UNIVERSITY STUDENT DESIGN CHALLENGE GUIDE

Student Design Challenge

Page 1 of 26

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NASA Glenn Research Center

UNIVERSITY STUDENT DESIGN CHALLENGE 2019-2020

AERONAUTICS SPACE

AUTONOMOUS UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS THE NEXT GENERATION OF SPACE TRAVEL

ELECTRIFIED AIRCRAFT PROPULSION SYSTEMS THE LAVA TUBES OF THE MOON

www.nasa.gov 2019 USDC-4

PS-02938-0819

http://www.nasa.gov

Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................3 2.0 Challenge Overview ..............................................................................................................................3

2.1 Aeronautics Challenge I: Automatic Dependence Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B) Systems for Situational Awareness of Autonomous Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)..............................3 2.1.1 Challenge Objective.............................................................................................................4 2.1.2 Mission Performance Requirements...................................................................................5 2.1.3 Conceptual Design...............................................................................................................6

2.2 Aeronautics Challenge II: Integrated Hierarchical Control of Propulsion, Power, and Thermal Management for Electrified Aircraft Propulsion Systems.............................................................9 2.2.1 Challenge Objective...........................................................................................................10 2.2.2 Performance Requirements ..............................................................................................10 2.2.3 Identification of Heat Loads ..............................................................................................11 2.2.4 Performance of Trade Study .............................................................................................11 2.2.5 Design Iteration .................................................................................................................11 2.2.6 Potential Resources...........................................................................................................11

2.3 Space Challenge I: Enabling the Next Generation of Space Travel .............................................12 2.3.1 Challenge Objective...........................................................................................................12 2.3.2 Mission Performance Requirements.................................................................................12 2.3.3 System Design ...................................................................................................................13

2.4 Space Challenge II: Exploring and Utilizing the Lava Tubes of the Moon ...................................14 2.4.1 Challenge Objective...........................................................................................................14 2.4.2 Mission Performance Requirements.................................................................................14 2.4.3 Potential Resources...........................................................................................................16

3.0 Challenge Details.................................................................................................................................16 3.1 Schedule and Milestones ............................................................................................................16 3.2 Judges and Judging......................................................................................................................17 3.3 Challenge Scoring ........................................................................................................................17 3.4 Final Submission and Final Presentations (Virtual Culmination) ................................................18 3.5 Culminating Event .......................................................................................................................18

4.0 Competition Rules and Requirements ................................................................................................18 4.1 Eligibility and Registration...........................................................................................................19 4.2 Rules and Considerations............................................................................................................19

5.0 Data Submission..................................................................................................................................20 5.1 Format.........................................................................................................................................20 5.2 Method........................................................................................................................................20 5.3 Presentation Package..................................................................................................................20

6.0 Roles and Responsibilities...................................................................................................................20 6.1 Role of Faculty Advisor................................................................................................................20 6.2 Role of Technical Experts ............................................................................................................20

Appendix A—Acronyms and Abbreviations..................................................................................................22 Appendix B—Presentation of Written Report ..............................................................................................23 Appendix C—Submission Release Form .......................................................................................................25

GRC—University Student Design Challenge Page 2 of 26

1.0 Introduction

Research and technology (R&T) development of innovative aeronautics- and space-related

technologies at NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) dates back to 1941. The Center invites teams

of undergraduate students to get involved in its R&T efforts by participating in the fourth-year

implementation of its sponsored University Student Design Challenge (USDC–4) during the 2019– 2020 academic year. The USDC–4 comprises two aeronautics-themed projects and two space-

themed projects, all of which encourage teams of participating students to use out-of-box

approaches to solve specific problems to benefit NASA mission needs.

Eligibility for the USDC–4 competition extends to full-time junior- or senior-year undergraduate

students in accredited U.S. academic institutions who are enrolled in multidisciplinary majors in

science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM) disciplines. Equally eligible are

students majoring in economics, marketing, graphic arts, or other disciplines that would aid in

successful execution of the Challenge projects. Each team of participating students is required to

have an on-campus faculty advisor. The team of students will have access to GRC subject matter

experts (SMEs) as off-campus technical mentors to complement on-campus faculty advisors.

Like past year offerings, the USDC–4 promotes participation through multidisciplinary teams of

students with STEAM majors to address societal needs for an optimal use of technical and

employable skills to drive and sustain workplace productivity. Using the resourcefulness of students

with diverse knowledge will increase the ability and creativity of the teams and foster team-building

and communication skills which, in turn, can enhance workplace productivity. The Design Challenge

encourages a multidisciplinary view of knowledge resulting from varied ideas and feasibilities.

2.0 Challenge Overview

The USDC-4 presents four Design Challenge options, two focused on Aeronautics and two on

Space:

❖ Aeronautics Challenge I: Design a low-power automatic dependence surveillance

broadcast (ADS-B) system for small unmanned aerial systems (UAS)

❖ Aeronautics Challenge II: Build and demonstrate a model of an electrified aircraft

propulsion (EAP) design

❖ Space Challenge I: Develop a concept for the first real interstellar mission

❖ Space Challenge II: Create robotic systems to explore lava tubes on the Moon for human

habitation

2.1 Aeronautics Challenge I: Automatic Dependence Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B) Systems for Situational Awareness of Autonomous Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)

The evolution of autonomous systems will transform aviation operations and provide

improvements in safety, efficiency, and flexibility of operations to increase the capacity,


robustness, and flexibility of the National Airspace System. Additional benefits will be realized

through new uses of the airspace, enabled by advances in autonomy such as advanced UAS

operations. Society will gain high confidence in autonomous aviation systems, and large-scale

autonomous systems will achieve goals specified at levels of system governance and

sustainability. Goals will include system-level maintenance, healing, and protection. Systems will

be interconnected and will rely on distributed sensor networks. System elements will be

distributed and collaborative, enabling unprecedented efficiency, agility, robustness, and

resilience.

