions per minute) under the Phase II contract is preferred.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Current CubeSat-ready star trackers can provide ~0.002° pointing information accuracy with low size, weight, and power (SWaP). However, that performance assumes relatively stable attitude control (i.e., a nonrapidly spinning CubeSat). Thus, a CubeSat-ready star tracker that itself spins, or maintains a consistent frame of reference while its host CubeSat spins, or can process observations significantly faster than the current state of the art (SOA), is a critical enabling technology for CubeSat-based Earth observations that normally would require a spinning antenna (e.g., ocean winds).

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Requirement: The star tracker should have the ability to provide 0.05° or better pointing angle accuracy (in roll, pitch, and yaw) while the CubeSat is spinning up to 20 rpm in low Earth orbit (300 to 1,000 km altitude).

Relevant CubeSats are anticipated to be oriented such that the Earth-observing antenna is pointing off-nadir by up to 40° to 50°. This provides a sufficient Earth-incidence angle to enable retrieval of ocean surface winds and other horizontally resolved atmospheric measurables (e.g., precipitation). For this science application, the star tracker is providing ~1-km geolocation accuracy for such measurements.

SWaP should be comparable to existing star trackers (~0.2U, ~0.25 kg, ~1 W).

References:

• Erlank, A.O. and  Steyn, W.H.: "Arcminute attitude estimation for CubeSats with a novel nano star tracker," IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 47(3), pp. 9679-9684,  2014.
• McBryde, C.R. and Lightsey, E.G.: "A star tracker design for CubeSats," 2012 IEEE Aerospace Conference, pp. 1-14, 2012, doi: 10.1109/AERO.2012.6187242.
• Walton, M.P. and Long, D.G.: "Architectures for Earth-observing CubeSat scatterometers," CubeSats and NanoSats for Remote Sensing II, Vol. 10769, 1076904, International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2018.
• Walton, P. and  Long, D.: "Space of solutions to ocean surface wind measurement using scatterometer constellations," Journal of Applied Remote Sensing, 13(3), 032506, 2019.

NASA's Science Mission Directorate (SMD), https://science.nasa.gov. encompasses research in the areas of Astrophysics, Earth Science, Heliophysics, Planetary Science, and Biological/Physical Sciences. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine have provided NASA with recently updated Decadal surveys that are useful to identify technologies that are of interest to the above science divisions. Those documents are available at https://nap.nationalacademies.org.  

A major objective of SMD instrument development programs is to implement science measurement capabilities with smaller or more affordable aerospace platforms so development programs can meet multiple mission needs and therefore make the best use of limited resources. The rapid development of small, low-cost remote sensing and in-situ instruments capable of making measurements across the electromagnetic spectrum is essential to achieving this objective. For Earth Science needs, in particular, the subtopics reflect a focus on remote sensing (active and passive) and in situ instrument development for space-based, airborne, and uninhabited aerial vehicle (UAV) platforms.  A strong focus is placed on reducing the size, weight, power, and cost of remote and in situ instruments to allow for deployment on a more affordable and wider range of platforms. Astrophysics has a critical need for sensitive detector arrays with imaging, spectroscopy, and polarimetric capabilities, which can be demonstrated on the ground, airborne, balloon, or suborbital rocket instruments. Heliophysics, which focuses on measurements of the sun and its interaction with the Earth and the other planets in the solar system, needs a significant reduction in the size, mass, power, and cost for instruments to fly on smaller spacecraft. Planetary Science has a critical need for miniaturized instruments with in-situ sensors that can be deployed on surface landers, rovers, and airborne platforms. For the 2023 program year, we are continuing to update the included subtopics. Please read each subtopic of interest carefully. We continue to emphasize Ocean Worlds and solicit the development of in-situ instrument technologies and components to advance the maturity of science instruments focused on the detection of evidence of life, especially extant of life, in the Ocean Worlds. The microwave technologies continue as two subtopics, one focused on active microwave remote sensing and the second on passive systems such as radiometers and microwave spectrometers. NASA has an additional interest in advancing quantum sensing technologies to enable wholly new quantum sensing and measurement techniques focused on the development and maturation towards space application and qualification of atomic systems that leverage their quantum properties.  Furthermore, photonic integrated circuit technology is sought to enable size, weight, power, and cost reductions, as well as improved performance of science instruments, subsystems, and components which is particularly critical for enabling the use of affordable small spacecraft platforms.

A key objective of this SBIR Focus Area is to develop and demonstrate instrument component and subsystem technologies that reduce the risk, cost, size, and development time of SMD observing instruments and enable new measurements. Proposals are sought for the development of components, subsystems, and systems that can be used in planned missions or a current technology program. Research should be conducted to demonstrate feasibility during Phase I and show a path toward a Phase II prototype demonstration. The following subtopics are concomitant with these objectives and are organized by technology.

Scope Title:

Microbial Monitoring of Spacecraft Environments: Automated Sample Preparation for Sequencing-Based Monitoring

Scope Description:

Microbial monitoring of the spaceflight environment, including surfaces, water, and air, is required by the medical operations community and enables crew health risk assessments. To date, this monitoring has relied on culture-based analysis in which the samples must be returned to Earth for identification. This data is used to assess risk to the vehicle and crew health, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness of the engineering controls in place and define any required remediation activities. While this method has served the International Space Station (ISS) well, it results in a bias towards the detection of culturable organisms, an inherent delay between sample collection and ground-based analysis, and an increase in the number of potential pathogens on the spacecraft. Moreover, sample return will not be possible on exploration missions. As such, a near real-time monitoring system capable of in situ analysis is absolutely critical. Significant strides toward in situ microbial monitoring have been made through the implementation of nanopore sequencing onboard the ISS. Sequencing was first demonstrated onboard the ISS in 2016 using Oxford Nanopore Technologies MinION. Following this demonstration, miniPCR (polymerase chain reaction), a small thermal cycler, was paired with the MinION, and a complete sample-to-answer method was validated. Following validation in subsequent payload experiments, this analysis method was transitioned to medical operations hardware and is currently being evaluated by Crew Health Care Systems to replace culture-based monitoring methods that require sample return; the current NASA microbial monitoring requirements have evolved to allow for the inclusion of this technology. Moreover, these updated requirements are in place for future programs, and this current manual sequencing-based method has been baselined for Gateway. The current sequencing-based method is manual, involves substantial crew time, and involves numerous consumables and piece parts. NASA is soliciting an automated system yielding a sequence-ready sample.

With the movement of the field toward metagenomic assessments, the increase in portability of these platforms, NASA’s acceptance of this molecular-based analysis and the evolution of requirements to include this technology, and the baselining of this molecular method as the monitor for future programs, this is a key time to seek an automated solution for sample preparation to enable sequencing. Innovations needed are:

DNA Extraction

Based on data from the ISS, spacecraft surfaces are relatively clean microbially, and swabs from these surfaces are considered to be low biomass. Optimal and efficient extraction from varied sample sources is needed, including swabs, wipes, and filters.

DNA Purification

Removal of cellular and source sample debris. This is critical for downstream processing.

DNA Amplification

While nontargeted metagenomics is the ultimate goal, the ability to amplify DNA as needed is ideal. For example, fungal identification is required, and it can be problematic to obtain sequencing reads from low levels of spores. The proposer does not need to define PCR targets but, rather, to describe the capability of the platform to perform this reaction. Another purification will likely be required following amplification.

Library Preparation

All sequencers require that DNA be put into a format that can be detected. As nanopore sequencing has been selected for future programs, providing libraries compatible with nanopore sequencing chemistry is required.

Requirements

• Provide DNA from low biomass environmental samples from surface swabs, surface wipes, and water/air filters.
• Provide purified, nanopore sequence-ready DNA.
• At Phase I, describe the ability to include an amplification reaction.
• Overall platform should need the minimal mass, volume, and power as required.
• Provide complete description of consumables required for toxicology assessment.
  • Provide the needed containment for the consumables per NASA Safety.
• All consumables should be able to be produced in a temperature-stable format with a shelf life minimum of at least 3 years.
• The overall platform should be stable at ambient conditions for at least 3 years with consumables replaced as required.
• The overall platform should be able to process multiple samples at once.
  • A minimum of 16 samples should either be processed simultaneously or sorted and processed sequentially.
• The overall platform should have a high ease of use and require minimal hands-on crew time (less than 1 hr, not including sample collection time).
  • Current manual prep and sequencing require ~5 hr of hands-on crew time, a 50% reduction to no more than 2.5 hr is desired. 

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 06 Human Health, Life Support, and Habitation Systems
• Level 2 06.3 Human Health and Performance

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

At the completion of Phase I, it is anticipated that a report detailing the proof of concept of a fully automated system will be provided. While a full prototype is not expected, laboratory test data detailing DNA extraction, purification, and library preparation should be delivered. Reporting should also discuss the ability to multiplex samples and reuse of the system. Additional data provided at the end of Phase I includes, but is not limited to, detailed schematics of the platform, test data from designs, test data of individual components (if included), and a plan for movement to Phase II. During development, attention should be directed toward mass, volume, power requirements, stowage conditions, ease of use, required consumables, toxicity of reagents, shelf stability of reagents, and level of biomass required for successful results (with low biomass samples expected from spacecraft environments).

At the completion of Phase I, expected deliverables will include:

• Proof of concept for an automated sample-to-sequence-ready DNA system.
• Laboratory demonstration of DNA extraction and purification from multiple sample sources.
• Report describing the capability of an optional amplification reaction.
• Laboratory demonstration of a library preparation compatible with nanopore sequencing.

Phase II

At the completion of Phase II, a full-scale prototype of the finished platform should be delivered to NASA. Documentation to accompany the prototype should include technical data sheets detailing the materials and consumables used, detailed instructions for operations, and design drawings. A final report should also be included that documents all development efforts, troubleshooting, and optimization that resulted in the final system. In addition, performance test data should be included detailing input source samples, DNA concentrations and purity achieved, and the total amount of prepared libraries generated. It is expected that some sequencing data will also be provided and discussed.

At the completion of Phase II, expected deliverables include:

• A full-scale prototype of the finished platform.
• A prototype demonstration of an automated solution for DNA extraction, purification, and library preparation from multiple sample sources.
• A prototype demonstration of nanopore sequencing from the resulting prepped DNA.
• Technical data sheets detailing materials and consumables.
  • Containment needed based on NASA Safety recommendations.  
  • Demonstrated temperature-stable consumables for at least 3 years.
• Performance descriptions regarding storage at ambient temperature for up to 3 years (hardware, not consumables).
• A 50% reduction in hands-on crew time compared to the current method (current method ~5 hr). 
  • Desired no more than 2.5 hr of hands-on time from sample collection to the initiation of sequencing. 

The proposers should clearly state the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) at which the research begins and what is expected at the end of Phase I and Phase II. Reference the TRL definitions here: Microsoft Word - TRL Definitions.doc (nasa.gov)

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

The state of the art in microbial identification, a NASA requirement needed for crew health assessments, is DNA sequencing, which is also the gold standard. NASA has been using DNA sequencing to identify returned cultures since 2006. The development of small, portable sequencers has provided the ability to place the monitor at the point of sample collection. NASA has achieved this, but the sample preparation required to support the generation of sequence-ready DNA involves multiple piece parts and consumables and requires a significant amount of hands-on time.

The gap is the lack of available commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) automated solutions for DNA extraction from low biomass samples through library preparation in support of nanopore sequencing.

The development of a fully automated solution would extend far beyond microbial motioning and would be of great value to the planetary protection community and space biology researchers within the spaceflight industry. Beyond spaceflight, this technology would make substantial contributions to health care settings.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This scope is included under the Space Operations Mission Directorate (SOMD) (previously the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD)).

This work is needed to support Gateway and lunar microbial monitoring operations. While the focus of this work is directed toward the medical operations community within SOMD, including NASA’s international partners, it is extendable to all stakeholders with the goal of microbial analysis. These groups include, but are not limited to: OSMA, Planetary Protection Office, SMD-Planetary Sciences Division/Planetary Protection Research Program, the Human Research Program, AES Exploration Capabilities, space industry, academia, other government agencies, and SMD-Biological and Physical Sciences Division.

References:

1. Castro-Wallace, S. L., Chiu, C. Y., John, K. K., Stahl, S. E., Rubins, K. H., McIntyre, A. B. R., Dworkin, J. P., Lupisella, M. L., Smith, D.J., Botkin, D. J., Stephenson, T. A., Juul, S., Turner, D. J., Izquierdo, F., Federman, S., Stryke, D., Somasekar, S., Alexander, N., Yu, G., Mason, C. E., and Burton, A. S. (2017) Nanopore DNA Sequencing and Genome Assembly on the International Space Station. Scientific Reports. 7:18022. Nanopore DNA Sequencing and Genome Assembly on the International Space Station | Scientific Reports (nature.com)
2. Burton, A. S., Stahl, S. E., John, K. J., Jain, M., Juul, S., Turner, D. J., Harrington, E. D., Stoddart, D., Paten, B., Akeson, M., and Castro-Wallace, S. L. (2020) Off Earth Identification of Bacterial Populations Using 16S rDNA Nanopore Sequencing. Genes. 11(1), 76. Genes | Free Full-Text | Off Earth Identification of Bacterial Populations Using 16S rDNA Nanopore Sequencing (mdpi.com)
3. Stahl-Rommel, S., Jain, M., Nguyen H. N., Arnold, R.R., Aunon-Chancellor, S. M.,  Sharp, G. M., Castro, C., John, K. K., Juul, S., Turner, D. J., Stoddart, D., Paten, B., Akeson, M., Burton, A. S., and Castro-Wallace, S. L. (2021) Real-Time Culture-Independent Microbial Profiling Aboard the International Space Station Using Nanopore Sequencing. Genes. 12(1), 106. Genes | Free Full-Text | Real-Time Culture-Independent Microbial Profiling Onboard the International Space Station Using Nanopore Sequencing (mdpi.com)
4. NASA Standard 3001 - Requirements:  https://www.nasa.gov/hhp/standards
   1. New requirements have not been made publicly available, but can be provided upon selection.

Scope Title:

Anti-Fog Solutions for Spacesuit Helmet

Scope Description:

For the current Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) spacesuit, an astronaut applies an anti-fog solution to the interior of the helmet bubble before each extravehicular activity (EVA). However, the anti-fog solution has been reported to cause eye discomfort during at least seven EMU EVAs when the anti-fog solution contacted the crewmember’s eyes. During STS-100, astronaut Chris Hadfield reported that eye irritation temporarily blinded him during his spacewalk. In addition, the wipe-on anti-fog solution is a consumable that needs to be accounted for and a supply launched for missions. To solve this, the Pressure Garment Subsystem (PGS) team wants the next-generation helmet pressure bubbles to use a permanent anti-fog technology for a solution. Having a permanent anti-fog solution for spacesuit helmets would eliminate eye irritation and the need for additional consumables.

During the Constellation spacesuit development program, NASA conducted a trade study on four different permanent anti-fog solutions. The evaluation tested coated samples with the four permanent anti-fog candidates based on Transmission, Haze, Adhesion and Abrasion Resistance, Craze Resistance, Cold Box, Steam, and Human Breath Response tests. 

Despite our efforts on Exploration EMU (xEMU) to develop a suitable permanent anti-fog coating on the helmet, the PGS team has had issues with inconsistent application in manufacturing, as well as robustness. It was easily damaged or worn away after only 40 or more hours of manned pressurized time (MPT). It was difficult even during careful cleaning using distilled or deionized (DI) water and a soft, lint-free wipe. In addition, the material used in the xEMU anti-fog coating is being discontinued. There is renewed interest in further investigation into a permanent anti-fog solution such as a coating or other technology for exploration suit helmet bubbles that the xEMU team is interested in pursuing. 

 Requirements 

• The anti-fog must be applied to a general purpose polycarbonate bubble.  
• Geometry is TBD. However, the xEMU bubble is a hemi-ellipsoid 10- by 13-in. polycarbonate bubble and the anti-fog would need to be applied across the curvature.
• If applicable, the vendor must be able to consistently meet recommended anti-fog coating thickness. 
  • Note: Historically, the required thickness is 6-12 microns, but this will depend on the anti-fog solution chosen.  
• Must be tolerant to breathing air and 100% oxygen operations environment and able to be manually cleaned.  
• Testing includes the following:  
  • Steam cycle (simulated breathing). The suggested cycle regiment would be for at least 104 °F temperature steam cycled for 216,000 cycles at 18 cycles per minute. 
    • 104 °F is the high average of exhaled breath temperature.
    • 216,000 cycles is calculated from 18 breaths per minute, 8-hr EVAs, and 25 EVA certification.    
    • Success criteria: No fogging occurring on samples and no evidence of delamination after the test. 
  • Adhesion per ASTM 3359.
  • Cleaning Test
    • Using distilled and DI water and wipe testing for 100 cycles.
• Must be tolerant to a low-pressure environment (4.3 psia) and meet NASA off-gassing requirements for a confined space.
• Must be tolerant of pressurization cycles that introduce minor variations of helmet surface area.
• Maintain optical clarity of the helmet assembly without reducing transmission to less than 70% through visible light wavelengths.  
• Performance of eliminating condensation while a test subject is in the suit in a relevant thermal vacuum environment for space. 
• Must pass White Sands Test Facility (WSTF) off-gas testing, specification TBD. 
• Nice to have: Resistant to isopropyl alcohol (IPA) at any concentration, stericide, or a 50% water/50% dish soap mixture

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 06 Human Health, Life Support, and Habitation Systems
• Level 2 06.2 Extravehicular Activity Systems

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Prototype

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I

• Completed test plan/report on the following for flat samples: 
  • Steam cycle (simulated breathing). The suggested cycle regiment would be for at least 104 °F temperature steam cycled for 216,000 cycles at 18 cycles per minute. 
    • 104 °F is the high average of exhaled breath temperature.
    • 216,000 cycles is calculated from 18 breaths per minute, 8-hr EVAs, and 25 EVA certification.    
    • Success criteria: No fogging occurring on samples and no evidence of delamination after the test. 
  • Adhesion per ASTM 3359.
  • Cleaning Test
    • Using distilled and DI water and wipe testing for 100 cycles.
• Consistently able to meet anti-fog thickness requirement from manufacturer along the entire geometry on the helmet assembly.
• At least five flat samples (no smaller than 1 by 1 in.) of coated polycarbonate. 
• Monthly status meetings with NASA on progress. 

Phase II

• Delivered prototype of helmet pressure bubble or equivalent size and shape bubble made of polycarbonate material, coated with permanent anti-fog solution.
• Completed test plan/report on curve samples or prototype helmet for the following: 
  • Steam cycle (simulated breathing). The suggested cycle regiment would be for at least 104 °F temperature steam cycled for 216,000 cycles at 18 cycles per minute. 
    • 104 °F is the high average of exhaled breath temperature.
    • 216,000 cycles is calculated from 18 breaths per minute, 8-hr EVAs, and 25 EVA certification.    
    • Success criteria: No fogging occurring on samples and no evidence of delamination after the test. 
  • Adhesion per ASTM 3359.
  • Cleaning Test
    • Using distilled and DI water and wipe testing for 100 cycles.
• NASA WSTF off-gas testing. 

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

For the current Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) spacesuit, an astronaut applies an anti-fog solution to the interior of the helmet bubble before each EVA. However, the anti-fog solution has been reported to cause eye discomfort during at least seven EMU EVAs when the anti-fog solution contacted the crewmember’s eyes. During STS-100, astronaut Chris Hadfield reported the eye irritation temporarily blinded him during his spacewalk. In addition, the wipe-on anti-fog solution is a consumable that needs to be accounted for and a supply launched for missions.

To solve this, the Exploration EMU (xEMU) pressure bubble wants to use a permanent anti-fog coating or other technology that prevents fogging. The EMU program did some work investigating a permanent anti-fog solution, HTAF-308. It failed during qualification due to delamination and flaking after manned testing so was never implemented. During the Constellation spacesuit development program, NASA conducted a trade study on four different permanent anti-fog solutions. The evaluation tested coated samples with the four permanent anti-fog candidates based on Transmission, Haze, Adhesion and Abrasion Resistance, Craze Resistance, Cold Box, Steam, and Human Breath Response tests. The results of that trade study selected HTAF-601 as the primary option. 

The HTAF-601 permanent anti-fog solution was tested throughout the xEMU Design, Verification, and Test (DVT) human-in-the-loop (HITL) events. However, major issues have arisen with further HITL testing with the coating. Cleaning the helmet has been a challenge to avoid damaging the permanent anti-fog coating. NASA has completed a set of different methods for cleaning the anti-fog to try to document a preferred method. It was found IPA cannot be used to clean the interior of the helmet because it will strip and delaminate the permanent anti-fog coating. Even with using a very gentle cleaning method of flushing with distilled or DI water and dabbing at facial oils, the permanent anti-fog starts to delaminate consistently after 50 hr of MPT. Finally, the HTAF-601 coating is being discontinued by the vendor. 

This subtopic will focus on companies looking at permanent anti-fog solutions that specifically address the issues that the Exploration Pressure Garment System (xPGS) team found with DVT. The hope is an innovative anti-fog solution can be found that is more appropriate and durable for the spacesuit environment. Success for a Phase II completion would be the company's anti-fog solution applied to a flight-like helmet shape of hemi-ellipsoid bubble that has completed sample steam and cleaning cycle testing. This technology could be infused in the current EMU spacesuit or future advanced suits selected by the new program, "Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program Office."

Other commercial industries have successfully implemented permanent anti-fog solutions. Ski goggles, motorcycle visors, and fighter pilot helmets are all examples of this technology being implemented. However, most of these solutions are for goggles only, and do not have the requirements of breath cycles. This SBIR will expand the application of this technology. 

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This technology would be applicable to all spacesuit architectures used by the Agency. Also, it is relevant to the new xEMU, International Space Station (ISS), as well as commercial space companies. As the xEMU is being designed, built, integrated, and tested at the Johnson Space Center (JSC), solutions will have a direct infusion path as the xEMU is matured to meet the design and performance goals.

References:

Davis, K. and Kukla, T., "NASA Advanced Space Suit xEMU Development Report – Helmet and Extravehicular Visor Assembly (EVVA)"  ICES-2022-260, 51st International Conference on Environmental Systems, St. Paul, MN, July 2022. 

The NASA Human Research Program (HRP) drives advances in scientific and technological research to enable human space exploration. It is a human-focused Program dedicated to providing solutions and mitigation strategies beyond low-earth orbit by reducing the risks to human health & performance through focused translational, applied and operational research. HRP's primary deliverables include:

·       Human health, performance, and habitability standards

·       Countermeasures and other risk mitigation solutions

·       Advanced habitability and medical support technologies

Recently, HRP has developed a strategy to deliver critical components for an evolvable Crew Health and Performance System by 2032. This will be central to how HRP characterizes spaceflight risks and produces mitigation strategies that enable optimal crew health and performance during exploration missions. HRP will demonstrate and mature this system in ground analogs, in LEO, and on and around the moon to support a 2039 Mars mission. The Human Research Roadmap (https://humanresearchroadmap.nasa.gov) is a web-based version of an HRP Integrated Research Plan (IRP) that allows users to search HRP risks, gaps, and tasks.

The HRP is organized into several research Elements:

·       Human Health Countermeasures

·       Human Factors and Behavioral Performance

·       Exploration Medical Capability

·       Space Radiation

Each of the HRP Elements addresses a subset of the risks. A fifth Element, Research Operations, and Integration (ROI) is responsible for the implementation of the research on various space and ground analog platforms. Furthermore, HRP has invested in a set of cross-risk initiatives, including -omics research, systems biology, and precision health. HRP subtopics are aligned with Element research and solicit technologies identified in their respective strategic plans.      

Scope Title:

Autonomous Medical Operations

Scope Description:

Current medical operations on the International Space Station (ISS) rely on real-time communication with NASA's Mission Control Center (MCC), leveraging telemedicine technologies to monitor and enable the optimization of Crew Health and Performance (CHP) measures. Near real-time communications allow MCC staff (Flight Surgeons, Flight Controllers, etc.) to intervene when a given medical scenario exceeds the crew's knowledge, skills, or abilities. This MCC subject matter expertise pool extends crew capabilities, allowing them to respond to larger and more complex sets of medically relevant events as they arise. Further, well before launch, crewmembers are trained to operate essential medical assets onboard the ISS and employ detailed, MCC-led procedures to respond to various planned and unplanned events. Importantly, all crewmembers receive pre-mission training on medically centric procedures in preparation for assigned spaceflight. Despite selecting a specific astronaut who receives additional medical training and is the designated “Crew Medical Officer,” onboard medical capabilities are understandably limited by experience, logistics, and communications. Consequently, crewmembers are not fully vested with the resources to adequately address the breadth of medical situations that will require more robust medical (and non-medical) decision support and may arise in exploration-class spaceflight operations.

In contrast to ISS missions where MCC can work with a crewmember to “troubleshoot” medical anomalies in real-time, exploration-class missions (and their more burdensome requirements for increasing autonomy) will necessarily evolve and come to dominate NASA’s efforts. Mars missions, understandably, will not have real-time communications with MCC, nor will they have a rapid return capability. Round trip communications between the surface of Mars and Earth is approximately 40 minutes, and the return trip for the spacecraft and crew will be months, which significantly complicates NASA's current medical operations paradigm. Communication bandwidth considerations may also limit data transmission between the crew and MCC, even in high acuity medical situations. More specifically, a variety of existing ISS medical operations require the spaceflight team to "Contact MCC" or "Notify Surgeon" for additional instructions, a capability significantly delayed, reduced, or unavailable for early and future Mars surface operations. In the more near term, Artemis missions in lunar orbit and on the surface of the Moon will also require a commensurate increase in remote operations. Artemis crews, faced with communications latencies that will make instantaneous procedural guidance impossible, medical evacuation times of up to 2 weeks because of the near rectilinear halo orbit, and limitations on crew training for medical operations, will need to address and resolve medical problem sets independently farther and farther afield, specifically in the domains of clinical decision support, medical decision making, and diagnostic/procedural execution. Independent medical decision-making activities can be achieved through autonomous crew decision support technologies combined with integrated systems that permit assessment, treatment, stabilization, or the resolution of problems in progressively Earth-independent fashion. Therefore, it is likely that some in-flight events will exceed the crew's and MCC's ability to medically respond to preserve CHP during exploration-class spaceflight missions. Unmanageable in-flight medical circumstances would otherwise require the astronauts to resort to providing inadequate or relatively ineffective medical care or would make a rapid, unplanned return to Earth (medical evacuation) necessary to seek definitive medical care for their affected crewmember. If mission planners, engineers, scientists, and policymakers do not explore, define, develop, select, test, and integrate autonomous medical support systems into future spaceflight systems, these scenarios become more likely.

NASA requires highly functional and easy-to-use novel autonomous medical support technologies that will reduce resource footprint, tools, and training while enabling greater autonomy and self-reliance for the crew. These technologies will allow astronauts to operate in a progressively Earth-independent manner by fomenting the integration and leveraging of highly transferable technologies to buy down risk. Enhanced clinical decision support tools focused on exploration-class spaceflight operations will nominally enable MCC, at baseline, to accurately monitor and even predict potentially adverse conditions when communications are robust while enhancing and facilitating crew decision support technologies and autonomous crew decision-making capability when MCC-Crew communication is suboptimal or absent.

