1 / 23

NASA NRA

NASA NRA. Recommendation:. Steps to “NRA Start”. ScottCarpenter@eden-corp.com 29-Jun-00. Slide # / Relevance. 3-5 Objectives for years 1-3 (assumed) 6-11 5-Steps to prepare the NRA 12 Qualitative funding breakdown 13,14 Possible Program position by year-1 end

miyoko
Download Presentation

NASA NRA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NASA NRA

  2. Recommendation: Steps to “NRA Start” ScottCarpenter@eden-corp.com 29-Jun-00

  3. Slide # / Relevance 3-5 Objectives for years 1-3 (assumed) 6-11 5-Steps to prepare the NRA 12 Qualitative funding breakdown 13,14 Possible Program position by year-1 end 15,16 Questions that should have answers by the end of the 3rd year 17 Action Items (Pre-NRA)

  4. Year-1 Strategic Objectives • Establish a foundation for future decision making. • Gather knowledge about issues related to the development and operation of a space fusion propulsion plant. • Preliminarily assess the benefit of fusion over alternate propulsion systems for possible future space missions. • Develop a relationship with fusion-energy players, such as the DOE, fusion community, et al.

  5. Year-1 Key Tactical Objectives • Upgrade systems integration for manypropulsion concepts (paper studies). • Develop tools that enable transparent, fair, and objective assessment of fusion and non-fusion propulsion to accomplish specific arduous space missions.

  6. Year-2 & 3 Macro Objectives • Continue upgrading paper studies where warranted, and building a knowledge base to support next-level funding decisions and program directions. • For each concept, address industrial base readiness; programmatic technology, infrastructure technology, and material resource needs; gross cost estimate; political and social commitment requirements; environmental and safety considerations; and other special features. • Select key systems for proof of principle technology development, if warranted (risk mitigation mind set).

  7. Steps to Initiate Year-1 NRA 1c. Describe Assessment ToolNeeds 1b. Describe Reference Space Missions 1a. Describe Standards for Vehicle Definition 2a. Request Proposals for Propulsion ConceptPaper Studies 2b. Request Proposals for Assessment Tool Development

  8. 1a. Describe Standards forVehicle Definition Rationale: These standards describe what’s needed for fair, transparent, and objective comparison of propulsion system performance (independent of space mission, payload, politics, cost, ...) Define: • terminology, • units, and • figures of merit Define minimum consideration in: • subsystem thoroughness and • engine-absorbed waste heat. Deadline: living draft available online prior to NRA release. Action: place earlier draft definitions online now (C. Williams et al.), and solicit comments from the Working Group for upgrades. Funded recipients need this information by the time of NRA release.

  9. 1b. Describe ReferenceSpace Missions Rationale: Reference space missions are needed to evaluate return-on-investment (ROI) for competing fusion, fission, chemical, and other devices over a variety of mission classes that may be needed in the future. Define reference missions and classes: • human mars and outer solar system, • robotic mass-moving, • multi-mission-engine classes, ... Define: • terminology, • units, and • figures of merit Deadline: living draft available online prior to NRA release. Action: solicit mission definitions from the Working Group now, put them online ASAP; prior to NRA release, organize them into a living draft of a broad range of classes with key reference missions.

  10. 1c. Describe Assessment ToolNeeds Rationale: To facilitate transparent, fair, and objective comparisons requires user-friendly, easily-accessible trade-study tools. Define assessment tool needs: • common platform for model intercomparisons (EXCEL?), • impulse and continuous thrust astrodynamic navigation, • mission-window and payload tracking, ... Deadline: living draft available online prior to NRA release. Action: solicit trade-study tool needs from the Working Group now, put them online ASAP; prior to NRA release, organize them into a living draft of a broad range of tool needs.

  11. 2a. Request Proposals for Propulsion Concept Paper Studies Rationale: To provide nominal support to bring many fusion propulsion concepts up to minimum standards required for transparent, fair, and objective assessment. Define selection & submission criteria: • NASA to describe programmatic needs & submission reqmnts, • Proposer to identify their concept’s missing subsystems, • Proposer to identify tentative technology status, ... Deadline: NASA part available online as part of the NRA release. Action: Solicit suggestions from the Working Group for defining the “Proposer Request for Funding” part of the NRA. Put suggestions online now for comment by the Working Group.