Communications connectivity requires radios, but radio frequency limitations are forcing

aviation communications higher and higher in the spectrum. The need for increased

communication and information exchanges requires an increasing bandwidth. The student team

designs are expected to solve the bandwidth problem.

2.1.1 Challenge Objective

The objective of this project is to build an ADS-B system for small UAS, inclusive of the

additional features of authentication of the transmissions, call grouping of secondary messages,

and relaying of highly desirable messages. Minimizing the system mass and power consumed

enables a more cost-effective detect-and-avoid payload.

Participating students are asked to create designs for an ADS-B-style system, with provisions

for ground station as infrastructure injection point, electric UAS aircraft vehicle requirements,

communication requirements, traffic system management, and safety.

Other considerations of this ADS-B system for small UAS are as follows:

❖ Assurance of safety message repetition rates

❖ Communications safety margin required for operation in non-clear air (rainy day or fog)

❖ Communication with nearby vehicles of secondary communications payloads (relay

functions)

❖ Determination of an optimum bandwidth

❖ Determination of the optimum size, weight, and power (SWaP) for the operational

capabilities based on the frequency, bandwidth, and required operational needs for

detect and avoid

Important characteristics to address include the following:

❖ State messages concatenation with secondary communications

❖ Authentication of state messages

❖ Energy consumption

❖ Tradeoffs in ADS-B energy consumption, maximum speed, and flight duration


Small UAS will require low-power detection, avoidance, and communications capabilities.

This effort is to design a low-power ADS-B system for small UAS aircraft traveling less than 55

mph and using the 80- to 90-GHz radio frequency spectrum.

The criteria for this Challenge can be divided into two categories: system design and system

performance. The system design criteria relate to how well the ADS-B data links integrate into

the current environment, e.g., compatibility with other avionics systems. System performance

criteria are designed to describe how well the system will achieve the ADS-B objectives, and in

terms of the applications it is expected to support.

In order to evaluate system performance, two scenarios are chosen as representative of

future environments; they are high- and low-density environments. The two types of

environment are chosen to permit comparison of the ADS-B data links in several different air

traffic situations. Example environments are as follows:

❖ High-air-traffic-density scenario, such as San Francisco/Oakland, California, with a total of

3,000 UAS aircraft

❖ Low-density scenario, with a total of 360 UAS aircraft, city transitioning to rural area,

exemplified by the Cleveland metro area

All UAS aircraft are assumed to be equipped with the ADS-B system and are uniformly

distributed in the horizontal plane within a circle of 400 nautical miles, and varying altitudes from

100 to 3,000 feet above surface. Moreover, the practical implementation of these electric air

vehicles requires leveraging new flight-weight technologies and adapting existing concept of

operations (ConOps) and air traffic management to support the autonomous operations.

This Design Challenge project requires the conceptual development of an ADS-B system for

small UAS that will use their service provider direction and command and control (C2)

communications system for strategic operational control, and will use the ADS-B system for

short-range tactical decisions involving vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure

communications, collision avoidance, and situational awareness.

2.1.2 Mission Performance Requirements

Starting assumptions:

❖ Spectrum band requirements: 90 GHz and 100 MHz bandwidth

❖ Vertical polarization

❖ Reference universal access transceiver (UAT) functional parameters: 1 message per

second, 4 message types, all with state information

❖ Communication link reliability needed is 95%. Operational reliability required is 99.999%.

❖ Terrain and collision avoidance system (TCAS) functionality requires class-size and class-

weight information exchange to determine actions

❖ UAS speed is 55 mph


❖ 3-dB communications link margin minimum required for operations

❖ 0.5 watts continuous drain on the UAS

❖ Link closure required for sensitivity-level systems is –93 dBm. Nominal sensitivity of

approximately –97 dBm.

Each student design team should consider how their respective design can satisfy the

requirements of the scenario, and each team should determine gross vehicle performance

requirements, range, and airspeed. The mission implies that the aerial system must meet the

following technical requirements for communications:

❖ UAS must be controllable at all times during operations via use of a ground-to-air

communications link.

❖ UAS shall be able to react, avoid, and return to instructed flight path.

❖ UAS shall be able to transmit its position and UAS airframe identification in the

operational space.

❖ UAS shall be able to perform emergency return home over a preset flight path or safely

land upon loss of communication with the control network during autonomous operation.

❖ UAS shall not transmit signals outside of its allocated spectrum at any time.

2.1.3 Conceptual Design

❖ Define mission by Tuesday, November 12, 2019, and specify

➢ Sample electric UAS capability and required municipal airport infrastructure

➢ Payload, range, and speed

➢ Market research (societal impact, public acceptability of electric UAS air vehicles, etc.)

❖ Begin vehicle design by Monday, December 9, 2019, and specify

➢ Airframe selection of UAS

➢ Electrical systems and their thermal management

➢ Other major systems and subsystems

➢ Weight and balance assessment of the new system on UAS

➢ Performance analysis of UAS

If gaps or shortfalls in weight or performance are predicted by the analysis, additional

technologies may be proposed and used to close the vehicle design. Student teams should be

prepared to define what the additional technologies are and how they will be used.


❖ Importance of Radio Frequency Communication

Radio frequency (RF) communication is the most optimized method for reliable command

and control, and data transmission and reception. RF systems are small and lightweight, with low

power consumption, and are capable of establishing robust communication links over very

specific frequencies.