Optimally, integrated solutions should add minimal mass, volume, power, and crew time, or even, where possible, result in savings of these resources. Examples of technology developments can include but are not limited to: advanced just-in-time training modalities; enhanced procedure execution technologies (augmented reality); autonomous physiologic monitoring and trend prediction, integrated clinical decision making support technologies, tools, and systems; automated in situ diagnostic and image interpretation capabilities; multipurpose medical supplies, devices, and technologies (e.g., 3D printing, etc.); and surface operations medical autonomy systems (e.g., casualty assessment/extraction/in situ evacuation, etc.).

This subtopic will advance NASA’s long-term priority for maturation of Earth-independent medical operations, but will also support near-term medical capabilities for the Artemis program, specifically in high-risk, critical path solutions for Artemis Phase I, by boosting "best in class" commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) or near-term translational technologic solutions to the NASA-specific exploration-class spaceflight problem sets and requirements that will augment operational clinical decision support, medical decision making and diagnostic/procedural execution. Clear deliverables to these ends entail innovations to: (1) maximize crew autonomy and self-reliance across a wide range of medical operations, (2) demonstrate how technology could be leveraged to prevent adverse medical conditions and provide prolonged in situ medical capabilities, (3) extend the amount of time needed before (or eliminate) MCC intervention is required, (4) minimize or reduce the occurrence of medically oriented operational scenarios that could negatively impact mission success, and (5) simultaneously reduce resource costs in terms of up and down mass, power, and volume through novel application of combination technologies, material solutions, or "cross-over" or "cross-domain" multiuse systems that optimize resource allocation/dedication. The subtopic will not only address the near-term needs of Artemis, but also provide a solid platform for maturation of technologies to support Artemis sustaining missions as well as deep space Earth-independent medical operations.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 5 to 7

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 06 Human Health, Life Support, and Habitation Systems
• Level 2 06.3 Human Health and Performance

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Desired Deliverables Description (provide deliverable description for both Phase I & Phase II)

Autonomous medical systems technologies that minimize mass, volume, and material waste, that increase crew ability to make sound and timely decisions independent of terrestrial mission control across a wide range of medical operational scenarios, and optimize crew health and performance on long-duration spaceflight operations.

Desired Deliverables Description

Phase I Deliverable—Candidate autonomous medical support technology prototypes. Documentation of analytical/experimental results validating predictions of key parameters, critical function and/or characteristic proof of concept.  Examples may include component and/or breadboard validation in a relevant laboratory environment and documented test performance demonstrating agreement with analytical predictions.

Phase II Deliverable—System prototypes successfully demonstrated in analog and space environments.  Documentation of test performance demonstrating agreement with analytical predictions as well as clarifying definition of scaling requirements. Examples may include system/sub-system model or prototype demonstration in an operational environment.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Current space-relevant autonomous systems comprise software, sensors, and other various technologies applied predominantly to spacecraft operational systems, habitats, and propellant loading systems. Two NASA testbeds evaluate autonomous systems technology: The 2^nd Generation Deep Space Habitat (Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX) and the Cryogenic Test Bed Laboratory (Kennedy Space Center, FL). Additionally, the ISS is essentially remotely and autonomously controlled by a large team of experts located at the NASA MCC (Houston, TX). The commercial industry is experiencing a significant paradigm shift regarding its adoption of autonomous systems enabled by multisensory industrial scale "Internet of Things" tracking, low-emission public transport utilization, factory production line optimization, sustainable agricultural practice implementations, and self-governing power grid solutions. Machine learning, artificial intelligence, and digital transformation are currently laying the groundwork to create new employment opportunities across the public sector that will be enhanced or wholly facilitated by autonomous systems. Recent and upcoming advances secondary to the high speeds and low latency of 5G cellular and space-based internet systems (e.g., Starlink™) will supplement deployment and dissemination of the seeds of a future system of systems comprising interacting robots, sensors, and humans in the workforce. Future missions to the lunar surface and beyond to Mars will have significant delays in communication.  Despite speed-of-light communication capabilities, future astronauts will experience delays of up to 22 minutes each way—requiring the development of synergistic and cross-cutting autonomous system technologies that assist astronauts in critical, timely decision making supported by integrated sensors, systems management tools, and "human in the loop" devices and software systems that automatically alert, detect, and assist in the diagnosis of ailing crewmembers as well as to alert the crew to potentially dangerous environmental conditions onboard their spacecraft.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This subtopic seeks technology development that benefits the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element of the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) as well as the Exploration Medical Integrated Product Team (XMIPT), part of the Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS)-CHP Systems Capability Leadership Team. Autonomous medical systems technologies are needed to address the following assigned risks mappings:

"Risk of Adverse Health Outcomes and Decrements in Performance Due to Medical Conditions that occur in Mission, as well as Long Term Health Outcomes Due to Mission Exposures" (ExMC)

“Risk of Adverse Outcome Due to Inadequate Human Systems Integration Architecture” (Human Factors and Behavioral Performance [HFBP])

Supports the following identified HRP Gaps:

Medical-701: We need to increase in-flight medical capabilities and identify new capabilities that (a) maximize benefit and (b) reduce “costs” on the human system/mission/vehicle resources.

HSIA-501: We need to determine how Human Systems Integration (HSI) will be used to develop dynamic and adaptive mission procedures and processes, to mitigate individual and team performance decrements during increasingly Earth-independent, future exploration missions (including in-mission and at landing).

And assigned Task Book entries:

-Assisted Medical Procedures (Status: Completed; Responsible HRP Element: ExMC)

-Medical Training Methods for Exploration Missions (Status: Completed; Responsible HRP Element: ExMC)

-Medical Proficiency Training (Status: Completed; Responsible HRP Element: Space Human Factors and Habitability; Collaborating Organization: ExMC)

-Adaptive Stress Training for Hazardous Conditions (Status: Active; Responsible Element: HFBP)

-ExMC Support of Medical Scenarios for the Autonomous Mission Operation (AMO) Test (Status: Completed; Responsible HRP Element: ExMC)

This topic also supports the following entries on the Exploration Medical IPT roadmap:

1. Medical Imaging, Diagnostics, and Treatment Technology
2. Operational Medical Decision Support and Informatics
3. CHP-Integrated Data Architecture

References:

• Ackerman MJ, Filart R, Burgess LP, et al. (2010) Developing next-generation telehealth tools and technologies: patients, systems, and data perspectives. Telemed J E-Health Off J Am Telemed Assoc 16:93–95. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2009.0153
• Antonsen E, Hanson A, Shah R, et al. (2016) Conceptual Drivers for an Exploration Medical System. 67th International Astronautical Congress, Guadalajara, Mexico.
• Ball J, Evans C (2001) Safe Passage: Astronaut Care for Exploration Missions. National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
• Barsten K, Baumann D, Byrne V, et al. (2014) Telemedicine Operational Concepts for Human Exploration Missions to Near Earth Asteroids. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA Johnson Space Center.
• Billica RD, Simmons SC, Mathes KL, et al. (1996) Perception of the medical risk of spaceflight. Aviat Space Environ Med 67:467–473.
• Blue R, Bridge L, Chough N, et al. (2014) Identification of Medical Training Methods for Exploration missions. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
• Bridge L, Watkins S (2011) Impact of Medical Training Level on Medical Autonomy for Long-Duration Space Flight. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
• Cummings, M. L. (2017) Informing autonomous system design through the lens of skill-, rule-, and knowledge-based behaviors. Journal of cognitive engineering and decision making, 12(1), 58-61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555343417736461
• Defense Science Board. (2016) Defense science board summer study of autonomy. Washington, DC: Under Secretary of Defense.
• Endsley, M. R. (2017) From here to autonomy: Lessons learned from human-automation research. Human factors, 59(1), 5-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720816681350
• Hamilton D, Smart K, Melton S, et al. (2008) Autonomous medical care for exploration class space missions. J Trauma 64:S354-363. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e31816c005d
• Holden, K., Munson, B., Russi-Vigoya, N., Dempsey, D., & Adelstein, B. D. (2019a) Human capabilities assessment for autonomous missions (HCAAM) phase II: Development and validation of an autonomous operations task list [Unpublished Report]. NASA Johnson Space Center.
• Holden, K., Russi-Vigoya, N., Adelstein, B. D., & Munson, B. (2019b) Human capabilities assessment for autonomous missions (HCAAM) phase I: Human performance standards and guidelines final report [Unpublished Report]. NASA Johnson Space Center.
• Johnson, M., Bradshaw, J., Feltovich, P., Jonker, C., van Riemsdijk, B., & Sierhuis, M. (2011) The fundamental principles of coactive design: Interdependence must shape autonomy. In M. de Vos, N. Fornara, J. Pitt, & G. Vouros (Eds.), Coordination, organizations, institutions, and norms in agent systems VI, 6541, pp. 172-191. The Institute for Human & Machine Cognition. http://www.ihmc.us/users/mjohnson/papers/Johnson_2010_COIN_FundamentalPrincipleofCoactiveDesign.pdf
• Schaefer, K. E., Chen, J. Y. C., Szalma, J. L., & Hancock, P. A. (2016) A meta-analysis of factors influencing the development of trust in automation: Implications for understanding autonomy in future systems. Human factors, 58(3), 377-400. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720816634228.
• Vera, A. H., Holden, K. L., Dempsey, D. L., Russi-Vigoya, M. N., Wu, S. & Beutter, B. R. (2019) Contextual inquiries and interviews to support crew autonomous operations in future deep space missions: Preliminary requirements and proposed future research. [Unpublished report]. NASA 
• Wu, S.-C., & Vera, A. H. (2019) Supporting crew autonomy in deep space exploration: preliminary onboard capability requirements and proposed research questions. Technical report of the autonomous crew operations technical interchange meeting. NASA technical memorandum, NASA/TM—2019–220345. https://humansystems.arc.nasa.gov/publications/NASA_TM-2019_220345.pdf

In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) involves any hardware or operation that harnesses and utilizes ‘in-situ’ resources (natural and discarded) to create products and services for robotic and human exploration. Local resources include ‘natural’ resources found on extraterrestrial bodies such as water, solar wind-implanted volatiles (hydrogen, helium, carbon, nitrogen, etc.), vast quantities of metals in mineral rocks and soils, and atmospheric constituents, as well as human-made resources such as trash and waste from the human crew, and discarded hardware that has completed its primary purpose.  The most useful products from ISRU are propellants, fuel cell reactants, life support commodities (such as water, oxygen, and buffer gases), and feedstock for manufacturing and construction.  ISRU products and services can be used to i) reduce Earth launch mass or lander mass by not bringing everything from Earth, ii) reduce risks to the crew and/or mission by reducing logistics, increasing shielding, and providing increased self-sufficiency, and/or iii) reducing costs by either needing less launch vehicles to complete the mission or through the reuse of hardware and lander/space transportation vehicles.  Since ISRU systems must operate wherever the resource of interest exists, technologies and hardware will need to be designed to operate in harsh environments, reduced gravity, and potential non-homogeneous resource physical, mineral, and ice/volatile characteristics. This year’s solicitation will focus on critical technologies needed in the areas of Resource Acquisition and Consumable Production for the Moon and Mars. The ISRU focus area is seeking innovative technology for: 

•            Regolith Transfer

•            Non-Water Volatile Capture and Utilization

•            Mineral Beneficiation

•            Metal Production

•            Regolith Inlet/Outlet Valves

As appropriate, the specific needs and metrics of each of these specific technologies are described in the subtopic descriptions.      

Scope Title:

Oxygen From Regolith

Scope Description:

Lunar regolith is approximately 45% oxygen by mass. The majority of the oxygen is bound in silicate minerals. Previous efforts have shown that it is possible to extract oxygen from regolith using various techniques. NASA is interested in developing the supporting technologies that may enable or enhance the ability to extract oxygen from lunar regolith.

Hopper and Regolith Transfer: Hopper must be able to hold 100 kg of relevant lunar simulant and demonstrate the ability to flow into a regolith transfer device. Regolith transfer device must demonstrate the ability to lift simulant to target that is at least 3 m above the ground and at least 3 m horizontal from the hopper at a rate of 5 kg/hr. Concepts should be scalable to a full-scale transfer rate of 50 kg/hr with a vertical lift of 10 m. Concepts should also consider longevity (at least 180 days of operation per year) and identify any potential wear issues.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 4 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 07 Exploration Destination Systems
• Level 2 07.1 In-Situ Resource Utilization

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I efforts should provide a feasibility study and/or proof of concept. Phase II efforts should demonstrate the technology using lunar regolith simulant where applicable, and tested in a vacuum where applicable.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Some oxygen-from-regolith methods have been demonstrated at relevant scales and are progressing toward Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 6. Many other methods have been demonstrated at the bench scale, but current designs lack a means to move regolith in and out of the oxygen extraction zone. Many of these processes are used terrestrially, but industrial designs do not provide a means to keep gases from escaping to the vacuum of space.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

The Artemis III Science Definition Report states that “the Artemis III mission will provide important new information relevant to leveraging the Moon’s resources towards a sustainable human presence on the surface.”

References:

• Lomax, B. A., Conti, M., Khan, N., Bennett, N. S., Ganin, A. Y., & Symes, M. D. (2020). Proving the viability of an electrochemical process for the simultaneous extraction of oxygen and production of metal alloys from lunar regolith. Planetary and Space Science, 180, 104748.
• Schwandt, C., Hamilton, J. A., Fray, D. J., & Crawford, I. A. (2012). The production of oxygen and metal from lunar regolith. Planetary and Space Science, 74(1), 49-56.
• Fox, E. T. (2019). Ionic liquid and in situ resource utilization. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20190027398
• Cardiff, E. H., Pomeroy, B. R., Banks, I. S., & Benz, A. (2007, January). Vacuum pyrolysis and related ISRU techniques. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 880, No. 1, pp. 846-853). American Institute of Physics. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20070014929
• Gustafson, R. J., White, B. C., & Fidler, M. J. (2009). Oxygen production via carbothermal reduction of lunar regolith. SAE International Journal of Aerospace, 4 (2009-01-2442), 311-316.
• Gustafson, R. J., White, B. C., Fidler, M. J., & Muscatello, A. C. (2010). The 2010 field demonstration of the solar carbothermal reduction of regolith to produce oxygen. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20110005526
• Gustafson, R., White, B., & Fidler, M. (2011, January). 2010 field demonstration of the solar carbothermal regolith reduction process to produce oxygen. In 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition (p. 434).
• Muscatello, T. (2017). Oxygen extraction from minerals. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20170001458
• Paley, M. S., Karr, L. J., & Curreri, P. (2009). Oxygen production from lunar regolith using ionic liquids. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20090017882
• Sibille, L., Sadoway, D. R., Sirk, A., Tripathy, P., Melendez, O., Standish, E., ... & Poizeau, S. (2009). Production of oxygen from lunar regolith using molten oxide electrolysis. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20090018064

Scope Title:

Lunar Ice Mining

Scope Description:

We now know that water ice exists on the poles of the Moon from data obtained from missions like the Lunar Prospector, Chandrayaan-1, Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), and the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS). We know that water is present in permanently shadowed regions (PSRs), where temperatures are low enough to keep water in a solid form despite the lack of atmospheric pressure. NASA is interested in developing technologies that can be used to excavate water ice in a vacuum and deliver it to a sealable container with minimal losses due to sublimation. NASA is also interested in technologies that can capture and utilize other volatiles that may be located in PSRs.

Icy Regolith Excavation: Proposed concepts should be able to excavate frozen regolith simulant with a water ice content between 1% and 5% by mass that is 0.5 m below the surface while minimizing a temperature increase in the excavated material. Phase II efforts should demonstrate the technique with an icy lunar simulant mixture at a target production rate of 35 kg regolith/hr with 1% water ice and 7 kg regolith/hr with 5% water ice. Phase II designs should consider demonstration in a relevant environment representative of a lunar polar shadowed region.

Non-Water Volatile Capture and Utilization: Proposed concepts should define a target volatile (e.g., H₂S, NH₃, SO₂, C₂H₄, CO₂, CH₃OH, CH₄) to be captured from lunar regolith and describe how it may be utilized in a way that reduces the cost of landing consumables on the lunar surface (e.g., production of polymers).

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 4 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 07 Exploration Destination Systems
• Level 2 07.1 In-Situ Resource Utilization

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Analysis
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I efforts should provide a feasibility study and/or proof of concept. Phase II efforts should demonstrate the technology using lunar regolith simulant where applicable.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Multiple efforts are now underway to extract, purify, and capture lunar water ice. However, little work has been performed on developing technologies to capture and utilize other useful volatiles that may be co-located within a PSR.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

NASA has referenced water ice as one of the reasons we have chosen the lunar poles as the location to establish a sustained human presence. The Artemis III Science Definition Report states that “the Artemis III mission will provide important new information relevant to leveraging the Moon’s resources towards a sustainable human presence on the surface.”

References:

• Colaprete, A., Schultz, P., Heldmann, J., Wooden, D., Shirley, M., Ennico, K., ... & Goldstein, D. (2010). Detection of water in the LCROSS ejecta plume. Science, 330(6003), 463-468.
• Gladstone, G. R., Hurley, D. M., Retherford, K. D., Feldman, P. D., Pryor, W. R., Chaufray, J. Y., ... & Stern, S. A. (2010). LRO-LAMP observations of the LCROSS impact plume. Science, 330(6003), 472-476.
• Hibbitts, C. A., Grieves, G. A., Poston, M. J., Dyar, M. D., Alexandrov, A. B., Johnson, M. A., & Orlando, T. M. (2011). Thermal stability of water and hydroxyl on the surface of the Moon from temperature-programmed desorption measurements of lunar analog materials. Icarus, 213(1), 64-72.
• Poston, M. J., Grieves, G. A., Aleksandrov, A. B., Hibbitts, C. A., Darby Dyar, M., & Orlando, T. M. (2013). Water interactions with micronized lunar surrogates JSC‐1A and albite under ultra‐high vacuum with application to lunar observations. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 118(1), 105-115.
• Mortimer, J., Lécuyer, C., Fourel, F., & Carpenter, J. (2018). D/H fractionation during sublimation of water ice at low temperatures into a vacuum. Planetary and Space Science, 158, 25-33.

Scope Title:

Mineral Beneficiation and Metal and Silicon Production

Scope Description:

Beneficiation allows for improved efficiency of ISRU processes that involve heating regolith in order to acquire a specific resource. NASA is also interested in processes where the primary product is metal, specifically metals other than iron, since iron extraction from regolith is a fairly advanced technology. Each of the following specific areas of technology interest may be proposed as individual efforts or combined.

Mineral Beneficiation: Proposed concepts should define a target mineral to be concentrated from lunar regolith feedstock and describe how it will be utilized in a way that reduces the cost of landing consumables on the lunar surface.

Metal and Silicon Production: Proposed concepts should define a target metal other than iron (e.g., aluminum) to be extracted from lunar regolith. Proposed concepts must include a method to move regolith through the reaction zone. Proposed concepts should be capable of passing abrasive granular material through the reaction zone for at least 1,000 cycles and determine the leak rate after 1,000 cycles.  Near-pure silicon and metals or metal alloys are acceptable. Form and properties of metals extracted for manufacturing should be considered and provided.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 07 Exploration Destination Systems
• Level 2 07.1 In-Situ Resource Utilization

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I efforts should provide a feasibility study and/or proof of concept. Phase II efforts should demonstrate the technology using lunar regolith simulant where applicable.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

The Moon to Mars Oxygen and Steel Technology (MMOST) SBIR Phase II sequential project is currently implementing size sorting and beneficiation of minerals containing iron at a relevant scale and is also producing iron as the main product. There has been little advancement toward the production of other metals, such as aluminum. The Aqua Factorem project funded through the NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) program represents the state of the art for ice beneficiation.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

NASA has referenced water ice as one of the reasons we have chosen the lunar poles as the location to establish a sustained human presence. The Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) has identified the need for water extraction technologies. The Science Mission Directorate (SMD) is currently funding the Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) mission to investigate lunar water ice.  

References:

• Trigwell, S., Captain, J., Weis, K., & Quinn, J. (2012). Electrostatic beneficiation of lunar regolith: Applications in in situ resource utilization. Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 26(1), 30-36. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20110016173/downloads/20110016173.pdf
• Quinn, J. W., Captain, J. G., Weis, K., Santiago-Maldonado, E., & Trigwell, S. (2013). Evaluation of tribocharged electrostatic beneficiation of lunar simulant in lunar gravity. Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 26(1), 37-42. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20110016172/downloads/20110016172.pdf
• Schwandt, C., Hamilton, J. A., Fray, D. J., & Crawford, I. A. (2012). The production of oxygen and metal from lunar regolith. Planetary and Space Science, 74(1), 49-56.

NASA's Science Mission Directorate (SMD), https://science.nasa.gov/ encompasses research in the areas of Astrophysics, Earth Science, Heliophysics, and Planetary Science. The National Academies of Science has provided NASA with recently updated Decadal surveys that are useful to identify technologies that are of interest to the above science divisions. Those documents are available at https://www.nationalacademies.org/.

A major objective of SMD instrument development programs is to implement science measurement capabilities with smaller or more affordable aerospace platforms so development programs can meet multiple mission needs and therefore make the best use of limited resources. The rapid development of small, low-cost remote sensing and in-situ instruments capable of making measurements across the electromagnetic spectrum is essential to achieving this objective. For Earth Science needs, in particular, the subtopics reflect a focus on remote sensing (active and passive) and in situ instrument development for space-based, airborne, and uninhabited aerial vehicle (UAV) platforms.  A strong focus is placed on reducing the size, weight, power, and cost of remote and in situ instruments to allow for deployment on a more affordable and wider range of platforms. Astrophysics has a critical need for sensitive detector arrays with imaging, spectroscopy, and polarimetric capabilities, which can be demonstrated on the ground, airborne, balloon, or suborbital rocket instruments. Heliophysics, which focuses on measurements of the sun and its interaction with the Earth and the other planets in the solar system, needs a significant reduction in the size, mass, power, and cost for instruments to fly on smaller spacecraft. Planetary Science has a critical need for miniaturized instruments with in-situ sensors that can be deployed on surface landers, rovers, and airborne platforms. For the 2022 program year, we are continuing to update the included subtopics. Please read each subtopic of interest carefully. We continue to emphasize Ocean Worlds and solicit the development of in-situ instrument technologies and components to advance the maturity of science instruments focused on the detection of evidence of life, especially extant of life, in the Ocean Worlds. The microwave technologies continue as two subtopics, one focused on active microwave remote sensing and the second on passive systems such as radiometers and microwave spectrometers. NASA has an additional interest in advancing quantum sensing technologies to enable wholly new quantum sensing and measurement techniques focused on the development and maturation towards space application and qualification of atomic systems that leverage their quantum properties.  Furthermore, photonic integrated circuit technology is sought to enable size, weight, power, and cost reductions, as well as improved performance of science instruments, subsystems, and components which is particularly critical for enabling the use of affordable small spacecraft platforms.

A key objective of this SBIR Focus Area is to develop and demonstrate instrument component and subsystem technologies that reduce the risk, cost, size, and development time of SMD observing instruments and to enable new measurements. Proposals are sought for the development of components, subsystems, and systems that can be used in planned missions or a current technology program. Research should be conducted to demonstrate feasibility during Phase I and show a path toward a Phase II prototype demonstration. The following subtopics are concomitant with these objectives and are organized by technology.

Scope Title:

Lidar Remote-Sensing Technologies

Scope Description:

This NASA SBIR subtopic seeks to advance laser/lidar technologies to overcome critical observational gaps in Earth and planetary science.  NASA recognizes the potential of lidar technology to meet many of its science objectives by providing new capabilities or offering enhancements over current measurements of atmospheric, geophysical, and topographic parameters from ground, airborne, and space-based platforms. To meet NASA’s requirements for remote sensing from space, advances are needed in state-of-the-art lidar technology with an emphasis on compactness, efficiency, reliability, lifetime, and high performance. Innovative lidar subsystem and component technologies that directly address the measurement of atmospheric constituents and surface features of the Earth, Mars, Moon, and other planetary bodies will be considered under this subtopic. Compact, high-efficiency lidar instruments for deployment on unconventional platforms, such as unmanned aerial vehicles, SmallSats, and CubeSats are also considered and encouraged. Proposals must show relevance to the development of lidar instruments that can be used for NASA science-focused measurements or to support current technology programs. Meeting science needs leads to four primary measurement types:

• Backscatter: Measures the profile of beam backscatter and attenuation from aerosols and clouds in the atmosphere to retrieve the optical and microphysical properties of suspended particulates. 
• Laser spectral absorption: Measures the profile of laser absorption by trace gases from atmospheric (aerosol/cloud) or surface backscatter and volatiles on surfaces of airless planetary bodies at multiple laser wavelengths to the retrieve concentration of gas within the measurement volume.
• Altimetry: An accurate measure of distance to hard targets in the atmosphere and ocean.
• Doppler: Measures wavelength changes in the return beam to retrieve velocity, direction of velocity vector, and turbulence.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.1 Remote Sensing Instruments/Sensors

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I research should demonstrate technical feasibility and show a path toward a Phase II prototype unit.  A typical Phase I deliverable could be a technical report demonstrating the feasibility of the technology and a design that is to be built under a Phase II program.  In some instances where a small subsystem is under investigation, a prototype deliverable under the Phase I is acceptable.

Phase II prototypes should be capable of laboratory demonstration and preferably suitable for operation in the field from a ground-based station, an aircraft platform, or any science platform amply defended by the proposer.  Higher fidelity Phase II prototypes that are fielded in harsh environments such as aircraft often require follow-on programs such as Phase III SBIR to evaluate and optimize performance in relevant environment.

