PROPOSAL AND BUSINESS PLAN SUBMITTED TO THE 1999 "NASA MEANS BUSINESS" STUDENT COMPETITION
ACOUSTIC SHAPING, INC: MANUFACTURERS IN MARS ORBIT
By the Georgia Tech team
Sam Wanis, Don Changeau, Justin Hausaman, Ashraf Charania, Catherine Matos, Richard Ames
DECEMBER 1998 I. Proposal Summary
The Georgia Tech team proposes a Business Plan for a technical concept which they have demonstrated in '97 and '98 NASA Microgravity flight-tests: Acoustic Shaping as a means of non- contact manufacturing in Space. Acoustic Shaping will offer flexible manufacturing of pressure vessels and precision-formed components using raw material obtained from moons and asteroids. The customers are the space-faring construction industry, as well as bio-engineering companies of the 21st century. Material from lunar and asteroid-based mines will be shipped to manufacturing facilities in Earth and Mars orbit. Finished products will be delivered using aerodynamic decelerators to customers on planetary surfaces, or used in the construction of space station modules and vehicles for other missions. By reducing the cost of manufactured components to a fraction of the cost of Earth-built or machined components, ASI will provide an enabling resource for human exploration of the Solar system. A systematic Implementation Plan is laid out to develop ASI as the aerospace construction industry of the 21st century. From its already-demonstrated technical foundations, the Plan reaches out using the student team's projections of the evolving space industry. This Plan is used to convey a sampling of Georgia Tech's capabilities and interests in NASA's HEDS mission, across disciplines and levels. The team has won support from faculty research teams across the School of Aerospace Engineering, the Dupree College of Business and the GT-Emory School of Biomedical Engineering, each of which brings research and curricular capabilities to this mission. The letter from the Chair of AE, and the participation of a powerful core of expertise, highlight Georgia Tech's support behind the enthusiasm of the student team. This proposal integrates the efforts of both Georgia Tech teams which submitted Letters of Intent to NASA.
1 LIST OF CONTENTS
I. Proposal Summary 1
II. Business Plan 3
1. Executive Summary 3
2. Technical Proposal 7 2.1 Introduction 7 2.2 Technology Model & Assumptions 8 2.3 Acoustic Shaping Technology 8 2.4 Implementation Plan 9 2.5 Discussion 9 2.6 Implementation Plan 13 3. Market and Economic Analysis 20
III. Supplemental Information: 23 Georgia Tech capabilities & interests associated with this project 1. School of Aerospace Engineering 23 2. GT/Emory School of BioMedical Engineering 26 3. Dupree College of Business and Management 26
IV. References 28
Selection Criteria Index
Issue Pages Planning Issues and Assumptions 9-13 Timeline 5 International partners/customers 4, 7 Academic Department description 23 Course Curriculum Description 23 Outreach Plan 18 Supporting Faculty, Partnerships 24-26 Supporting Faculty Citations 28-31 Team member listing 7, 26 Team Leader Information 26 Letters of Endorsement 32
2 II. BUSINESS PLAN II.1 Executive Summary Acoustic Shaping Inc.
EarthBase R&D Center, 225 North Avenue Operational Locations: School of Aerospace Engineering, Solar System Manufacturing Facility: CanalView Business Georgia Institute of Technology Park, Mars Orbit Atlanta GA30332-0150 Earth Regional Manufacturing: ISS Freedom, Low Earth 404-894-9622 Orbit Payload Exchange Operations: Lunar Orbit Station
Vision ASI will lead the space-based manufacturing industry of the 21st century.
Objectives ASI will provide: · Custom-fabricated parts for the International Space Station. · High-precision, high-purity parts for Earth-based bioengineering industry. · Standardized components for the construction industry in Space.
Business Description At $5,000 per lb. to Low Earth Orbit, the cost of shipping components and machine tools from Earth is a large obstacle to the human venture into space. ASI provides a solution to this problem: manufacturing using adaptively-controlled sound waves to form surface shapes in microgravity, from granular or liquid-state materials. ASI will offer non-contact, flexible manufacturing of sophisticated components to Mars explorers and to the construction business in the Solar System. Initial operations located on the International Space Station (ISS) in low Earth Orbit will serve near-term customers on ISS, using material shipped from Earth. As revenue and markets develop, the primary manufacturing facility will be located in lunar orbit to help build the second ISS, and start lunar mining. As this market develops the main manufacturing facility will be built and located at the Mars orbital station. Material brought from lunar and asteroid mines will be turned into precision-formed components at ASI. Products will be delivered by aerodynamic decelerators to customer sites on the planetary surface, and carried on Cycler Shuttles to customer sites in GEO / LEO / lunar orbit. From these beginnings, ASI will lead the space-faring construction business in the Solar System.
Market Space-related business accounts for over $121B/yr in 1998. Currently, all items are shipped from Earth, at costs-to-orbit of over $5K per lb. The International Space Station alone is expected to grow to an Earth-weight of over 1 million lbs. by 2004. Demand for Space-based construction is projected to be $20B/yr in 2005, rising to $500B/yr by 2020 as human space exploration progresses. ASI's role in this market is both as market enabler and as supplier. ASI's customer base consists of two types of industries:
Orbiting Space Station.[MarsSociety,1998
3 1) NASA and Aerospace firms contracting to NASA and ESA for construction of : § International Space Station components § Spacecraft for Solar System & Deep Space exploration § Lunar and Mars surface base facilities
As Space Commercialization proceeds, these firms will transition to serve the developing commercial markets on Earth for the development and habitation of space, with attendant increases in size.
Examples of ASI-built products are:
· Space-Station outer and interior panels. · Nozzles · Plumbing components · Pre-fabricated, pressurized habitation modules. · Pressure vessels. Artist’s concept of a potential Mars mission, from NASA Web pages, showing connected pressure vessels to form habitation modules. From [Mars Society, 1998 ]
Competitive Edge ASI's core technology is the Acoustic Shaping technology proven by our team in over 120 parabolas of microgravity flight on NASA's KC- 135. Our core competence includes the depth and breadth of technical/ business/marketing capabilities from 3 schools and 4 research labs at Georgia Tech, one of the premier technological institutes of the world. Access to Georgia Tech translates into a complete capability across the life-cycle of this technology.
These Earth-based facilities offer complete concept-to-test capability, spanning such areas as System Design and Life-Cycle Analysis/Simulation/Optimization, Booster technology, Hypersonic Controls, Spacecraft Attitude Control, Re-entry Aerothermodynamics, Acoustics, Mathematical Modeling & Simulation, and aerodynamic glide/decelerator technologies. ASI's links to the School of Bioengineering at Georgia Tech bring access to an area of rising importance to the human exploration of space. Bioengineering is expected to form a rising share of the mass-market demand on Earth for precision components enabled by ASI's technology.
ASI seeks partnerships with the entities leading Space Exploration: NASA, the large aerospace companies Lockheed-Martin and Boeing, as well as a leading technological university, Georgia Tech. The ASI team in particular, and these Georgia Tech schools in general, are models of the future engineering environment envisioned by NASA, our project teams integrating diverse technical disciplines as well as people from all parts of the world.
Glimpse of an ASI Manufacturing Facility At the core of the space-based Phase-Controlled Acoustic Shaping Technology (PCAST) facility are 10 Acoustic Chamber modules of various sizes, with up to 25 individually-programmable speaker systems each. The chambers are pressurized with a suitable gas such as nitrogen. Raw material is received at the orbiting station and converted to the desired particle size or liquid characteristics in a preprocessing plant. The temperature and pressure are brought to the needed levels, and a pre- selected sound field is imposed. The material is fed into the chamber along with the binder component, so that the mixture solidifies along the desired surfaces; some processes will use solar / microwave heating or rapid cooling. After curing for the appropriate time, the formed shape removed, finishing processes applied, and the part is loaded back into transporters.
4 Business Location Manufacturing will be located in orbit to use jitter-free, long-duration microgravity essential for quality control. The first location will be at the ISS to serve customers in LEO and GEO. The next will be in lunar proximity, to participate in ISS-2 construction and help initiate lunar mining. With material coming from lunar mines, the Mars station will be built and moved to Mars Orbit, for access to the Martian surface market and to major transfer orbits for missions throughout the Solar System. Mars orbit offers convenient access to Earth, to Earth's Moon, and to the Asteroid Belt. Subsidiary locations in lunar orbit allow exchange between raw materials from the Moon, and finished products.
Implementation Plan Summary Phase I: Concept Validation & Startup funding 1. NASA-GT collaboration to demonstrate technology on the NASA KC-135 Microgravity Flight Laboratory, 1996 - 1999. Over 80 parabolas flown; successful validation with various parametric variations. 2. NASA-GT experiment: one STS flight with model-scale production plant, 1999-2001. Phase II: Production on ISS; Capital Infusion (Pilot) 3. NASA/GT/ASI/Other Aerospace company partnership to send larger, scale model production chamber to ISS-1 to gain operational experience with producing space station parts. 2001 - 2005 4. Dual-chamber production plant placed in orbit and docked to ISS; goes into production. 2003- 2005. 5. Automation of dual-chamber plant with resupply using STS and other launchers. 2003-2005. Phase III: Production in lunar orbit / ISS-2 construction 6. Dual-chamber plant flown to lunar orbit / L-2 Lagrangian Point to begin construction of ISS-2. Year 2005. 7. First raw material from Moon surface, Year 2008 8. Construction of ISS-2: Years 2007-2010 9. Construction of commercial facilities (e.g. "Hilton L-2") in orbit using material from lunar surface. 2008-2012 10. Construction of lunar surface facilities for mining, exploration and tourism: 2005-2015 11. Construction of Mars Orbit Station pieces in lunar orbit, 2006-2010 12. Mars station shipping and assembly. 2010-2015 Phase IV: Revenue Generation and large-scale production: 13. Phobos material mining & delivery system. 2013 14. Mars surface operations 2012-2013 15. Mars station expansion 2013-2019 Phase V: Out to the Solar System 16. Asteroid Belt Transit System 2016 17. First Solar System Expedition module delivered from Mars orbit facility, 2020.