❖ Factors Limiting Range of Wireless Link

The range of a wireless link is limited by a number of factors. The path loss itself will diminish

the signal when distance increases, and obstacles in the line of sight can give additional

attenuation. Also, other radio transmissions in the operational environment can interfere with

the command/control/data signal. If the interfering signals occur in the same frequency as the

wireless link, it will be observed as noise. This phenomenon reduces the signal-to-noise ratio,

causing command and control issues, as well as noisy video images, while limiting the range of

the link. This problem can be mitigated by using a channel that is far away in frequency from the

interferer or by physically moving the receiver and antenna. There are other sources of

interference that manifest themselves as powerful signals outside the link. Such signals can

penetrate weak front-end channel filtering and affect the performance of the low-noise amplifier

(LNA). These signals are typically radars, broadcast towers, or military radios. The best course of

action here is to operate outside their coverage area.

❖ DO–160G Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) Compliance

The choice of communication equipment can also affect the mass of the entire vehicle. For

example, the automatic direction finder (ADF) radio operates in frequency ranges from 190 KHz

to 1 MHz. The airplane equipment cannot interfere with ADF radio. This explains why the DO– 160G document, Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment,

published by the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (https://do160.org/), has

conducted and radiated emission requirements that start at the low 190-Hz frequency. Currently,

the ADF radio is optional equipment for airplanes. Many airlines select this option, thereby

resulting in installation of ADF radio in many modern airplanes. A considerable number of 787,

777, 777X and older airplanes use the ADF radio. The low-frequency range of the radio results in

larger and heavier filters in power electronics. At the megawatt power level, the yielded mass

can result in less effective payload capacity.

An additional objective of the Challenge project is to use model-based systems engineering

methods to define and refine the systems feasibility for large-scale deployment.

❖ Areas of high interest (weighted)

➢ Power consumed on board the UAS; watts RF/DC consumed. Weight of 5

➢ Frequency reuse plan. Weight of 2


https://do160.org/

➢ Current TCAS/UAT minimum message set. Weight of 1

➢ Current TCAS/UAT minimum message set authentication. Weight of 2

➢ Relay function allows greater visibility and message forwarding to adjacent systems.

Weight of 3.

➢ Improvements to fundamental system/design. Weight of 4; decreased power

consumed, increased capacity, or increased reliability.

❖ Figure of Merit (FOM)

➢ FOM of 10 for a system that closes for the communication use case

➢ FOM of 5 for least consumed power

➢ FOM of 3 for maximum margin in decibels

➢ FOM of 2 for defining the UAS reaction time and margins in seconds

❖ Tool Used

➢ Cameo Systems Modeler, SysML, is a modeling tool for model-based systems

engineering

❖ Output

➢ Use case model

○ Derived requirements

○ Constraints

➢ Free space link budget, IF-77 Electromagnetic Wave Propagation Model (Gierhart-

Johnson)

➢ UAV implementation link budget: Receive noise chain analysis and DC power analysis

➢ Optimized parameters: Using the Monte Carlo analysis tool, which is built in to Cameo.

This is to get size, weight, and power (SWaP) and performance. Note that the receiver

noise chain analyses can be done by using any desired tool.

❖ Deliverables

Among the expected deliverables are:

➢ Any assumptions made during the design process, also noted in model

➢ Refined design requirements, From-To format

➢ Optimized models in Cameo Systems Modeler, SysML

➢ PowerPoint (PPT) presentation of final design


2.2 Aeronautics Challenge II: Integrated Hierarchical Control of Propulsion, Power, and Thermal Management for Electrified Aircraft Propulsion Systems

Electrified aircraft propulsion (EAP) systems have the potential to revolutionize air travel in

the coming generation. This is a time of disruptive change not seen since the advent of the

turbine engine; nontraditional participants are entering a mature market space with very

unconventional aircraft designs. However, traditional market participants, recognizing the threat,

are responding with system architectures and concepts of their own. All these activities focus on

the fundamental promise of EAP, namely, to provide new design flexibility that can open new

markets and produce viable system-level benefits while reducing fuel burn, emissions, and noise.

As with any disruptive technology, propulsion electrification suffers from performance issues

in some of the underlying electric components. As a result, there is tremendous research activity

focusing on many critical technologies. In reality, no one really knows what viable electrified

propulsion concept (Fig. 1) will result in a feasible product for commercial aviation. However, two

facts remain clear for the near future: hydrocarbon fuels are the densest form of storing energy,

and the turbine engine is the most efficient means of producing power.

Figure 1. Electrified Aircraft Propulsion Architecture


Given this outlook, it is reasonably expected that near-term propulsion system designs will

be based on some type of combination of electric components and turbomachinery. Another

expectation is that system integration and operability will be fundamentally challenging. This is

because EAP systems, which consist of a turbine engine, an electrical power system, and a

thermal management system, operate on time scales covering six orders of magnitude. In

addition, the components are highly multidisciplinary and are generally sourced by different

organizations. Therefore, the integrated hierarchical control of the engine, power, and thermal

management systems is a significant technology to be developed and explored.


The objective of this project is to integrate the three major systems of an electrified

propulsion design that comprises a turbine engine, an electric power system, and a thermal

management system. The engine and power systems will be defined by NASA. However, the

thermal management system design will not close (i.e., will not produce any viable vehicle-level

benefits to justify the use of EAP) without new advances in technology. Identifying and resolving

the technology gaps more effectively than efforts by competitors will differentiate a successful

team’s design and the ultimate success of new products.