As seen in the section below on “State of the Art and Critical Gaps,” desired deliverables, technologies and components should be applicable to subsystem or system-level lidar technology solutions, as opposed to stand-alone components such as lasers or photodetectors of unspecified applicability to a measurement goal.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

• Transformative technologies and architectures are sought to vastly reduce the cost, size, and complexity of lidar instruments from a system perspective. Advances are sought for operation on a wide range of compact (SmallSat, CubeSat, or Unmanned Aerial Vehicle size) packages. Reduction in the complexity and environmental sensitivity of laser architectures is sought, while still meeting performance metrics for the measured geophysical observable. Novel thermal management systems for laser, optical, and electronic subsystems are also sought to increase efficiency, decrease physical footprint, and transition laser systems to more compact platforms. New materials concepts could be of interest for the reduction of weight for lidar-specific telescopes, optical benches, and subcomponents.  Integrated subsystems combining laser, optical, fiber, and/or photodetector components are of interest for reducing the size, weight, and power (SWaP) of lidar instruments.
• Compact, efficient, tunable, and rugged narrow-linewidth pulsed lasers operating between ultraviolet and infrared wavelengths suitable for lidar are sought. Specific wavelengths are of interest to match absorption lines or atmospheric transmission are: 290 to 320 nm (ozone absorption), 420 to 490 nm (ocean sensing), 532 nm (aerosols), 820 and 935 nm (water vapor lines), 1064 nm (aerosols), 1550 nm (Doppler wind), 1645 to 1650 nm (high pulse energy (>10 mJ) for methane line, Doppler wind, and orbital debris tracking), and 3000 to 4000 nm (hydrocarbon lines and ice measurement).  For pulsed lasers two different regimes of repetition rate and pulse energies are desired: from 1 to 10 kHz with pulse energy greater than 1 mJ and from 20 to 100 Hz with pulse energy greater than 100 mJ. For laser spectral absorption applications, such as differential absorption lidar, a single frequency (pulse transform limited) and frequency-agile source is required to tune >200 pm on a shot-by-shot basis while maintaining high spectral purity (>1,000:1). Direct generation of laser light in the 820 nm spectral band without use of nonlinear optics (e.g., parametric conversion or harmonic conversion) is sought after for space-based water vapor DIAL (differential absorption lidar) applications. Technology solutions employing cryogenic lasers are encouraged to help improve efficiency and enable use of new laser materials. Laser sources of wavelength at or around 780 nm are not sought this year. Laser sources for lidar measurements of carbon dioxide are not sought this year.
• Novel approaches and components for lidar receivers are sought, matching one or more of the wavelengths listed in the bullet above. Such receiver technology could include integrated optical/photonic circuitry, freeform telescopes and/or aft optics, frequency-agile ultra-narrow-band solar blocking filters for water vapor DIAL (<10 pm full width at half maximum, >80% transmission, and phase locked to the transmit wavelength), and phased-array or electro-optical beam scanners for large ( >10 cm) apertures. Integrated receivers for Doppler wind measurement at 1550 or 1650 nm wavelength are sought for coherent heterodyne detection at bandwidths of 1 GHz or higher, combining local oscillator laser, photodetector, and/or fiber mixing. Development of telescopes should be submitted to a different subtopic (S12.03), unless the design is specifically a lidar component, such as a telescope integrated with other optics. Receivers for direct detection wind lidar are not sought this year.
• New three-dimensional (3D) mapping and hazard detection lidar with compact and high-efficiency lasers to measure range and surface reflectance of planets or asteroids from >100 km altitude during mapping to <1 m during landing or sample collection, within SWaP to fit into a CubeSat package or smaller. New high-resolution 3D lidar with appropriate SWaP for stratospheric platforms for wild fire fuel modeling. New lidar technologies are sought that allow system reconfiguration in orbit, single photon sensitivities and single beam for long-distance measurement, and variable dynamic range and multiple beams for near-range measurements.  High-speed, low-SWaP 2D scanners are also sought for single-beam lidars that enable wide scan angles with high repeatability and accuracy.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

The proposed subtopic addresses missions, programs, and projects identified by the Science Mission Directorate (SMD), including:

• Atmospheric water vapor: Profiling of tropospheric water vapor supports studies in weather and dynamics, radiation budget, clouds, and aerosol processes.
• Aerosols: Profiling of atmospheric aerosols and how aerosols relate to clouds and precipitation. 
• Atmospheric winds: Profiling of wind fields to support studies in weather and atmospheric dynamics on Earth and atmospheric structure of planets.
• Topography: Altimetry to support studies of vegetation and the cryosphere of Earth, as well as the surface of planets and solar system bodies.
• Greenhouse gases: Column measurements of atmospheric gases, such as methane, that affect climate variability.
• Hydrocarbons: Measurements of planetary atmospheres.
• Gases related to air quality: Sensing of tropospheric ozone, nitrogen dioxide, or formaldehyde to support NASA projects in atmospheric chemistry and health effects.
• Automated landing, hazard avoidance, and docking: Technologies to aid spacecraft and lander maneuvering and safe operations.

References:

• NASA missions are aligned with the National Research Council's decadal surveys, with the latest survey on earth science published in 2018, "Thriving on Our Changing Planet: A Decadal Strategy for Earth Observation from Space": https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/decadal-survey-for-earth-science-and-applications-from-space
• For planetary science, NASA missions are aligned with the National Academies' Decadal Survey titled "Planetary Science and Astrobiology Decadal Survey 2023-2032": https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/planetary-science-and-astrobiology-decadal-survey-2023-2032
• Description of NASA lidar instruments and applications can be found at:
  • https://science.larc.nasa.gov/lidar/
  • https://science.gsfc.nasa.gov/sci/

Scope Title:

Component Advancements for Microwave Remote Sensing

Scope Description:

This subtopic supports technologies to aid NASA in its microwave sensing missions. Component advancements are desired to improve capabilities of active microwave remote sensing instruments, including improvements for classical radar/radio components—solid-state power amplifier (SSPA) technology, low-loss high-isolation switching, high-linearity low-noise amplifiers, and quantum radar/radio components—Rydberg laser stabilization systems to access target RF transitions in S-band and K-band, and monolithic integrated RF-optics sensor head for atom-based Rydberg detectors:

Classical radar/radio components:

• Specifically, we are seeking L- and/or S-band solid-state power amplifiers (SSPAs) to achieve a power-added efficiency (PAE) of >50% for 1 kW peak transmit power, through the use of efficient multidevice power-combining techniques or other efficiency improvements. There is also a need for high-efficiency ultra-high-frequency (335 to 535 MHz) monolithic microwave integrated circuit (MMIC) power amplifiers with saturated output power greater than 20 W, high efficiency of >70%, and gain flatness of 1 dB over the band. High-isolation switches are also desired within this frequency band.
• Solid-state amplifiers that meet high efficiency (>50% PAE) requirements and have small form factors would be suitable for SmallSats, support single-satellite missions (such as RainCube), and enable future swarm techniques. No such devices at these high frequencies, high powers, and efficiencies are currently available. We expect a power amplifier with TRL 2 to 4 at the completion of the project.
• Low-noise amplifiers at V-band (64-70 GHz) and W-band (94 GHz) are desired with increased linearity. While very low noise figures (2.5 dB) are available at these frequencies, input-referred P1dB is typically below -20 dBm. Amplifiers are desired with increased P1dB over the state of the art, while maintaining or improving noise figure.

Quantum radar/radio components or subsystems to support STV:

• Optimized frequency-stabilization subsystems for a compact Rydberg laser package with a coupler laser wavelength tunable to access target RF transitions at S-band and K-band with absolute frequency stability at the 100-kHz level or better (goal: 10kHz) for operation under typical vibration conditions in suborbital flight.
• Integrated sensor head in a monolithic construction that is a thermally controlled vapor cell with dual RF couplings for atom-mixer optical front-end applications. Mechanically-stable fiber-to-free-space optics/opto-mechanics.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.1 Remote Sensing Instruments/Sensors

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I: Provide research, analysis, and software to advance scope concept as a final report.

Phase II: Design and simulation with prototype.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Advances in Surface Deformation and Change are strongly desired for Earth remote sensing, land use, natural hazards, and disaster response. NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR) is a flagship-class mission, but only able to revisit locations on ~weekly basis, whereas future constellation concepts using SmallSats would decrease revisit time to less than 1 day, which is game changing for studying earthquake precursors and postrelaxation. For natural hazards and disaster response, faster revisit times are critical. MMIC devices with high saturated output power in the few to several watts range and with high PAE (>50%) are desired.

Advances in quantum radars/receivers are strongly desired. Quantum sensing (QS) has the ability to transform space-based science, particularly by substantially increasing the spatial and temporal resolution of remote sensing measurements needed to understand Earth’s climate variability. Quantum detectors configured in, or as a primary part of, novel remote sensing technologies, could assist SMD’s science needs by harnessing QS-derived technology and a variety of advanced component technologies. This could potentially enable unprecedented science measurements in established areas ranging from geodetic observation of aquifers on Earth to lunar seismometry, and in new mission concepts including experimental searches for signatures of dark energy, achieving spatio-temporal super-resolution, super-broad-band or dynamic sensing, and testing the connection between general relativity and quantum mechanics. An example of a technical challenge for the remote sensing of Earth’s surface topography and vegetation is that differences in precipitation, vegetation zones (canopy, near surface, or root), ice, and basal properties set distinctly different measurement requirements. For example, in radar remote sensing, observations of these key variables require the use of multiple bands covering the entire radio window (VHF to Ka-band: 50 MHz – 40 GHz) with different configurations sensitive to amplitude, phase or polarization of signals to enable vertical profiling with high accuracy, high spatio-temporal resolution, and with tomography capability. 
 

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Surface Deformation and Change science is a continuing Decadal Survey topic, and follow-ons to the science desired for NISAR mission are already in planning. Cloud, water, and precipitation measurements increase capability of measurements to smaller particles and enable much more compact instruments. Surface, Topography, and Vegetation (STV) is a Decadal Survey topic that will have significant impact in the following decade and that require new and nonconventional technologies. STV touches multiple science goals from solid earth, ecosystems, climate, hydrology, and weather, and is challenging to fit within the cost cap.

References:

• NISAR follow-on for Surface Deformation and Change: https://science.nasa.gov/earth-science/decadal-sdc
• NASA: "Radar in a CubeSat (RainCube)," https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/cubesat/missions/raincube.php
• National Academies Press: "Global Atmospheric Composition Mission," https://www.nap.edu/read/11952/chapter/9
• NASA: "Global Precipitation Measurement Mission," https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/GPM/overview/index.html
• NASA Surface Topography and Vegetation Incubation Study: https://science.nasa.gov/earth-science/decadal-stv

Scope Title:

Deployable and/or Steerable Aperture Technologies

Scope Description:

Low-frequency deployable antennas for Earth and planetary radar sounders: antennas capable of being hosted by SmallSat/CubeSat platforms are required for missions to icy worlds, large/small body interiors (i.e., comets, asteroids), and for Earth at center frequencies from 5 to 100 MHz, with fractional bandwidths >=10%. Dual-frequency solutions or even tri-frequency solutions are desired; for example, an approximately 5- to 6-MHz band, with an approximately 85- to 95-MHz band. Designs need to be temperature tolerant; that is, not changing performance parameters drastically over flight temperature ranges of ~100 °C.

High-frequency (V-band) deployable antennas for SmallSats and CubeSats: Small-format, deployable antennas are desired (for 65 to 70 GHz) with an aperture size of ~1 m² that when stowed, fit into form factors suitable for SmallSats—with a desire for similar on the more-challenging CubeSat format. Concepts that remove, reduce, or control creases/seams in the resulting surface, on the order of a fraction of a wavelength at 70 GHz, are highly desired. 

Technologies enabling low-mass steerable technologies, especially for L- or S-bands, including—but not limited to—antenna or radio-frequency (RF) electronics, enabling steering: cross track +/-7° and along track +/-15°. This would enable a complete antenna system with a mass density of 10 kg/m² (or less) with a minimum aperture of 12 m². Examples of different electronics solutions include completely integrated transmit/receive (TR) modules, with all control features for steering included; or  alternatively, an ultra-compact TR module controller, which can control N modules, thus allowing reduction in size and complexity of the TR modules themselves. 

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.1 Remote Sensing Instruments/Sensors

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype

Desired Deliverables Description:

For both antenna types (low and high frequency) a paper design is desired for Phase I, and a prototype for Phase II. Concepts and prototypes for targeted advances in deployment technologies are welcome and do not need to address every need for mission-ready hardware.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Low-frequency antennas, per physics, are large, and so are deployable, even for large spacecraft. For Small/CubeSats the challenges are to get enough of an antenna aperture with the proper length to achieve relatively high bandwidths. No such 10% fractional antenna exists for the Small/CubeSat form factors.

High-frequency antennas can often be hosted without deployment, but a ~1-m²-diameter antenna on a Small/CubeSat is required to be deployable. A specific challenge for high-frequency deployable antennas is to deploy the aperture with enough accuracy such that the imperfections (i.e., residual folds, support ribs, etc.) are flat enough for antenna performance.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Low-frequency-band antennas are of great interest to subsurface studies, such as those completed by MARSIS (Mars Advanced Radar for Subsurface and Ionosphere Sounding) and SHARAD (Shallow Radar) for Mars, and planned for Europa by the REASON (Radar for Europa Assessment and Sounding: Ocean to Near-surface) on the Europa Clipper. Studying the subsurfaces of other icy worlds is of great interest to planetary science, as is tomography of small bodies such as comets and asteroids. Because of the impact of the ionosphere, low-frequency sounding of Earth is very challenging from space, but there is great interest in solutions to make this a reality. Lastly, such low-frequency bands are also of interest to radio astronomy, such as that being done for OLFAR (Orbiting Low Frequency Antenna for Radio Astronomy): https://research.utwente.nl/files/5412596/OLFAR.pdf.

V-band deployable antennas are mission enabling for pressure sounding from space.

References:

For low-frequency deployables, see similar missions (on much larger platforms):

• REASON: https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/europa-clipper/
• MARSIS: https://mars.nasa.gov/express/mission/sc_science_marsis01.html

For high-frequency deployables, see similar, but lower frequency mission:

• RainCube: https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/cubesat/missions/raincube.php

Scope Title:

Low-Power W-Band Transceiver

Scope Description:

Require a low-power compact W-band  (monolithic integrated circuit or application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) preferred) transceiver with up/down converters with excellent cancellers to use the same antenna for transmit and receive. Application is in space landing radar altimetry and velocimetry. Wide-temperature-tolerant technologies are encouraged to reduce thermal control mass, either through designs insensitive to temperature changes or active compensation through feedback. Electronics must be tolerant to a high-radiation environment through design (rather than excessive shielding). In the early phases of this work, radiation tolerance must be considered in the semiconductor/materials choices, but it is not necessary to demonstrate radiation tolerance until later. For ocean worlds around Jupiter, bounding (worst-case) radiation rates are expected to be at less than 50 rad(Si)/sec—with minimal shielding—during the period of performance (landing or altimeter flyby), but overall total dose is expected to be in the hundreds of krad total ionizing dose (TID). Most cases will be less extreme in radiation.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.X Other Sensors and Instruments

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I: Paper study/design.

Phase II: Prototype.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Low-power-consumption transceivers for W-band are critical for studies of atmospheric science, pressure sounding, and atmospheric composition for both Earth and planetary science. Such transceivers currently do not exist.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

• ACE (Advanced Composition Explorer): https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/missions/ace/in-depth/
• Planetary Terminal Descent and Landing Radar Final Report: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710011019.pdf

References:

Missions for atmospheric science and altimetry applications:

• ACE: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/missions/ace/in-depth/
• Mars Science Laboratory: https://descanso.jpl.nasa.gov/monograph/series13/DeepCommo_Chapter8--141029.pdf

Scope Title:

Components or Methods to Improve the Sensitivity, Calibration, or Resolution of Microwave/Millimeter-Wave Radiometers

Scope Description:

NASA requires novel solutions to challenges of developing stable, sensitive, and high-resolution radiometers and spectrometers operating from microwave frequencies to 1 THz. Novel technologies are requested to address challenges in the current state of the art of passive microwave remote sensing. Technologies could improve the sensitivity, calibration, or resolution of remote-sensing systems or reduce the size, weight, and power (SWaP). Companies are invited to provide unique solutions to problems in this area. Possible technologies could include:

• Low-noise receivers (e.g., total power, pseudo-correlation, polarimetric) at frequencies up to 1 THz.
• Solutions to reduce system 1/f noise over time periods greater than 1 sec.
• Internal calibration systems or methods to improve calibration repeatability over time periods greater than days or weeks.
• Noise sources up to 1 THz.
• Broad-band (multi-octave) packaged low-noise amplifiers covering up to 70 GHz.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.1 Remote Sensing Instruments/Sensors

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Research
• Analysis
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Research, analysis, software, or hardware prototyping of novel components or methods to improve the performance of passive microwave remote sensing: 

• Depending on the complexity of the proposed work, Phase I deliverables may include a prototype system or a study.
• Phase II deliverables should include a prototype component or system with test data verifying functionality.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Depending on frequency, current passive microwave remote-sensing instrumentation is limited in sensitivity (as through system noise, 1/f noise, or calibration uncertainty), resolution, or in SWaP. Critical gaps depend on specific frequency and application.

Gaps include include technologies to reduce 1/f noise with submillimeter amplifier-based receivers, particularly using internal calibration sources such as noise sources or pseudo-correlation architectures. Other gaps include highly linear receiver front ends capable of being calibrated in the presence of radio-frequency interference (RFI) that may change the operating point of prefilter components.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Critical need: Creative solutions to improve the performance of future Earth-observing, planetary, and astrophysics missions. The wide range of frequencies in this scope are used for numerous science measurements such as Earth science temperature profiling, ice cloud remote sensing, and planetary molecular species detection.

References:

• Ulaby, Fawwaz; and Long, David: Microwave radar and radiometric remote sensing, Artech House, 2015.
• Wilson, W.J.; Tanner, A.B.; Pellerano, F.A.; and Horgan, K.A.: "Ultra stable microwave radiometers for future sea surface salinity missions," Jet Propulsion Laboratory, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2005.
• Racette, P. and Lang, R.H.: "Radiometer design analysis based upon measurement uncertainty," Radio science, 40(05), pp. 1-22, 2005.
• Cooke, C.M. et al.: "A 670 GHz integrated InP HEMT direct-detection receiver for the tropospheric water and cloud ice instrument," IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology, 11(5), pp. 566-576, 2021.

Scope Title:

Advanced Digital Electronic or Photonic Systems Technology for Microwave Remote Sensing

Scope Description:

Technology critical to increasing the utility of microwave remote sensing based on photonic (or other novel analog) systems, application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs), and field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) are showing great promise. This topic solicits proposals for such systems or subsystems to process microwave signals for passive remote-sensing applications for spectrometry or total power radiometry. Example applications include:

• Photonic (or other analog) components or systems to implement spectrometers, beamforming arrays, correlation arrays, oscillators, noise sources, and other active or passive microwave instruments having size, weight, and power (SWaP) or performance advantages over digital technology.
• ASIC-based solutions for digital beamforming, creating one or more beams to replace mechanically scanned antennas.
• Digitizers for spectrometry starting at 20 Gsps, 20 GHz bandwidth, 4 or more bit resolution, and simple interface to a FPGA.
• ASIC implementations of polyphase spectrometer digital signal processing with ~1 W/GHz; 10-GHz-bandwidth polarimetric spectrometer with 1,024 channels; and radiation-hardened and minimized power dissipation.

All systems or subsystems should also focus on low-power, radiation-tolerant broad-band microwave spectrometers for NASA applications. Proposals should compare predicted performance and SWaP to conventional radio-frequency and digital-processing methods.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.1 Remote Sensing Instruments/Sensors

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Demonstration of novel subsystem or system to enable increased capability in passive microwave remote-sensing instruments. Photonic systems specifically are low-TRL emerging technologies, so offerors are encouraged to identify and propose designs where photonic technology would be most beneficial. For electronic solutions, low-power spectrometers (or other applications in the Scope Description) for an ASIC or other component that can be incorporated into multiple NASA microwave remote-sensing instruments are desired:

• Depending on the complexity of the proposed work, Phase I deliverables may include a prototype system or a study.
• Phase II deliverables should include a prototype component or system with test data verifying functionality.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

• Photonic systems for microwave remote sensing are an emerging technology not used in current NASA microwave missions, but they may enable significant increases in bandwidth or reduction in SWaP. Again, state-of-the-art digital electronic solutions typically consume many watts of power.
• Digital beamforming: most digital beamforming applications have focused on either specific narrowband approaches for commercial communications or military radars. NASA needs solutions that consume low power and operate over wide bandwidths.
• Digitizers: High-speed digitizers exist but have poorly designed output interfaces. Specifically designed ASICs could reduce this power by a factor of 10, but pose challenges in design and radiation tolerance. A low-power solution could be used in a wide range of NASA remote-sensing applications.
• Spectrometers: The state of the art is currently the use of conventional microwave electronics for frequency conversion and filtering for spectrometers. Wideband spectrometers still generally require over 10 W. Current FPGA-based spectrometers require ~10 W/GHz.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Photonic systems may enable significantly increased bandwidth of Earth-viewing, astrophysics, and planetary science missions. In particular, this may allow for increased bandwidth or resolution receivers, with applications such as hyperspectral radiometry.

Broadband spectrometers are required for Earth-observing, planetary, and astrophysics missions. The rapid increase in speed and reduction in power per gigahertz in the digital realm of digital spectrometer capability is directly applicable to planetary science and enables radio-frequency interference (RFI) mitigation for Earth science.

References:

• Ulaby, Fawwaz; and Long, David: Microwave radar and radiometric remote sensing, Artech House, 2015.
• Chovan, Jozef; and Uherek, Frantisek: "Photonic Integrated Circuits for Communication Systems," Radioengineering, vol. 27, issue 2, pp. 357-363, June 2018.
• Pulipati, S. et al.: "Xilinx RF-SoC-based Digital Multi-Beam Array Processors for 28/60 GHz Wireless Testbeds," Moratuwa Engineering Research Conference (MERCon), Moratuwa, Sri Lanka, July 2020.
• Johnson, Joel T. et al.: "Real-Time Detection and Filtering of Radio Frequency Interference Onboard a Spaceborne Microwave Radiometer: The CubeRRT Mission," IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 13, pp. 1610-1624, 2020.
• Le Vine, David M.: "RFI and Remote Sensing of the Earth from Space," Journal of Astronomical Instrumentation, 8.01, 2019,  https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20170003103

Scope Title:

Advanced Deployable Antenna Apertures at Frequencies up to Millimeter-Wave

Scope Description:

Deployable antenna apertures are required for a wide range of NASA passive remote-sensing applications from SmallSat platforms. Current deployable antenna technology is extremely limited, particularly above Ka-band. NASA requires low-loss deployable antenna apertures at frequencies up to 200 GHz or beyond. Deployed aperture diameters of 0.5 m or larger are desired, but proposers are invited to propose concepts for smaller apertures at higher frequencies. Typical bandwidths required for these antennas may be 10% or more for microwave radiometers.

NASA also requires low-loss broad-band deployable or compact antenna feeds with bandwidths of two octaves or more. Frequencies of interest start at 500 MHz. Loss should be as low as possible (less than 1%) to minimize radiometric uncertainty caused by changes in the antenna physical temperature. The possibility of thermal control and/or monitoring of the antenna is desired to further improve system calibration stability. 

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.1 Remote Sensing Instruments/Sensors

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables should consist of analysis and potential prototyping of key enabling technologies.

Phase II deliverables should include a deployable antenna prototype.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Current low-loss deployable antennas are limited to Ka-band. Deployable apertures at higher frequencies are required for a wide range of applications, as aperture size is currently an instrument size, weight, and power (SWaP) driver for many applications up to 200 GHz.

Typical radiometer frequencies without deployable antenna technologies include (but are not limited to) 50-57 GHz, 88 GHz, 112-120 GHz, and 176-190 GHz. Radar remote sensing would also benefit from deployable antenna technologies at 65-70 GHz, 94 GHz, and 167-175 GHz.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Antennas at these frequencies are used for a wide range of passive and active microwave remote sensing, including measurements of water vapor and temperature. NASA requires low-loss deployable antenna apertures at frequencies up to 200 GHz or beyond. NASA also requires low-loss broad-band deployable or compact antenna feeds with bandwidths of two octaves or more; these frequencies of interest start at 500 MHz. 

References:

• Passive remote sensing such as performed by the Global Precipitation Mission (GPM) Microwave Imager (GMI): https://gpm.nasa.gov/missions/GPM/GMI
• Chahat, N. et al.: "Advanced CubeSat Antennas for Deep Space and Earth Science Missions: A review," IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 37-46, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1109/MAP.2019.2932608.

Scope Title:

Sensor and Detector Technologies for Visible, Infrared (IR), Far-IR, and Submillimeter

Scope Description:

NASA is seeking new technologies or improvements to existing technologies to meet the detector needs of future missions, as described in the most recent decadal surveys (links are external):

• Thriving on Our Changing Planet: A Decadal Strategy for Earth Observation from Space (2018 Decadal): https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24938/thriving-on-our-changing-planet-a-decadal-strategy-for-earth 
• Vision and Voyages for Planetary Science in the Decade 2013-2022: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/resources/598/vision-and-voyages-for-planetary-science-in-the-decade-2013-2022/ 
• Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s (Astro2020): “https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/26141/pathways-to-discovery-in-astronomy-and-astrophysics-for-the-2020s,

Please note:

1. Technologies for visible detectors are not being solicited this year.
2. Technologies for lidar detectors are not being solicited this year.
3. For FY 2023 emphasis will be placed on Earth-Science-related technologies (infrared (IR) and far-IR detectors and technologies).

Low-power and low-cost readout integrated electronics:

• Photodiode arrays: In-pixel digital readout integrated circuit (DROIC) for high-dynamic-range IR imaging and spectral imaging (10 to 60 Hz operation) focal plane arrays to circumvent the limitations in charge well capacity, by using in-pixel digital counters that can provide orders-of-magnitude larger effective well depth, thereby affording longer integration times.
• Microwave kinetic inductance detector/transition-edge sensor (MKID/TES) detectors: A radiation-tolerant, digital readout system is needed for the readout of low-temperature detectors such as MKIDs or other detector types that use microwave-frequency-domain multiplexing techniques. Each readout channel of the system should be capable of generating a set of at least 1,500 carrier tones in a bandwidth of at least 1 GHz with 14-bit precision and 1-kHz frequency placement resolution. The returning-frequency multiplexed signals from the detector array will be digitized with at least 12-bit resolution. A channelizer will then perform a down-conversion at each carrier frequency with a configurable decimation factor and maximum individual subchannel bandwidth of at least 50 Hz. The power consumption of a system consisting of multiple readout channels should be at most 20 mW per subchannel or 30 W per 1-GHz readout channel. That requirement would most likely indicate the use of a radio-frequency (RF) system on a chip (SoC) or application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) with combined digitizer and channelizer functionality.
• Bolometric arrays: Low-power, low-noise, cryogenic multiplexed readout for large-format 2D bolometer arrays with 1,000 or more pixels, operating at 65 to 350 mK. We require a superconducting readout capable of reading 2 TES per pixel within a 1 mm² spacing. The wafer-scale readout of interest will be capable of being indium-bump bonded directly to 2D arrays of membrane bolometers. We require row and column readout with very low crosstalk, low read noise, and low detector noise-equivalent power degradation.   