Summary Gantt Chart Phase 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 -00 -05 -10 -15 -20 Phase I: Concept Validation & Startup funding Phase II: Production on ISS; Commercial capital Phase III: Production in lunar orbit / ISS-2 construction Phase IV: Revenue Generation & large-scale production (Mars) Phase V: Out to the Solar System
5 Project Team
Name Responsibilities/expertise Sam Wanis Team Leader, Acoustic [email protected] Shaping technology Justin Hausaman Space Mission Planning Don Changeau Business Planning. [email protected] Richard Ames Business Management [email protected] Ashraf Charania Space Mission Costing [email protected] Catherine Matos Aerodynamic Decelerators; [email protected] Information Technologies
Advisory Board
Name e-mail Expertise N.M. Komerath [email protected] Faculty Advisor; Testing technologies & operations R.G. Loewy [email protected] Structures & Materials; Corporate Management J. Olds [email protected] Space launch systems A. Calise [email protected] Flight Mechanics & Control M. Smith [email protected] Structural Mechanics S. Ruffin [email protected] Aerothermodynamics D.P. Giddens [email protected] Bioengineering; Aerospace Engineering Erian Armanios [email protected] Composite Manufacturing; Space Commercialization N. Jayaraman [email protected] Business Management; Manufacturing
6 II.2 TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
2.1 INTRODUCTION
By optimistic estimates, it costs $5,000 to lift each pound of matter to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) from the surface of the Earth. The rapid growth in space launch options, worldwide, may bring this cost down in the next decade. Even if it is brought down by a factor of 10, conventional manufacturing facilities will be extremely expensive to ship to Mars, or indeed to any extra-terrestrial activity. Clearly there is a need for innovative, non-contact, Flexible Manufacturing technology to enable the human exploration and development of space.
Space-related business accounts for over $121B/yr in 1998 [Covault 1998a]. The International Space Station alone is expected to grow to an Earth-weight of over 1 million lbs. by 2004 [Air&Space 1999a]. Currently, all items are shipped from Earth, with space-based operations limited to assembly: this is obviously a major constraint in mission planning. Even the Artists' Conceptions seen in today's web pages appear to be constrained by this limitation [Mars Society]. For example, every picture shown here of Mars exploration and Space Station construction shows modules bearing strong resemblance to empty rocket fuel and equipment storage tanks. The other aspect seen in these pictures is the prevalence of pressure vessels and radiation shields: both are needed for humans and human- engineered machines to survive outside the narrow pressure/temperature/ wavelength ranges of Earth's atmosphere.
Cargo Launch of Mars Habitat using Energia Launch Vehicle - [MarsSociety 1998a ]
Demand for Space-based construction is projected to be $20B/yr in 2005, rising to $500B/yr by 2020 as human space exploration progresses. ASI's role in this market is both as market enabler and as supplier: many of the facilities needed to build other facilities will themselves be built cheaply and efficiently in space by ASI. ASI's customer base consists of two types of industries. In the long term, the dominant revenue source will be the space construction industry, the customers being NASA and Aerospace firms contracting to NASA and ESA for construction of § International Space Station components § Spacecraft for Solar System & Deep Space exploration § Lunar and Mars surface base facilities.
Space-based manufacturing enabled by ASI technology is also ideal for several Earth-based markets requiring high-purity, non-contact manufacturing. We focus on the biomedical engineering industry, for four reasons:
1) This industry is poised for explosive growth, as the critical mass of capital, demand and technical capabilities starts interacting. 2) Biomedical engineering is a critical technology for human space exploration, and human habitation of space and other worlds.
7 3) We at Georgia Tech have uniquely strong capabilities in aerospace-related bio-engineering, and strong, historic links to biomedical research. This reduces the cost of product design, facilitates customer interactions, and reduces customer/user resistance problems. 4) ASI's technology is ideal for the high-purity, long-life, low-weight, complex-shaped components needed for artificial replacement parts for the human body, such as heart valves. Current pricing of these items makes them viable targets of space-based manufacturing.
2.2 Examples of ASI-built products
· Space-Station outer and interior panels: As the pictures in this Plan show, large, flat- and curved-wall structures play a major part in human space exploration. These panel shapes are ideally suited to ASI technology, both in fabrication and in design/analysis/simulation. · Nozzles: Convergent-divergent nozzles made of high-temperature materials are vital for gas- based space thrusters. Earth-based launch weight and frontal-area drag in atmospheric flight drive the design of these nozzles at present, constraining them to operate far below ideal efficiency. Space-fabricated nozzles obviate these problems. ASI has the expertise in gas/plasma dynamics, materials, aerothermodynamics, and mathematical modeling to construct these for future space propulsion systems. · Pre-fabricated, pressurized habitation modules: The technical issues are the same as those of space station panels. As the industry develops, habitation modules will represent a standardized mass market, justifying ASI diversification into the other technologies involved in providing complete, pre-fabricated modules. · Plumbing components: As curved surface fabrication becomes standardized, plumbing systems will be mass-produced using ASI technology. · Pressure vessels: Again, the technical issues are similar to those of habitation modules.
The above list shows that ASI technology is central to building spacecraft, space stations, and planetary habitation. Thus ASI, will evolve into the Aerospace Vehicle and Construction industry of the future.
2.3 Acoustic Shaping Technology
ASI's core technology is the Acoustic Shaping technology proven by the GT team in over 120 parabolas of microgravity flight on NASA's KC- 135 out of Houston in 1997 and 1998. Acoustic Shaping uses the fact that sound fields can generate mean flows, and net forces, in a fluid medium. This basic phenomenon has been known for over a century in various forms[Andrade1932]. Early observations were of dust heaps formed inside pipes and coal mine shafts[. Most school-children have seen demonstrations of "acoustic levitation". In acoustic levitation, the force due to a sound Curved walls forming in microgravity field generated by powerful speakers is used to lift small objects and suspend them above a surface, balancing the gravitational force. Levitation of steel spheres has been demonstrated on Earth [Whymark 1975] using powerful, cooled ultrasonic drivers, for non-contact, microwave melting operations. NASA Space Shuttle experiments demonstrated the use of Acoustic Positioning in microgravity, where individual droplets of molten material were suspended at the center of an oven, in order to develop perfectly spherical and pure spheres in microgravity. The sound field in these experiments was ultrasonic, and required cooling of the speakers. Numerous patents and papers, listed in [Wanis 1998a] have considered the enhancement of the levitation force, and the control of particle positions using passive geometric and active means.
8 The Georgia Tech Microgravity student flight team developed Acoustic Shaping technology to form complex shapes using large numbers of solid particles in air, in a rectangular box. Their 1997 experiments demonstrated that: · Particles self-align to form walls in the sound field, rather than agglomerate around a single stable point as suggested by the previous single-particle experiments. · The wall shapes correspond with high fidelity to predicted shapes from acoustic mode calculations. · Wall shapes can be flat, or have varying radius of curvature in multiple dimensions, as predicted from sound field theory. · Particle shapes can be heterogeneous, such as Styrofoam pieces and Rice Krispies cereal, representative of crushed solid material from lunar mines. · Low, audible-range sound levels are adequate in microgravity to form multiple walls of either straight or curved shape. · Harmonics could be used to form intersecting walls. · Varying speaker location, phase and amplitude could be used to control the behavior of particles of various sizes, shapes and densities.
This technology is being developed into a full-scale space manufacturing capability, including · first-principles-based prediction · empirical simulation · inverse design · model-scale validation in earth-based microgravity flight experiments · model-scale validation in space-based experiments
2.4 Related Capabilities at Georgia Tech
We also bring the depth and breadth of technical/ business/ marketing capabilities from 3 schools and 4 research labs at Georgia Tech, one of the premier technological institutes of the world. These earth- based facilities offer complete concept-to-test capability, spanning: · Aerospace System Design and Analysis · Booster technology · Hypersonic Controls · Spacecraft Attitude Control · Re-entry Aerothermodynamics · Acoustics · Mathematical Modeling & Simulation · Aerodynamic glide/decelerator technologies · Advanced diagnostics / testing technologies
ASI's links to the School of Bioengineering at Georgia Tech bring access to 25 years of research, with specific interests in: · Arterial shapes and their relation to flow properties · Artificial parts for human-tissue replacement.
These capabilities are summarized in Part III of this proposal.
2.5 Assumed Technology Models
Located in the CanalView Industrial Park in equatorial Mars orbit, ASI will offer non-contact, custom manufacturing of sophisticated components for Mars explorers and the construction business in the Near Solar System. Raw, pulverized asteroid and lunar material carried as ballast by Earth-Mars Orbiters will be turned into precision, 3-D shapes using ASI's Phase-Controlled Acoustic Shaping Technology (PCAST). Products will be direct-delivered by re-entry craft/parachute/balloon transporters to customer sites on the Martian surface, or carried as ballast on returning orbital Mars Shuttles to 9 GEO / LEO. In future, ASI aims to capture significant market share in the modular construction business arising from missions to elsewhere in the Solar System. The above scenario assumes several technological steps of the future.
2.5.1 Space Launch Technology
At the close of the 20th century, humanity is poised at the starting line of a massive race into Earth orbit. Conventional multi-stage, land-based rocket launch capability has sprung up at various NASA and Air Force locations in the Eastern and Western U.S., Russia's Baikonur and other launch sites, ESA's Guinea-Bisseau, People's Republic of China, India, Japan, Brazil and Australia. In addition, numerous commercial launch facilities are functional or imminent: Boeing's Delta operations, and Russia's Energia are examples. Alternate schemes for access to orbit are proliferating: Pegasus and the multinational Sea-Launch are already operating, with the X-33, the Lockheed VentureStar, airbreathing NASP, Hermes, Sanger, and various schemes for sub-orbital tourist flights, electromagnetic accelerators etc. being seriously studied. The X-Prize is an example [Holland et al, 1998] of the race in the tourist-flight category.
We project that innovation and competition will bring the cost-to-LEO down to $2000 per lb. in 1998 dollars by 2005, flattening at that level pending mass demand for space commercialization.
2.5.2 Low-Earth Orbit Facility: ISS "Freedom"
The International Space Station has just gone into orbit, with Module 2 connected to Module 1 Zarya)( this month. Commercialization of operations at ISS is part of specific NASA and international space agency plans.
2.5.3 Lunar Mining
For acoustic manufacturing to be viable, raw materials must be obtained from places where gravity is low, to minimize transportation costs. Gravity at the lunar surface is 1/6 that of earth, and the lack of an atmosphere makes it easier to ship material to orbit from the Moon. There is optimism of finding some water below the lunar surface, and the certainty of finding iron and other minerals. The lunar surface already provides plenty of solid material in dust form, ready-made for conversion to low-tech habitation panels using acoustic shaping. A suitable binder and stiffeners must be found, but this is not expected to be difficult.