2.2.2 Performance Requirements

Each multidisciplinary team is expected to build a simulation model of their electrified

propulsion system. NASA will provide details on architecture, individual power and propulsion

components, and constraints. The model will be used to analyze and document the system

performance, identify weaknesses, and improve the design. Problem areas are to be redesigned

in an iterative fashion until the system closes and a realistic design is achieved.

The model developed under this Challenge should be demonstrated in a simulation

environment, utilizing tools that provide dynamic simulation capability sufficient to capture the

interaction of the power, propulsion, and thermal management systems. The use of popular,

widely available codes such as the NASA-developed open-source software T-MATS and EMTAT

(to be released), Simulink (MathWorks), etc., is strongly encouraged.

Among the important characteristics to include are the following:

❖ Power

❖ Stability

❖ Operability

❖ Controllability

❖ Thermal management


2.2.3 Identification of Heat Loads

After building the EAP model, teams will identify and analyze heat loads across the

turbomachinery and electrical power systems on a component-by-component basis using a

common mission profile provided by NASA. The heat loads will need to be managed to avoid

maintenance and reliability issues, as well as potentially catastrophic system failure.

2.2.4 Performance of Trade Study

Using model data, teams will perform trade studies to analyze how component efficiencies

affect system performance. With this information, teams will identify the most likely areas for

technology improvement that will enable one to close the team’s design and maximize E!P benefits.

2.2.5 Design Iteration

The thermal management system (TMS) will be the primary differentiator in the EAP design.

Not only must the design close, but it will also be evaluated on how well it minimizes peak

temperatures and overall temperature rise. The TMS must be active and either open or closed

loop. Regardless of the design, the TMS is expected to increase system weight, which will offset

performance improvements; It is critical to properly document the team’s design and support all assumptions, especially if there is a lack of engineering data.

2.2.6 Potential Resources

Adibhatla, Shreeder, et al.: Propulsion Control Technology Development Needs to Address NASA

Aeronautics Research Mission Goals for Thrusts 3a and 4. AIAA Propulsion and Energy Forum.

AIAA-2018-4824. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20180005340.pdf

Aircraft Configurations/Technologies.

https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/aeronautics/electrified-aircraft-propulsion-eap/eap-for-larger

aircraft/aircraft-configurations-technologies/

Connolly, Joseph W., et al.: Modeling and Control Design for a Turboelectric Single Aisle Aircraft

Propulsion System.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20180005436.pdf

Jansen, Ralph H.; Bowman, Cheryl; Jankovsky, Amy; Dyson, Rodger; and Felder, James. Overview

of NASA Electrified Aircr aft Propulsion Research for Large Subsonic Transports.


Johnson, Wayne; and Silva, Christopher: Observations from Exploration of VTOL Urban Air

Mobility Designs. 2 018.

https://rotorcraft.arc.nasa.gov/Research/Programs/eVTOL_observations_Johnson_Silva_20

18.pdf

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NASA Aeronautics Strategic Implementation

Plan. 2017 Update. NP-2017-01-2352-HQ.

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/sip-2017-03-23-17-high.pdf



https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/aeronautics/electrified-aircraft-propulsion-eap/eap-for-larger-aircraft/aircraft-configurations-technologies/



https://rotorcraft.arc.nasa.gov/Research/Programs/eVTOL_observations_Johnson_Silva_2018.pdf

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/sip-2017-03-23-17-high.pdf

2.3 Space Challenge I: Enabling the Next Generation of Space Travel

The Pioneer and Voyager spacecraft were the first interstellar emissaries from Earth. Though

never intended to survive long enough to execute this type of mission, the Voyagers still have

limited function after more than 40 years of deep space travel and have been able to confirm

that they have crossed the boundary between the solar system and interstellar space.


The objective of this project is to apply the lessons learned from the Voyager mission to

develop a concept for the first real interstellar mission. The objective is to develop a mission

concept that can deliver a science payload of at least 50 kg to interstellar space in 20 years or

less, and send data back to Earth for a minimum of an additional 20 years after crossing into

interstellar space. The concept development should determine the spacecraft power, propulsion,

and communications system technologies capable of meeting the noted requirements. The

student team(s) will compare the technology needs against current state of the art and identify

the required steps to extend current capabilities to meet the mission requirements. Include any

Earth-based communications technologies or infrastructure that would require technology

development. Develop a concept for the flight system, including all spacecraft subsystems,

launch requirements, and a concept of operations (ConOps) from launch through end of mission

(at least launch + 40 years).

The team(s) should start by researching the Voyager Interstellar Mission and the systems that

have permitted the spacecraft to operate for more than 40 years. The desired science

measurements and data gathering on the environment of interstellar space should also be

researched, starting with the measurements from the Voyager spacecraft and performing a

literature search on published technical papers on interstellar travel. Finally, the team(s) should

familiarize themselves with the deep space network and its current and planned future

capabilities, as well as high-data-rate communications systems currently being studied under the

auspices of N!S!’s Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) Program; In addition to meetings with the on-campus faculty advisor, tag-ups should be held regularly

with NASA GRC SMEs who support the project to provide any needed guidance to the university

team(s) of students.


Requirements include the following:

❖ Assess trajectory options for the mission, beginning with launch. Gravity assist maneuvers

can be utilized to supplement the delta velocity supplied by the launch vehicle.

Nontraditional spacecraft propulsion systems, or even no spacecraft propulsion system,

should be assessed and factor into the technology development needs to meet mission

requirements.

❖ Determine launch vehicle requirements to support the mission concept.


❖ Determine the scope of science desired for the mission, and prioritize that science against

instrument mass to fulfill the science objective and mission performance capabilities.

❖ Consider secondary mission objectives on a noninterference basis, with the primary

mission objective of returning data on interstellar space. The secondary mission

objectives would include science within the solar system.