Far-IR/submillimeter-wave detectors:

• Novel materials and devices: New or improved technologies leading to measurement of trace atmospheric species (e.g., CO, CH₄, N₂O) or broadband energy balance in the IR and far-IR from geostationary and low-Earth orbital platforms. Of particular interest are new direct detector or heterodyne detector technologies made using high-temperature superconducting films (e.g., thin-film YBCO or MgB₂, or multilayered engineered superconductors with tunable critical temperature) or engineered semiconductor materials, especially 2D electron gas (2DEG) and quantum wells (QW).
• Array receivers: Development of a robust wafer-level packaging/integration technology that will allow high-frequency-capable interconnects and allow two dissimilar substrates (i.e., silicon and GaAs) to be aligned and mechanically "welded" together. Specially develop ball grid and/or through-silicon via (TSV) technology that can support submillimeter-wave (frequency above 300 GHz) arrays. Compact and efficient systems for array receiver calibration and control are also needed.
• Receiver components: Development of advanced terahertz receiver components is desired. Such components include:
  • Novel concepts for room-temperature-operated receivers for Earth science with competitive noise performance (goal of 5 times the quantum limit in the 500 to 1,200 GHz range).
  • Local oscillators capable of spectral coverage 2 to 5 THz, output power up to >2 mW, frequency agility with >1 GHz near chosen terahertz frequency, and continuous phase-locking ability over the terahertz-tunable range with <100-kHz line width. Both solid-state (low-parasitic Schottky diodes) as well as quantum cascade lasers (for f > 2 THz).
  • Components and devices such as mixers, isolators, and orthomode transducers, working in the terahertz range, that enable future heterodyne array receivers.
  • Novel receiver architectures such as single-sideband heterodyne terahertz receivers and high-precision measurement accuracy for multiple lines.
  • ASIC-based SoC solutions are needed for heterodyne receiver backends. ASICs capable of binning >6 GHz intermediate frequency bandwidth into 0.1- to 0.5-MHz channels with low power dissipation (<0.5 W) would be needed for array receivers.
  • Novel quasi-optical devices for terahertz beam multiplexing for a large (16+) number of pixels with >20% bandwidth.
  • Low-power, low-noise intermediate-frequency (IF) amplifiers that can be used for array receivers, operated at cryogenic as well as room temperature.
  • Novel concepts for terahertz preamplifiers from 300 GHz to 5 THz.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.1 Remote Sensing Instruments/Sensors

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Analysis
• Prototype

Desired Deliverables Description:

For Phase I activities the deliverables are nominally feasibility studies, detailed design, or determination of the trade space and detailed optimization of the design, as described in a final report. In some circumstances simple prototype models for the hardware can be demonstrated and tested. 

For Phase II studies a working prototype that can be tested at one of the NASA centers is highly desirable. 

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Efficient multipixel readout electronics are needed both for room-temperature operation as well as cryogenic temperatures. We can produce millions-of-pixel detector arrays at IR wavelengths up to about 14 µm, only because there are ROICs available on the market. Without these, high-density large-format IR arrays such as quantum well IR photodetectors, HgCdTe, and strained-layer superlattices would not exist. The Moore's Law corollary for pixel count describes the number of pixels for the digital camera industry as growing in an exponential manner over the past several decades, and the trend is continuing. The future of long-wave detectors is moving toward tens of thousands of pixels and beyond. Readout circuits capable of addressing their needs do not exist, and without them the astronomical community will not be able to keep up with the needs of the future. These technology needs must be addressed now, or we are at risk of being unable to meet the science requirements of the future:

• Commercially available ROICs typically have well depths of less than 10 million electrons.
• 6- to 9-bit, ROACH-2 board solutions with 2,000 bands, <10 kHz bandwidth in each are state of the art (SOA).
• IR detector systems are needed for Earth imaging based on the recently released Earth Decadal Survey.
• Direct detectors with D ~ 10⁹ cm-rtHz/W achieved in this range. Technologies with new materials that take advantage of cooling to the 30 to 100 K range are capable of D ~ 10¹² cm-rtHz/W. Broadband (>15%) heterodyne detectors that can provide sensitivities of 5× to 10× the quantum limit in the submillimeter-wave range while operating at 30 to 77 K are an improvement in the SOA because of the higher operating temperature.
• Detector array detection efficiency <20% at 532 nm (including fill factor and probability of detection) for low-after-pulsing, low-dead-time designs is SOA.
• Far-IR bolometric heterodyne detectors are limited to 3-dB gain bandwidth of around 3 GHz. A novel superconducting material such as MgB₂ can provide significant enhancement of up to 9 GHz IF bandwidth.
• Cryogenic low-noise amplifiers (LNAs) in the 4 to 8 GHz bandwidth with thermal stability are needed for focal plane arrays, Origins Space Telescope (OST) instruments, Origins Survey Spectrometers (OSSs), MKIDs, far-IR imagers and polarimeters (FIPs), Heterodyne Instrument on OST (HERO), and the Lynx Telescope. Direct-current (DC) power dissipation should be only a few milliwatts.
• Another frequency range of interest for LNAs is 0.5 to 8.5 GHz. This is useful for HERO. Other NASA systems in the Space Geodesy Project (SGP) would be interested in bandwidths up to 2 to 14 GHz.
• 15 to 20 dB gain and <5 K noise over the 4 to 8 GHz bandwidth has been demonstrated.
• Currently, all space-borne heterodyne receivers are single pixel. Novel architectures are needed for ~100-pixel arrays at 1.9 THz.
• The current SOA readout circuit is capable of reading 1 TES per pixel in a 1-mm² area. 2D arrays developed by NIST have been a boon for current NASA programs. However, NIST has declined to continue to produce 2D circuits or to develop one capable of a 2-TES-per-pixel readout. This work is extremely important to NASA’s filled, kilopixel bolometer array program.
• 2D cryogenic readout circuits are analogous to semiconductor ROICs operating at much higher temperatures. We can produce detector arrays of millions of pixels at IR wavelengths up to about 14 µm, only because there are ROICs available on the market. Without these, high-density large-format IR arrays such as quantum well infrared photodiode, HgCdTe, and strained-layer superlattices would not exist.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

• Future short-, mid-, and long-wave IR Earth science and planetary science missions all require detectors that are sensitive and broadband with low power requirements.
• Future astrophysics instruments require cryogenic detectors that are supersensitive and broadband and provide imaging capability (multipixel).
• Aerosol spaceborne lidar as identified by the 2017 decadal survey to reduce uncertainty about climate forcing in aerosol-cloud interactions and ocean ecosystem carbon dioxide uptake. Additional applications in planetary surface mapping, vegetation, and trace-gas lidar.
• Earth radiation budget measurement per 2007 decadal survey Clouds and Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES) Tier-1 designation to maintain the continuous radiation budget measurement for climate modeling and better understand radiative forcings.
• Astrophysical missions such as OST will need IR and far-IR detector and related technologies.
• LANDSAT Thermal InfraRed Sensor (TIRS), Climate Absolute Radiance and Refractivity Observatory (CLARREO), BOReal Ecosystem Atmosphere Study (BOREAS), Methane Trace Gas Sounder, or other IR Earth-observing missions.
• Current science missions utilizing 2D large-format cryogenic readout circuits:
  • HAWC+ (High Resolution Airborne Wideband Camera Upgrade), for SOFIA (Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy) future missions
  • PIPER (Primordial Inflation Polarization Experiment), balloon-borne.
  • PICO (Probe of Inflation and Cosmic Origins), a probe-class cosmic microwave background mission concept.

References:

• Meixner, M. et al.: “Overview of the Origins Space telescope: science drivers to observatory requirements,” Proc. SPIE 10698, 2018,  https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/firs/docs/
• Leisawitz, D. et al.: “The Origins Space telescope: mission concept overview,” Proc. SPIE 10698, 2018, https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/firs/docs/
• Allan, L. N.; East, N. J.; Mooney, J.T.; Sandin, C.: “Materials for large far-IR telescope mirrors,” Proc. SPIE 10698, Paper 10698-58, 2018.
• DiPirro, M. et al.: “The Origins Space telescope cryogenic-thermal architecture,” Proc. SPIE 10698, Paper 10698-44, 2018, https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/firs/docs/
• Sakon, I., et al.: “The mid-infrared imager/spectrometer/coronagraph instrument (MISC) for the Origins Space Telescope,” Proc. SPIE 10698, Paper 10698-42, 2018, https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/firs/docs/
• Staguhn, J. G., et al.: “Origins Space Telescope: the far infrared imager and polarimeter FIP,” Proc. SPIE 10698, Paper 10698-45, 2018,  https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/firs/docs/
• Risacher, C. et al.: “The upGREAT 1.9 THz multi-pixel high resolution spectrometer for the SOFIA Observatory,” A&A 595, A34, 2016.
• Goldsmith, P.: "Sub-Millimeter Heterodyne Focal-Plane Arrays for High-Resolution Astronomical Spectroscopy," The Radio Science Bulletin, 362, 53, 2017.
• "Performance of Backshort-Under-Grid Kilopixel TES arrays for HAWC+," DOI 10.1007/s10909-016-1509-9.
• "Characterization of Kilopixel TES detector arrays for PIPER," http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AAS...23115219D
• "A Time Domain SQUID Multiplexing System for Large Format TES Arrays," https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=31361
• Mellberg, A. et al.: “InP HEMT-based, Cryogenic, Wideband LNAs for 4-8 GHz operating at very low DC-Power,” https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1014467
• Montazeri, S. et al.: “A Sub-milliwatt 4-8 GHz SiGe Cryogenic Low Noise Amplifier," https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8058937
• Montazeri, S. et al.: “Ultra-Low-Power Cryogenic SiGe Low-Noise Amplifiers: Theory and Demonstration,” IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, vol. 64, no. 1, 2016.
• Schleeh, J. et al.: “Ultralow-Power Cryogenic InP HEMT with Minimum Noise Temperature of 1 K at 6 GHz,” IEEE Electron Device Letters, Vol. 33, No. 5, 2012.
• ACCP study: "Science and Applications Traceability Matrix," at https://science.nasa.gov/science-red/s3fs-public/atoms/files/ACCP_SATM_Rel_E_TAGGED.pdf
• Teixeira, J. et al.: "Toward a Global Planetary Boundary Layer Observing System: The NASA PBL Incubation Study Team Report." 
• Surface Topography and Vegetation Structure Study Team report: https://science.nasa.gov/science-red/s3fs-public/atoms/files/STV_Study_Report_20210622lowres.pdf

Scope Title:

Sensors and Sensor Systems Targeting Oceans

Scope Description:

NASA seeks measurement capabilities that support current satellite and model validation, advancement of surface-based remote sensing networks, and targeted Airborne Science Program and ship-based field campaign activities as discussed in the Research Opportunities in Space and Earth Sciences (ROSES) solicitation. Data from such sensors also inform process studies to improve our scientific understanding of the Earth System. In situ sensor systems (airborne, land, and water-based) can comprise stand-alone instrument and data packages; instrument systems configured for integration on ship-based (or alternate surface-based platform) and in-water deployments, NASA’s Airborne Science aircraft fleet or commercial providers, unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), or balloons; ground networks; or end-to-end solutions providing needed data products from mated sensor and airborne/surface/subsurface platforms. An important goal is to create sustainable measurement capabilities to support NASA’s Earth science objectives, with infusion of new technologies and systems into current/future NASA research programs. Instrument prototypes as a deliverable in Phase II proposals and/or field demonstrations are highly encouraged. 

Complete instrument systems are generally desired, including features such as remote/unattended operation and data acquisition and minimum size, weight, and power consumption. All proposals must summarize the current state of the art and demonstrate how the proposed sensor or sensor system represents a significant improvement over the state.  

Specific desired sensors or mated platform/sensors include: 

• A hyperspectral in-water radiometry system (HIWRS), ideally with linear polarization measurement capability, completely covering the UV-Vis-NIR (ultraviolet-visible-near-infrared) wavelength range between 320 and 890 nm with a minimum resolution of 5 nm and 1-nm sampling desired (minimum spectral sampling of 2.5 nm).  The instrument system shall measure upwelling and downwelling radiances and have a separate solar irradiance reference sensor with equivalent spectral and polarization capabilities.  Spectral radiometric uncertainty should be lower than 4% in the 400 to 580 nm spectral region and approximately 5% for the 580 to 720 nm region, combining uncertainty contributions from instrument absolute calibration, characterization (including at least spectral calibration, nonlinearity, stray light perturbation and polarization sensitivity, temperature dependence, and, if applicable, geometrical and in-water response), environmental perturbation, and data processing (with National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) traceability).  The HIWRS must be ocean submersible to 200 m and ideally will be deployable as an ocean vertical profiling system that provides high vertical resolution near the sea surface on the order of 5 cm (preferred for top 1 m) to 20 cm.  Integrated tilt, temperature, and water-depth sensors are essential for the in-water profiling system. 
• In situ measurements of ocean particulate backscatter, depolarization, beam attenuation, and diffuse attenuation coefficients relevant for combined ocean-atmosphere active remote sensing (355, 473, 486, 532, 1064 nm wavelengths and 170° to 180° scattering angle with ≤1° angular resolution).  Instrument must be ocean submersible to 300 m or deeper. 
• In situ polarized hyperspectral UV-Vis volume scattering function (VSF) instrument (ocean submersible to 300 m) covering the angular range close to 0° and, more importantly, as far as 180° (with  ≤2° angular resolution). Instrument should have ability to measure (at least) horizontal and vertical aspects of linear polarization. Degree of resolution in angles and wavelength can be decreased for instrument portability and robustness (such as for autonomous unmanned vehicle (AUV) deployments). 
• A well-calibrated airborne hyperspectral imager with spectral sensitivity in the UV to Vis (340 to 900 nm; preferably 320 to 1,080 nm) with spectral sampling of at least 2.5 nm, spectral resolution of at least 5 nm, and a wide dynamic range and sensitivity spanning from ocean radiances to cloud radiances for use in comparison to the Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, ocean Ecosystem (PACE) Ocean Color Instrument and other sensors. 
• Innovative, high-value sensors directly targeting a stated NASA need (including aerosols, clouds, and ocean) may also be considered. Proposals responding to this specific bullet are strongly encouraged to identify at least one relevant NASA subject matter expert. 

The S1.08 subtopic is and remains highly relevant to NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) and Earth Science research programs, in particular the Earth Science Atmospheric Composition, Climate Variability & Change, and Carbon Cycle and Ecosystems focus areas. In situ and ground-based sensors inform NASA ship and airborne science campaigns led by these programs and provide important validation of the current and next-generation of satellite-based sensors (e.g., PACE, TEMPO (Tropospheric Emissions: Monitoring of Pollution), OCO-2 (Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2), GLIMR (Geosynchronous Littoral Imaging and Monitoring Radiometer), SBG (Surface Biology and Geology), and ACCP (Aerosols, Cloud, Convection and Precipitation)—see links below). The solicited measurements will be highly relevant future NASA campaigns with objectives and observing strategies similar to past campaigns; for example, NAAMES (North Atlantic Aerosols and Marine Ecosystems Study), EXPORTS (EXport Processes in the Ocean from RemoTe Sensing), CAMP2EX (Cloud, Aerosol and Monsoon Processes-Philippines Experiment), FIREX-AQ (Fire Influence on Regional to Global Environments Experiment-Air Quality), KORUS-AQ (Korea-United States Air Quality), and DISCOVER-AQ (Deriving Information on Surface conditions from Column and Vertically Resolved Observations Relevant to Air Quality).  

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 4 to 7

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.3 In-Situ Instruments/Sensor

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

The ideal Phase I proposal would demonstrate a clear idea of the problem to be solved, potential solutions to this problem, and an appreciation for potential risks or stumbling blocks that might jeopardize the success of the Phase I and II projects. The ideal Phase I effort would then address and hopefully overcome any major challenges to (1) demonstrate feasibility of the proposed solution and (2) clear the way for the Phase II effort. These accomplishments would be detailed in the Phase I final report and serve as the foundation for a Phase II proposal. 

The ideal Phase II effort would build, characterize, and deliver a prototype instrument to NASA including necessary hardware and operating software. The prototype would be fully functional, but the packaging may be more utilitarian (i.e., less polished) than a commercial model. 

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

The subtopic is and remains highly relevant to the NASA SMD and Earth Science research programs, in particular the Earth Science Atmospheric Composition, Climate Variability & Change, and Carbon Cycle and Ecosystems focus areas. Suborbital in situ and remote sensors inform NASA ground, ship, and airborne science campaigns led by these programs and provide important validation of the current and next generation of satellite-based sensors (e.g., PACE, OCO-2, TEMPO, GLIMR, SBG, A-CCP; see links in References). The solicited measurements will be highly relevant to current and future NASA campaigns with objectives and observing strategies similar to past campaigns (e.g., ACTIVATE (Aerosol Cloud meTeorology Interactions oVer the western ATlantic Experiment), NAAMES, EXPORTS, CAMP2EX, FIREX-AQ, KORUS-AQ, and DISCOVER-AQ; see links in References). 

Obtaining quality measurements during ship-board field and airborne flight campaigns for support of active satellite missions and for obtaining observations to support next-generation missions remains highly important for NASA Ocean Science. Quality field instruments for particle backscatter at high scattering angles (>170°), multiple scattering angles, and high fidelity remains elusive, with most of these only measuring specific components of the scattering matrix. New in situ optical instruments are needed with higher spectral resolution to support the upcoming PACE mission field support activities. Finally, there are few instruments that can provide comprehensive measurements of the polarization characteristics of the ocean, with most capturing selective aspects. For subsurface radiance measurements, a critical gap is that no commercially available profiling package has become available that can obtain hyperspectral measurements of the ocean upwelling and downwelling within the upper 1 m of the ocean with high vertical resolution necessary for in-water profiling.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

The subtopic is and remains highly relevant to NASA SMD and Earth Science research programs, in particular the Earth Science Atmospheric Composition, Weather and Atmospheric Dynamics, Climate Variability & Change, Carbon Cycle and Ecosystems, and Earth Surface and Interior focus areas. In situ and ground-based sensors inform NASA ship and airborne science campaigns led by these programs and provide important validation of the current and next generation of satellite-based sensors (e.g., PACE, OCO-2, TEMPO, GLIMR, SBG, A-CCP; see links in References). The solicited measurements will be highly relevant future NASA campaigns with objectives and observing strategies similar to past campaigns (e.g., NAAMES, EXPORTS, CAMP2EX, FIREX-AQ, KORUS-AQ, DISCOVER-AQ; see links in References). The need horizon of the subtopic sensors and sensor systems is both near-term (<5 yr) and midterm (5 to 10 yr). 

Relevant Programs and Program Officers include: 

• NASA Earth Science Division (ESD) Ocean Biology and Biogeochemistry Program

• NASA ESD Tropospheric Composition Program 

• NASA ESD Radiation Sciences Program 

• NASA ESD Weather and Atmospheric Dynamics Program 

• NASA ESD Earth Surface and Interior Program

• NASA ESD Airborne Science Program 

References:

Relevant current and past satellite missions and field campaigns include:

• PACE Satellite Mission, scheduled to launch in 2022, that focuses on observations of ocean biology, aerosols, and clouds:  https://pace.gsfc.nasa.gov/
• EXPORTS field campaign, targeting the export and fate of upper ocean net primary production using satellite observations and surface-based measurements: https://oceanexports.org
• GLIMR Satellite Mission, focusing on geostationary observations of coastal waters and ocean productivity, land-to-sea carbon fluxes, and harmful algal blooms along the U.S. coast and other regions of interest off South America and the Caribbean Sea:  https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-targets-coastal-ecosystems-with-new-space-sensor
• Decadal Survey Recommended ACCP Mission (now named Atmos), focusing on aerosols, clouds, convection, and precipitation: https://science.nasa.gov/earth-science/decadal-surveys
• TEMPO Satellite Mission, focusing on geostationary observations of air quality over North America: http://tempo.si.edu/overview.html
• CAMP2Ex airborne field campaign, focusing on tropical meteorology and aerosol science: https://espo.nasa.gov/camp2ex
• FIREX-AQ airborne and ground-based field campaign targeting wildfire and agricultural burning emissions in the United States: https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/projects/firex-aq/
• KORUS-AQ airborne and ground-based field campaign focusing on pollution and air quality in the vicinity of the Korean Peninsula: https://espo.nasa.gov/korus-aq/content/KORUS-AQ
• DISCOVER-AQ airborne and ground-based campaign targeting pollution and air quality in four areas of the United States: https://discover-aq.larc.nasa.gov/
• NAAMES Earth Venture Suborbital field campaign targeting the North Atlantic phytoplankton bloom cycle and impacts on atmospheric aerosols, trace gases, and clouds: https://science.larc.nasa.gov/NAAMES/
• ACTIVATE Earth Venture Suborbital field campaign targeting atmospheric aerosols, trace gases, and clouds over the Western Atlantic: https://activate.larc.nasa.gov/
• AToM airborne field campaign mapping the global distribution of aerosols and trace gases from pole to pole: https://espo.nasa.gov/atom/content/ATom
• OCO-2 Satellite Mission that targets spaceborne observations of carbon dioxide and the Earth’s carbon cycle: https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/oco2/index.html.
• Decadal Survey Planetary Boundary Layer (PBL) Incubation Study: https://science.nasa.gov/earth-science/decadal-pbl
• Decadal Survey Surface Topography and Vegetation (STV) Incubation Study: https://science.nasa.gov/earth-science/decadal-stv

Scope Title:

Detectors

Scope Description:

This subtopic covers detector requirements for a broad range of wavelengths from ultraviolet (UV) through to gamma ray for applications primarily in astrophysics, heliophysics, and planetary science; and also to Earth science. Requirements across the board are for greater numbers of readout pixels, lower power, faster readout rates, greater quantum efficiency, single photon counting, and enhanced energy resolution. The proposed efforts must be directly linked to a requirement for a NASA mission. These include Explorers, Discovery, Cosmic Origins, Physics of the Cosmos, Solar-Terrestrial Probes, Vision Missions, and Earth Science Decadal Survey missions. Additive manufacturing of interconnect technology development requested here is a science enabling technology for the next strategic-class astrophysics mission infrared/optical/ultraviolet (IROUV) that has been recommended by the 2020 Astrophysics Decadal Survey. Proposals should reference current NASA missions and mission concepts where relevant. Specific technology areas are:

• Large-format, high-resolution focal plane arrays: Desired features include 8k x 8k, three-side buttable; pixel size: <~7 µm; read noise: ~1 e^- rms; dark signal ~1x10^-4 e^-/pixel/s; operating temperature >150 K; radiation hard.
• Large-format, low-dark-rate, high-efficiency, photon-counting, solar-blind, far- and near-UV detectors: Desired features include at least 100x100 mm² formats with <25 µm resolution elements, flat-field uniformity <10% across face, low-power-consumption-anode readout electronics, immunity to gain sag, high photon-counting rates (> 10⁷ counts/s), low dark (<<1 count/cm²/s); quantum efficiency (QE) >30% between 100 and 200 nm; solar blind; radiation hard.
• High-dynamic-range, high-efficiency detectors in UV/O/NIR, narrowband (UV only), and broadband (UV to NIR (near IR)).
• Solid-state detectors with polarization sensitivity relevant to astrophysics as well as planetary and Earth science applications; for example, in spectropolarimetry as well as air quality and aerosol monitoring and for O₃, NO₂, SO₂, H₂S, and ash detection. Refer to National Research Council's Earth Science Decadal Survey (2018).
• Significant improvement in wide-band-gap semiconductor materials (such as AlGaN, ZnMgO, and SiC), individual detectors, and detector arrays for astrophysics missions and planetary science composition measurements. For example, SiC avalanche photodiodes (APDs) must show:
  • Extreme-UV (EUV) photon counting, a linear mode gain >10×10⁶ at a breakdown reverse voltage between 80 and 100 V.
  • Detection capability of better than 6 photons/pixel/s down to 135 nm wavelength.
• Solar-blind (visible-blind) UV, far-UV (80 to 200 nm), and EUV sensor technology with high pixel resolution, large format, high sensitivity and high dynamic range, and low voltage and power requirements—with or without photon counting.
• Solar x-ray detectors with small independent pixels (10,000 count/s/pixel) over an energy range from <5 to 300 keV.
• Supporting technologies that would help enable the x-ray Surveyor mission that requires the development of x-ray microcalorimeter arrays with much larger field of view, ~10⁵ to 10⁶ pixels, of pitch ~25 to 100 μm, and ways to read out the signals. For example, modular superconducting magnetic shielding is sought that can be extended to enclose a full-scale focal plane array. All joints between segments of the shielding enclosure must also be superconducting. Improved long-wavelength blocking filters are needed for large-area, x-ray microcalorimeters.
• Novel concepts for improving superconducting magnetic shielding such as superconducting inks or additive manufacturing are of interest for detector focal planes with challenging shielding geometries and other requirements.
• Filters with supporting grids are sought that, in addition to increasing filter strength, also enhance electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding (1 to 10 GHz) and thermal uniformity for decontamination heating. x-ray transmission of greater than 80% at 600 eV per filter is sought, with IR transmission of less than 0.01% and UV transmission of less than 5% per filter. A means of producing filter diameters as large as 10 cm should be considered.
• Detectors with fast readout that can support high count rates and large incident flux from the EUV and x-rays for heliophysics applications, especially solar-flare measurements.
• Supporting technologies for packaging of UV detector focal planes with suitable device interfaces (such as microshutter arrays) including additive manufacturing of electronics (AME) of conductive materials to create high-density, well-isolated interconnects in fine feature sizes (down to 50 µm wide on planar substrates that include up to a 1.5-mm sidewall). In NASA 2022 Astrophysics Strategic Technology Gaps, see gap "High Throughput, Large-Format Object Selection Technologies for Multi-Object and Integral Field Spectroscopy."

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.1 Remote Sensing Instruments/Sensors

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables: results of tests and analysis of designs, as described in a final report. 

Phase II deliverables: prototype hardware or hardware for further testing and evaluation is desired.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

This subtopic aims to develop and advance detector technologies focused on UV, x-ray, and gamma-ray spectral ranges. The science needs in this range span a number of fields, focusing on astrophysics, planetary science, and UV heliophysics. A number of solid-state detector technologies promise to surpass the traditional image-tube-based detectors. Silicon-based detectors leverage enormous investments and promise high-performance detectors, and more complex materials such as gallium nitride and silicon carbide offer intrinsic solar-blind response. This subtopic supports efforts to advance technologies that significantly improve the efficiency, dynamic range, noise, radiation tolerance, spectral selectivity, reliability, and manufacturability in detectors.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) applications:

• Astrophysics: https://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/
• The Explorers Program: https://explorers.gsfc.nasa.gov/
• Planetary Missions Program Office: https://www.nasa.gov/planetarymissions/index.html
• Heliophysics: https://science.nasa.gov/heliophysics

Missions under study (Large Ultraviolet Optical Infrared Surveyor (LUVOIR), Habitable Exoplanet Observatory (HabEx), Lynx, and New Frontiers-Io Observer):

• LUVOIR—Large UV/Optical/IR Surveyor: https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/luvoir/
• Habitable Exoplanet Observatory (HabEx): https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/habex/
• The LYNX Mission Concept: https://wwwastro.msfc.nasa.gov/lynx/
• Lunar Science/Missions: UV spectroscopy to understand Lunar water cycle and minerology (water detection using edge at 165 nm, H₂ at 121.6 nm, and OH^- at 308 nm), LRO-LAMP (Lyman Alpha Mapping Project).
• Gravitational Wave Science: Swift detection of x-ray and UV counterparts of gravitation wave sources.
• Planetary Science: Europa Clipper (water/plume detection), Enceladus, Venus (sulfur lines in the 140 to 300 nm range).
• Earth Science: ozone mapping, pollution studies.