In the longer term, concepts for human Mars missions envisage fuel manufacture on the surface of Phobos [Aldrin 1990]. This addresses the technical issues of getting raw material cheaply for the Mars construction market.
2.5.4 Lunar gravity-assisted orbit transfers
NASA and the Russian space agency have over 33 years of experience in using lunar gravity to perform intricate orbital maneuvers. Most recently, a Hughes AsiaSat spacecraft [Smith 1998a] demonstrated the use of lunar gravity assist to assume stable GEO, a techniquewhich looks attractive for routine transfers to GEO. Presumably, lunar gravity assist can also help missions to Mars and other planets. Again, current concepts for planetary exploration envisage the construction of long-term storage and "Star-Ports" at the Lagrangian points in the Earth-Moon gravity system Aldrin[ 1990].
2.5.5 Mars transportation systems
There are several proposals for Mars transportation systems, and as the demand and variety of missions multiplies, one suspects that all these transport systems will come into being, with intense competition for market share.
10 The "MARS DIRECT" proposal GT Team member Justin Hausaman considers Dr. Robert Zubrin's Mars Direct transport system [MarsSociety1998], summarized below to illustrate current thinking regarding this concept. This proposal includes the method of transporting all the required equipment for manned and unmanned missions to Mars for the colonization of the planet. It considers the Launch Craft, the transition from LEO into Mars’s orbit and Landing on the Martian surface. We also summarize long range transportation on the surface of Mars and a planned mission from the surface of Mars to return back to Earth (for a manned mission). The concept includes Spacecraft Designs, In Situ Propellant Production, and Martian surface transportation. Crisis management is also considered.
The equipment needed for a manned mission to Mars would be a habitat for the crew for their 6-month journey to Mars (12 tons), food for 3 meals a day for a four-person crew (7 tons, mixture of dry and whole food), Water and oxygen (6 tons), equipment and research materials of ship (3.5 tons), plus a 15% margin of error, and propellant needed to carry the payload from LEO to Mars orbit. Transportation for a mission payload to be thrown from LEO into Mars orbit can be achieved using a Saturn V class Hydrogen/Oxygen burning rocket. A design for an alternative to the Saturn V rocket using shuttle parts has been proposed by RobertZubrin. His ship called the Ares is composed of two solid rocket boosters, a liquid fuel tank, an Ares capsule on top, and a space shuttle main engine system attached to the bottom of the craft. This craft can deliver a manned mission payload with a crew or a unmanned mission payload cargo to Mars.
The manned mission will depend directly on the success of the unmanned missions. The unmanned missions will comprise of an Earth Returning Craft (5 tons), Mars Orbiting vehicle (24 tons), water and oxygen (3 tons), food stuffs (3.4 tons), hydrogen used for producing water through RWGS (6.3 tons), propulsion stages for return to earth (4.5 tons), supplemental equipment (3 tons), and an In Situ Electrolysis system for converting water into oxygen and hydrogen (for return propellant)(.5 tons). The unmanned missions will also include a coupled research rover for collecting samples and analyzing them (.5 tons) and a small reactor will power the whole system (3.5 tons). After monitoring the unmanned missions through landing and until all water produced is separated and used for the production of methane and oxygen, and that the MOV has inserted into Mars orbit, the manned mission can take effect. After the successful completion of the unmanned missions, two consecutive launches will follow, the first will be the manned mission and the second will be another unmanned mission in order to set up for the next manned mission.
The Ares rockets can be launched from the old Saturn V launch pads. The booster rockets will detach at 2 minutes after launch, then the rocket will be powered solely by the main engine system attached to the bottom of the craft (same as the main engines on the space shuttle). Once the craft leaves the atmosphere the Ares second stage (main engines and main fuel cell) will detach and burn up in the atmosphere. The third stage of the craft, containing the equipment and engines, Will then fire the main LEO to Mars booster rockets (SSME) to leave LEO and travel for the 180-day journey to Mars orbit traveling at about 4.5 km/sec.
The stay on Mars will be approximately 550 days or 1.5 years. For a vast exploration of the planet one needs an aerial means of transportation due to the fact that Mar’s terrain is extremely variant, and land based vehicles cannot traverse them. The atmospheric pressure is only 1% that of Earth’s, making aerodynamic flight difficult. However, using modified balloons from the MAP mission the crew will be able to traverse the planet. Using the high-speed winds of the upper atmosphere and using a balloon, they will be able to rise above 97% of the mountains and gorges. Regulating the pressure in the balloon from .01atm is one of pumping and liquefying oxygen gas into tanks for descent and then expelling the contents of the tanks to repressurize the balloon and ascend. This method is also a closed system and therefore would minimize the need for refueling.
For the return trip to Earth, the crew will enter the ERV. They will use the propellant made from splitting the water and carbon dioxide and making Methane. This will launch the crew back into Mars orbit to rendezvous with the MOV and then firing the main rockets on the MOV will accelerate the crew back home at the same 4.5 km/sec speed as they had arrived, for another 6 month journey back home.
11 Realizing that problems could arise during this unprecedented space journey, a crisis management plan is included in this proposal should problems arise. In the event that massive malfunctions occur during the journey certain precautions could be taken. 1. If the HAB should lose its life support system the crew can construct electrodes to induce a charge into their water supply to produce oxygen for breathing, the remaining Hydrogen would then be expelled from the craft. However this method can only occur if the crew is already 2/3 into the journey because the crew would have to sacrifice most of their water in order to have enough oxygen and water to make it another two months. If the crew is 1/2 the way or less a direct abort can be employed. The HAB stage will then retract the tether and fire emergency rockets in order to stop and about face back to earth. Once the crew reaches earth they can then fall into earth orbit and rendezvous with the ISS for emergency extraction. In case of a loss of pressure in the transit balloons, a small landing air shell can inflate via carbon dioxide cartridges to provide an airbag for an impact landing.
The "Cycler" Mars Transit system
Col. Buzz Aldrin, part of the team which first stepped on the Moon, has proposed the Mars Cycler system [Aldrin 1990]. This consists of several well-equipped, large vehicles that would be placed into continuous orbits, with a short (5-month) leg and a long (10-21-month) leg. Astronauts and cargo would be transferred to these ships by small, short-range craft, so that the logistics and habitation modules needed for long-range space travel are confined to the reusable, continuous-orbit vehicles, rather than being duplicated on expensive, single-shot vehicles. The need to accelerate and decelerate a high-mass vehicle is minimized, so that the recurring cost of Mars transit are minimized.
In this concept, a Starport would be built at Space Station Freedom. A series of "Space Taxi" vehicles would be launched to dock at Freedom, and these would be used to perform lunar landings. A Lunar Starport would be assembled in low lunar orbit, and used to refine the taxis and landers. The Lunar Starport would be transferred to the L-2 Lagrangian Point, and propellants would be developed from material mined on the Moon. The Mars Starport would be built at L-2 and transferred to Mars orbit.
The first inhabited mission to Mars orbit would use a vehicle on a direct trajectory; this is called the "Semi-Cycler". The astronauts would complete construction of the Mars Starport, and explore Phobos. The astronauts would return to Earth, taking the long but inexpensive Semi-Cycler trajectory. Meanwhile a second crew would test the first "Cycler" vehicle at L-2. vehicle would return to earth orbit through the inexpensive but longer "Semi-cycler" trajectory, taking 10 months on the return trip.
The fist Cycler carrying the second crew arrives near Mars. The crew leaves the Cycler in their taxis and aerobrake into Mars orbit to reach the Mars Starport. Propulsion stages for their return trip are shipped from L-2 to the Mars Starport. The second trip of the SemiCycler arrives at Mars in time for the crew to attach the propulsion modules and return to Earth.
Over time, the Cyclers become a permanent orbiting transit system, conveying people and materials between Earth orbit and Mars orbit.
Impact of assumptions regarding Mars missions
ASI's future is not critically dependent on the precise scenario for Mars missions. The competing scenarios each contain some assumptions about stations at Mars and Earth orbit, and local production of propellants or structure at the moon, Phobos or Mars itself. The technology required to mine and ship raw material to ASI's orbiting facilities is no more risky than these scenarios.
2.5.6 Mars Orbiting Station
This is an assumption in NASA HEDS, as well as in the above proposals. Whether this will be called "CanalView" or not is irrelevant: we had to call it something. Perhaps, as Col. Aldrin [1990] envisaged, the Station may actually orbit Phobos rather than Mars itself.
12 2.5.7 Mars surface exploration:
This is a stated goal of NASA HEDS.
2.5.8 Lunar Surface / Phobos / Asteroid / comet mining:
Popularized by the motion pictures "Asteroid" and "Deep Impact"[Larson 1998], these are nevertheless close to practical reality. Robotic probes have rendezvoused with passing comets, and deep- penetrating probes are in near-term development [Covault 1998b]. Extending these to perform robotic capture / mining and return to Mars orbit is certainly viable with commercial interest in manufacturing. In fact legal issues arising from the ethics of Space usage, and the danger of collision with larger asteroids, are the primary issues in mining heavenly bodies.
2.5.9 Suitability of acoustically-formed objects for space applications:
The real issues here are: · Variety and cost of materials obtained from the Moon, from Phobos, and from asteroids. · Performance of epoxies, melts and other binding mechanisms in acoustic fields. · Cost of adapting the PCAST chambers to various types of material processing. · The cost and extent of pre-and post-processing required for each application.
Data on lunar materials is abundant, and the feasibility of making building materials from these is good [Lin, 1987a&b]. These issues are typical of the beginning of the next aerospace construction industry: the cultural uncertainties are similar to those of adapting horse-cart, railway and ship-building technologies to the new field of aircraft construction in the early 20th century. ASI's Advisory Board includes authorities in advanced materials technology and computational mechanics, along with the radical thinking of biomedical structural applications, precisely to address these exciting issues.
2.5.10 Extension to other forms of manufacturing
ASI aims to lead the Space construction industry. The initial reason for confidence is the ready availability of Acoustic Shaping technology. With revenues generated from this, ASI will diversify to add other technologies as opportunities arise. For example, the synergy between bioengineering and microgravity construction may lead to radically different methods of "growing" structures. Pure crystal growth is already seen as a major industry for microgravity; again this may be absorbed into our technologies.