Particular attention should be given to the following considerations:

❖ Autonomy

❖ Communications

❖ Safety

❖ Controllability

❖ Traffic and thermal management

❖ Power and propulsion

❖ Weight

2.3.3 System Design

Final report(s) by the team(s) should include the following:

❖ Spacecraft concept with dimensioned drawings or computer-aided design (CAD)

renderings

❖ A mass equipment list (MEL) containing a mass breakdown of the system to subsystems

and components, with mass growth allowances that depend on the maturity of the

system or component (per ANSI/AIAA S-120A-2015 standard, Mass Properties Control for

Space Systems). A suitable margin should then be applied to the spacecraft as

recommended in the ANSI/AIAA standard.

❖ Power consumption by subsystem/component for each mission phase should be

documented in a power equipment list, with allowances as recommended in the

ANSI/AIAA standard.

❖ All trades, assessments, and analyses should be fully documented in the final report(s) by

the team(s). The final report(s) should capture the decision process and all rationales for

anything that requires the team to make a decision based on pros and cons or to meet a

mission requirement (or requirements derived from the mission requirements).

❖ A Concept of Operations (ConOps) should be created. The ConOps should look at mission

operations, beginning at launch and continuing through the end of the mission.

Communications issues should be considered, including how to achieve communications

with Earth from distances of light-hours to light-days. Given that spacecraft consumables

will be at a premium, teams should determine if the operations can conserve any


consumables to help ensure a 40-year supply. Will the spacecraft need to do active

navigation in the solar system and in interstellar space? Teams should also consider what

can go wrong during the mission and address how the spacecraft can be designed to

withstand potential failures. Additionally, the ConOps should address the infrastructure

required on Earth to support communications with the spacecraft for the time required

and over the distances involved.

2.4 Space Challenge II: Exploring and Utilizing the Lava Tubes of the Moon

For long-duration human occupation at the lunar surface, the ability to make use of local

resources will be a key development. Human survival will require the extraction of oxygen from

rocks or water collected from the cryogenic bottoms of permanently shadowed polar craters. In

addition, long-term hazards to human health, such as unshielded solar radiation and ions, galactic

cosmic radiation, and meteorite bombardment, will need to be avoided or minimized.

One concept for safely sheltering humans at the lunar surface long term is to take advantage

of the likely existence of empty lava tubes as naturally occurring "caves" to shield our fragile

biology from most of the radiation, avoid habitat or atmospheric containment structure impacts

by meteorites, and even reduce the temperature swing from lunar night to day for the habitat

(about –170 C to 120 C at mid-latitudes on the surface).


The objective of this project is to create robotic systems that can enter, explore, and map

subsurface lunar cavities of unknown depth and dimension, and return, if not themselves, then

comprehensive information for human habitation evaluation. Lava tube entry may need to be

through a collapsed roof section ("skylight") or via a partially collapsed horizontal tunnel end.

Also required are concepts for how to use an underground cavity as a habitat and how that

habitat volume would be robotically constructed. The method of habitat construction may affect

which underground spaces would be suitable for use, and those constraints need to be specified.

Design Challenge goals include (1) minimizing the mass of any tools, equipment, or structures

needed to accomplish the lunar tasks and (2) minimizing the physical interaction required by the

astronauts by using thoroughly preplanned, highly engineered approaches and employing

robotics with as much autonomy as practical.


For initial construction of a cave-sheltered human habitat by potentially autonomous

robotics, what is the minimum mass and/or number of robots to start (e.g., find and map lava

tubes) and then to begin construction?

Could initial construction be unsupervised (autonomous) for at least a minimal habitat

volume? Would a phased approach be feasible, allowing a human visit at an early stage? How

would that be accomplished, what minimum systems would be required, and how long would

local production of life support consumables take?


For a full self-contained, long-term habitat for a specified number of humans, questions that

will need to be addressed include the following:

❖ What critical subsystems are required, and how are they affected by cave location, size,

and geometry? For instance, how would maintenance access to support subsystems

occur? How would a minimum required underground volume scale with population?

❖ What power source or sources could be used? Would a long-lived nuclear power plant be

required? Would a combination of solar power and batteries or reversible fuel cells be

sufficient? How do power requirements scale with population?

❖ What communications would be necessary? How would access to the surface and/or

surface mobility be accomplished (if necessary)? How much commerce with Earth (or

other human populations) and related infrastructure (landing pads) would be needed?

❖ Assuming recycling/processing of water and biowastes, what percentage recovery

efficiency must be achieved? If nonrecyclable solid waste is generated, how much (or

what percentage of the waste stream) is it, and what is done with it?

Each of the Design Challenge decisions will affect required launch mass, how long processing

of local materials will take, possible phasing of human arrival, and/or level of robotic autonomy

required. Estimates of the quantities should be documented. Among the important

considerations to address are the following:

❖ Habitat construction

❖ Robotic system designs

❖ Launched mass

❖ Life support requirements

❖ Autonomy impacts

Student teams should address required k ey topics for the following milestone dates:

❖ Define the overall habitat system architecture by November 18, 2019, and specify

➢ Assumptions made in system architecture design and operations approach

➢ Initial habitat capacity when first occupied by humans

➢ Number of launches/landings (at what mass capacity) to achieve habitability

➢ Degree of reliance on local source materials when first inhabitable

❖ Undertake subsystem interdependence analyses by December 9, 2019, to determine

➢ Robotics usage impacts on needed resources, including energy

➢ Minimum energy requirements per human inhabitant for basic life support

(nonrenewable)


➢ Scaling of life support energy required with degree of recycling (e.g., for hydroponics,

greenhouse lights, etc.)