References:

• NASA Cosmic Origins (COR): https://cor.gsfc.nasa.gov/
• NASA Planetary Missions Program Office: https://www.nasa.gov/planetarymissions/index.html
• NASA Explorers and Heliophysics Projects Division (EHPD): https://ehpd.gsfc.nasa.gov/
• NASA Astrophysics Technology Gap list: https://apd440.gsfc.nasa.gov/tech_gaps.html; 
  https://apd440.gsfc.nasa.gov/tech_gap-descriptions.html#tieronetop
• NASA Heliophysics Strategic Mission Programs: https://science.nasa.gov/heliophysics/2024_decadal_survey/heliophysics-strategic-mission-programs
• Planetary Science and Astrobiology Decadal Survey 2023-2032: "Origins, Worlds, and Life," https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/planetary-science-and-astrobiology-decadal-survey-2023-2032  
• "Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s," https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/26141/pathways-to-discovery-in-astronomy-and-astrophysics-for-the-2020s
• Earth Science Decadal Survey: "Thriving on Our Changing Planet: A Decadal Strategy for Earth Observation from Space (2018)," https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/24938/thriving-on-our-changing-planet-a-decadal-strategy-for-earth

Scope Title:

In Situ Instruments and Instrument Components for Planetary Science

Scope Description:

This subtopic solicits development of instruments and instrument components suitable for deployment on in situ planetary missions. To narrow the critical gaps between the current state of art and the technology needed for the ever-increasing science and exploration requirements, in situ technologies are being sought to increase instrument resolution and sensitivity and/or reduce mass, power, and volume as well as increase data rates without loss of scientific capability. Of particular interest are technologies to support future missions described in the National Research Council Planetary Decadal Survey report "Origin, Worlds, and Life: A Decadal Strategy for Planetary Science and Astrobiology 2023-2032" (hereafter referred to as the Planetary Decadal Survey). Proposers should show an understanding of relevant space science needs, present a feasible plan to fully develop a technology, and infuse it into a NASA program. Proposers should provide a comparison metric for assessing proposed improvements compared to existing flight instrument capabilities.

Novel instrument concepts are encouraged, particularly if they enable a new class of scientific discovery. Technology developments relevant to multiple environments and platforms are also desired.

The proposed technologies must be capable of withstanding operation in space and planetary environments, including the expected pressures, radiation levels, launch and impact stresses, and range of survival and operational temperatures.

Specifically, this year this subtopic solicits instruments and instrument components that provide significant advances in the following areas: 

• Technologies relevant to detection and/or identification of organic molecules (including biomolecules), salts, and/or minerals at Mars, ocean worlds, and other bodies. Examples include high-resolution gas or liquid chromatographs, miniaturized mass spectrometers and their drive electronics (e.g., radio-frequency (RF) tanks) and front-end/back-end advancements (e.g., electrospray ionization sources, lasers, ion mobility sources/separators, RF guides/funnels, pumps), isotope analyzers, dust detectors, organic analysis instruments with chiral discrimination, x-ray spectrometers, laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy, electrochemical methods, nanopore technologies, etc.) These developments should be geared towards analyzing and handling very small sample sizes (microgram to milligram) and/or low column densities/abundances.
• Imagers and spectrometers and the associated components that provide high performance in low-light environments (visible and near-infrared (NIR) imaging spectrometers, thermal imagers, etc.)
• Instruments capable of monitoring the bulk chemical composition and physical characteristics of gas samples and ice particles such as the plume (density, velocity, variation with time, etc.).
• Seismometers, mass analyzers, heat flow probes, and trace gas detectors with improved robustness and high-g-force survivability that are applicable to impactor deployment to planetary surfaces.
• Sensors, instruments, components, and technologies for operation in extreme-environment conditions (e.g., temperature, pressure, radiation) such as Venus and Europa.
• Technologies for quantifying lunar water and measuring the D/H ratio in lunar water and other solar system destinations.
• Flight qualifiable low-SWaP (size, weight, and power) laser systems applicable to quantum accelerometers using cold-Cs-based atom interferometers. Of particular interest is an integrated 850-nm laser system complete with control and electronics that produce >150 mW of total usable laser power with <20 W of DC power consumption in a <2-liter package. The laser systems should meet typical requirements of Raman-based light-pulse atom interferometers (linewidth 100 kHz, long-term frequency stability, two controllable laser frequency outputs of 10 GHz apart, ~µs switching time, -60 dB extinction, amplitude control (arbitrary waveform capable preferred), frequency tuning >2 GHz, and others. Offerors should consult papers in open literature of typical atom interferometer laser control requirements).
• Technologies that allow sample collection during high-speed (>1-km/sec) passes through plumes and can maximize total sample mass collected while passing through tenuous plumes. This includes systems and subsystems capable of capture, containment, and/or transfer of gas, liquid, ice, and/or mineral phases from plumes to sample processing and/or instrument interfaces, such as cold double-walled isolators for sample manipulation at -80 ºC and Biohazard Safety Level (BSL)-4 conditions. This fly-through sampling focus is distinct from S13.01, which solicits sample collection technologies from surface platforms.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.3 In-Situ Instruments/Sensor

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

The Phase I project should focus on feasibility and proof-of-concept demonstration (TRL 2-3). The required Phase I deliverable is a report documenting the proposed innovation, its status at the end of the Phase I effort, and the evaluation of its strengths and weaknesses compared to the state of the art. The report can include a feasibility assessment and concept of operations, simulations and/or measurements, and a plan for further development to be performed in Phase II. 

The Phase II project should focus on component and/or breadboard development with the delivery of specific hardware for NASA (TRL 4-5). Phase II deliverables include a working prototype of the proposed hardware, along with documentation of development, capabilities, and measurements.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

In situ instruments and technologies are essential bases to achieve Science Mission Directorate's (SMD's) planetary science goals summarized in the Planetary Decadal Survey. There are currently various in situ instruments for diverse planetary bodies. However, there are ever-increasing science and exploration requirements and challenges for diverse planetary bodies. For example, there are urgent needs for the exploration of icy or liquid surfaces on Europa, Enceladus, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, etc., and plumes from planetary bodies such as Enceladus as well as a growing demand for in situ technologies amenable to small spacecraft.

To narrow the critical gaps between the current state of art and the technology needed for the ever-increasing science/exploration requirements, in situ technologies are being sought to achieve much higher resolution and sensitivity with significant improvements over existing capabilities with lower mass, power, volume, and data rate.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

In situ instruments and technologies are essential bases to achieve the SMD's planetary science goals summarized in the Planetary Decadal Survey. In situ instruments and technologies play an indispensable role for NASA’s New Frontiers and Discovery missions to various planetary bodies.

In addition to Phase III opportunities, SMD offers several instrument development programs as paths to further development and maturity. These include the Planetary Instrument Concepts for the Advancement of Solar System Observations (PICASSO) Program, which invests in low-TRL technologies and funds instrument feasibility studies, concept formation, proof-of-concept instruments, and advanced component technology, as well as the Maturation of Instruments for Solar System Exploration (MatISSE) Program and the Development and Advancement of Lunar Instrumentation (DALI) Program, which invest in mid-TRL technologies and enable timely and efficient infusion of technology into planetary science missions.

References:

• National Academies' Planetary Decadal Survey report "Origin, Worlds, and Life: A Decadal Strategy for Planetary Science and Astrobiology 2023-2032": https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/26522/origins-worlds-and-life-a-decadal-strategy-for-planetary-science
• NASA Roadmap for Ocean Worlds Exploration: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/opag/ROW
• In situ instruments and technologies for NASA's ocean worlds exploration goals: https://www.nasa.gov/specials/ocean-worlds/
• NASA technology solicitation ROSES 2022, "C.12 Planetary Instrument Concepts for the Advancement of Solar System Observations"(PICASSO) call: https://nspires.nasaprs.com/external/solicitations/summary.do?solId={C29CDA56-E518-672A-23C6-8BEB8639E5AC}&path=&method=init
• NASA technology solicitation ROSES 2022, "C.13 Maturation of Instruments for Solar System Exploration (MatISSE) call: https://nspires.nasaprs.com/external/solicitations/summary.do?solId={E241ECD4-E5F4-CE18-22C2-303C02B5EA73}&path=&method=init
• NASA technology solicitation ROSES 2022/ C.19 Development and Advancement of Lunar Instrumentation (DALI) call: https://nspires.nasaprs.com/external/solicitations/summary.do?solId={CCF1C796-C426-2A96-0664-91648897CCA8}&path=&method=init
• Needed instrument technologies as listed on the website of NSAS’s Planetary Exploration Science Technology Office (PESTO): https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/space/pesto/instrument-technologies-future/

Scope Title:

Enabling Technologies for Remote-Sensing Heliophysics Instruments

Scope Description:

Remote-sensing technologies are being sought to achieve much higher resolution and sensitivity with significant improvements over existing capabilities. Remote-sensing technologies amenable to CubeSats and SmallSats are also encouraged. Specifically, this subtopic solicits instrument development that provides significant advances in the following areas:

Auroral, Airglow, and Geospace Instrumentation:

• Technologies or components enabling auroral, airglow, and geospacer at far and extreme ultraviolet (FUV/EUV) and soft x-ray wavelengths.
  • Technologies to reduce size, weight, and power beyond the current state of the art.
  • Technologies to reject background beyond the current state of the art.
  • Technologies to improve live time, spatial resolution, or spectral resolution beyond the current state of the art.
• Technologies for precise radiometry at terahertz bands corresponding to upper atmosphere thermal emissions in the 1 to 5 THz range, particularly at 4.7 THz. This includes, but is not limited to:
  • Technologies that reduce size, mass, and power of terahertz radiometry instrumentation; for example, by increasing the operating temperature of terahertz detectors.
  • Technologies that enable terahertz spectroscopy; for example, by use of a terahertz local oscillator for heterodyne mixing.
  • Technologies that improve signal-to-noise ratio of terahertz instrumentation, particularly at 4.7 THz.

Ionosphere and Magnetosphere Instrumentation:

• Passive sensing of ionospheric and magnetospheric plasma density structure using transmitters of opportunity (e.g., global navigation satellite system (GNSS) or ground-based transmissions).
• Electromagnetic sounding of ionospheric or magnetospheric plasma density structure at radio-frequencies from kilohertz to >10 MHz.
  • Solar x-ray, ultraviolet, and visible light instrumentation.
• Technologies or components that advance capabilities for solar imaging at far and extreme ultraviolet (FUV/EUV) and soft x-ray wavelengths.
  • Technologies to reduce size, weight, and power beyond the current state of the art.
  • Technologies to improve background rejection beyond the current state of the art.
  • Technologies to improve live time, spatial resolution, or spectral resolution beyond the current state of the art.
• Technologies that enable observations of bright solar flares without saturation in wavelength range from EUV to x-rays. This includes but is not limited to:
  • Fast-cadence solid-state detectors (e.g., charge-coupled device (CCD) and complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS)) for imaging in the EUV with or without intrinsic ion suppression.
  • Fast-cadence solid-state detectors for imaging soft or hard x-ray (~0.1 to hundreds of kiloelectron volts) imaging, .preferably with the ability to detect the energy of individual photons.
  • Technologies that attenuate solar x-ray fluences by flattening the observed spectrum by a factor of 100 to 1,000 across the energy range encompassing both low- and high-energy x-rays—preferably flight programmable.
• Technologies to either reduce the size, complexity, or mass or to improve the imaging resolution of solar telescopes used for imaging solar x-rays in the ~1 to 300 keV range.
  • Technologies capable of smoothly laminating silicon micropore optics with materials that enhance the grazing incidence reflectivity of soft x-rays in the energy range of 0.1 to 2 keV.
• Technologies to reduce the size, complexity, mass, or power of solar coronagraphs to enable better inclusion on extra-Sun-Earth-line missions (e.g., L4, L5, high solar inclination, solar farside, etc.). For example, extendable high, precision booms that include occulters and baffles.
• Technologies, including metamaterials and microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) that enable polarization, wavelength, or spatial discrimination without macroscale moving parts.

Proposers are strongly encouraged to relate their proposed development to NASA's future heliophysics goals as set out in the Heliophysics Decadal Survey (2013-2022) and the NASA Heliophysics Roadmap (2014-2033). Proposed instrument components and/or architectures should be as simple, reliable, and low risk as possible, while enabling compelling science. Novel instrument concepts are encouraged, particularly if they enable a new class of scientific discovery. Technology developments relevant to multiple environments and platforms are also desired. Proposers should show an understanding of relevant space science needs, and present a feasible plan to fully develop a technology and infuse it into a NASA program. Detector technology proposals should be referred to the S12.06 subtopic.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.1 Remote Sensing Instruments/Sensors

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables may include an analysis or test report, a prototype of an instrument subcomponent, or a full working instrument prototype.
Phase II deliverables must include a prototype or demonstration of a working instrument or subcomponent and may also include analysis or test reports.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

These instruments and technologies play indispensable roles for NASA’s Living With a Star (LWS) and Solar Terrestrial Probe (STP) mission programs as well as a host of smaller spacecraft in the Explorers Program. In addition, there is growing demand for remote-sensing technologies amenable to CubeSats and SmallSats. To narrow the critical gaps between the current state of art and the technology needed for the ever-increasing science/exploration requirements, remote-sensing technologies are being sought to achieve much higher resolution and sensitivity with significant improvements over existing capabilities—and at the same time with lower mass, power, and volume.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Remote-sensing instruments and technologies are essential bases to achieve SMD's Heliophysics goals summarized in National Research Council’s, Solar and Space Physics: A Science for a Technological Society. These instruments and technologies play indispensable roles for NASA’s LWS and STP mission programs, as well as for a host of smaller spacecraft in the Explorers Program. In addition, there is growing demand for remote-sensing technologies amenable to CubeSats and SmallSats.

References:

• For example missions, see "NASA Science Missions," https://science.nasa.gov/missions-page?field_division_tid=5&field_phase_tid=All
• For details of the specific requirements, see the National Research Council’s "Solar and Space Physics: A Science for a Technological Society," http://nap.edu/13060
• For details of NASA's Heliophysics roadmap, see the "NASA Heliophysics Science and Technology Roadmap for 2014-2033," https://explorers.larc.nasa.gov/HPSMEX/MO/pdf_files/2014_HelioRoadmap_Final_Reduced_0.pdf
• 2013 Heliophysics Decadal Survey: https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/a-decadal-strategy-for-solar-and-space-physics-heliophysics

Scope Title:

Enabling Technologies for In Situ Particle and Fields Heliophysics Instruments

Scope Description:

In situ technologies for particles and fields instruments are being sought to achieve improved performance over existing capabilities that are amenable to CubeSats and SmallSats. Specifically, this subtopic solicits instrument development that provides significant advances in the following areas:

• Technologies for the development of high-voltage control elements (e.g., optocouplers or transistors) for use with high-voltage power supplies to linearly apply a specified high voltage to an electrode. These components need to be highly reliable; radiation hardened (100 krad TID); stable over wide temperature ranges (-35 ºC to >70 ºC); and capable of operating at voltages of >6 kV with >100 mA continuous current, >1 A pulse current, and low leakage current (<<100 nA).
• Technologies for the development of magnetic core material suitable for incorporation into science-grade flux-gate magnetometers that can achieve reliable 0.1 nT resolutions and 100 Hz sampling.
• Technologies for the development of compactly stowed, lightweight, long, straight, and rigid booms that can deploy a sensor with embedded electronics to distances of 6 m or longer on satellites and sounding rockets in order to measure DC electric fields (down to 0.1 mV/m) and plasma waves. Mass target: 2 kg or less.

Proposers are strongly encouraged to relate their proposed development to NASA's future heliophysics goals as set out in the Heliophysics Decadal Survey (2013-2022) and the NASA Heliophysics Roadmap (2014-2033). Proposed instrument components and/or architectures should be as simple, reliable, and low risk as possible, while enabling compelling science. Novel instrument concepts are encouraged, particularly if they enable a new class of scientific discovery. Technology developments relevant to multiple environments and platforms are also desired. Proposers should show an understanding of relevant space science needs, and present a feasible plan to fully develop a technology and infuse it into a NASA program.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.3 In-Situ Instruments/Sensor

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables: Concept study report, preliminary design, and test results.
Phase II deliverables: Detailed design, prototype test results, and a prototype deliverable with guidelines for in-house integration and test (I&T).

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Most charged-particle instruments have the need to apply high-voltage to electrodes or grids in order to select the energy-per-charge of ions and electrons in space. The availability of high-voltage optocouplers (HVOCs) suitable for spaceflight are severely limited, and the number of reliable vendors since the Covid-19 pandemic has significantly decreased. MOSFET high-voltage technology (SiC) is currently limited to stand-off distances of a few kilovolts but may present an alternative solution to HVOCs in stepping circuits.

Suitable magnetic core material for incorporation into science-grade flux-gate magnetometers has become extremely limited. New vendors of core materials are critical for the continuation of high-quality magnetic field measurements.

The ability to deploy electric field sensors on CubeSat or SmallSats is limited, yet is of critical need for the ever-increasing number of Heliophysics constellation missions.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Particle and field instruments and technologies are essential bases to achieve the Science Mission Directorate's (SMD's) Heliophysics goals summarized in the National Research Council’s, Solar and Space Physics: A Science for a Technological Society. In situ instruments and technologies play indispensable roles for NASA’s LWS and STP mission programs, as well as a host of smaller spacecraft in the Explorers Program. In addition, there is growing demand for particle and field technologies amenable to CubeSats and SmallSats. NASA SMD has two excellent programs to bring these subtopic technologies to higher level: Heliophysics Instrument Development for Science (H-TIDeS) and Heliophysics Flight Opportunities for Research and Technology (H-FORT). H-TIDeS seeks to advance the development of technologies and their application to enable investigation of key heliophysics science questions and space weather. This is done through incubating innovative concepts and development of prototype technologies. It is intended that Phase II and III technologies, further developed through H-TIDeS, would then be proposed to H-FORT to mature by demonstration in a relevant environment. The H-TIDeS and H-FORT programs are in addition to Phase III opportunities. Further opportunities through SMD include Explorer Missions, Discovery Missions, and New Frontiers Missions.

References:

• National Research Council: "Solar and Space Physics: A Science for a Technological Society," http://nap.edu/13060
• Example missions (e.g., NASA Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) mission, Fast Plasma Investigation; Solar Probe; STEREO; and Geospace Dynamics Constellation): http://science.nasa.gov/missions

Scope Title:

Sample Preparation

Scope Description:

This subtopic seeks proposals that advance NASA's objective of leveraging the microgravity environment aboard the International Space Station (ISS) to maintain and strengthen the U.S. leadership in the area of biological and physical science research that is critical to our economic prosperity amid increasing global competition. Proposals should describe technologies capable of safely handling soft matter and/or biological materials in the microgravity environment for sample preparation and post-experiment analyses. Samples may consist of aqueous and polymer solutions that have non-Newtonian flow characteristics, volatile liquids, and particles over a wide range of sizes and properties. Preparation activities will include the ability to accurately measure and dispense reactants; rehydrate dry/lyophilized samples and specimens; mix; transfer; remove trapped bubbles; dry, desiccate, and seal samples; empty and cleanse containers.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 1 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.3 In-Situ Instruments/Sensor

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

For Phase I, as a minimum, development and test of a bench-top prototype and a written report detailing evidence of demonstrated prototype technology in the laboratory or in a relevant environment and stating the future path toward hardware demonstration in orbit. A preliminary assessment of the technology business case (cost and revenue forecast, market size, potential customers, etc.) is also required.

Desired deliverables at the end of Phase II would be a preliminary design and concept of operations, development and test of an engineering development unit in a relevant environment (ground or space), and a report containing detailed science requirements, results of testing, and an updated business case analysis and/or application plan. Concepts that can achieve flight demonstration on a suborbital flight or on the ISS during Phase II are especially valuable.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Experimental samples traditionally have been prepared in ground-based laboratories and launched to the ISS where experiments are conducted. Limited analyses of test samples can be conducted aboard the ISS, but most experiments require preserving, storing, and returning the samples to Earth, where detailed analyses are conducted. The ability to safely prepare, manipulate, and analyze samples in crew environment is severely limited by handling fluids such that in a contained manner on-orbit is required to achieve the pace of ground-based samples. 

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This subtopic is in direct support of NASA’s recent policy to enable commercial and marketing activities to take place aboard the ISS. The ISS capabilities will be used to further stimulate the demand for commercial product development and strengthen U.S. leadership in in-space manufacturing and production.

References:

• Chaikin, Paul, Noel Clark, and Sidney Nagel: Grand Challenges in Soft Matter Science: Prospects for Microgravity Research, No. E-19904, 2021.
• Burton, Aaron S., Sarah E. Stahl, Kristen K. John, Miten Jain, Sissel Juul, Daniel J. Turner, Eoghan D. Harrington et al.: "Off earth identification of bacterial populations using 16S rDNA nanopore sequencing," Genes, 11, 1, 2020, p. 76.
• Castro-Wallace, Sarah L., Charles Y. Chiu, Kristen K. John, Sarah E. Stahl, Kathleen H. Rubins, Alexa BR McIntyre, Jason P. Dworkin et al.: "Nanopore DNA sequencing and genome assembly on the International Space Station," Scientific Reports, 7, 1, 2017, pp. 1-12.
• Schneider, Walter, Jay Perry, James Broyan, Ariel Macatangay, Melissa McKinley, Caitlin Meyer, Andrew Owens, Nikzad Toomarian, and Robyn Gatens: "NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Technology Development and Maturation for Exploration: 2019 to 2020 Overview," 2020 International Conference on Environmental Systems, 2020.

Scope Title:

Sample Analysis

Scope Description:

This subtopic seeks proposals that advance NASA's objective of leveraging the microgravity environment aboard the International Space Station (ISS) to maintain and strengthen the U.S. leadership in the area of biological and physical science research that is critical to our economic prosperity amid increasing global competition. Proposals will be accepted for compact devices for measuring and transmitting data regarding cells, proteins, and metabolites in various specimen types, including blood, saliva, urine, and other body fluids.  Exhaled breath (with an abundance of volatile molecules) may be especially attractive because it can be obtained from animals non-invasively and may hold important clues about mammalian physiology.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.3 In-Situ Instruments/Sensor

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype

Desired Deliverables Description:

For Phase I, as a minimum, development and test of a bench-top prototype and a written report detailing evidence of demonstrated prototype technology in the laboratory or in a relevant environment and stating the future path toward hardware demonstration in orbit. A preliminary assessment of the technology business case (cost and revenue forecast, market size, potential customers, etc.) is also required.

Desired deliverables at the end of Phase II would be a preliminary design and concept of operations, development and test of an engineering development unit in a relevant environment (ground or space), and a report containing detailed science requirements, results of testing, and an updated business case analysis and/or application plan. Concepts that can achieve flight demonstration on a suborbital flight or on the International Space Station (ISS) during Phase II are especially valuable.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Currently, most samples require preserving, storing, and returning the samples to Earth where detailed analyses are conducted. Not only does the process of returning the samples to Earth delay analysis and interpretation of the results, it adds risk that the samples may be compromised in some manner by the process.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This subtopic is in direct support of NASA’s recent policy to enable commercial and marketing activities to take place aboard the ISS. The ISS capabilities will be used to further stimulate the demand for commercial products development and strengthen U.S. leadership in in-space manufacturing and production.

References:

• Burton, Aaron S., Sarah E. Stahl, Kristen K. John, Miten Jain, Sissel Juul, Daniel J. Turner, Eoghan D. Harrington et al. "Off earth identification of bacterial populations using 16S rDNA nanopore sequencing," Genes, 11, 1, 2020, p. 76.
• Castro-Wallace, Sarah L., Charles Y. Chiu, Kristen K. John, Sarah E. Stahl, Kathleen H. Rubins, Alexa BR McIntyre, Jason P. Dworkin et al: "Nanopore DNA sequencing and genome assembly on the International Space Station." Scientific Reports, 7, 1, 2017, pp. 1-12.
• Schneider, Walter, Jay Perry, James Broyan, Ariel Macatangay, Melissa McKinley, Caitlin Meyer, Andrew Owens, Nikzad Toomarian, and Robyn Gatens: "NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Technology Development and Maturation for Exploration: 2019 to 2020 Overview," 2020 International Conference on Environmental Systems, 2020.

Scope Title:

High-Efficiency Cryocoolers

Scope Description:

Low-temperature coolers:

NASA seeks improvements to multistage low-temperature spaceflight cryocoolers. Coolers are sought with the lowest temperature stage typically in the range of 4 to 10 K, with cooling power at the coldest stage larger than currently available and with high efficiency. The desired cooling power is application specific, but includes a range of approximately 50 to 200 mW at 4 K. Devices that produce extremely low vibration, particularly at frequencies below a few hundred hertz, are of special interest. System- or component-level improvements that improve efficiency and reduce complexity and cost are desirable. Examples of target missions include several concepts currently under study for far-infrared and x-ray probe-class observatories recommended in the 2020 Astrophysics Decadal Survey. In addition to the large coolers, there has recently been interest in small, low-power (~10-mW) 4 K coolers for quantum communication and sensing instruments. 

Miniature coolers:

NASA seeks miniature, high-efficiency cryocoolers for instruments on Earth and planetary missions. A range of cooling capabilities is sought. Two examples include 0.2 W at 30 K with heat rejection at 300 K and 0.3 W at 35 K with heat rejection at 150 K. For both examples, an input power of ≤5 W and a total mass of ≤400 g is desired. The ability to fit within the volume and power limitations of a SmallSat platform would be highly advantageous. Cryocooler electronics are also sought in two general categories: (1) low-cost devices that are sufficiently radiation hard for lunar or planetary missions, and (2) very low cost devices for a relatively short term (~1 year) in low Earth orbit. The latter category could include controllers for very small coolers, such as tactical and rotary coolers.
 
  
Heterodyne techniques can achieve very high to extremely high spectral resolution for far-IR spectrometers. Advanced heterodyne receivers operating at 20 K, well above operating temperatures of other superconducting detectors, have been demonstrated. The mixer and low-noise amplifiers in these future advanced heterodyne sensors typically require 50 to 100 mW of cooling at 15 to 20 K, and the local oscillator requires 1 to 2 W cooling power at 80 to 120 K. NASA is seeking advanced multistage cryocooler technologies that will enable these sensors to operate in a SmallSat platform. The cryocooler input power must be compatible with available power in the SmallSat platform, which is typically several tens of watts. 
 
It is desirable that the cooler can efficiently operate over a wide heat sink temperature range, from -50 to 70 ºC.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.1 Remote Sensing Instruments/Sensors

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I: Proof-of-concept demonstration.