2.5.11 Delivery: Aerodynamic Deceleration
Components manufactured in low planetary orbit are most conveniently delivered to planetary surface customers by aerodynamic deceleration. This includes a wide range of technologies. · Re-entry capsules (e.g., Gemini, Apollo) with ablative heat shields and parachute touchdown: this involves a high landing impact. · Re-entry lifting bodies (e.g. STS) and wheeled landing · Re-entry lifting bodies with hypersonic control (e.g. X-38 Crew Return Vehicle), aerodynamic glide, parachute deceleration and parafoil flaring touchdown. · Re-entry lifting bodies, parachute and balloon touchdown (e.g., Mars Pathfinder).
ASI executives Richard Ames, Catherine Matos, Sam Wanis and Don Changeau are members of a research team which has worked under NASA Grants to study the aerodynamics of parafoil deployment and control, as well as the vortex flow aerodynamics of the X-38 Crew Return Vehicle lifting body. These technologies are directly related to current designs under consideration by NASA for planetary missions. Expertise, analysis and testing capabilities related to each aspect are available with ASI's Advisory Board, as detailed in the Appendix.
13 2.6 Implementation Plan
ASI's implementation plan consists of six distinct phases.
Phase I: Concept Validation & Startup funding
NASA-GT collaboration to demonstrate technology on the NASA KC-135 Microgravity Flight Laboratory, 1996 - 1999.
This phase is nearing successful completion. As a GT student team, we have prepared experiments and flown them successfully on over 80 parabolas of microgravity flight in April 1997 and April 1998. We have performed successful validation of our hypotheses and experiment designs with various parametric variations. Perhaps uniquely for the Undergraduate Microgravity Flight Program, we have presented one and are preparing another Technical Paper for the Aerospace Sciences Meetings of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, to a peer group which includes leading scientists working on microgravity research. Our research won two widely-read articles in the Wall Street Journal, the first in 1997 on the front page, read by the top businesspeople in America, and the second in 1998, in the WSJ's Internet-based edition, where dynamic, color images of our experiments came to life for the technologically-inclined WSJ readers.
Estimated funding requirement: $0 (Already accomplished or funded by NASA/GSGC)
NASA-GT experiment: one STS flight with model-scale production plant, 1999-2001.
The KC-135 flights offered tremendous experience with microgravity experiments, and we have made excellent scientific and engineering use of them. However, some of the exciting possibilities of this technology remain to be demonstrated in microgravity environments with longer duration and reduced g-jitter. Phase-controlled movement of particles and particle walls requires over a minute of jitter-free microgravity, impractical on the student microgravity flights. Formation of solid walls by combining epoxies or other binary constituents requires a microgravity period exceeding 1 hour, again beyond the KC-135's capabilities. These demonstrations must be performed in Space, using Shuttle-based experiments. They are the critical steps towards demonstrating Space-based manufacture.
The proposed STS experiment would be to take a self-contained 1m x 1m x 1m box containing a PCAST chamber with six speakers, a portable computer and D/A controller, an amplifier / CD system, 3 mini-video camcorders, and two reservoirs of chemical constituents. Once in orbit, the first constituent, a solid granular substance, will be injected into the chamber, and walls formed using pre-programmed resonant modes. These walls will be moved to different parts of the chamber and distorted using phase control of the speakers, and the wall geometry’s and dynamics recorded. The second constituent will then be injected, brought into contact with the first at specified wall locations, and kept in place for a few minutes until the walls harden. The sound will then be turned off and the formed shapes allowed curing and hardening for a few hours before being removed by the Astronauts and examined. The anticipated result is a solid panel, of flat or curved shape, roughly 0.8 x 0.8 meters square: the first construction panel manufactured in Space! The Astronauts willing, perhaps the experiment can be repeated with a different set of epoxies or other substances to form other shapes, such as a pipe segment.
Estimated Funding Requirement: $250K to develop the STS experiment and analyze the results after the STS flight.
Phase II: Production on ISS; Capital Infusion (Pilot Program)
NASA/GT/ASI/Other Aerospace company partnership to send larger, scale model production chamber to ISS-1 to gain operational experience with producing space station parts. 2001–2005.
14 Once the STS experiment is completed, the lessons learned can be used to refine the design of the first prototype Space Manufacturing plant: a PCAST Pilot chamber, somewhat larger than the one proven on STS, but intended for long-duration, semi-autonomous operation on the ISS. The chamber size is limited by the need to keep it inside the confines of the ISS modules, where space is at a premium. Chamber size and geometry will be optimized after discussion with NASA engineers as to the size and shape of panels and other components most likely to be needed on ISS. Though this facility must still depend on raw material shipped from Earth, it will be able to generate panels and parts of desired shape. With the ingenuity of the Astronauts and Cosmonauts on ISS, we anticipate that the Flexible Manufacturing capability of the PCAST device will be put to thorough use.
This portion of the project will use a partnership developed between ASI/GT, NASA, ISS, and at least one of the large aerospace companies involved in ISS operation: commercial funding will be sought for this phase, though the anticipated customers are still the NASA/ international government entities operating ISS. The chamber may be launched in pieces or as one piece, by NASA or other agencies.
Phase III: ISS Full Scale Manufacturing Facility / Lunar Orbital Station
Dual-chamber production plant placed in orbit and docked to ISS; goes into production. 2004- 2008.
A large dual-chamber system weighing roughly 1200 kg will be shipped in pieces to ISS and assembled as a docked, autonomous facility. This will be funded by commercial capital infusion. Initially, its operation will require human involvement. Again, some of the components must be shipped from Earth; this will increasingly resemble lunar material in composition. The facility will go into full use, building components for ISS and a Lunar Orbital Station, as well as components for use in lunar mining operations.
As operational experience is accumulated on the ergonomics and market nature of the Space Manufacturing business, the PCAST facility's operation will be automated to the point where it can operate by remote command for long duration’s. It will become an autonomous, fully automated factory.
Dual-chamber plant flown to lunar orbit / L-2 Lagrangian Point to begin construction of another station. Year 2009.
To be consistent with current scenarios for Space Exploration, the next phases of ASI must shift the scene to the vicinity of the Moon. The Dual-chamber PCAST facility from ISS will be taken to the L-2 Lagrangian Point, where the construction of the first Lunar Orbiting Space Station is expected to occur. The facility will be prepared to receive raw material mined from the Moon.
First raw material from Moon surface: Year 2010
The real payoff of Acoustic Shaping begins with the first delivery of raw material mined from a low-gravity environment like the Moon. With this, ASI will go into full-scale production.
Construction of another Orbital Station: Years2011
The second International Space Station will probably be built at one of the Lagrangian Points, or in Lunar orbit. ASI plans to do a substantial portion of the construction of this Station, especially its habitation modules, ducting and pressure vessels.
Construction of commercial facilities (e.g. "Hilton L-2") in orbit using material from lunar surface. 2009-2012 15 As construction costs come down and the versatility of PCAST manufacturing increases, larger PCAST modules will be built in lunar orbit. These will be used in the construction of the first large-scale tourist / business visitor facilities. The Earth-based hotel industry is expected to take a leading role in supporting this development: the view from L2 is awesome. Thus, the capabilities for building and operating human habitation and life support systems in Space will grow by orders of magnitude, with commercial involvement.
Construction of lunar surface facilities for mining, exploration and tourism: 2009-2013
The commercial construction phase described above will provide the financial strength to develop and diversify ASI's technology base and operations. ASI plans to acquire and build mining sites and Moon-based facilities. On the ISS-2, ASI will build major shipping/receiving facilities, as well as a Solar System Vehicle Facility (SSVF).
Phase IV: MARS Station Revenue Generation and large-scale production:
Construction of Mars Orbit Station pieces in lunar orbit, 2009-2012
The SSVF will bid for a primary role in building Mars transporter vehicles, be they the Mars Direct vehicles of Dr. Zubrin's designs, or the Cycler, Semi-Cycler and Propellant Systems of Col. Aldrin's designs.
Mars station assembled and shipped. 2010 – 2012
Once built at L-2, the Mars Station vehicles will be shipped to Mars / Phobos orbit.
Phobos material mining & delivery system. 2013
Once the Mars Station is at the vicinity of Mars, the first priority will be to establish mining and material shipment operations on Phobos, whose low gravity is attractive for this purpose.
Mars surface operations 2012–2018
With components built using Phobos-delivered material, ASI will deliver machines and facilities to the Mars surface.
Mars station expansion 2013–2019
The customer base on Mars is expected to comprise both government entities engaged in exploration / regulation, and commercial entities engaged in prospecting, building production/shipping facilities, and developing property for habitation / tourism. Gravity on Mars being 1/3 that of Earth, Mars is expected to become a popular recreational playground of those with 5 months of the year to kill in Space Cruises.
Phase V: Out to the Solar System
Asteroid Belt Transit System 2018
The final element before starting on grand explorations of the rest of the solar system and beyond is to establish a regular transit system which will go out to the asteroid belt and return with shipments of material of various kinds, extracted from production facilities there. This will provide a limitless supply and variety of material for various manufacturing applications. The Mars orbit station will develop into the major manufacturing hub of human civilization, being centrally located, straddling the primary routes to and from Earth, Mars and the outer planets. 16 First Solar System Expedition module delivered from Mars orbit facility, 2020
The Mars Orbit facility of ASI will proudly build the first Solar System Expedition Module, thus starting the next phase in the human exploration and development of Space.
2.7 Discussion
Relation to NASA's HEDS Roadmap In this section, we relate our plan to the stated goals of NASA's programs for Human Exploration and Development of Space [Steinberg et al, 1999a - 1998c]
2.7.1 Mission: Explore, use and enable development of space for human enterprise. Time frame 1998-2002: Establish requirements and architecture to radically cut costs ASI's plan for this period is to work with NASA and demonstrate the practicality of constructing Space Station parts using STS and ISS experiments.
Time Frame 2003-2009: Prepare to conduct human missions of exploration to planetary and other bodies in the solar system - Advance biomedical knowledge and technologies. - Enable commercial development of space - Facilitate use of space for commercial products
ASI will demonstrate production of bio-engineered components in Space, using materials shipped from Earth. Also in this period, commercial production of Space Station components will commence, using Acoustic Shaping technology. At this stage, raw materials will still be shipped from Earth, so the revenue-generation must still come from Bio-engineering products, and some start-up support will be required from technology demonstration funding for the aerospace construction aspects.