➢ Additional infrastructure and habitation buildout resource requirements, both local

and landed mass

If shortfalls in capabilities are predicted using current state of the art, identify what additional

technologies may be required to close the design.

2.4.3 Potential Resources

Duke, Michael B.; Mendell, Wendell W.; and Roberts, Barney B.: Strategies for a Permanent Lunar

Base. https://www.chicagospace.org/strategies-for-a-permanent-lunar-base/

Heiken, Grant H.; Vaniman, David T.; and French, Bevan M., eds: Lunar Sourcebook. 1991,

Cambridge University Press.

https://www.lpi.usra.edu/publications/books/lunar_sourcebook/

Järvstråt, Niklas; and Toklu, Y. Cengiz. (2004). Design and Construction for Self-sufficiency in a

Lunar Colony.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228918710_Design_and_Construction_for_Self

sufficiency_in_a_Lunar_Colony

Lewis, John S.; Matthews, Mildred Shapley; and Guerrieri, Mary L., eds: Resources of Near-Earth

Space. University of Arizona Press, Space Science Series.

https://www.amazon.com/Resources-Near-Earth-Space

Science/dp/0816514046/ref=sr_1_1?qid=1563818585&refinements=p_27%3AMary+L.+Gue

rrieri&s=books&sr=1-1&text=Mary+L.+Guerrieri

O’Handley, Douglas: Final Report on System Architecture Development for a Self-Sustaining

Lunar Colony. https://space.nss.org/media/2000-System-Architecture-Development-For-A

Self-Sustaining-Lunar-Colony.pdf

Scharmen, Fred: What Will Humans Really Need in Space?

https://slate.com/technology/2019/06/chen-qiufan-space-leek-response-agriculture.html

Tate, Karl: How Moon Base Lunar Colony Works (Infographic). Space.com.

https://www.space.com/21588-how-moon-base-lunar-colony-works-infographic.html

3.0 Challenge Details

The following information applies to both the Aeronautics and Space components of the

Challenge.

3.1 Schedule and Milestones

Students must register for the Design Challenge competition between September 16 and

October 18, 2019, the registration deadline. Registered students are required to participate in

the following scheduled activities and deliverables:


https://www.chicagospace.org/strategies-for-a-permanent-lunar-base/

https://www.lpi.usra.edu/publications/books/lunar_sourcebook/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228918710_Design_and_Construction_for_Self-sufficiency_in_a_Lunar_Colony

https://www.amazon.com/Resources-Near-Earth-Space-Science/dp/0816514046/ref=sr_1_1?qid=1563818585&refinements=p_27%3AMary+L.+Guerrieri&s=books&sr=1-1&text=Mary+L.+Guerrieri

https://space.nss.org/media/2000-System-Architecture-Development-For-A-Self-Sustaining-Lunar-Colony.pdf

https://slate.com/technology/2019/06/chen-qiufan-space-leek-response-agriculture.html

https://www.space.com/21588-how-moon-base-lunar-colony-works-infographic.html

10/18/2019 Registration Deadline

10/25/2019 Submission Release Form Deadline

11/6/2019 Aero Projects Kickoff Presentation and Introductory Workshops I

and II

11/7/2019 Space Projects Kickoff Presentation and Introductory Workshops I

and II

11/18/2019 to 11/19/2019 Aero Projects Virtual Student Team Meetings I and II with GRC

SMEs

11/20/2019 to 11/21/2019 Space Projects Virtual Student Team Meetings I and II with GRC

SMEs

1/22/2020 to 1/23/2020 Virtual Preliminary Design Review and Team Photo

2/19/2020 to 2/20/2020 Virtual Pre-Culminating Design Review and Team Action Photo

3/13/2020 Final Design Report and Team Project Video Deadline

3/23/2020 to 3/27/2020 Final Presentations – Teams Present Final Outcomes

4/13/2020 Winners Announced

6/11/2020 GRC On -Site Culminating Event – Winning Teams Invited

3.2 Judges and Judging

Each USDC–4 Challenge project will have three independent judges: two subject matter

experts (SMEs) and one GRC Office of Education staff member with technical expertise regarding

the Challenge projects. Each team’s final report and presentation will contribute heavily to the

selection of the Challenge winners. The judges, with their collective final decision authority, will

select the winning team based on

❖ Challenge scoring (Section 3.3)

❖ Compliance with USDC–4 requirements and rules (Section 4)

❖ Compliance with USDC–4 data submission guidelines (Section 5)

Judging will be conducted via videoconference using standardized criteria on a scale of 1 (low,

poor) to 5 (high, superb). Judges will provide scores to each team within 3 weeks of the final

presentations.

3.3 Challenge Scoring

Challenge scores will be based on the judges’ assessment of each team’s creativity and

ingenuity, as well as the feasibility and practicality of their approach, in addressing and/or solving

the challenges and issues presented in the USDC–4; Each team’s final submission should reflect a high level of quality and effort. Judges are allotted considerable discretion in Challenge scoring.


Where data support in a presentation is evident, its inclusion will be factored into the eventual

score for any team.

3.4 Final Submission and Final Presentations (Virtual Culmination)

Each participating team of students shall email their Final Design Report to grc-university

[email protected] no later than March 13, 2020. Team Project Videos are also due

on March 13, 2020; see Section 4.2 for details.

Each team shall make a 20- to 30-minute virtual presentation on their design to the USDC–4

judges between March 23 and March 27, 2020.