Phase II: Desired deliverables include coolers and components, such as electronics, that are ready for functional and environmental testing.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Low-temperature coolers:
Current spaceflight cryocoolers for this temperature range include hybrid coolers with a lower Joule-Thompson stage precooled by linear-piston-driven Stirling or pulse-tube upper stage at about 20 K. One such state-of-the-art cryocooler, the Mid-Infrared Instrument (MIRI) cooler on the James Webb  Space Telescope (JWST), provides about 55 mW of cooling at 6 K. For large future space observatories, large cooling power and much greater efficiency will be needed. For cryogenic instruments or detectors on instruments with tight pointing requirements, orders-of-magnitude improvement in the levels of exported vibration will be required. Some of these requirements are laid out in the "Advanced cryocoolers" Technology Gap in the latest (2017) Cosmic Origins Program Annual Technology Report.

Miniature coolers:
Present state-of-the-art cryocoolers can achieve Carnot efficiency above 13% and specific mass lower than 0.75 kg/W of cooling at 77 K for cooling capacity under 1 W at 77 K. 
 
Cryocoolers enable the use of highly sensitive detectors, but current coolers cannot operate within the tight power constraints of outer planetary missions.  There are no lightweight cryocoolers (<3 kg) that can provide cooling below 20 K. Cryocooler power could be greatly reduced by lowering the heat rejection temperature, but presently there are no spaceflight systems that can operate with a heat rejection temperature significantly below ambient.
 

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Science traceability (from NASA's Strategic plan): 

• Goal 1: Expand the frontiers of knowledge, capability, and opportunity in space.
• Objective 1.6: Discover how the universe works, explore how it began and evolved, and search for life on planets around other stars.

Low-temperature cryocoolers are listed as a "Technology Gap" in the latest (2017) Cosmic Origins Program Annual Technology Report. Future missions that would benefit from this technology include the far-infrared- and X-ray-probe-class observatories recommended by the 2020 Astrophysics Decadal Survey, as well, in the more distant future, far-infrared and x-ray flagships.

NASA is moving toward the use of small, low-cost satellites to achieve many of its Earth science and some of its planetary science goals. The development of cryocoolers that fit within the size and power constraints of these platforms will greatly expand their capability, for example, by enabling the use of infrared detectors.

In planetary science, progress on cryogenic coolers will enable the use of far- to mid-infrared sensors with orders-of-magnitude improvement in sensitivity for outer planetary missions. These will allow thermal mapping of outer planets and their moons.

References:

• Examples of mission concepts for the far-IR probe include: 

  • PRIMA (Probe Far-Infrared Mission for Astrophysics, which is based on the Galaxy Evolution Probe (GEP); see Moore et al.: "Thermal architecture of the galaxy evolution probe mission concept," Proc. SPIE, 10698, 1069858, 2018, doi.org/10.1117/12.2314237)

  • SPICE (Space Interferometer for Cosmic Evolution, which is based on the Space Infrared Interferometric Telescope (SPIRIT) concept; see DiPirro, M. et al.: "The SPIRIT thermal system," Proc. SPIE, 6687, 66870D, 2007, doi.org/10.1117/12.734140)

• Example of Astrophysics flagship mission concepts include:

  • Origins Space Telescope: https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/firs/
  • LYNX: https://wwwastro.msfc.nasa.gov/lynx/docs/science/observatory.htm

Scope Title:

Actuators and Other Cryogenic Devices

Scope Description:

NASA seeks devices for cryogenic instruments, including:

• Small, precise motors and actuators, preferably with superconducting windings, that operate with extremely low power dissipation. Devices using standard NbTi conductors, as well as devices using higher temperature superconductors that can operate above 5 K, are of interest.
• Cryogenic heat pipes for heat transport within instruments. Heat pipes using hydrogen, neon, oxygen, argon, and methane are of interest. Length should be at least 0.3 m.  Devices that have reduced gravitational dependence and that can be made low profile, or integrated into structures such as radiators, are of particular interest.
• Reliable solid-state conductors with variable thermal conductance ranging from 0.05 W/K to 0.005 W/K to allow one cryocooler to efficiently provide cooling for two or more targets operating at significantly different temperatures, maintaining them at their calibration temperatures even when their heat load ratios deviate significantly from design values. This technology would eliminate the need to iteratively alter the conductors to tune their conductance ratio during cryogenic instrument calibration stage, significantly reducing cryogenic infrared (IR) spectrometer integration and testing cost. 
   

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.1 Remote Sensing Instruments/Sensors

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I: Proof-of-concept test on a breadboard-level device.

Phase II: Working prototypes ready for testing in the relevant environments.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Motors and actuators: Instruments often have motors and actuators, typically for optical elements such as filter wheels and Fabry-Perot interferometers. Current cryogenic actuators are typically motors with resistive (copper) windings. Although heat generation is naturally dependent on the application, an example of a recent case is a stepper motor used to scan a Fabry-Perot cavity; its total dissipation (resistive + hysteric) is ~0.5 W at 4 K.  A flight instrument would need heat generation of at least 20× less.

Cryogenic heat pipes: Heat transport in cryogenic instruments is typically handled with solid thermal straps, which do not scale well for larger heat loads. Currently available heat pipes are optimized for temperatures above ~120 K. They have limited capacity to operate against a gravitational potential, which complicates ground testing. 

Current conductors with a thermal switch can only operate in the ON or OFF mode, but not in a mode where its thermal conductance can be varied continuously with negligible (<50 mW) active control power in the temperature range of 120 to 180 K.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Science traceability: NASA Strategic plan 2018, Objective 1.1: Understand The Sun, Earth, Solar System, and Universe.

Almost all instruments have motors and actuators for changing filters, adjusting focus, scanning, and other functions. On low-temperature instruments, for example on mid- to far-IR observatories, dissipation in actuators can be a significant design problem.

References:

For more information on earlier low-temperature heat pipes:

• Brennan, P. et al.: AIAA paper 93-2735, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1993-2735
• Prager, R.C.: AIAA paper 80-1484, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1980-1484
• Alario, J. and Kosson, R.: AIAA paper 80-0212, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1980-212

Scope Title:

Sub-Kelvin Cooling Systems

Scope Description:

Future NASA missions will require sub-Kelvin coolers for extremely low temperature detectors. Systems are sought that will provide continuous cooling with high cooling power (>5 µW at 50 mK), and high heat rejection temperature (10 K), while maintaining high thermodynamic efficiency and low system mass.

Improvements in components for adiabatic demagnetization refrigerators are also sought. Specific components include:

(1) High-cooling-power-density magnetocaloric materials. Examples of desired materials include GdLiF₄, Yb₃Ga₅O₁₂, GdF₃, and Gd elpasolite. High-quality single crystals are preferred because of their high conductivity at low temperature, but high-density polycrystals are acceptable in some forms. Total volume must be >40 cm³. For polycrystalline materials, this could be composed of smaller sections.

(2) Compact, lightweight, low-current superconducting magnets capable of producing a field of at least 4 tesla (T) while operating at a temperature of at least 10 K, and preferably above 15 K. Desirable properties include:

• A high engineering current density (including insulation and coil packing density), preferably >300 A/mm².
• A field/current ratio of >0.5 T/A, and preferably >0.66 T/A.
• Low hysteresis heating. 
• Bore diameters ranging between 22 and 40 mm, and lengths ranging between 50 and 100 mm, depending on the application. 

(3) Shielding requirements include: 

• Lightweight active/passive magnetic shielding (for use with 4-T magnets) with low hysteresis and eddy current losses as well as low remanence. Shields should reduce stray field to <0.1 mT at 100 mm from the outer surface.  In addition to simple cylinders, toroidal and other self-shielding geometries will be considered. 
• Lightweight, highly effective outer shields that reduce the field outside an entire multistage device to <5 µT. Outer shields must operate at 4 to 10 K and must have penetrations for low-temperature, noncontacting heat straps.  

(4) Heat switches with on/off conductance ratio >30,000 and actuation time of <10 s.  Switches are sought to cover the temperature range 20 K > T > 0.03 K, though the hot/cold temperature ratio for any one switch is typically <5.  They should have an on-state conductance of >(500 mW/K) x (T/4.5 K).  Devices with no moving parts are preferred.  

(5) Suspensions with the strength and stiffness of Kevlar^®, but lower thermal conductance from 4 to 0.050 K.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 4

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.1 Remote Sensing Instruments/Sensors

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I: For components, a subscale prototype that proves critical parameters. For systems, a proof-of-concept test.

Phase II: For components, functioning hardware that is directly usable in NASA systems. For systems, a prototype that demonstrates critical performance parameters.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

The adiabatic demagnetization refrigerator in the Soft X-ray Spectrometer instrument on the Hitomi mission represents the state of the art in spaceflight sub-Kelvin cooling systems. The system is a 3-stage, dual-mode device. In the more challenging mode, it provides 650 µW of cooling at 1.625 K, while simultaneously absorbing 0.35 µW from a small detector array at 0.050 K. It rejects heat at 4.5 K. In this mode, the detector is held at temperature for 15.1-h periods, with a 95% duty cycle. Future missions with much larger pixel count will require much higher cooling power at 0.050 K or lower, higher cooling power at intermediate stages, and 100% duty cycle. Heat rejection at a higher temperature is also needed to enable the use of a wider range of more efficient cryocoolers.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Science traceability: NASA Strategic plan 2018, Objective 1.1: Understand The Sun, Earth, Solar System, And Universe.

Sub-Kelvin coolers are listed as a "Technology Gap" in the latest (2017) Cosmic Origins Program Annual Technology Report.

Missions that would benefit from this technology include several concepts presently under development for the far-infrared and X-ray probe-class missions recommended in the 2020 Astrophysics Decadal Survey, as well as future far-infrared and X-ray flagship missions.

References:

For a description of the state-of-the-art sub-Kelvin cooler in the Hitomi mission:

• Shirron, et al.: "Thermodynamic performance of the 3-stage ADR for the Astro-H Soft-X-ray Spectrometer instrument," Cryogenics, 74, pp. 24-30, 2016, and references therein.

For articles describing magnetic sub-Kelvin coolers and their components:

• Cryogenics, 62, pp. 129-220, July 2014 special issue.

Scope Title:

Optical Atomic Clocks

Scope Description:

Space exploration relies on sensors for science measurements as well as spacecraft operation. As sensing precisions push their limits, quantum phenomena inevitably must be exploited. It is expected that sensors utilizing quantum properties will offer new and significantly improved capabilities. NASA is interested in advancing quantum sensing technologies and infusing them into space science missions. In particular, this call seeks the development and maturation towards space application and qualification of atomic systems that leverage their quantum properties (e.g., optical atomic clocks, atom interferometers, Rydberg atom sensors, artificial atom-based sensors such as nitrogen-vacancy (NV) center point-defect sensors, etc.).

Recent developments of laser control and manipulation of atoms have led to new types of quantum sensors and clocks. Atomic particles, being intrinsically quantum mechanical, have demonstrated theirs unique advantages in metrology and sensing. Perhaps the most celebrated atomic metrology tool is the atomic clock. Atomic clocks in the optical frequency domain (i.e., optical primary frequency standards) have approached, and are expected to exceed, a frequency uncertainty beyond 1 part in 1x1018. These optical clocks can be used, in turn, as precision sensors; e.g., sensitivity to the fundamental physics constants has been explored for detection of dark matter and time variations in those fundamental constants.

The gaps to be filled and technologies to be matured include, but are not limited to, the following: 

(1) Optical atomic clocks 

• Subsystem and components for high-performance and high-accuracy optical clocks, mostly notably Sr and Yb lattice clocks as well as Sr+ and Yb+ singly trapped ion clocks. They comprise atomic physics packages, which are necessarily laser systems, and include clock lasers, optical frequency combs, as well as advanced electronics and controllers based on microprocessors or field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs). They should have a path to a flight system. 
• Space-qualifiable small-size low-power clock lasers at, or subsystems that can lead to, better than 3×10^-15 Hz/√𝜏 near 0.1 to 10 s (wavelengths for Yb+, Yb, and Sr clock transitions are of special interest). 
• Technical approaches and methods for beyond-state-of-the-art compact and miniature clocks for space with emphasis on the performance per size, power, and mass.   
• Technical approaches and methods for beyond-state-of-the-art time transfer between orbiting and terrestrial clocks.

(2) Other atomic and artificial atomic sensors 

• Rydberg sensors or their subsystems/components for electric field or microwave measurements. 
• Space-qualifiable NV diamond or chip-scale atomic magnetometers.
• High-performance, miniaturized or chip-scale optical frequency combs.
• Other innovative atomic quantum sensors for high-fidelity field measurements that have space applications and can be developed into a space-quantifiable instrument.  

Because of the breath and diversity of the portfolio, performers are expected to be aware of specific gaps for specific application scenarios. All proposed system performances may be defined by offeror with clear justifications. Subsystem technology development proposals should clearly state the relevance to the anticipated system-level implementation and performance; define requirements, relevant atomic species, and working laser wavelengths; and indicate its path to a space-borne instrument. Finally, for proposals interested in quantum sensing methodologies for achieving the optimal collection of light for photon-starved astronomical observations, it is suggested to consider the STTR subtopic T8.06.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 1 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.3 In-Situ Instruments/Sensor

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware
• Research
• Analysis
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Phase I deliverables: results of a feasibility study, analysis, and preliminary laboratory demonstration, as described in a final report.

Phase II deliverables: prototype or demonstration hardware; summary of performance analysis; and applicable supporting documentation, data, and/or test reports.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Many technology gaps exist in the development state of atomic sensors and clocks intended for NASA space applications. These gaps are mainly in the areas of reducing size, mass, and power, while increasing their performance and advancing them towards space qualification. These gaps may pertain to components, subsystems, instruments/devices, novel approaches, and/or theoretical analysis tools. Most of the needed improvements are elements that are beyond the current state of the art. These needed improvements include high-flux ultra-cold atom sources, atomic physics packages and atomic vacuum cell technology specific to clock and atom interferometer applications, miniature optical isolators, efficient modulators, active wave front and polarization devices, fast high-extension-ratio switches, efficient detectors, and novel frequency conversion methods/devices. Also needed are lasers and laser-optics system approaches with a high degree of integration and robustness that are suitable for atomic devices, small ultra-stabilized laser systems, and miniature self-referenced optical frequency combs. These are examples and not an exhaustive list.    

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Currently, no technology exists that can compete with the (potential) sensitivity, (potential) compactness, and robustness of atom-optical-based gravity- and time-measurement devices. Earth science, planetary science, and astrophysics all benefit from unprecedented improvements in gravity and time measurement. Specific roadmap items supporting science instrumentation include, but are not limited to:

• TX08.1.2: Electronics (reliable control electronics for laser systems)
• TX08.1.3: Optical Components (reliable laser systems)
• TX08.1.4: Microwave, Millimeter, and Submillimeter-Waves (ultra-low noise microwave output when coupled w/ optical frequency comb)
• TX08.1.5: Lasers (reliable laser system w/ long lifetime)

References:

• 2020 NASA Technology Taxonomy: https://go.nasa.gov/3hGhFJf
• 2017 NASA Strategic Technology Investment Plan: https://go.usa.gov/xU7sE

Scope Title:

Atomic Interferometry

Scope Description:

Recent developments of laser control and manipulation of atoms have led to new types of precision inertial force and gravity sensors based on atom interferometry. Atom interferometers exploit the quantum mechanical wave nature of atomic particles and quantum gases for sensitive interferometric measurements. Ground-based laboratory experiments and instruments have already demonstrated beyond the state-of-the-art performances of accelerometer, gyroscope, and gravity measurements. The microgravity environment in space provides opportunities for further drastic improvements in sensitivity and precision. Such inertial sensors will have great potential to provide new capabilities for NASA Earth and planetary gravity measurements, for spacecraft inertial navigation and guidance and for gravitational wave detection and test of properties of gravity in space. Currently the most mature development of atom interferometers as measurement instruments are those based on light-pulsed atom interferometers with freefall cold atoms. There remain a number of technical challenges to infuse this technology in space applications.

Some of the identified key challenges are (but not limited to):

• Space-qualifiable high-flux ultra-cold atom sources, related components, and methods (e.g., >1×10⁶ total atoms near the point at <1 nK for Rb, K, Cs, Yb, and Sr).
• Ultra-high vacuum technologies and approaches for quantum sensor applications that allow small-size and low-power, completely sealed, nonmagnetic enclosures with high-quality optical access and are capable of maintaining <1×10^-9 Torr residual gas pressure. Consideration should be given to the inclusion of cold atom sources of interest, such as switchable and/or regulated atom vapor pressure or flux.  
• Beyond the state-of-the-art photonic components at wavelengths for atomic species of interest, particularly visible and ultraviolet (UV):
  • Efficient acousto-optic modulators: e.g., low radio-frequency (RF) power ~200 mW, low thermal distortion, ~80% or greater diffraction efficiency.
  • Efficient electro-optic modulators: e.g., low bias drift, residual AM, and return loss; fiber-coupled preferred. 
  • Miniature optical isolators: e.g., ~30 dB isolation or greater, ~ -2 dB loss or less.
  • Robust high-speed high-extinction shutters: e.g., switching time <1 ms and extinction >60 dB are highly desired.
  • Integrated micro-optical assemblies for quantum sensor applications.
• Flight qualifiable: i.e., rugged and long-life lasers or laser systems of narrow linewidth, high tunability, and/or higher power for clock and cooling transitions of atomic species of interest. Also, cooling and trapping lasers of 10 kHz linewidth and ~1 W or greater total optical power are generally needed, but offerors may define and justify their own performance specifications. 
• Analysis and simulation tool of a cold atom system in trapped and free-fall states relevant to atom interferometer and clock measurements in space. 

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 1 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.3 In-Situ Instruments/Sensor

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Desired deliverables for this scope include an analysis and simulation tool of a cold atom system in trapped and free-fall states relevant to an atom interferometer in space. Other types of deliverables are lasers or laser systems of narrow linewidth (~10 kHz) , high tunability, and/or higher power (> 1 W) for clock and cooling transitions of atomic species of interest. Examples of Phase I deliverables will include results of a feasibility study, analysis, and preliminary laboratory demonstration, as described in a final report. The Phase II deliverables will be prototype or demonstration hardware; summary of performance analysis; and applicable supporting documentation, data, and/or test reports.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Flight-qualifiable laser or laser system transitions that would be suitable for cooling or trapping atomic species of interest. The wavelengths for these lasers are outside of the telecom wavelengths (in particular, 852 nm to enable Cs cold atom systems). Many technology gaps exist in the development of these lasers for NASA space Atom Interferometer Gravity Gradiometer (AIGG) applications. These gaps are mainly in the areas of reducing size, mass, and power, while increasing their performance and advancing them towards space qualification. These gaps may pertain to components, subsystems, instruments/devices, novel approaches, and/or theoretical analysis tools. Most of the needed improvements are elements that are beyond the current state of the art. These needed improvements include high-flux ultra-cold atom sources, atomic physics packages and atomic vacuum cell technology specific to atom interferometer applications.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

The technology advancement  from this subtopic will lead to the realization of an orbiting AIGG, which would significantly advance the capability to measure the Earth’s time variable gravity (TVG). Performance simulations have shown that an orbiting AIGG will result in a factor of 8 improvement in the recovery of the Earth’s TVG compared to GRACE Follow-On. Also, the Mass Change Designated Observable (MCDO) mission study team has identified an advanced gravity gradiometer based on atomic interferometry as a critical future technology for significant advancement in TVG observations. The MCDO study has included simulation performance studies of a notional space-based AIGG, as well as supporting an Instrument Design Lab study and a Mission Design Lab study for an AIGG Technology Demonstration Mission (TDM). The AIGG testbed is being developed at the Goddard Space Flight Center. 

References:

2017 NASA Strategic Technology Investment Plan: https://go.usa.gov/xU7sE

2015 NASA Technology Roadmaps: https://go.usa.gov/xU7sy

The NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) seeks technology for cost-effective high-performance advanced space telescopes for astrophysics and Earth science. Astrophysics applications require large-aperture, lightweight highly reflecting mirrors, deployable large structures, innovative wavefront, structural metrology, and cryogenic optics to enable far-infrared telescopes. A few of the new astrophysics telescopes and their subsystems will require operation at cryogenic temperatures as cold as 4 K. This focus area will consider technologies necessary to enable future telescopes and observatories to collect electromagnetic bands, ranging from X-rays to millimeter waves, and also include gravity waves. New technologies in innovative mirror materials, such as silicon, silicon carbide, and nanolaminates, and innovative structures and deployments are needed on scales ranging from CubeSats to flagship-class missions. Instruments commonly benefit in size and cost from the use of free-form optics and require innovative fabrication and metrology systems. Instrument technologies for high-contrast exoplanet imaging include deformable mirrors and active structures for high-precision wavefront control and stabilization, as well as technologies to accurately deploy and control scattered light with large-scale deployable occulters. Wavelength control and stabilization approaches are critical to the success of high-precision radial velocity measurements. Earth science requires modest apertures in the 2 to 4-meter size category that are cost-effective. Both nanotechnology and wavefront sensing, and control are needed to build telescopes for Earth science.

Scope Title:

Control of Scattered Starlight with Coronagraphs

Scope Description:

This scope addresses the unique problem of the imaging and spectroscopic characterization of faint astrophysical objects that are located within the obscuring glare of much brighter stellar sources. Examples include planetary systems beyond our own, the detailed inner structure of galaxies with very bright nuclei, binary star formation, and stellar evolution. Contrast ratios of 1 million to 10 billion over an angular spatial scale of 0.05 to 1.5 arcsec are typical of these objects. Achieving a very low background requires control of both scattered and diffracted light. The failure to control either amplitude or phase fluctuations in the optical train severely reduces the effectiveness of starlight cancellation schemes.

This innovative research focuses on advances in coronagraphic instruments that operate at visible and near-infrared wavelengths. The ultimate application of these instruments is to operate in space as part of a future observatory mission concept such as the Habitable Exoplanet Observatory (HabEx) and Large Ultraviolet Optical Infrared Surveyor (LUVOIR). Measurement techniques include imaging, photometry, spectroscopy, and polarimetry. There is interest in component development and innovative instrument design, as well as in the fabrication of subsystem devices that include, but are not limited to, the following areas:

Starlight diffraction control and characterization technologies:

• Diffraction control masks for coronagraphs, which include transmissive scalar, polarization-dependent, spatial apodizing, and hybrid metal/dielectric masks, including those with extremely low reflectivity regions that allow them to be used in reflection.
• Systems to measure spatial optical density, phase inhomogeneity, scattering, spectral dispersion, thermal variations, and to otherwise estimate the accuracy of high-dynamic range apodizing masks.
• Methods to distinguish the coherent and incoherent scatter in a broadband speckle field.

Wavefront control technologies:

• Small-stroke, high-precision, deformable mirrors scalable to 10,000 or more actuators (both to further the state of the art towards flightlike hardware and to explore novel concepts). Multiple deformable-mirror technologies in various phases of development and processes are encouraged to ultimately improve the state of the art in deformable-mirror technology. Process improvements are needed to improve repeatability, yield, power consumption, connectivity, stability, and performance precision of current devices.
• High-precision, stable, deformable mirrors whose nominal surface can carry optical prescriptions for dual use as imaging optics such as off-axis parabolas and apodizing elements. Similar to other technologies, scalable actuator arrays between hundreds and thousands of actuators are encouraged.
• Driving electronics, including multiplexers and application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) with ultra-low power dissipation for electrical connection to deformable mirrors.

Optical coating and measurement technologies:

• • Instruments capable of measuring polarization crosstalk and birefringence to parts per million.
  • Polarization-insensitive coatings for large optics.
  • Methods to measure the spectral reflectivity and polarization uniformity across large optics.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.2 Observatories

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Under this scope, a concept study provided as a final report in Phase I is acceptable, and a prototype for Phase II is acceptable.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Coronagraphs have been demonstrated to achieve high contrast in moderate bandwidth in laboratory environments. The extent to which the telescope optics will limit coronagraph performance is a function of the quality of the optical coating and the ability to control polarization over the full wavefront. Wavefront control using deformable mirrors is critical. Controllability and stability to picometer levels is required. To date, deformable mirrors have been up to the task of providing contrast approaching 10¹⁰, but they require thousands of wires, and overall wavefront quality and stroke remain concerns. 

Relevance / Science Traceability:

These technologies are directly applicable to mission concept studies such as HabEx, large ultraviolet/optical/infrared telescope (LUVOIR), starshades, and any space telescopes that could potentially be used for exoplanet imaging and characterization.  

References:

See SPIE conference papers and articles published in the Journal of Astronomical Telescopes and Instrumentation on high-contrast coronagraphy, segmented coronagraph design and analysis, and starshades.
 

• Exoplanet Exploration—Planets Beyond Our Solar System: https://exoplanets.jpl.nasa.gov
• Exoplanet Exploration Program: https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/exep/ 
  • Specifically the technology pages and those addressing coronagraphs: https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/exep/technology/technology-overview/   
  • The 5-year technology development plan:  https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/internal_resources/446/
• Goddard Space Flight Center: https://www.nasa.gov/goddard

Scope Title:

Control of Scattered Light with Starshades

Scope Description:

As with the scope addressing coronagraphs, this scope addresses the unique problem of the imaging and spectroscopic characterization of faint astrophysical objects that are located within the obscuring glare of much brighter stellar sources. Examples include planetary systems beyond our own, the detailed inner structure of galaxies with very bright nuclei, binary star formation, and stellar evolution. Contrast ratios of 1 million to 10 billion over an angular spatial scale of 0.05 to 1.5 arcsec are typical of these objects. Achieving a very low background requires control of both scattered and diffracted light. The starshade's shape is designed to control the diffraction of starlight and form a deep shadow around the distant telescope. In this way, high contrast is achieved with a diffraction-limited telescope that does not require an internal high-precision wavefront control system. Sources of scatter include sunlight glinting on the sharp edges of the starshade and multiple reflections between petal surfaces and edge assemblies. Earthshine on the telescope-facing surfaces must also be considered. 

The research focuses on:

• Low-scatter, low-reflectivity, sharp, flexible razor-sharp edges for control of solar scatter at the perimeter of the starshade.
• Large-area (hundreds of square meters) antireflection and thermal-control coatings for flexible optical shield surfaces that are robust to cleaning and handling for starshade optical surfaces.
• Particulate-contamination mitigation measures, including (but not limited to) dust-resistant coatings, vacuum-ultraviolet-eroding coatings, and on-orbit cleaning technologies.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.2 Observatories

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

Under this scope a concept study provided as a final report in Phase I is acceptable, and a prototype for Phase II is acceptable.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

The optical design of the starshade has been tested at laboratory scales and shown to achieve 10^-10 contrast in broadband light in flightlike geometries. Model validation of perturbation sensitivities have also been demonstrated for contrast levels of 10^-9. A full-scale 10-m disk including the optical shield has been constructed, deployed, and shown to meet flight deployment requirements. Half-scale petals have been constructed and tested, validating the required thermal stability. Formation flying sensitivity has been demonstrated in the laboratory and through modeling to levels required for flight. Critical gaps relevant to this call include the fabrication of sharp optical edges and optical edge assemblies as well as methods to mitigate both particulate and molecular contamination of the edges and the telescope-facing surfaces.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

These technologies are directly applicable to mission concept studies such as Habitable Exoplanet Observatory (HabEx), infrared/optical/ultraviolet (IR/O/UV) space telescope, starshade missions, and any space telescopes that could potentially be used for exoplanet imaging and characterization.  