  12. 2b. Request Proposals for Assessment-Tool Development Rationale: To provide nominal support to develop user-friendly trade-study tools for eventual use by participants, management, and the public for assessing fusion-engine/space-mission benefit. Define selection & submission criteria: • NASA to describe programmatic needs & submission reqmnts, • Proposer to describe the benefit of their assessment tool, • Proposer to describe user-friendliness and portability, ... Deadline: NASA part available online as part of the NRA release. Action: Solicit suggestions from the Working Group for defining the “Proposer Request for Funding” part of the NRA. Put suggestions online now for comment by the Working Group.

  13. Possible Year-1 Funding Breakdownassumption = 2M$/year • Oversight, • Working Group, • outreach, • education, • contingency 3. Program Coordination 2a. Paper Studies Fund upgrades of ~10 fusion propulsion studies, say 100K$ each ? • Astro-navigation, • mission window and payload tracking, • infrastructure tracking, • standardized modeling platform deployment, • web-integration. 2b. Assessment-Tool Development

  14. Possible Program Position by Year-1 End(detail on next slide)

  15. A Growing Number of Dynamic Transparent Modules The Model Owner retains their specific platform, butto keep it simple and transparent for the Program, all models are translated to a Common Platform (say EXCEL Spreadsheet Modules). - This probably needs more explanation.

  16. Questions that may be Answered during Years 1-3 NASA can facilitate a worldwide consortium of government, university, industry, and public partners to find answer's to the following questions. 1. Can mission-capability per unit-cost be improved through fusion propulsion? 2. What space missions could benefit, or require, fusion propulsion? 3. Which fusion power plant concepts are adaptable for propulsion in space? 4. What is the status of fusion-technology on Earth? 5. What are the special adaptations required for space-based fusion systems? 6. How can existing candidate space-based fusion concepts be brought up to standards useful for a fair comparison? 7. What are the categories of figure-of-merits (FOMs) needed for comparison? 8. What subsystems must be considered for a fair concept comparison? 9. What tools are needed to perform subsystem/space-mission trades? (continued on next slide)

  17. Questions that may be Answered during Years 1-3 (continued) 10. What tools are needed for comparison to non-fusion propulsion concepts? 11. What tools are needed to assess the space-mission capability of specific fusion concepts, taking into account mission window and planet alignment? 12. What tools are needed to easily determine astrodynamic flight path? 13. What tools are needed for multi-mission payload tracking? 14. What are the special operating concerns of fusion-propulsion concepts? 15. What are the logical parking orbits and construction orbits? 16. What infrastructure is required to support launch, construction, and operations? 17. What are the knowledge-based tools needed to manage and to keep the participants, the public, and government informed of the issues and progress of the project?

  18. Action Items (Pre-NRA) • Establish 6 new topical message boards dedicated to gathering information, by the Working Group, that is required for NRA release: 1. Suggested “Vehicle Definition” Standards 2. Suggested Reference Space Missions 3. Suggested Software Tool Development to Facilitate Transparent, Fair, and Objective Engine/Mission-Capability Comparisons 4. NRA selection & submission criteria for Fusion Engine Paper Studies 5. NRA selection & submission criteria for Assessment-Tool Development 6. Ask questions that need answering during Phase-I of the fusion program (Years 1-3?) • Use the Planned October Workshop to abridge, articulate, and finalize the issues discovered in the Message Boards above.

  19. Yellow brick roadmap. Spectacular Event Roadmap. Business Roadmap.

  20. “yellow brick” Roadmap Space Fusion Transportation System Spectacular Event Planned Rational

  21. “yellow brick” Roadmap ~ Quantum Mechanics Here one instant, gone the next. Scott A. Carpenter,19-Jan-02-Sat-21:25

  22. Fusion will track with the software technology part of the WWW, the Semantic Web. Real System Virtual Prototypes Automacy Age of Semantic Web, Universal Taxonomies Transparency Time “yellow brick” Roadmaps Scott A. Carpenter,19-Jan-02-Sat-20:25

More Related