3.5 Culminating Event

Winners will be announced on April 13, 2020. Each of the winning and runner-up teams and

their respective faculty advisors will travel to Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio. First-

place teams of the Aeronautics and Space projects will present their design highlights to the GRC

NASA employees and summer interns and faculty fellow. The winning teams will have a

networking luncheon with NASA managers, as well as participate in a tour of selected GRC

facilities.

Pending availability of funds, NASA (or its business partner) will secure and coordinate travel

arrangements with expenses up to $5,000 per team awarded to the winning and runner-up teams

if their academic institutions are located outside a 50-mile radius of GRC. Lawful permanent

residents of the United States and non-U.S. citizens on the winning and runner-up teams shall

adhere to GRC access policies. Please note that GRC may not be able to provide access to some

international visitors, or may need to restrict access.

4.0 Competition Rules and Requirements

Each team’s final submission must focus on GRC’s areas of expertise and address the

following considerations:

❖ For Aeronautics Project I: Power, Stability, Operability, Controllability, and Thermal

Management

❖ For Aeronautics Project II: Power, Autonomy, Communications, Safety, Controllability,

Traffic and Thermal Management, and Weight and Propulsion

❖ For Space Project I: Power, Autonomy, Communications, Vehicle Requirements, and

Trajectory Options

❖ For Space Project II: Autonomy, Habitat Construction, Robotic System Designs, Launched

Mass, and Life Support Requirements

Student teams must follow USDC rules regarding eligibility, registration, design, deliverables,

monitoring, and review.


mailto:[email protected]


4.1 Eligibility and Registration

Each team must

❖ Comprise full-time undergraduate students in their junior or senior year.

❖ Be enrolled in an accredited U.S. (including Puerto Rico) academic institution.

❖ Have a U.S. citizen as Team Lead/Point of Contact (POC). Other members of each team

must be U.S. citizens or a combination of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents of

the United States.

❖ Attend the Virtual Kickoff Meeting of their focused Aeronautics or Space project.

❖ Comprise no fewer than 3 individuals and no more than 6.

❖ Have Team Leads/POCs register all team members through their academic institution no

later than 11:59 p.m. EST on October 18, 2019.

❖ Have an on-campus faculty member volunteer serving as advisor for the complete

duration of the USDC–4.

❖ Have all their members complete the Submission Release Form for University Student

Design Challenge, located in Appendix C, and return the completed form via email to grc

[email protected] no later than 11:59 p.m. EST on October 25,

2019.

4.2 Rules and Considerations

Each team participating in the USDC–4 agrees to

❖ Grant NASA unimpeded visitation to its operations and/or worksites to allow inspection

of its conceptual design, if needed. NASA may use such visits (virtual or in-person) to verify

any team’s compliance with stated USDC–4 rules.

❖ Permit NASA to review any USDC-related information and/or data the team has withheld.

NASA may use such data to validate a team’s final submission;

❖ Provide the following in support of social media and press releases:

➢ Team Project Video: A 2- to 3-minute video that shows the team building or

developing their design from start to finish. Use creativity to tell the story of the

project. Avoid having one person speaking to the camera the entire time. Do not send

a video version of a PowerPoint presentation. Send video as an MP4 file to a medium

that will be identified at a later date (e.g., Dropbox or Google Drive). Due date is

March 13, 2020.

➢ Two photos: One photo of the team with the faculty advisor and one photo of the

team in action (e.g., creating design drawings, charts, or quantitative figures). Photos




should be at least 1200 pixels wide by 600 pixels high. Photos cannot be blurry or low

resolution. No file sizes greater than 3 MB.

5.0 Data Submission

Each team must follow the submission guidelines below.

5.1 Format

Each team’s written report must not exceed 12 pages (excluding appendices and

bibliography) and must be received via email by the GRC O ffice of Education no later than 11:59

p.m. EST on March 13, 2020. The report shall follow the template in Appendix B.

Presentation and document submissions shall be in Adobe portable document format (PDF)

or PowerPoint (PPT), although PDF is preferred. Any handwritten or drawn document(s) shall be

scanned and delivered via PDF with a minimum resolution of 400 by 400 dots per inch (dpi).

5.2 Method

All USDC–4 material, including each team’s final submission, shall be sent to this email

address: [email protected].

5.3 Presentation Package

Each Presentation Package shall include a cover page bearing the title of the Presentation

Package, each team member’s name, the faculty advisor’s name, the academic affiliation and location, and express reference to “2020 GRC University Student Design Challenge (USDC–4).” POCs for each team shall place their initials next to their name.

6.0 Roles and Responsibilities

There are distinct responsibilities for on-campus faculty advisors and GRC-based technical

experts, as noted in the following subsections.

6.1 Role of Faculty Advisor

The on-campus faculty advisor

❖ Advises students on Challenge project, on campus

❖ Guides students to achieve goals of Design Challenge

❖ Refers students to appropriate institutional resources

❖ Confirms his or her support via email to [email protected]

6.2 Role of Technical Experts

GRC’s highly skilled workforce includes world-renowned researchers, among them rocket

scientists, engineers, physicists, and chemists as well as aviation specialists and others, many of




whom will serve as technical experts throughout the Design Challenge. Students will be

immersed in NASA-related research and engineering through interaction with these talented,

dedicated, and passionate employees. With countless specializations in numerous fields, the

employees at GRC share one goal: working for the public in support of N!S!’s mission; Technical experts have the following roles and responsibilities:

❖ Serve as content specialists

❖ Serve as Design Challenge judges

❖ Respond to team questions

❖ Review projects

❖ Debrief teams if requested


Appendix A—Acronyms and Abbreviations

ADF Automatic Direction Finder

ADS-B Automatic Dependence Surveillance Broadcast

AIAA American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

ANSI American National Standards Institute

C2 Command and Control

ConOps Concept of Operations

dB Decibel

dBm A power ratio expressed in dB with reference to one milliwatt (mW)

DC Direct Current

DO-160 Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment

EAP Electrified Aircraft Propulsion

EMI Electromagnetic Interference

EMTAT Electrical Modeling and Thermal Analysis Toolbox

FOM Figure of Merit

GRC Glenn Research Center

kHz Kilohertz

LNA Low-Noise Amplifier

MHz Megahertz

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

PPT PowerPoint

R&T Research and Technology

RF Radio Frequency

SCaN Space Communications and Navigation

SME Subject Matter Expert

STEAM Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics

SWaP Size, Weight, and Power

SysML Systems Modeler

T-MATS Toolbox for Modeling and Analysis of Thermodynamic Systems

TCAS Terrain and Collision Avoidance System

TMS Thermal Management System

UAS Unmanned Aerial System

UAT Universal Access Transceiver

USDC University Student Design Challenge

VTOL Vertical takeoff and landing


Appendix B—Presentation of Written Report

Title of Report (Cover Page)

First A. Author, Second B. Author, Jr., Third Author

Academic Affiliation, City, State, Zip Code

Faculty Advisor/Academic Affiliation

2020 GRC University Student Design Challenge (USDC–4) NASA Glenn Research Center

Cleveland, Ohio


Title of Report (Title Page) The title of your paper should be typed in bold, 18-point type, with capital and lowercase letters,

and centered at the top of the page.

Abstract

The abstract should appear at the beginning of your paper. It should be one

paragraph long and complete in itself (not an introduction). It should indicate

subjects dealt with in the paper and state the objectives of the investigation.

Newly observed facts and conclusions of the experiment or argument discussed

in the paper must be stated in summary form; readers should not have to read

the paper to understand the abstract. The abstract should be bold, indented

(1/2 in.) on each side, justified, and separated from the rest of the document by

two blank lines.

Keywords: Nomenclature:

Body of Paper

For uniformity, 12-point Calibri font is recommended.

Major report headings should be bold, centered, and numbered with Roman numerals. Subheadings should be bold, flush left, and numbered with capital letters. Sub-subheadings should be italic, flush left, and numbered.

Reports should include the following sections:

I. Introduction/Background

II. Methodology/Approach

III. Discussion of Results/Findings

IV. Conclusions/Recommendations

Appendix (if any)

Acknowledgments

References


______________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________

Appendix C—Submission Release Form

SUBMISSION RELEASE FORM FOR

UNIVERSITY STUDENT DESIGN CHALLENGE

Title of Submission:

(“Submission”).

Submitter’s Name:

(“Student”).

Submission Team Members (if applicable) (“Student’s Team”):

Faculty advisor(s) (if applicable):

Name of School

School Address

City State Zip Phone

Grade/Level of Study

I, the Student, certify that the above Submission, including any text and illustrations, and any

ancillary or attendant material, was made, created, or otherwise developed by the Student or the

Student’s Team and was not copied from another work, photograph, illustration, or website or

made, developed, or created by any other person or entity. I understand that the Submission,

including any text and illustrations, and any ancillary or attendant material, will not be returned.

I give permission to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to use,

reproduce, publish, perform publicly, display publicly, prepare derivative works from, and

distribute copies to the public of the Submission, including any text and illustrations, and any

ancillary or attendant material, and the Student’s name, photo, school, and grade/level of study

for any and all purposes deemed appropriate by NASA. NASA may distribute the Submission,

including text and illustrations, and any ancillary or attendant material, through a variety of


*** *** ** ** *** ***

media, including, but not limited to, print, television, websites, or any other means digital or

otherwise. NASA may also permit a third party to exercise NASA’s rights, including, but not

limited to, the right to display or distribute the Submission, including text and illustrations, and

any ancillary or attendant material, in a manner NASA deems appropriate. If information from

any other person or entity is included in the Submission, including text and illustrations, and

any ancillary or attendant material, it is the Student’s responsibility to obtain the appropriate permissions for use of such information as provided herein.

Student unconditionally releases, discharges, and agrees to save harmless NASA from and

against any and all claims, liabilities, demands, actions, causes of action, costs and expenses,

whatsoever, at law or in equity, known or unknown, anticipated or unanticipated, suspected or

unsuspected, which Student ever had, now has, or may, shall, or hereafter have by any reason,

matter, cause, or thing whatsoever, arising out of Student’s participation or efforts in making,

creating, or otherwise developing the Submission, including text and illustrations, and any

ancillary or attendant material.

This release and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with it or its subject matter

or formation (including non-contractual disputes or claims) shall be governed by and construed

in accordance with the laws of the United States of America, and the Student agrees that the

courts of the United States of America shall have exclusive jurisdiction to settle any dispute or

claim that arises out of or in connection with this release.

If any provision, or portion thereof, of this release is, or becomes, invalid under any applicable

statute or rule of law, it is to be deemed stricken, and the rest of this release shall remain in full

force and effect.

Student hereby affirms that he/she is over the age of 18 and has the right to contract in his/her

own name. Student has read the above release prior to its execution and fully understands the

contents thereof. This release shall be binding upon Student and his/her heirs, legal

representatives, and assigns.

(Participant’s Signature) (Date)

* OR *

I, , am the parent or legal guardian of

the Student and have the right to contract for him/her. I have read the above release prior to

its execution and fully understand the contents thereof. This agreement shall be binding

upon me and my heirs, legal representatives, and assigns and those of the subject(s) listed

above.

(Signature of Parent or Legal Guardian) (Date)


Documents

UNIVERSITY STUDENT DESIGN CHALLENGE GUIDE