References:

Technology development reports, concept videos, and prototype deployment videos: https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/exep/technology/starshade/

Scope Title:

Technology for Extreme Precision Radial Velocity

Scope Description:

Astronomical spectrographs have proven to be powerful tools for exoplanet searches. When a star experiences periodic motion due to the gravitational pull of an orbiting planet, its spectrum is Doppler modulated in time. This is the basis for the precision radial velocity (PRV) method, one of the first and most efficient techniques for detecting and characterizing exoplanets. Because spectrographs have their own drifts, which must be separated from the periodic Doppler shift, a stable reference is always needed for calibration. Optical frequency combs (OFCs) and line-referenced etalons are capable of providing the spectral rulers needed for PRV detection of exoplanets. Although "stellar jitter" (a star’s photospheric velocity contribution to the RV signal) is unavoidable, the contribution to the error budget from Earth’s atmosphere would be eliminated in future space missions. Thus, there is a need to develop robust spectral references, especially at visible wavelengths, to detect and characterize Earth-like planets in the habitable zone of their Sun-like host stars, with size, weight, and power (SWaP) suitable for space-qualified operation to calibrate the next generation of high-resolution spectrographs with precision corresponding to <~1 cm/sec over multiple years of observations.

This scope solicits proposals to develop cost-effective component and subsystem technology for low-SWaP, long-lived, robust implementation of RV measurement instruments both on the ground and in space. Research areas of interest include but are not limited to:

• Integrated photonic spectrographs.
• Spectrograph gratings.
• PRV spectrograph calibration sources.
• High-efficiency photonic lanterns.
• Advanced optical fiber delivery systems and subsystems with high levels of image scrambling and modal noise reduction.
• Software for advanced statistical techniques to mitigate effects of telluric absorption and stellar jitter on RV precision and accuracy.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.2 Observatories

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

• Phase I will emphasize research aspects for technical feasibility, have infusion potential into ground or space operations, provide clear and achievable benefits (e.g., reduction in SWaP and/or cost, improved RV precision), and show a path towards a Phase II proposal. Phase I deliverables include feasibility and concept of operations of the research topic, simulations, and measurements; validation of the proposed approach to develop a given product (TRL 3 to 4); and a plan for further development of the specific capabilities or products to be performed in Phase II. Early development and delivery of prototype hardware/software is encouraged.
• Phase II will emphasize hardware/software development with delivery of specific hardware or software products for NASA, targeting demonstration operations at a ground-based telescope in coordination with the lead NASA center. Phase II deliverables include a working prototype or engineering model of the proposed product/platform or software along with documentation of development, capabilities, and measurements (showing specific improvement metrics); and tools as necessary. Proposed prototypes shall demonstrate a path towards a flight-capable platform. Opportunities and plans should also be identified and summarized for potential commercialization or NASA infusion. 

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

High-resolving-power spectrographs (R ~ 150,000) with simultaneous ultraviolet (UV), visible, and near-infrared (NIR) coverage and exquisite long-term stability are required for PRV studies. Classical bulk optic spectrographs traditionally used for PRV science impose architectural constraints because of their large mass and limited optical flexibility. Integrated photonic spectrographs are wafer-thin devices that could reduce instrument volume by up to 3 orders of magnitude. Spectrometers that are fiber fed, with high illumination stability, excellent wavelength calibration, and precise temperature and pressure control represent the immediate future of PRV measurements.

Traditional RV spectrographs would benefit from improvements in grating technology. Diffraction-limited PRV spectrographs require echelle gratings with low wavefront error and high efficiency—both of which are very challenging to achieve. Echelle spectrographs are designed to operate at high angle of incidence and very high diffraction order; thus, the grating must have very accurate groove placement (for low wavefront error) and very flat groove facets (for high efficiency). For decades, echelle gratings have been fabricated by diamond ruling, but it is difficult to achieve the level of performance required for PRV instruments. Newer grating fabrication techniques using lithographic methods to form the grooves may be a promising approach. As spectrograph stability imposes limits on how precisely RV can be measured, spectral references play a critical role in characterizing and ensuring this precision. Only laser frequency combs (LFCs) and line-referenced Fabry-Pérot etalons are capable of providing the broad spectral coverage and long-term stability needed for extreme PRV detection of exoplanets. Although both frequency combs and etalons can deliver high-precision spectrograph calibration, the former requires relatively complex hardware in the visible portion of the spectrum.

Commercial fiber laser astrocombs covering 450 to 1400 nm at 25 GHz line spacing and <3 dB intensity variations over the entire bandwidth are available for ground-based astronomical spectrographs. However, the cost for these systems is often so prohibitive that recent RV spectrograph projects either do not use a LFC or include it only as a future upgrade. Alternatively, astrocombs produced by electro-optic modulation (EOM) of a laser source have been demonstrated in the NIR. EOM combs produce modes spaced at a radio-frequency (RF) modulation frequency, typically 10 to 30, and they avoid the line-filtering step required by commercial mode-locked fiber laser combs. The comb frequency can be stabilized by referencing the laser pump source to a molecular absorption feature or another frequency comb. Where octave-spanning EOM combs are available, f-2f self-referencing provides the greatest stability. EOM combs must be spectrally broadened to provide the bandwidth necessary for PRV applications. This is accomplished through pulse amplification followed by injection into highly nonlinear fiber or nonlinear optical waveguides. 

Power consumption of the frequency comb calibration system will be a significant driver of mission cost for space-based PRV systems and motivates the development of a comb system that operates with less than 20 W of spacecraft power. Thus, for flight applications, it is highly desirable to develop frequency comb technology with low power consumption; ~10 to 30 GHz mode spacing; compact size; broad (octave spanning) spectral grasp across both the visible and NIR; low phase noise; stability traceable to the International System of Units definition of the second; and importantly, long life.

The intrinsic illumination stability of the spectrometer also sets a fundamental measurement floor. As the image of the star varies at the entrance to the spectrometer because of atmospheric effects and telescope guiding errors, so too does the recorded stellar spectrum, leading to a spurious RV offset. Current seeing-limited PRV instruments use multimode optical fibers, which provide some degree of azimuthal image scrambling, to efficiently deliver stellar light from the telescope focal plane to the spectrometer input. Novel-core-geometry fibers, in concert with dedicated optical double-scramblers, are often used to further homogenize and stabilize the telescope illumination pattern in both the image and pupil planes. However, these systems still demonstrate measurable sensitivity to incident illumination variations from the telescope and atmosphere. Furthermore, as spectral resolution requirements increase, the commensurate increase in instrument size becomes impractical. Thus, the community has turned to implementing image and pupil slicers to reformat the near or far fields of light entering the spectrometer by preferentially redistributing starlight exiting the fiber to maintain high spectral resolution, efficiency, and compact spectrometer size.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

The NASA Strategic Plan (2018) and Space Mission Directorate Science Plan (2014) both call for discovery and characterization of habitable Earth analogs and the search for biosignatures on those worlds. These goals were endorsed and amplified upon in the recent National Academy of Science (NAS) Exoplanet Report, which emphasized that a knowledge of the orbits and masses is essential to the complete and correct characterization of potentially habitable worlds. PRV measurements are needed to follow up on the transiting worlds discovered by Kepler, K2, and Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS). The interpretation of the transit spectra that the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) will obtain will depend on knowledge of a planet’s surface gravity, which comes from its radius (from the transit data) and its mass (from PRV measurements or, in some cases, transit timing variations). Without knowledge of a planet's mass, the interpretation of its spectrum is subject to many ambiguities.

These ambiguities will only be exacerbated for the direct-imaging missions such as the proposed Habitable Exoplanet Observatory (HabEx) and Large Ultraviolet Optical Infrared Surveyor (LUVOIR) flagships, which will obtain spectra of Earth analogs around a few tens to hundreds of stars. Even if a radius can be inferred from the planet's brightness and an estimate of its albedo, the lack of a dynamical mass precludes any knowledge of the planet's density, bulk composition, and surface gravity, which are needed to determine, for example, absolute gas column densities. Moreover, a fully characterized orbit is challenging to determine from just a few direct images and may even be confused in the presence of multiple planets. Is a planet in a highly eccentric orbit habitable or not? Only dynamic (PRV) measurements can provide such information. Thus, highly precise and highly stable PRV measurements are absolutely critical to the complete characterization of habitable worlds.

The NAS report also noted that measurements from space might be a final option if the problem of telluric contamination cannot be solved. The Earth’s atmosphere will limit precise radial velocity measurements to ~10 cm/sec at wavelengths longer than ~700 nm and greater than 30 cm/sec at wavelengths >900 nm, making it challenging to mitigate the effects of stellar activity without a measurement of the color dependence due to stellar activity in the PRV time series. A space-based PRV mission, such as has been suggested in the NASA EarthFinder mission concept study, may be necessary. If so, the low-SWaP technologies developed under this SBIR program could help enable space-based implementations of the PRV method.

References:

Precision radial velocity:

• Fischer et al.: "State of the Field: Extreme Precision Radial Velocities," 2016, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PASP..128f6001
• Plavchan et al.: "Radial Velocity Prospects Current and Future: A White Paper Report prepared by the Study Analysis Group 8 for the Exoplanet Program Analysis Group (ExoPAG)," 2015, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015arXiv150301770P
• Plavchan et al.: "EarthFinder Probe Mission Concept Study (Final Report)," 2019, https://smd-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/science-red/s3fs-public/atoms/files/Earth_Finder_Study_Rpt.pdf
• EPRV Working Group report. See this website for preliminary information and the final report from this group due in mid-August: https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/exep/NNExplore/EPRV/

Photonic lanterns:

• Gris-Sanchez, I. et al.: "Multicore fibre photonic lanterns for precision radial velocity Science," 2018,  https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/475/3/3065/4769655
• Jovanovic, N. et al.: "Integrated photonic building blocks for next-generation astronomical instrumentation I: the multimode waveguide." Optics Express, 20, 17029, 2012.

Astrocombs:

• Yi, X. et al.: "Demonstration of a near-IR line-referenced electro-optical laser frequency comb for precision radial velocity measurements in astronomy," Nature Communications, 7, 10436, 2016.
• Halverson, S. et al.: "The habitable-zone planet finder calibration system," Proc. SPIE, 9147, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy V, 91477Z,  2014, https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2054967
• Suh, M.-G., et al.: "Searching for exoplanets using a microresonator astrocomb," Nature Photonics, 13(1), pp. 25–30, 2019.
• Obrzud, E., et al.: "A Microphotonic Astrocomb," Nature Photonics, 13(1), pp. 31–35, 2019.
• Metcalf, A., et al.: "Stellar Spectroscopy in the Near-infrared with a Laser Frequency Comb," Optica, 6(2), 2019.
• Lee, S.H., Oh, D.Y., Yang, Q. et al.: "Towards visible soliton microcomb generation," Nat Commun, 8, 1295, 2017.

Nonlinear waveguides:

• Chang, L., et al.: "Heterogeneously integrated GaAs Waveguides on Insulator for Efficient Frequency Conversion," Laser Photonics Reviews, 12, 1800149, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/lpor.201800149
• Halir, R., et al.: "Ultrabroadband supercontinuum generation in a CMOS-compatible platform," Optics letters, 37, 1685, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1364/OL.37.001685

Spectral flattening:

• Probst, R.A., et al.: "Spectrally Flattened, Broadband Astronomical Frequency Combs," 2015, https://doi.org/10.1364/CLEO_SI.2015.SW4G.7

Scope Title:

Precision Optical Metering Structures and Instruments

Scope Description:

The need for continued innovation on optical systems and fabrication technologies as applied to ultraviolet to far-infrared telescopes should be encouraged by the participation of small businesses and others. New composite materials, advanced and nanotechnology manufacturing, and new optical techniques could provide the necessary advancements for the new challenging astrophysical missions. Future space astronomy missions from ultraviolet to millimeter wavelengths will push the state of the art in current optomechanical technologies. Size, dimensional stability, temperature, risk, manufacturability, and cost are important factors, separately and in combination. The Infrared/Optical/Ultraviolet (IR/O/UV) Space Telescope calls for deployed apertures as large as 15 m in diameter; and the Origins Space Telescope (OST), for operational temperatures as low as 4 K. Methods to construct large telescopes in space are also under development. Additionally, sunshields for thermal control and starshades for exoplanet imaging require deployment schemes to achieve 30- to 70-m-class space structures.

This subtopic addresses the need to mature technologies that can be used to fabricate 10- to 20-m-class, lightweight, ambient or cryogenic flight-qualified observatory systems and subsystems (telescopes, sunshields, starshades). Proposals to fabricate demonstration components and subsystems with direct scalability to flight systems through validated models will be given preference. The target launch volume and expected disturbances, along with the estimate of system performance, should be included in the discussion. Novel metrology solutions to establish and maintain optical alignment will also be accepted.

Technologies including, but not limited to, the following areas are of particular interest:

(1) Precision structures/materials:

• Low coefficient of thermal expansion/coefficient of moisture expansion (CTE/CME) materials/structures to enable highly dimensionally stable optics, optical benches, and metering structures.
• Materials/structures to enable deep-cryogenic (down to 4 K) operation.
• Novel athermalization methods to join materials/structures with differing mechanical/thermal properties.
• Lightweight materials/structures to enable high-mass-efficiency structures.
• Precision joints/latches to enable submicron-level repeatability.
• Mechanical connections providing microdynamic stability suitable for robotic assembly.

(2) Deployable technologies:

• Precision deployable modules for assembly of optical telescopes (e.g., innovative active or passive deployable primary or secondary support structures).
• Hybrid deployable/assembled architectures, packaging, and deployment designs for large sunshields and external occulters (20- to 50-m class).
• Packaging techniques to enable more efficient deployable structures.

(3) Metrology:

• Techniques to verify dimensional stability requirements at subnanometer-level precision (10 to 100 pm).
• Techniques to monitor and maintain telescope optical alignment for on-ground and in-orbit operation.

A successful proposal shows a path toward a Phase II delivery of demonstration hardware scalable to 5 m in diameter for ground test characterization. Proposals should show an understanding of one or more relevant science needs and present a feasible plan to fully develop the relevant subsystem technologies and transition them into a future NASA program(s).

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 12 Materials, Structures, Mechanical Systems, and Manufacturing
• Level 2 12.2 Structures

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware

Desired Deliverables Description:

For Phase I, a successful deliverable would include a demonstration of the functionality and/or performance of a system/subsystem with model predictions to explain observed behavior as well as make predictions of future designs.

For Phase II this should be demonstrated on units that can be scaled to future flight sizes.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

The James Webb Space Telescope represents the state of the art in large deployable telescopes. The Roman Space Telescope (RST) coronagraph instrument (CGI) will drive telescope/instrument stability requirements to new levels. The mission concepts in the upcoming Astro2020 decadal survey will push technological requirements even further in the areas of deployment, size, stability, lightweighting, and operational temperature. Each of these mission studies have identified technology gaps related to their respective mission requirements.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

These technologies are directly applicable to the RST CGI and the IR/O/UV Space Telescope mission concepts. Ultra-stable optomechanical systems are listed as a "critical" technology gap with an "urgent" priority in the LUVOIR STDT (Science and Technology Definition Team) Final Report for the Astro2020 Decadal Survey and are also highly applicable to the IR/O/UV Space Telescope proposed in the 2021 Decadal Survey "Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s."

References:

• Large UV/Optical/IR Surveyor (LUVOIR): https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/luvoir/
• Habitable Exoplanet Observatory (HabEx): https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/habex/
• Origins Space Telescope: https://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/firs/
• Exoplanets: https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/what-is-an-exoplanet/technology/
• NASA in-Space Assembled Telescope (iSAT) Study: https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/exep/technology/in-space-assembly/iSAT_study/

Scope Title:

Materials, Substrates, Structures, and Mechanisms for Advanced Optical Systems

Scope Description:

This scope solicits mirror system technology solutions that enable or enhance telescopes for missions of any size (from balloon or CubeSat to Probe or Flagship) operating at any wavelength from UV/optical to mid/far-infrared. A mirror system is defined as the substrate (material and core structure), supporting structure, with associated mechanisms and active wavefront or thermal sense and control systems. After mission-specific performance specifications, the most important metrics are affordability or areal cost (cost per square meter of collecting aperture) and mass. Also important is the ability to predict ‘in-use’ performance via validated integrated structural thermal optomechanical performance (STOP) modeling.

Potential balloon science missions are either in the extreme UV (EUV), UV/optical (UVO), or in the infrared/far-infrared (IR/FIR): EUV missions require optical components with surface slopes of <0.1 µrad; UVO science missions require 1-m-class telescopes diffraction limited at 500 nm; and Mid-IR missions require 2-m-class telescopes diffraction limited at 5 µm. In all cases, telescopes must be able to maintain diffraction-limited performance for elevation angles ranging from 10° to 65° over a temperature range of 220 to 280 K. Also, the telescopes need to have a total mass of less than 300 kg and be able to survive a 10g shock (on landing) without damage. For packaging reasons, the primary mirror assembly should have a radius of curvature 3 m (nominal) and a mass <150 kg.

Potential FIR space missions require telescopes with apertures up to 6 m monolithic or 16 m segmented with diffraction-limited performance as good as 5 µm (400 nm rms transmitted wavefront), operating at lower than 10 K (survival temperature from 4 to 315 K). Mirror substrate thermal conductivity at 4 K must be greater than 2 W/m·K. Ideally, the mirror should have less than 100 nm rms surface figure change from 300 to 10 K.  Mirror areal density goal is 25 kg/m² for the primary mirror substrate and 50 kg/m² for the primary mirror assembly (including structure). Areal cost goal is total cost of the primary mirror at or below $100K/m². Potential solutions include, but are not limited to, materials with a low coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE), homogenous CTE, and high thermal conductivity; metal alloys, nanoparticle composites, carbon fiber, graphite composites, ceramic, or SiC materials; and additive manufacture or direct precision machining.

Potential ultraviolet/optical (UVO) space missions require telescopes with apertures up to 6-m monolithic or 16-m segmented with better than 500 nm diffraction-limited performance (40 nm rms transmitted wavefront) achieved either passively or via active control operating at 250 to 270 K (nominal). Optical components need to have <5 nm rms surface figures. Additionally, a potential exoplanet mission, using an internal coronagraph, requires total telescope wavefront stability of less than 3 pm rms. This stability specification places severe constraints on the dynamic mechanical and thermal performance. Potential enabling technologies include: ultrastable mirror substrate and support structures (60 to 500 Hz first mode), athermal telescope structures, athermal mirror struts, ultrastable joints with low CTE, vibration compensation or isolation of  >140 dB, and active thermal control of <1 mK.

Mirror areal density depends upon available launch vehicle capacities to Sun-Earth L2 (i.e., 15 kg/m² for a 5-m-fairing Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) versus 150 kg/m² for a new heavy lift vehicle. Regarding areal cost, a good goal is to keep the total cost of the primary mirror at or below $100M. Thus, a 6-m-class mirror (with ~30 m² of collecting area) should have an areal cost of less than $3.5M/m². Also, a 16-m-class mirror (with 200 m² of collecting area) should have an areal cost of less than $0.5M/m².

CubeSAT missions need low-cost, compact, scalable, diffraction-limited, and athermalized off-axis reflective and on-axis telescopes. One potential mission is for near-infrared/short-wave-infrared- (NIR/SWIR-) band optical communication. A NIR/SWIR optical-communication system needs to have an integrated approach that includes fiber optics, fast-steering mirrors, and applicable detectors.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.2 Observatories

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Research

Desired Deliverables Description:

An ideal Phase I deliverable would be an optical component or telescope system of at least 0.25 m or a relevant subcomponent of a system leading to a successful Phase II delivery and a preliminary design and manufacturing plan that demonstrates feasibility. While detailed analysis will be conducted in Phase II, the preliminary design should address how optical, mechanical (static and dynamic), and thermal designs and performance analyses will be done to show compliance with all requirements. Past experience or technology demonstrations that support the design and manufacturing plans will be given appropriate weight in the evaluation.

An ideal Phase II project further advances the technology to produce a flight-qualifiable and scalable optical system, subsystem or relevant components (with TRL in the 4 to 5 range) with the required performance. Deliverables would be accompanied by all necessary documentation, including the optical performance assessment and all data on processing and properties of its substrate materials. A successful mission-oriented Phase II would have a credible plan to deliver for the allocated budget a fully assembled and tested telescope assembly that can be integrated into the potential mission as well as demonstrate an understanding of how the engineering specifications of their system meets the performance requirements and operational constraints of the mission (including mechanical and thermal stability analyses).

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Current SOA (state-of-the-art) normal-incidence space mirrors cost $4 million to $6 million per square meter of optical surface area. This research effort seeks to improve the performance of advanced precision optical components while reducing their cost by 5× to 50×, to between $100K/m² and $1M/m². 

Current SOA balloon mission mirrors require lightweighting to meet balloon mass limitations and have difficulty meeting optical to mid-IR diffraction-limited performance over the wide temperature range because of the CTE limitations and gravity sag change as a function of elevation angle.

Currently, SOA optical communications on-axis or axisymmetric designs are problematic because of the central obscuration. Off-axis designs provide superior optical performance because of the clear aperture; however, they are more complex to design, manufacture, and test.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This subtopic scope primarily matures technologies for potential Astrophysics Division missions ranging from advanced mirror/structure materials to innovative fabrication and test processes/tools that address technology gaps identified by the 2022 Astrophysics Biennial Technology Report (https://apd440.gsfc.nasa.gov/technology.html) and the 2022 Exoplanet Exploration Program Technology Gap List (https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/internal_resources/2269/). Specific examples include large-aperture ultra-stable telescopes and large-aperture cryogenic telescopes.

Additionally, it matures technologies for potential balloon missions flying higher than 45,000 ft to perform UV and mid/far-IR science at wavelengths inaccessible from the ground.

Optical communications enable high-data-rate downlink of science data. The initial motivation for this scalable off-axis optical design approach is for bringing high-performance reflective optics within reach of laser communication projects with limited resources. 
 

References:

NASA: "2022 Astrophysics Biennial Technology Report," https://apd440.gsfc.nasa.gov/technology.html

NASA: "2022 Exoplanet Exploration Program Technology Gap List," https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/internal_resources/2269/

Dankanich et. al.: “Planetary Balloon-Based Science Platform Evaluation and Program Implementation - Final Report,” available from https://ntrs.nasa.gov/ (search for "NASA/TM-2016-218870").

For additional information about scientific balloons: https://www.csbf.nasa.gov/docs.html

An example of an on-axis design has been utilized in the Lunar Laser Communications Demonstration (LLCD): https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/conference-proceedings-of-spie/10563/105630X/NASAs-current-activities-in-free-space-optical-communications/10.1117/12.2304175.full?SSO=1

An example of an off-axis design is being developed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) for Deep Space Optical Communications (DSOC): https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/conference-proceedings-of-spie/10096/100960V/Discovery-deep-space-optical-communications-DSOC-transceiver/10.1117/12.2256001.full

Scope Title:

Fabrication, Test, and Control of Optical Components and Telescopes

Scope Description:

The ability to fabricate, test, and control optical surfaces is enabling for future missions of all spectral bands (ultraviolet (UV), optical, infrared (IR), and far-IR). This scope solicits technology advances that enable the manufacture of optical components (of all diffraction limits, sizes, and operating temperatures) for a lower cost. Achieving this goal requires technologies that enable/enhance the deterministic manufacture of optical components to their desired optical prescription, control of the shape of optical components "in flight," and fully characterize surface errors.

Given that deterministic optical fabrication is relatively mature, technology advances are solicited that primarily reduces cost—particularly for large mirrors. Technology that increases remove rate (to reduce processing time) while producing smoother surfaces (less mid- and high-spatial frequency error) are potentially enhancing. Potential technologies for improvement include (but are not limited to): computer controlled grinding/polishing; electrolytic in-process dressing (ELID) processes; electrochemical processes; on-machine in-process metrology feedback; roller embossing at optical tolerances; and slumping, or replication, technologies. 

To achieve high-contrast imaging for exoplanet science using a coronagraph instrument, systems must maintain wavefront stability to <3 pm rms during critical observations. This requires new technologies and techniques for wavefront sensing, metrology, and verification and validation of optical system wavefront stability. Current methods of wavefront sensing include image-based techniques such as phase retrieval, focal-plane contrast techniques such as electric field conjugation and speckle nulling, and low-order and out-of-band wavefront sensing that uses nonscience light rejected by the coronagraph to estimate drifts in the system wavefront during observations. These techniques are limited by the low stellar photon rates of the dim objects being observed (~5 to 11 Vmag), leading to tens of minutes between wavefront control updates. New methods may include: techniques of using out-of-band light to improve sensing speed and spatial frequency content, new control laws incorporating feedback and feedforward for more optimal control, new algorithms for estimating absolute and relative wavefront changes, and the use of artificial guide stars for improved sensing signal-to-noise ratio and speed. Current methods of metrology include edge sensors (capacitive, inductive, or optical) for maintaining segment cophasing and laser distance interferometers for absolute measurement of system rigid-body alignment. Development of these techniques to improve sensitivity, speed, and component reliability is desired. Low-power, high-reliability electronics are also needed. Metrology techniques for system verification and validation at the picometer level during integration and test (I&T) are also needed. High-speed spatial and speckle interferometers are currently capable of measuring single-digit picometer displacements and deformations on small components in controlled environments. Extension of these techniques to large-scale optics and structures in typical I&T environments is needed.

Finally, mirror segment actuators are needed to align and co-phase segmented aperture mirrors to diffraction-limited tolerances. Depending upon the mission, these mechanisms may need precisions of <1 nm rms and the ability to operate at temperatures as low as 10 K. Potential technologies include superconducting mechanisms.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.2 Observatories

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Hardware
• Software
• Prototype

Desired Deliverables Description:

An ideal Phase I deliverable would be a prototype demonstration of a fabrication, test, or control technology leading to a successful Phase II delivery. Past experience or technology demonstrations that support the design and manufacturing plans will be given appropriate weight in the evaluation.

An ideal Phase II project would further advance the technology to demonstrate the manufacturing process, metrology instrument, or sense and control system on a flight-traceable optical component. Phase II deliverables would be accompanied by all necessary documentation, including the optical performance assessment and all data on processing properties. A successful mission-oriented Phase II would have a credible plan for how to integrate the technology into a potential mission as well as demonstrate an understanding of how the engineering specifications of their system meets the performance requirements and operational constraints of the mission (including mechanical and thermal stability analyses). 

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Deterministic optical fabrication is relatively mature. There are multiple small and large companies offering commercial products and services. The Webb and Roman telescopes were/are being fabricated by deterministic processes. However, these processes are expensive. Technology advances are required to enhance these processes and reduce their cost—particularly for large mirrors.

Wavefront sensing using star images, including dispersed-fringe and phase-retrieval methods, is at TRL 6, qualified for space by Webb. WF sensing and control for coronagraphs, including electric field conjugation and low-order wavefront sensing (LOWFS), is at TRL4 and is being developed and demonstrated by the Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope Coronagraph Instrument (WFIRST/CGI). But none of these technologies have the precision and frequency bandwidth to enable <3 pm rms stability needed for exo-Earth coronagraphy.