2.7.2 Mission: Research, develop, verify and transfer advanced aeronautics, space and related technologies: 1998-2002: Engage educators and students to promote educational excellence Invest in advanced concepts that may produce breakthroughs in human exploration and commercial development of space. Transfer knowledge and technologies, and promote partnerships to improve health and enhance quality of life. ASI's proposal to involve Georgia Tech addresses these issues. In the near term, the proposal involves several Georgia Tech students, from diverse educational and cultural backgrounds, in a team effort with students from other leading American institutions, and with NASA personnel. The opportunity for students to interact across disciplines, especially to work with Business and Finance students, is particularly interesting. Acoustic Shaping has breakthrough potential, and many different uses. Demonstrating Space-based construction using materials mines from heavenly bodies will completely change the cost-benefit analyses of space missions and human space exploration.
2.7.3 Goals of HEDS Enterprise: - ..Continue to develop biomedical knowledge and technology. - ..demonstrate the feasibility of utilizing local resources to "live off the land". ..research and technology development for advanced life support systems. - ..develop revolutionary technologies that will support future national decisions regarding human missions beyond Earth orbit. - Join private sector to stimulate opportunities for commercial development of space as a key to future settlement. - ..Near term efforts will emphasize pilot projects that provide clear benefit.. - ..long-term emphasis on use of resources and environments of planetary bodies - ..to sustain a human presence beyond Earth.
These are all identifiable features of the ASI proposal. 17 Crosscutting processes: ..Provide aerospace products and capabilities ..Generate Knowledge ..Communicate Knowledge ..Foster partnerships with teachers and students
ASI's proposal to include the Aerospace Digital Library addresses all these issues in a coherent, scaleable and relevant manner.
2.8 Outreach Plan for Integration and Dissemination of Knowledge Gained from this Project: The Aerospace Digital Library
The School of Aerospace Engineering has several programs in place currently that would be used in the Outreach Plan to transmit the competition experience to others. In addition to the Aerospace Digital Library initiative described previously, the School hosts a weekly series of talks where students and members of the faculty share recent research results and other developments. This forum can easily be used to inform the faculty and students of lessons learned from the NASA competition. The School has also worked in the past with the local television news, as well as a national newspaper, The Wall Street Journal, to report accomplishments by students, such as the successful flights of our undergraduate flight experiment team Acoustic Shaping under the NASA Microgravity Student Flight Opportunities program. Additionally, the experience and knowledge gained from this competition could be incorporated into the School’s curriculum, enabling a long-term means of transferring this information.
The Aerospace Digital Library (ADL) is a project with a unique mission, on a scale as grand as NASA's missions: Integrate human knowledge across levels and disciplines by providing a Gateway through Aerospace Engineering. Its beginnings are best seen at: www.ae.gatech.edu/research/windtunnel/adl2.html
Set at the high school level, ADL's Design-Centered Introduction to Aerospace Engineering gives the user a quick perspective of the field, along with the incentive to go through a guided introduction to how a large aircraft is designed, from mission specification to performance analysis and 3-view layout. Along the way, each aerospace discipline is introduced, and linked to higher levels, all the way to professional databases and the research leading edge. The number of professional-level courses being linked through this resource is rising almost on a daily basis as teachers learn about ADL. This resource is very much "in sync" with NASA's priorities: it provides an excellent vehicle to unite Integrated Product Design teams, giving each member a quick overview, and access to in-depth knowledge, in every other discipline.
The relevance of ADL to this project comes in many aspects, but one aspect is easily seen: users of ADL already include several middle-schoolers, both in Metro Atlanta, and across the nation, who use it to link to NASA's Technical Reports Server, NACA reports, etc., using the precise, in-depth guidance provided in ADL for solution to their Science Fair problems. As required, Professor Komerath and EAG students assist these users to find their way to solutions: in future, much of this guidance will be automated based on experience.
We suspect that NASA engineers, as well as colleagues in every aspect of engineering, will eventually what these middle-schoolers are picking up so fast: the sheer utility of linking their work to ADL as the engineering work environment of the future. The reviewers of this proposal are specifically invited to contribute links to their own work, and help us develop this resource.
2.9 Legal considerations There are several Patents covering different aspects of the acoustic levitation field, listed in part in [Wanis et al, 1998a]. These must be licensed or bought out. Many of these were developed under 18 government funding, and as such should be available at no cost to government customers. Acquiring these related technologies will bring several customizations and refinements toASI's technology base.
Insurance needs for ASI will in fact be less than those needed for industries that depend on Earth- based manufacturing. ASI facilities are planned to be integrated with current and future Space Station plans, and with lunar mining plans. Delivery of finished products via aerodynamic deceleration poses some hazards that will require careful study for insurance coverage, but these are expected to easily exceed the safety level of all competing forms of spacecraft return. Again, ASI depends on technology proven by NASA for other missions.
Mining on heavenly bodies will raise the concerns of people on Earth. It is anticipated that international laws will be developed, regulating this activity. Again, it should be noted that ASI's raw materials are relatively low-grade construction materials rather than precious minerals, and thus involve little processing waste. Also, ASI's manufacturing process uses low-cost, low-intensity energy sources: mainly solar heating and solar electricity generation to power temperature chambers and acoustic speakers. There will be little chemical-disposal problem, since the materials will be combined in these chambers, rather than being machined with losses. Thus ASIis expected to be recognized as a leader in environmentally responsible manufacturing.
19 II.3 MARKET AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Note from Faculty Advisor n.k.: Team member Ashraf Charania is an experienced cost-estimator for Space missions, which puts to good use his dual-degree program in Economics (Emory University) and Aerospace Engineering (Georgia Tech). At Georgia Tech he works in the Space Systems Design Lab, under the guidance of Dr. John Olds.
1. Overview
Examination of the current and near term space manufacturing market indicates the presence of a legitimate economic opportunity. The financial requirements to achieve the strategic approach outlined in previous sections will rely on a combination of public and private partnerships in order to realize the benefits of this program. Each phase of the program involves different funding levels from sundry sources. As the program moves into subsequent phases it evolves into a more commercially based venture. The initial phases require government resources in order to help risk mitigation through support of the technological development process. Eventually higher levels of private funding will be considered for the program.
In this analysis the assumed discount rate was taken to be 20%. The program was subdivided into four main phases for the cost analysis (see the following table). Phase 1 consists of a demonstration experiment aboard the space shuttle. Phase 2 consists of a pilot manufacturing facility on the International Space Station. Phase 3 consists of a full scale manufacturing facility that can be transported to lunar orbit and stationed there permanently. Once transported, this facility's first task will be to create the basic panels and structure for a second, companion orbital manufacturing facility in lunar orbit. Phase 4 utilizes these lunar facilities to eventually help construct a facility that will be sent to Mars for use as another orbital manufacturing facility there. This Mars facility itself will be used to create another similar facility like was done on the moon. These secondary facilities are created to add a level of redundancy to the project.
Mission Phase Formulation PROGRAM PHASE PROGRAM START DDT&E PERIOD ETO LAUNCH IOC (LIFETIME) DISPOSAL YEAR 1: SHUTTLE 1998 1998-2000 2001 2001 (1YR) 2002 2: ISS PILOT 2001 2001-2004 2005 2005 (1 YR) 2006 3: ISS FULL SCALE 2004 2004-2006 2007 2008 (4 YRS) 2013 / LUNAR ORBIT (X2) 4: MARS 2007 2007-2009 2010 2012 (6 YRS) 2019 PLATFORM (X2)
2. Formulation of Costs
An initial mass summary was created for each phase of the project as seen in the following table. Due to the uncertainty in the specific data a mass margin of 20% was included in the analysis.
Mass Summary of Project Phases Program Definition Intial Mass Margin Total Mass Phase Detail kg % kg Phase 1 Shuttle 12 20% 14.4 Phase 2 ISS Pilot 29 20% 34.8 Phase 3 ISS Fullscale / Lunar Orbital Station 1065 20% 1278 Phase 4 Mars Orbital Station 1597.5 20% 1917
As seen in the following table the financing for the project changes as the project matures. The initial higher levels of government contribution in the first years are needed to mitigate the barriers to entry for any such space-manufacturing project. Once technological demonstration is nearly complete at the 20 end of Phase 2 then the private financing option can be used to fully support the program. However, government contribution would once again be needed for a successful migration of the manufacturing concept to Mars. It has been assumed that any such migration will most likely encounter some technological challenges that can be mitigated by bringing some government support back into the program into Phase 4.
Assumed DDT&E, TFU, and Government Contribution Program Definition Single Unit DDTE Govt. Contrib. TFU Govt. Contrib. Phase Detail $ % $ % Phase 1 Shuttle $75,000 40% $75,000 40% Phase 2 ISS Pilot $1,000,000 20% $200,000 20% Phase 3 ISS Fullscale / Lunar Orbital Station $10,000,000 0% $2,000,000 0% Phase 4 Mars Orbital Station $100,000,000 10% $50,000,000 10%
As seen in the following table the design, development, testing, and evaluation (DDT&E) and theroectical first unit (TFU) costs are adjusted with a learning curve of 80%. In addition, the enhanced data reflect the effects of government contributions.
Cumulative DDT&E and TFU (TFU includes all units) After Governent Contributions Program Definition All Units No. of Units Learning Curve DDTE' TFU' Phase Detail % $ $ Phase 1 Shuttle 1 80% $45,000 $45,000 Phase 2 ISS Pilot 1 80% $800,000 $200,000 Phase 3 ISS Fullscale / Lunar Orbital Station 2 80% $18,000,000 $3,600,000 Phase 4 Mars Orbital Station 2 80% $162,000,000 $90,000,000
After coupling the base DDT&E and TFU data with the program timeline a cost schedule was developed for this program which yieled the discounted life cycle costs as seen in the following table.
Discounted Life Cycle Cost Item Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 DDTE $32,083 $656,636 $2,566,667 $68,250,000 TFU $37,500 $166,667 $3,000,000 $75,000,000 ETO Launch $48,870 $101,259 $3,356,078 $4,316,126 In Space Trans. $0 $0 $2,796,732 $7,517,253 Facility $69,896 $897,184 $4,353,444 $33,560,478 Ops/ Main $69,896 $897,184 $4,353,444 $33,560,478 Disposal $7,234 $166,667 $600,000 $2,700,000 Total $265,479 $2,885,595 $21,026,364 $224,904,336
3. Market Formulation
The next portion in this analysis that was required was an examination of the marketplace. The current data from the current International Space Station (ISS) was used to formulate a market price that could be charged to a potential customer. As seen in the following table the total life cycle cost (LCC) per mass of the ISS has been discounted to reflect the cost of only structural panels and a discount for market price in order to reflect the uncertainty of charging government based prices to any future commercial space market. The output of this proposed manufacturing facility was based to be 10ft by 10ft panels of 1/4 inch thickness that could be used in the development of various space structures such as a follow-up to the ISS or a Space Hilton.
21 Market Price Per Output Panel Based on ISS
ITEM VALUE PANEL MASS 10FTX10FT 1/4 INCH PANEL 117 KG ISS LCC 70,000,000,000 $ ISS MASS 1,000,000 LBS ISS MASS 454,545.45 KG COST 154,000 $/KG COMPLEXITY FACTOR REDUCTION 15% ISS PANELS 23,100 $/KG MARKET PRICE FACTOR 20% SPECIFIC MARKET PRICE 4,620 $/KG MARKET PRICE PER PANEL 540,540 $
4. Economic Results
The Net Present Value (NPV) yielded in this analysis was found to be $21.6 M with an associated Internal Rate-of-return (IRR) of 36% (see discounted cash flow in the following figure). This positive NPV and high IRR indicates that even though the project has high risk the potential high positive returns readily indicates that the proposed program should be pursued.
Projected Discounted Cash Flow (Program Start Year = 1998)
$10.00
$5.00
$0.00 1998 2003 2008 2013 2018 2023 2028 2033
-$5.00 Discounted Value ($M)
-$10.00
-$15.00 Program Year
22 III: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: SAMPLING OF GEORGIA TECH INTERESTS AND CAPABILITIES
From its beginnings as the North Avenue Trade School in the 19th century, The Georgia Institute of Technology has grown into the largest source of engineering graduates in the United States. It is also one of the very best by any measure, a fact which is gaining in recognition. The latest opinion survey of practicing engineers by US News and World Reports ranks the Georgia Tech engineering program second in the nation. In addition to the 300+ faculty and 10,000 students of the College of Engineering, Georgia Tech has unique capabilities in the College of Sciences, the Dupree College of Business and Management, and the Ivan Allen College of Technology, Policy and International Affairs. The traditions of practical, hands-on problem-solving and competitive spirit that characterized the North Avenue Trade School, and the Georgia Tech graduates of NASA's early days, are still thriving in today's technological university. The College of Engineering offers the full range of engineering expertise, of which two specific schools are sampled here: The School of Aerospace Engineering, and the new School of Bioengineering. As seen below, Georgia Tech offers capabilities relevant to the full spectrum of NASA's activities.
1. Interests in the School of Aerospace Engineering
The School of Aerospace Engineering prepares students at the Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctoral levels for a career in engineering, with primary emphasis on flight vehicles. The School has several research facilities, including a 7’x9’ test section low speed windtunnel, a low turbulence windtunnel, a flow visualization facility, structures laboratory, combustion laboratory, a fluid dynamics laboratory, and extensive computer research facilities. Georgia Tech’s School of Aerospace Engineering is an integral part of the Georgia Space Grant Consortium, and is a Rotorcraft Center of Excellence. The School also houses a UAV (Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle) research facility, and a Materials Research Council, as well as fields a competitive Aerial Robotics team. The faculty of the school is divided among several research disciplines: Aerodynamics and Fluid Mechanics, Aeroelasticity and Structural Dynamics, Flight Mechanics and Controls, Propulsion and Combustion, Structural Mechanics and Materials Behavior, and System Design and Optimization.
1.1 Department Course Curriculum
The current course curriculum focuses on flight vehicles, the steps leading up to design of them, and the fundamental principles behind those steps. The program emphasizes analysis and problem solving, exposure to open-ended problems and design issues including manufacturing, maintenance, teamwork, communications skills, and professionalism. The current undergraduate and graduate curriculums includes classes in (to name but a few): AE 4001: High Speed Aerodynamics AE 6250: Rocket Propulsion AE 4010: Advanced Flow Diagnostics AE 6020: Elements of Compressible Flow AE 8123: Flow Control AE 6023: Hypersonic Flow Theory AE 4120: Composite Aerospace Structures AE 6800: Numerical Fluid Dynamics AE 4130: Computational Structural Analysis AE 8113: High-Temperature Gas Dynamics AE 4501: Orbital Mechanics AE 4251: Jet and Rocket Propulsion AE 4502: Spacecraft Attitude Dynamics AE 8123: Introduction to Space Vehicles AE4353: Design for Life Cycle Cost AE 6351: Spacecraft and Launch Vehicle Design
Currently, there are no business planning, marketing, feasibility, etc. classes included in the curriculum. The NASA Means Business competition, and the experience of working with students and faculty from Business Schools, would be used to introduce those elements into the course curriculum. In the senior level design classes, a business plan, addressing questions that the Competition raises (such as: How much will the venture cost, and how can the money be raised? How should it all be managed? How should the ideas be marketed?) would be an extremely beneficial addition.
23 1.2. Supporting Faculty
Dr. John Olds, Assistant Professor, Aerospace Engineering is the co-Director, Aerospace Systems Design Laboratory. Dr. Olds’ research focuses on the design of advanced space launch systems, in particular the conceptual design of advanced earth-to-orbit launch vehicles. Dr. Olds applies multidisciplinary design and analysis methods to advanced space transportation vehicle design problems. Research areas include multidisciplinary design optimization techniques, distributed computational design frameworks, and improved design-oriented disciplinary analysis capabilities. Recently, a student team led by Dr. Olds won the X-prize competition, developing a concept for a single-stage suborbital vehicle to carry 3 passengers plus a pilot, with a rail-launch system. His team also brings expertise in cost estimation for space missions, a valuable part of ASI's capabilities. Their recent publications are listed under Olds[1996 - 1997c] and Holland et al [1998].
Dr. Anthony Calise of the School of AE works on nonlinear control, applied to a variety of problems ranging from helicopters to earthquake-riding buildings. He has developed control algorithms for the X- 36 and the X-30 experimental programs, and for various missile designs, see Calise[ 1990a - 1998b].
Dr. Stephen A. Ruffin, formerly a NASA Ames scientist, works on the aerothermodynamics of hypersonic atmospheric vehicles [Ruffin 1993-1995b]. He brings computational capability related to the problems of re-entry for landing and for aerobraking in orbit transfer maneuvers. These issues become important when considering the economics of bringing raw material for ASI's operations from the moon to Mars.
Dr. Marilyn Smith develops computational capabilities for aeroelastic problems [Smith1994-1998c], critical in the design of high-speed aerodynamic vehicles, and for the design of acoustic-shaped panels under intense sound fields. She also has experience with computing the high-angle-of-attack flowfield over a lifting body under hypersonic flight conditions.
Dr. Narayanan Komerath [Komerath 1994-1998] heads the Experimental Aerodynamics Group. They have worked with NASA on high angle of attack aerodynamics of wing-bodies (Langley), rotorcraft aerodynamics (Langley and Ames), and the aerodynamics of the X-38 Crew Return Vehicle and its parafoil landing system (Johnson Space Center). In addition, the EAG guided the first undergraduate flight experiments on Acoustic Shaping under the NASA Microgravity Student Flight Opportunities program, which have since resulted in two AIAA Papers on Microgravity Materials Processing .
On the X-38 project, EAG students worked with JSC engineers (Rick Barton's group) at the Georgia Tech 7' x 9' wind tunnel, solving problems using laser sheet flow visualization, digital signal processing of sensor signals, and force measurements on parafoils. EAG was able to participate in near-real-time in this fast-paced NASA development program, getting results on various models of the X-38 under conditions of interest identified from NASA drop tests and high-speed wind tunnel tests. EAG also calibrated the Air Data Probe built by a contractor company for NASA, again at short lead time. Communication of drawings, test plans, data and results was achieved using Internet pages. Two members of the present team (Richard Ames and Catherine Matos) were team leaders on these projects and have worked with JSC.
Komerath's Experimental Aerodynamics Group is a microcosm of the kind of business organization envisaged in several NASA plans. EAG students come from all parts of the world, and are diverse in every respect except in their enthusiasm for Aerospace Engineering and their commitment to excellence. Built almost entirely on external funding generated through work done for competitive business and government customers, EAG has the world's best facilities for advanced diagnostics on complex aerodynamics problems, related to both rotorcraft aerodynamics and high angle-of-attack maneuvering flight. They have won 3 U.S Patents since 1992, in image processing, dynamic testing, and aerodynamic control technologies. The full-time students who staff EAG facilities have notched up a unique record of excellence: among a long list of achievements is the fact that 5 of the last 6 PhD theses from this group have won School nominations for Georgia Tech's Outstanding PhD Thesis Award, putting them in the top 10% of GT theses, and three have won ('93, '94 and '98), putting them in the top 1%. EAG is a leader in multidisciplinary team-oriented projects, and leads the Aerospace Digital Library Project at Georgia Tech, described below. 24 Professor Robert Loewy is a veteran leader of the aerospace academic community. He served as Chief of Structures at Boeing, and as Chief Scientist of the Air Force. He has participated in numerous discussions for advisory panels related to NASA projects, and provides a unique perspective on the future of the aerospace industry.
Dr. Erian Armanios, Professor of Aerospace Engineering, is the Director of the NASA Georgia Space Grant Consortium (GSCC), and of the Aerospace Composites Laboratory. Through joint projects with Clark Atlanta University, Morehouse College, Spelman College and Tuskegee University, and other affiliate institutions, GSCC is highly successful in developing partnerships with the leading educators of minority engineers. In addition, GSCC takes the magic of the space program to K-12 and junior college population throughout Georgia and the Southeast through the OSS Regional Broker/Facilitator clearinghouse. GSCC sponsors Georgia Tech team(s) in the NASA Microgravity Student Flight Opportunities program, and hosts K-12 visitors at Georgia Tech, including a recent, tremendously successful workshop for students participating in the ACT-SO competition which included a visit by NASA's Astronaut Stephanie D. Wilson. Dr. Armanios has won patents on flow-control actuators using smart materials, and has developed innovative energy-absorption devices using the unique properties of tailored composite materials. Recent publications are listed as Armanios[1986-1998].
25 2. Interests in the GT/Emory School of BioMedical Engineering
Before becoming the first Chair of the Georgia Tech / Emory joint School of Biomedical Engineering, Dr. Don P. Giddens, was a director of the School of Aerospace Engineering at Georgia Tech and the Dean of Engineering at Johns Hopkins University. His aerospace career started with work on hypersonics with Aerospace Corporation in the 1960s. At Georgia Tech, his interests turned to turbulent flows, and then to bioengineering applications, developing a strong collaboration with Emory University's Medical School. He was one of the founders of the bioengineering program at Georgia Tech. When a bio-engineering Center was established at the School of Mechanical Engineering, Dr. Giddens moved his research to M.E., but returned to AE as School Director in 1988. In 1992, he became Dean of Engineering at Johns Hopkins, where he worked to link engineering to the strong biomedical programs at Hopkins. In 1997 he became the founding Chair of a unique School combining interests in State-supported Georgia Institute of Technology, and privately-funded Emory University: the new GT/Emory School of Biomedical Engineering. He thus brings a uniquely strong link between aerospace technology and biomedical engineering. Dr. Giddens' participation also opens the doors to the other research programs in the School of biomedical engineering. His publications are listed under [Giddens1991 - Giddens 1998].
3. The Dupree College of Business and Management
Dr. Narayanan Jayaraman [Jayaraman1988-1993b] is Associate Professor of Business and Area Coordinator for Finance at the Dupree College. His research interests are in the areas of corporate finance, options markets, Japanese capital markets, corporate restructuring, risk management, and entrepreneurial finance. He is a member of the Program committee for the Financial Management Association annual meetings as well as an ad-hoc referee for several professional journals. He has published over fifteen scholarly articles in various journals including Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, the Journal of Banking and Finance, and the Pacific-Basin Finance Journal. His paper on the post-listing puzzle won the best paper award at the fourth annual Pacific-Basin conference in Hong-Kong. He has won several teaching awards including E. Roe Stamps, IV Excellence-in-Teaching award, Institute Junior Faculty Teaching Excellence award, Lilly Teaching Fellowship award, and the Core Professor of the year award in the MSM program. He is a regular participant in executive training programs. One of his areas of specialization is Entrepreneurial Finance. Recent publications are under
Name and level student team members
Name Level Sam Wanis Undergraduate Senior Justin Hausaman Undergraduate Freshman Don Changeau Undergraduate Freshman Ashraf Charania Undergraduate Senior; dual-degree in AE (GT) and Economics (Emory) Richard Ames Graduate student, PhD candidate (B.AE, MSAE, MSMgmt.) Catherine Matos Graduate student, PhD candidate (B.AE, MSAE) Laura Ledsinger Graduate student, PhD candidate (B.AE, MSAE)
Team Leader & Faculty Advisor:
Sam Wanis, [email protected], 404-894-9622
Dr. Narayanan M. Komerath, [email protected], 404-894-3017
Commitment regarding team expenses Expenses incurred, such as preparing the proposal and communicating with NASA personnel will be covered by the Experimental Aerodynamics Group and the Georgia Space Grant Consortium.
26 27 IV. References
1. Air&Space [1999a]: Editors: "Birth of a Station". Air&Space, Smithsonian Magazine, Vol.13, No.5, Dec.98/Jan. 1999, p. 52-59. 2. Aldrin [1990]: Aldrin, B., "The Mars Transit System". Air & Space, Smithsonian, November 1990, p. 40-47 3. Andrade, E.N.D.C., "On the Groupings and General Behavior of Solid Particles Under the Influence of Air Vibration in Tubes". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, A, vol.230, p.413-451, 1932. 4. Armanios [1989a]: Armanios, E.A., "Interlaminar Fracture in Graphite/Epoxy Composites, " Interlaminar Fracture of Composites, pp. 85-102, (E.A. Armanios, Ed.), Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland (1989). 5. Armanios [1997]: Hooke, D, Armanios, E, Dancila, D., Thakker, A., Doorbar, P., “Failure of a titanium metal-matrix composite cylindrical shell under internal pressure”, ASTM Special Technical Publication, v 1285 June 1997, Conshohocken PA, p 27-44. 6. Armanios [1986]: Armanios, E.A., Rehfield, L.W. Reddy, A.D., "Design Analysis and Testing for Mixed-Mode and Mode II Interlaminar Fracture of Composites, " Composite Materials: Testing and Design (Seventh Conference), ASTM STP 893. J.M. Whitney, Ed., American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1986, pp. 232-255. 7. Armanios [1989b]: Armanios, E.A. and Rehfield, L.W., "Sublaminate Analysis of Interlaminar Fracture in Composites: Part I - Analytical Model, " Journal of Composites Technology and Research, Vol. II, No. 4, Winter 1989, pp. 135-146. 8. Armanios [1991]: Armanios, E.A., Badir, A. and Bedichevsky, V., "Effect of Damage on Elastically Tailored Composite Laminates", Proceedings of the AHS International Technical Specialists' Meeting on Rotorcraft Basic Research, Atlanta, Georgia, March 25-27, 1991, pp.(48-1)-(48-11). 9. Calise [1998]: Calise, A.J., Zimmerman, F. “Numerical Optimization Study of Aeroassosted Orbital Transfer”, Journal of Guidance and Control Dynamics, v21, n1, Jan-Feb 1998, p 127-133. 10. Calise [1992]: Calise, A. and Leung, M. “Hybrid Approach to Near-Optimal Launch Vehicle Guidance”, AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference, Washington DC, 1992. 11. Calise [1990a]: Calise, A, Leung, M., “An Approach to Optimal Guidance of an Advanced Launch Vehicle Concept”, Proceedings of the American Control Conference, Green Valley AZ, p 1824- 1828, May 1990. 12. Calise [1990b]: Calise, A, Bae, G.,“Optimal Heading Change with Minimum Energy Loss for a Hypersonic Gliding Vehicle”, Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, v 13 n 4 Jul-Aug 1990 p 609-614. 13. Covault [1998a]: Covault, C., "Globral Commercial Space Business Sought for ISS". Aviation Week & Space Technology, May 11, 1998, p. 26-27. 14. Covault [1998b]: Covault, C., Dornheim, M.A., "DS1 Outbound After Post-Launch Scare". Aviation Week & Space Technology, November 2, 1998, p. 32-33. 15. Conrad [1998]: Conrad, C., "Prescription for NASA's Mid-Life Crisis: Go Commercial". Viewpoint, Aviation Week & Space Technology, November 2, 1998, p. 76. 16. David [1998]: David, L., "Is Faster, Cheaper Better?" Aerospace America, September 1998, p. 42- 48. 17. Dornheim [1998]: Dornheim, M.A., "X-33 Flight Slips Half-Year to December 1999". Aviation Week & Space Technology, November 2, 1998, p. 26.Kargel [1996]: Kargel, J.S., Strom, R.G., "Global Climatic Change on Mars". Scientific American, November 1996, p. 80-88. 18. Dunn [1998]: Dunn, M., "Houston, [and Moscow, Munich, Tokyo, Montreal…] We Have a Problem: Mission Control Gets Ready for The International Space Station". Air & Space, Smithsonian Magazine, Vol.13, No.2, June/July 1998, p. 54-59. 19. Giddens [1997a]: Jones, S.A., F. Loth, D.P. Giddens, I. Morita, F. Kajiya, H. Osamu, Y. Ogasawara, K. Tsujioka, and C.K. Zarins. “In vivo measurements of blood flow velocity profiles in canine ilio-femoral anastomotic bypass grafts.”. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering. 119: 30-38, 1997. 20. Giddens [1997b]: Loth, F., S.A. Jones, D.P. Giddens, H. Bassiouny, S. Glagov, and C.K. Zarins. “Measurements of velocity and wall shear stress inside a PTFE vascular graft model under steady flow conditions.”, Journal of Biomechanical Engineering, 119: 187-194, 1997. 21. Giddens [1995]: Pritchard, W.F., P.F. Davies, Z. Derafshi, D.C. Polacek, R. Tsao, R.O. Dull, S.A. Jones, and D.P. Giddens, “Effects of wall shear stress and fluid recirculation on the localization of 28 circulating monocytes in a three-dimensional flow model.” Journal of Biomechanics. 28: 1459- 1469, 1995. 22. Giddens [1993]: Giddens, D.P., A.P. Yoganathan, and F.J. Schoen. "Prosthetic cardiac valves.", Cardiovascular Pathology, Chapter 16, 167S-177S. Elsevier Science Publishing Company, Inc., 1993. 23. Giddens [1991]: Glagov, S., D.P. Giddens, H. Bassiouny, S. White, and C.K. Zarins. "Hemodynamic effects and tissue reactions at graft to vein anastomosis for vascular access." In Vascular Access for Hemodialysis-II, edited by B.G. Sommer and M. L. Henry, Chapter 1, 3-20. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc., and Precept Press, Inc., 1991. 24. Holland, et al [1998]: Holland, S., Whitfield, J., Scott, J., Zachary, B., Ledsinger, L., Fischer, D., Musani, R., "Global Spacelines Incorporated Proudly Presents: The Future of Commercial Space Flight". Georgia Institute of Technology; Winning Design Team Entry in the X-Prize University Design Competition, May 1998. 25. Jayaraman [1993a]: Jayaraman, N., Shastri, K, Tandon, Kinshore, "The Impact of International Cross Listings on Risk and Return, Journal of Banking and Finance, vol. 17, no. 1, 1993 pp. 91- 104. 26. Jayaraman [1993b]: Jayaraman, N, Hwang, C., "The Post-Listing Puzzle: Evidence from Tokyo Stock Exchange Listings, Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, vol. 1, no. 2, 1993, pp. 111-126. 27. Jayaraman [1991a]: Jayaraman, N, Shastri, K., "The Effects of Announcement of Dividend Increases on Stock Return Volatility: The Evidence from the Options Markets, " Journal of Business Finance, and Accounting. 28. Jayaraman [1991b]: Jayaraman, N, Mandelker, G., Shastri, K, "Market Anticipation of Merger Activities: An Empirical Test," Managerial and Decision Economics, vol. 12, 1991, pp.439-448. 29. Jayaraman [1988]: Jayaraman, N, Shastri, K., "The Valuation Impacts of Specially Designated Dividends" Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, vol. 23, 1988, pp.301-312. 30. Khozin [1997]: Khozin, G., "A More Perfect Union". Air & Space, Smithsonian Magazine, Vol.12, No.1, April/May 1997, p. 58-59. 31. Komerath et al [1998a]: Komerath, N.M., et al., "Aerospace Digital Library". 1998. http://www.ae.gatech.edu/research/windtunnel/adl.html 32. Komerath [1998a]: Komerath, N.M., “Design-Centered Freshman Introduction to Aerospace Engineering”. Session 1202, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference, June 1998. 33. Komerath [1996a]: Komerath, N.M., “Experimental Curriculum in Diagnostics and Control of Unsteady Flows”. Journal of Engineering. Education, Vol. 85, No. 3, July 1996, p. 263-268. 34. Komerath [1994]: Komerath, "Flow Imaging and Control Laboratory: An Experiment in Iterative Learning". ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, 1994, Vol. 1, p. 737-743. 35. Komerath [1998b]: Wanis, S., Akovenko, J., Cofer, T., Ames, R., Komerath, N., “Acoustic Shaping in Microgravity”. AIAA Paper 98-1065, Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, NV January 1998 36. Komerath [1996b]: Hubner, J.P., Komerath, N.M., "Counter-Rotating Structures Over a Delta Wing". AIAA Journal, September 1996 37. Komerath [1996c]: Magill, John C., Komerath, N.M., Dorsey, J.F., "Experimental Evaluation of an Adaptive Controller for a Wind Driven Pitch Manipulator". AIAA Journal of Guidance, Dynamics and Control, January 1996. 38. Komerath [1997c]: Matos, C. A., Mahalingam, R., Ottinger, G., Klapper, J., Funk, R. B., and Komerath, N.M., " Wind Tunnel Measurements of Parafoil Geometry Aerodynamics", AIAA Paper 98-0606, 36th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting , January 1998, Reno, NV. 39. Komerath [1999]: Wanis, S., Komerath, N.M., Sercovich, A., "Acoustic Shaping in Microgravity: Higher Order Surface Shapes". AIAA Paper 99-0954, 37th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, NV, January 1999. 40. Larson [1998]: Larson, G.C., "The Wizards of What If". Air & Space, Smithsonian Magazine, Vol.13, No.2, June/July 1998, p. 70-73 41. Lin [1987a]: Lin, T.D., "Concrete for Lunar Base Construction", in Shohrokhi, F., Chao, C.C., Harwell, K.E., "Commercial Opportunities in Space", Progress in Aeronauics and Astronautics, Vol. 110, , 1987, p. 510-521. 42. Lin [1987b]: Lin, T.D., Love, H., Stark, D., "Physical Properties of Concrete Made with Apollo 16 Lunar Soil Sample". in Shohrokhi, F., Chao, C.C., Harwell, K.E., "Commercial Opportunities in Space", Progress in Aeronauics and Astronautics, Vol. 110, 1987, p. 522-533. 43. Loewy [1996]: Loewy, R. “ Disparities Between Perceptions and the Real Nature of Engineering Education”, presented at the 19th AIAA Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Technology 29 Conference, New Orleans, LA, June 17-20, 1996 and published in the Proceedings of the AIAA Aerospace America. 44. Loewy [1997a]: Loewy, R.,” Recent Developments in Smart Structures with Aeronautical Applications”, presented at the 37th Israel Annual Conference on Aerospace Sciences, Haifa, Israel, Feb. 26-27, 1997. Accepted for Publication in “Smart Materials & Structures,” 1997. 45. Loewy [1997b]: Loewy, R. “Aeroelastic Pitch-Lag Instability of Helicopter Rotors”, The Revolution in Structural Dynamics, Hubert I. Flomenhoft, editor, Dynaflow Press, Library of Congress Catalog No. 97-069295, pgs. 157-161, 1997. 46. Loewy [1984]: Loewy,R. “Helicopter Vibrations: A Technological Perspective.” Alexander A. Nikolsky Memorial Lecture, presented at the American Helicopter Society 40th Annual Forum, May 1984, published Journal of the American Helicopter Society, Oct. 1984. 47. Loewy [1999]: Loewy, R. “Avionics: A "New" Senior Partner in Aeronautics “, AIAA Dryden Lecture, 1999. 48. Lucid [ 1998]: Lucid, S., W., "Six Months on Mir". Scientific American, Vol.278, No.5, May 1998, p. 46-55 49. MarsSociety [1998a]: Web Page of The Mars Society, 1998. http://www.marssociety.org.mars_charts.asp 50. Novichkov [1998]: Novichkov, N., "Energia Contracts for Yamal Satellites". Aviation Week & Space Technology, May 18, 1998, p. 73. 51. Olds [1997a]: Olds, J.R. and Lee, H., “Integration of Cost Modeling and Business Simulation in to Conceptual Launch Vehicle Design”, AIAA 97-3911, AIAA Defense and Space Programs Conference and Exhibit, Huntsville, AL, Sept. 1997. 52. Olds [1996]: Olds, J.R., Mankins, Escher, Howell, “Combined Airbreathing/Rocket Powered Highly Reusable Space Transports: A Progress Report”, AIAA 96-4516, 7th International Spaceplanes and Hypersonic Systems & Technology, Norfolk, VA, November 1996. 53. Olds [1997b]: Olds, J.R. and Way, D.W., “Sirius: A New Launch Vehicle Option for Mega-LEO Constellation Deployment”, AIAA 97-3122, 33rd AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, Seattle, WA, July 1997. 54. Olds [1997c]: Olds, J.R. and McCormick, D.J. “Component-Level Weight Analysis for RBCC Engines”, AIAA 97-3953, 1997 AIAA Defense and Space Programs Conference & Exhibit, Huntsville, AL, Sept. 1997. 55. Ruffin [1995a]: Ruffin, S.M. and Berkman, M., "Vibrational Transition Rate Studies of N-2 and CO at Moderate Temperatures," accepted in the Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer, September 1995. 56. Ruffin [1995b]: Ruffin, S.M. "Prediction of Vibrational Relaxation in Hypersonic Expanding Flows - Part I: Model Development," Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer, Vol. 9, No. 2, April- June 1995. 57. Ruffin [1995c]: Ruffin, S.M. "Prediction of Vibrational Relaxation in Hypersonic Expanding Flows - Part II: Results," Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer, Vol. 9, No. 2, April-June 1995. 58. Ruffin [1993a]: Ruffin, S,M.,"Vibrational Energy Transfer of Diatomic Gases in Hypersonic Expanding Flows," Stanford University, Department of Aeronautics & Astronautics, Report No. 635, pp. 1-175, June 1993. 59. Ruffin [1993b]: Sharma, S.P., Ruffin, S.M., Gillespie, W.D., Meyer, S.A., "Vibrational Relaxation Measurements in an Expanding Flow Using Spontaneous Raman Scattering,"Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 697-703, October-December 1993. 60. Sekigawa [1998]: Sekigawa, E., "Japanese Watchdog Agency Questions Need for J-1". Aviation Week& Space Technology, May 11, 1998, p. 41. 61. Smith [1998]: Smith, B.A., "Commercial Satellite Completes Lunar Flyby". Aviation Week & Space Technology, May 18, 1998, p. 74. 62. Smith [1998b]: Smith, E.J., "The Ulysses Mission". Scientific American, January 1998, p. 75-79. 63. Smith [1996]: Smith, M. J., "Computational Considerations of an Euler/Navier-Stokes Aeroelastic Method for a Hovering Rotor", AIAA Journal of Aircraft., Vol. 33, No. 2, March-April 1996, pg. 429- 434. 64. Smith [1995a]: Stoker, R. and Smith, M. J., “An Evaluation of Finite Volume Direct Simulation and Perturbation Methods in CAA Applications,” Journal of Computational Acoustics., Vol. 3, No. 4 (1995), pg. 281-295.
30 65. Smith [1994]: Englar, R. J., Smith, M. J., Rover, R. and Kelley, S., “Development of Circulation Control Technology for Application to Advanced Subsonic Transport Aircraft - Parts I and II,” AIAA Journal of Aircraft., Vol. 31, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1994. 66. Smith [1995b]: Smith, M. J., Hodges, D. H., Cesnik, C. E. S., “An Evaluation of Computational Algorithms to Interface Between CFD and CSD Methodologies”, Wright Laboratory Report WL-TR- 96-3055, November 1995. 67. Smith [1998]: Smith, M. J., Cesnik, C. E. S., Hodges, D. H., and Moran, K. J., “An Evaluation Of Computational Algorithms Suitable For Fluid-Structure Interactions, Part II: Applications Evaluation,” submitted to the AIAA Journal of Aircraft., March, 1998. 68. Steinberg et al, [1998a]: Steinberg, G., Sams, P., "Preview of Human Exploration and Development of Space Roadmap". http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/nsp/hedsroad.htm 69. Steinberg et al [1998b]: Steinberg, G., Sams, P., "NASA's Strategic Management System". 1998. http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/nsp/sms.htm 70. Steinberg et al [1998c]: Steinberg, G., Sams, P., "Human Exploration and Development of Space".1998. http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/nsp/heds.htm 71. Steinberg et al [1998c]: Steinberg, G., Sams, P., "Crosscutting Processes". 1998. http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/crosscut.htm 72. Wanis et al [1997]: Wanis, S., et al., "Acoustic Shaping in Microgravity". 1997. Web Page at: http://www.ae.gatech.edu/research/windtunnel/index.html 73. Wanis et al [1998a]: Wanis, S., Akovenko, J., Cofer, T., Ames, R., Komerath, N.M.,"Acoustic Shaping in Microgravity". AIAA Paper, 36th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, Nevada, January 1998. 74. Wanis et al [1999]: Wanis, S., Sercovich, A., Komerath, N.M., "Acoustic Shaping in Microgravity: Higher Order Modes". AIAA Paper 99-0954, 37th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, Nevada, January 1999. 75. Weissman [1998]: Weissman, P.R., "The Oort Cloud". Scientific American, September 1998, p.84- 89. 76. White [1998]: White, R.J., "Weightlessness and the Human Body". Scientific American, September 1998, p. 59-63.
31