Laser-distance interferometers for point-to-point measurements with accuracies from nanometers to picometers have been demonstrated on the ground by the Space Interferometry Mission and other projects and in orbit by the LISA Pathfinder and Grace Follow-On missions. Application to telescope alignment metrology has been demonstrated on testbeds to TRL 4 for nanometer accuracy. Picometer accuracy for telescopes awaits demonstration.

Edge sensors are in use on segmented ground telescopes but are not yet on space telescopes. New designs are needed to provide picometer sensitivity and millimeter range in a space-qualified package.

Higher order wavefront sensing for coronagraphs using out-of-band light is beginning development, with data limited to computer simulations.

Mechanism SOA is defined by the JWST actuators. They provide ample range for far-IR applications, but are more precision than necessary and are expensive. Furthermore, they are not adequate for UVO applications.

Potential solutions for achieving <3 pm wavefront stability include, but are not limited to: metrology, passive control, and active control for optical alignment and mirror phasing; active vibration isolation; metrology; and passive and active thermal control.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

This subtopic scope primarily matures fabrication/test and wavefront control technologies for potential Astrophysics Division missions that address technology gaps identified by the 2022 Astrophysics Biennial Technology Report (https://apd440.gsfc.nasa.gov/technology.html) and the 2022 Exoplanet Exploration Program Technology Gap List (https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/internal_resources/2269/https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/internal_resources/2269/). Specific examples include large-aperture ultra-stable telescopes and large-aperture cryogenic telescopes.

Fabrication and testing technologies for deterministic optical manufacturing are enabling/enhancing for large monolithic and segmented aperture telescopes for missions ranging from UV to optical to far-IR. Control technologies are enabling for coronagraph-equipped space telescopes and segmented space telescopes. 

References:

Scope Title:

Special Topics:Near Angle Scatter and Ultra-Stiff Biologically InspiredMirror Substrates

Scope Description:

Topic #1: Near Angle Scatter

Near angle scatter from surface microroughness, optical coating columnar structure, surface defects, contamination, radiation exposure, and micrometeoroid impacts can limit the ability to detect and characterize Earth-like planets in the habitable zones of Sun-like stars. Models, validated by experiment, that predict scattered light amplitude at angular separation from the host star from 40 to 500 milliarcseconds as a function of these sources are needed to help define component specifications for a potential 6-m mission to perform exo-Earth science.

Topic #2: Ultra-Stiff Biologically Inspired Mirror Substrates

This special topic solicits companies that can manufacture exotic mirror substrate structures, either of their own design or of NASA’s design. Telescope stability is enabling for missions at all wavelengths (ultraviolet (UV), optical, infrared (IR), and far-IR). It is particularly enabling for coronagraph and interferometric instruments. The stiffer an optical component and structure is, the more stable the resulting telescope will be. Stiffness is also important for balloon missions which need to minimize change in gravity sag of its primary mirror as a function of elevation angle. Historically, high-stiffness low-mass mirrors and structures have been achieved using low-density materials (such as beryllium or SiC) or extreme lightweighting of glass mirrors. Currently, this subtopic is investing in additively manufactured mirrors. In all previous cases, however, the fabricated mirrors used "classical" geometric architectural forms. Biologically inspired architectures might yield mirrors and telescope structures with lower mass and higher stiffness. Biologically inspired architectures might enable the design of structures that more efficiently distribute load and control modal responses. 

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 2 to 3

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.2 Observatories

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

For Topic #1: Near Angle Scatter

• Phase I detailed theoretical analysis of how to predict near angle scatter in the 40 to 500 milliarcseconds region and an implementable test plan to validate the model.
• Phase II data that validates with greater than 99% confidence a model for predicting near-angle scatter in the 40 to 500 milliarcseconds region.

For Topic #2: Ultra-Stiff Biologically Inspired Mirror Substrates

• An ideal Phase I deliverable would be a precision optical system of at least 0.15 m or a relevant subcomponent of a system whose stiffness or modal properties can be modeled and verified by test. 
• An ideal Phase II project would further advance the technology by producing a flight-qualifiable optical system greater than 0.5 m or a relevant subcomponent (with a TRL in the 4 to 5 range).
• Phase I and Phase II system or component deliverables would be accompanied by all necessary documentation, including the optical performance assessment and all data on processing and properties of its substrate materials. 

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Mirror technology is enabling for all potential Science Mission Directorate (SMD) science. Special Topic #1 is directly traceable to the Decadal recommended exo-planet mission.  Special Topic #2 has applicability to any mission requiring a large-aperture low-mass stiff telescope.

References:

NASA: "X-ray and Cryogenic Facility," https://optics.msfc.nasa.gov/tech-2/

Scope Title:

X-Ray Mirror Systems Technology

Scope Description:

NASA large x-ray observatories require low-cost, ultrastable, preferably lightweight mirrors with high-reflectance optical coatings and effective stray-light suppression. The current state of the art of mirror fabrication technology for x-ray missions is very expensive and time consuming. Additionally, a number of improvements such as 1 arcsec or better angular resolutions and 1 to 5 m² collecting areas are needed for this technology. Likewise, the stray-light suppression system is bulky and ineffective for wide-field-of-view telescopes.
 

In this area, we are looking to address the multiple technologies, including improvements to manufacturing (machining, rapid optical fabrication, slumping, or replication technologies); metrology, performance prediction, and testing techniques; active control of mirror shapes; new structures for holding and actively aligning of mirrors in a telescope assembly to enable x-ray observatories while lowering the cost per square meter of the collecting aperture; and effective design of stray-light suppression in preparation for the Decadal Survey of 2020. Additionally, we need epoxies that impart little to no stress on the mirrors during application and curing. For silicon mirrors, the epoxies should absorb infrared (IR) radiation (with wavelengths between 1.5 and 6 µm that traverse silicon with little or no absorption) and therefore be cured quickly with a beam of IR radiation. Currently, x-ray space mirrors cost $4 million to $6 million per square meter of optical surface area. This research effort seeks a cost reduction for precision optical components by 5 to 50 times, to less than $1M to $100K per square meter.
 

Additionally, proposals are solicited to develop new advanced-technology computer-numerical-control (CNC) machines to polish the inside and/or outside of a full-shell substrate (between 100 and 1,000 mm in height, 100 to 2,800 mm in diameter, varying radial prescription along azimuth, ~2 mm in thickness), grazing-incidence optics to x-ray-quality surface tolerances (with surface figure error <1 arcsec half-power diameter (HPD), radial slope error <1 µrad, out-of-round <2 µm). Current state-of-the-art technology in CNC polishing of full-shell substrate, grazing-incidence optics yields better than 2.5 arcsec HPD on the mandrel used for replicating shells. Technology advances beyond current state of the art include application of CNC and deterministic polishing techniques that (1) allow for direct force closed-loop control, (2) reduce alignment precision requirements, and (3) optimize the machine for polishing cylindrical optics through simplifying the axis arrangement and the layout of the cavity of the CNC polishing machine.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.2 Observatories

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Typical deliverable based on subelements of this subtopic is an X-ray optical mirror system—demonstration, analysis, reports, software, and hardware prototype:

• Phase I deliverables:  Reports, analysis, demonstration, and prototype.
• Phase II deliverables: Analysis, demonstration, and prototype.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

X-ray optics manufacturing, metrology, coating, testing, and assembling complete mirror systems in addition to maturing the current technology is very costly and time consuming. Most of the SOA (state of the art) requiring improvement is ~10 arcsec angular resolution. SOA stray-light suppression is bulky and ineffective for wide-field-of-view telescopes. We seek a significant reduction in both expense and time. Reduce the areal cost of a telescope by 2× such that the larger collecting area can be produced for the same cost or half the cost.
 

The gaps to be covered in this track are:

• Lightweight, low-cost, ultrastable mirrors for large x-ray observatories.
• Stray-light suppression systems (baffles) for large advanced x-ray observatories.
• Ultrastable, inexpensive, lightweight x-ray telescope using grazing-incidence optics for high-altitude balloon-borne and rocket-borne missions.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

The 2010 National Academy Decadal Report specifically identifies optical components and the ability to manufacture and perform precise metrology on them needed to enable several different future missions (Lynx and Advanced X-ray Imaging Satellite (AXIS)).
 

The National Research Council NASA Technology Roadmap Assessment ranked advanced mirror technology for new x-ray telescopes as the #1 Object C technology requiring NASA investment.

References:

NASA High Energy Astrophysics (HEA) mission concepts including x-ray missions and studies are available at: https://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/heasarc/missions/concepts.html

Scope Title:

Coating Technology for X-Ray-UV-OIR

Scope Description:

The optical coating technology is a mission-enabling feature that enhances the optical performance and science return of a mission. Lowering the areal cost of coating determines if a proposed mission could be funded in the current cost environment. The most common forms of coating used on precision optics are antireflective (AR) coating and high-reflective (HR) coating.
 

The current coating technology of optical components is needed to support the 2020 Astrophysics Decadal process. Historically, it takes 10 years to mature mirror technology from TRL 3 to 6. Achieving these objectives requires sustained systematic investment.
 

The telescope optical coating needs to meet a low-temperature operation requirement. It is desirable to achieve 35 K in the future.
 

Many future NASA missions require suppression of scattered light. For instance, the precision optical cube utilized in a beam-splitter application forms a knife-edge that is positioned within the optical system to split a single beam into two halves. The scattered light from the knife-edge could be suppressed by carbon nanotube (CNT) coating. Similarly, scattered light suppression for gravitational-wave observatories and lasercom systems where simultaneous transmit/receive operation is required could be achieved by a highly absorbing coating such as CNT. Ideally, the application of CNT coatings needs to:
 

• Achieve broadband (visible plus near-infrared (NIR)) reflectivity of 0.1% or less.
• Resist bleaching or significant albedo changes over a mission life of at least 10 years.
• Withstand launch conditions such as vibration, acoustics, etc.
• Tolerate both high continuous-wave (CW) and pulsed power and power densities without damage: ~10 W for CW and ~0.1 GW/cm² power density, and 1-kW/nsec pulses.
• Adhere to a multilayer dielectric or protected metal coating, including ion beam sputtering (IBS) coating.

NASA's Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) mission requires a telescope that operates simultaneously in transmission and reception. An off-axis optical design is used to avoid having the secondary mirror send the transmitted beam directly back at the receiver. Very low reflectivity coatings will help further suppress scattered light from the telescope structure and mounts. In addition, the ability to fabricate very low reflectivity apodized petal-shaped masks at the center of a secondary mirror may enable the use of an on-axis optical telescope design, which may have some advantages in stability as well as in fabrication and alignment because of its symmetry. The emerging cryogenic etching of black silicon has demonstrated bidirectional reflectance distribution function (BRDF) ultralow reflectance with specular reflectance of 1×10^-7 in the range of 500 to 1064 nm. The advancement of this technology is desired to obtain ultralow reflectivity:
 

• Improve the specular reflectance to 1×10^-10 and hemispherical reflectance to better than 0.1%.
• Improve the cryogenic etching process to provide a variation of the reflectance (apodization effect) by increasing or decreasing the height of the features.
• Explore etching process and duration.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.2 Observatories

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Coating—analysis, reports, software, demonstration of the concept, and prototype:

• Phase I deliverables: Report, analysis, demonstration, and prototype.
• Phase II deliverables: Analysis, demonstration, and prototype.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Coating technology (for a wide range of wavelengths from x-ray to IR: x-ray, extended ultraviolet (EUV), Lyman UV (LUV), vacuum UV (VUV), visible, and IR):

• The current x-ray coating is defined by Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array (NuSTAR).
• Current EUV is defined by Heliophysics (80% reflectivity from 60 to 200 nm).
• Current UV-optical-IR (UVOIR) is defined by Hubble. MgF₂-overcoated aluminum on 2.4-m mirror. This coating has birefringence concerns and marginally acceptable reflectivity between 100 and 200 nm.

Metrics for x-ray:

• Multilayer high-reflectance coatings for hard x-ray mirrors.
• Multilayer depth-gradient coatings for 5 to 80 keV with high broadband reflectivity.
• Zero-net-stress coating of iridium or other high-reflectance elements on thin substrates (<0.5 mm).

Metrics for EUV:

• Reflectivity >90% from 6 to 90 nm onto a <2-m mirror substrate.

Metrics for Large UV/Optical/IR Surveyor (LUVOIR):

• Broadband reflectivity >70% from 90 to 120 nm (LUV) and >90% from 120 nm to 2.5 µm (VUV/visible/IR).
• Reflectivity non-uniformity <1% from 90 nm to 2.5 µm.
• Induced polarization aberration <1% for 400 nm to 2.5 µm spectral range from mirror coating applicable to a 1- to 8-m substrate.

Metrics for LISA:

• HR: Reflectivity >99% at 1064+/-2 nm with very low scattered light and polarization-independent performance over apertures of ~0.5 m.
• AR: Reflectivity <0.005% at 1064+/-2 nm.
  • Low-absorption, low-scatter, laser-line optical coatings at 1064 nm.
  • High reflectivity, R > 0.9995.
  • Performance in a space environment without significant degradation over time due, for example, to radiation exposure or outgassing.
  • High polarization purity, low optical birefringence over a range of incident angles from ~5° to ~20°.
  • Low coating noise (thermal, photothermal, etc.) for high-precision interferometric measurements.
  • Ability to endure applied temperature gradients (without destructive effects, such as delamination from the substrate).
  • Ability to clean and protect the coatings and optical surfaces during mission integration and testing. Cleaning should not degrade the coating performance.

Nonstationary optical coatings:

• Used in reflection and transmission that vary with location on the optical surface.

CNT coatings:

• Broadband visible to NIR, total hemispherical reflectivity of 0.01% or less, adhere to the multilayer dielectric or protected metal coating.

Black-silicon cryogenic etching (new):

• Broadband UV+visible+NIR+IR, reflectivity of 0.01% or less, adhere to the multilayer dielectric (silicon) or protected metal.

Software tools to simulate and assist the anisotropic etching by employing a variety of modeling techniques such as rigorous coupled-wave analysis (RCWA), method of moments (MOM), finite-difference time domain (FDTD), finite element method (FEM), transfer matrix method (TMM), and effective medium theory (EMT).

Relevance / Science Traceability:

• Coating for x-ray, EUV, LUV, UV, visible, and IR telescopes: Astrophysics Decadal specifically calls for optical coating technology investment for future UV/optical and exoplanet missions.
• Heliophysics 2009 Roadmap identifies optical coating technology investments for Origins of Near-Earth Plasma (ONEP), Ion-Neutral Coupling in the Atmosphere (INCA), Dynamic Geospace Coupling (DGC), Fine-scale Advanced Coronal Transition-Region Spectrograph (FACTS), Reconnection and Micro-scale (RAM), and Solar-C.
• LISA requires low-scatter HR coatings and low reflectivity coatings for scatter suppression near 1064 nm. Polarization-independent performance is important.
• Nulling polarimetry/coronagraphy for exoplanets imaging and characterization, dust and debris disks, extra-galactic studies, and relativistic and nonrelativistic jet studies.

References:

Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) is a space-based gravitational wave observatory building on the success of LISA Pathfinder and Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO). Led by the European Space Agency (ESA), the new LISA mission (based on the 2017 L3 competition) is a collaboration between ESA and NASA. More information can be found at: https://lisa.nasa.gov

Scope Title:

Free-Form Optics

Scope Description:

Future NASA science missions demand wider fields of view in a smaller package. These missions could benefit greatly by free-form optics, as they provide nonrotationally symmetric optics, which allow for better packaging while maintaining desired image quality. Currently, the design and fabrication of free-form surfaces is costly. Even though various techniques are being investigated to create complex optical surfaces, small-size missions highly desire efficient small packages with lower cost that increase the field of view and expand the operational temperature range of unobscured systems. In addition to the free-form fabrication, the metrology of free-form optical components is difficult and challenging because of the large departure from planar or spherical shapes accommodated by conventional interferometric testing. New methods such as multibeam low-coherence optical probe and slope-sensitive optical probe are highly desirable.
 

Specific metrics are:

• Design: Innovative design methods/tools for free-form systems, including applications to novel reflective optical designs with large fields of view (>30°) and fast F/#s (<2.0).
• Fabrication: 10-cm-diameter optical surfaces (mirrors) with free-form optical prescriptions >1 mm, spherical departure with surface figure error <10 nm rms, and roughness <5 Å; 10-cm-diameter blazed optical reflective gratings on free-form surface shapes with >1 mm departure from a best-fit-sphere and grating spacings from 1 to 100 µm; larger mirrors are also desired for flagship missions for ultraviolet (UV) and coronagraphic applications, with 10-cm- to 1-m-diameter surfaces having figure error <5 nm rms and roughness <1 Å rms.
• Metrology: Accurate metrology of free-form optical components with large spherical departures (>1 mm), independent of requiring prescription-specific null lenses or holograms.

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 6

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.2 Observatories

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Research
• Analysis
• Prototype
• Hardware
• Software

Desired Deliverables Description:

Optical components—demonstration, analysis, design, metrology, software, and hardware prototype:

• Phase I deliverables: Report, analysis, demonstration, and prototype.
• Phase II deliverables: Analysis, demonstration, and prototype.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Free-form optics design, fabrication, and metrology for package-constrained imaging systems. This field is in early stages of development. Improving the optical surfaces with large field of view and fast F/#s is highly desirable.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

NASA missions with alternative low-cost science and small-size payload are increasing. However, the traditional interferometric testing as a means of metrology is unsuited to free-form optical surfaces due to changing curvature and lack of symmetry. Metrology techniques for large fields-of-view and fast F/#s in small size instruments are highly desirable—specifically if they could enable cost-effective manufacturing of these surfaces (e. g. CubeSat, SmallSat, and NanoSat). Additionally, design studies for large observatories such as Origins Space Telescope (OST) and Large UV/Optical/IR Surveyor (LUVOIR, currently being proposed for the 2020 Astrophysics Decadal Survey) have demonstrated improved optical performance over a larger field-of-view afforded by free-form optics. Such programs will require advances in free-form metrology to be successful.

References:

• "Application for Freeforms Optics at NASA," https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20170010419.pdf
• "Alignment and Testing for a Freeform Telescope," https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20180007557
• "Freeform Surface Characterization and Instrument Alignment for Freeform Space Applications,"  https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20190025929

Led by the Science Mission Directorate (SMD), NASA will carry out the scientific exploration of our Earth, the planets, moons, comets, and asteroids of our solar system, and the universe beyond. SMD’s future direction will be moving away from exploratory missions (orbiters and flybys) into more detailed/specific exploration missions that are at or near the surface (landers, rovers, and sample returns) or at more optimal observation points in space. These future destinations will require new vantage points or would need to integrate or distribute capabilities across multiple assets. Future destinations will also be more challenging to get to, have more extreme environmental conditions and challenges once the spacecraft gets there, and maybe a challenge to get a spacecraft or data back from. A major objective of the NASA science spacecraft and platform subsystems development efforts is to enable science measurement capabilities using smaller and lower-cost spacecraft to meet multiple mission requirements, thus making the best use of our limited resources. To accomplish this objective, NASA is seeking innovations to significantly improve spacecraft and platform subsystem capabilities while reducing the mass and cost that would in turn enable increased scientific return for future NASA missions. A spacecraft bus is made up of many subsystems such as propulsion; thermal control; power and power distribution; attitude control; telemetry command and control; transmitters/antenna; computers/on-board processing/software; and structural elements. High-performance space computing technologies are also included in this focus area. Science platforms of interest could range from unpiloted aerial vehicles, sounding rockets, or balloons that carry scientific instruments/payloads, to planetary ascent vehicles or Earth return vehicles that bring samples back to Earth for analysis. This topic area addresses the future needs in many of these sub-system areas, as well as their application to specific spacecraft and platform needs. For planetary missions, planetary protection requirements vary by planetary destination, and additional backward contamination requirements apply to hardware with the potential to return to Earth (e.g., as part of a sample return mission). Technologies intended for use at/around Mars, Europa (Jupiter), and Enceladus (Saturn) must be developed so as to ensure compliance with relevant planetary protection requirements. Constraints could include surface cleaning with alcohol or water, and/or sterilization treatments such as dry heat (approved specification in NPR 8020.12; exposure of hours at 115° C or higher, non-functioning); penetrating radiation (requirements not yet established), or vapor-phase hydrogen peroxide (specification pending). The National Academies’ Decadal Surveys for Astrophysics, Earth Science, Heliophysics, and Planetary Science discuss some of NASA’s science mission and technology needs and are available at https://nap.nationalacademies.org/.  

Scope Title:

Extreme Environments Technology

Scope Description:

NASA's missions support a diversity of environments with extreme conditions that are not observed on Earth. Traditional approaches for building a spacecraft for these environments call for the use of environmental protective housings to keep the instruments and other hardware in Earth-like conditions. These environmental protective housings are mass and power intensive. To eliminate the need for these environmental protective housings with large size, weight and power (SWaP), this subtopic develops technologies for producing space systems and instruments that can directly operate in the extreme environments of NASA missions.

This subtopic addresses NASA's need to develop space technologies and systems that can operate without environmental protection housing in the extreme environments of NASA missions. Key performance parameters of interest are survivability and operation under one of the following conditions:

1. Very low temperature environments (as low as -240 °C) (e.g., temperatures at the surfaces of Titan and of other ocean worlds, and in permanently shadowed craters on the Moon).
2. Combination of low-temperature and high-radiation environments (-180 °C with 2.9 Mrad of radiation) (e.g., surface conditions of Europa).
3. Very high temperature and high pressure and chemically corrosive environments (480 °C, 90 bar) (e.g., Venus surface conditions).

NASA is interested in expanding its ability to explore the deep atmospheres and surfaces of planets, asteroids, and comets through the use of long-lived (>10 days) balloons, rovers, and landers. Survivability in extreme high temperatures and high pressures is also required for deep-atmospheric probes to the giant planets. Proposals are sought for technologies that are suitable for remote-sensing applications at cryogenic temperatures and in situ atmospheric and surface explorations in the high-temperature, high-pressure environment at the Venusian surface or in low-temperature environments such as those of Titan, Europa, Ganymede, Mars, the Moon, asteroids, comets, and other small bodies. In addition, proposals are sought for technologies that enable NASA's long-duration missions to environments with wide temperature swings and high cosmic radiation. High reliability, ease of maintenance, low size, weight, and power (SWaP), and low outgassing characteristics are highly desirable. Special interest lies in the development of the following technologies that are suitable for the environments discussed above:

• Wide-temperature-range precision mechanisms: for example, beam-steering, scanner, linear, and tilting multi-axis mechanisms.
• Radiation-tolerant/radiation-hardened low-power, low-noise, mixed-signal  control electronics for precision actuators and sensors.
• Wide-temperature-range, radiation-hard sensors and actuators for autonomous robotic missions.
• Wide-temperature-range feedback sensors with subarcsecond/nanometer precision.
• Long-life, long-stroke, low-power, and high-torque force actuators with subarcsecond/nanometer precision.
• Long-life bearings/tribological surfaces/lubricants.
• High-temperature analog and digital electronics, electronic components, and in-circuit energy storage (capacitors, inductors, etc.) elements.
• High-temperature actuators and gearboxes for robotic arms and other mechanisms.
• Low-power and wide-operating-temperature radiation-tolerant/radiation-hardened radio-frequency (RF) electronics.
• Radiation-tolerant/radiation-hardened, low-power/ultralow-power, wide-operating-temperature, low-noise mixed-signal electronics for spaceborne systems such as guidance and navigation avionics and instruments.
• Radiation-tolerant/radiation-hardened, wide-operating-temperature power electronics.
• Radiation-tolerant/radiation-hardened electronic packaging (including shielding, passives, connectors, wiring harness, and materials used in advanced electronics assembly).

Expected TRL or TRL Range at completion of the Project: 3 to 5

Primary Technology Taxonomy:

• Level 1 08 Sensors and Instruments
• Level 2 08.X Other Sensors and Instruments

Desired Deliverables of Phase I and Phase II:

• Prototype
• Hardware
• Research
• Analysis

Desired Deliverables Description:

Provide research results and analysis for Phase I as a final report. Deliverables for Phase II should include proof-of-concept working prototypes that demonstrate the innovations defined in the proposal and enable direct operation in extreme environments. 

Research and technology development work should be conducted to demonstrate technical feasibility during Phase I and show a path toward a Phase II hardware demonstration, and when possible, deliver a demonstration unit for functional and environmental testing at the completion of the Phase II contract.

State of the Art and Critical Gaps:

Future NASA missions to high-priority targets in our solar system will require systems that have to operate at extreme environmental conditions. Current state-of-practice for development of space systems is to place the hardware developed with conventional technologies into bulky and power-inefficient environmentally protective housings. The use of environmental-protection housing will severely increase the mass of the space system and limit the life of the mission and the corresponding science return. More recently, researchers have worked on technologies that are tolerant to extreme environments. Example of such technologies include sensor and electronic platforms in silicon carbide, silicon germanium, and III-nitrides. However, these developments are still at the early stages and need to be advanced to higher technology readiness levels (TRLs) to be applicable to NASA missions. This solicitation seeks to change the state of the practice by supporting technologies that will enable development of low-SWaP, highly efficient systems that can readily survive and operate in these extreme environments without the need for the environmental protection systems.

All proposals relevant to the scope described above would be eligible to be considered for award. This year a preference will be given to those proposals that would benefit in situ studies of planets with extreme environments. Specific examples include techniques that would be beneficial to systems that will descend through kilometers of cryogenic ice in ocean worlds, acquire and communicate scientific observations during descent, and sample and concentrate meltwater and interior oceans.

Relevance / Science Traceability:

Relevance to SMD (Science Mission Directorate) is high.

Low-temperature survivability is required for surface missions to Titan (-180 °C), Europa (-220 °C), Ganymede (-200 °C), small bodies, and comets. Mars diurnal temperatures range from -120 °C to +20 °C. For the Europa Clipper baseline concept with a mission life of 10 years, the radiation environment is estimated at 2.9 Mrad TID (total ionizing dose) behind 0.1-in-thick aluminum. Lunar equatorial region temperatures swing from -180 °C to +130 °C during the lunar day/night cycle, and shadowed lunar pole temperatures can drop to -240 °C.

Advanced technologies for high-temperature systems (electronic, electromechanical, and mechanical) and pressure vessels are needed to ensure NASA can meet its long-duration (days instead of hours) life target for its science missions that operate in high-temperature and high-pressure environments.

References:

• Proceedings of the Extreme Environment Sessions of the IEEE Aerospace Conference: https://www.aeroconf.org/ (or via IEEE Xplore Digital Library)
• Proceedings of the meetings of the Venus Exploration Analysis Group (VEXAG): https://www.lpi.usra.edu/vexag/
• Proceedings of the meetings of the Outer Planet Assessment Group (OPAG): https://www.lpi.usra.edu/opag/

Scope Title:

Contamination Control (CC) and Planetary Protection (PP) Implementation and Verification

Scope Description: