NASA Tech Briefs: Research at Ames focuses on three areas: biotechnology, nanotechnology, and information technology. Can you explain some of the technologies from these areas with particular commercial impact? Scott Hubbard: I’ve been working on showing the impact that our high-end computing has had. Starting in the 1980s, the work done here at Ames in high-end computing has spawned a revolution that has an impact of well over $10 billion in direct sales in the commercial world. Today, we’re trying to extend this by our work in the nanotechnology area, as well as the combination of biology, nanotechnology, and information technology. Each one of these areas has a major impact on its own. Biology focuses on the fact that we can now sequence the genome, which is having an enormous impact in the area of pharmaceuticals, and is part of our work here in space biology. Nanotechnology is an emerging field that is affecting everything from cosmetics, to medical science, to future robots. Information technology is pervasive, from your desktop to advanced vehicle health monitoring for future spacecraft. Each one represents an area that has an impact on NASA and on the external world. We’ve gone one step further to see what happens when you fuse those three areas – when you look at the intersection of these. What kind of hard problems can we solve by this bio/nano/infotech fusion? NTB: As NASA’s lead center in nanotechnology, how is Ames positioned to bring this type of research to the commercial community? Hubbard: We’re trying to address both the technology pull and the technology push, and to incorporate into our planning the university community working at the front lines of basic technology, as well as with the industrial people who are learning how to fabricate these materials and how to manipulate them for usable products. That’s a conscious part of our planning. One of the ways we’re promoting this is that we’ve just awarded a series of cooperative agreements or grants for research, engineering, and technology institutes. One is for nano materials, and we’re working directly with people at Purdue and UCLA. Today, universities have an eye toward how new technologies may be applied. The industry/university/government triangle is part of our planning. NTB: So you support the technology transfer effort NASA has put in place? Hubbard: Having come from industry, I understand the tech transfer process very well. Part of the technology I developed when I was a staff scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, I carried out into the entrepreneurial world, and it was the basis of a small company I worked with. I’ve seen that from both sides of the fence. We’re focused on going all the way from an advanced concept or technology through a flight application or an application that takes the technology and inserts it into a mission. That is one of the metrics for NASA technologists – to see it actually fly, whether it’s on an advanced aircraft or a spacecraft. That’s what is so appealing about working on technology for NASA – the chance to see it go somewhere and be part of a new discovery or exploration. NTB: One
of the most advanced computing projects at Ames is FutureFlight Central,
which
will help the nation’s airports simulate their facilities
before construction takes place. Are there efforts underway for the FAA
to use FutureFlight Central? We’ve also programmed into FutureFlight Central information from the Mars Pathfinder mission. We’re working with the Mars Program Office on ways to use the data from the two recently launched Mars rovers when it comes back. This tool will be an exciting way of communicating to the various teams what the planet looks like in three dimensions and in a 360° view. NTB: As a member of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board, you’ve seen some of the test results that point to a problem with foam striking the shuttle wing. How close is NASA to implementing ways to correct the problem? Hubbard: It’s my understanding that at the area of the external tank where the orbiter attaches to it, there is a history of big blocks of foam coming off of this area. No one quite understands why. From the briefings, I understand that NASA is on the way to redesigning that area, possibly putting some type of metal box around it or doing something to keep the foam in that area from shedding in the future. We have unequivocal evidence that that’s where the foam came from that hit the wing leading edge, and that probably cracked the leading edge. The first test we did with the real reinforced carbon showed that it cracked the wing leading edge, and we’re on the way to follow that up with tests in the area, where we believe from other data, that the breech occurred. NTB: Will solving this problem require new technology, or is it simply a matter of implementing existing technology? Hubbard: I think that the near-term return to flight issues are engineering issues. It’s a matter of finding a fix for an existing problem. In the longer term, though, I think as we contemplate the next generation of human-carrying spacecraft, we need to think about advanced technologies like vehicle health monitoring. It would seem, if you’re building an advanced spacecraft – particularly one with humans aboard – you would want a very smart spacecraft that would immediately alert the crew of what’s happening everywhere in the spacecraft. With modern computing technology, this is something we should plan for. The Board found that by virtue of recovering this data - a box like a flight recorder box that played the scenario out after the fact – that one sensor did, in fact, see the foam strike. But none of the data was available to the crew. It was all taped for later playback. Having advanced capability to monitor what’s going on in such a special spacecraft would be a useful new technology. NTB: Will existing shuttles keep flying until a new vehicle is developed? Hubbard: That’s the path that the agency was on, pre-accident. There is an Integrated Space Transportation Plan that calls for using the shuttle until a new vehicle is phased in. I think that planning is on hold at the moment while NASA waits for the Board to issue its findings. Many things will have to be put on hold while NASA and the Human Spaceflight Program go through the different recommendations. But it’s all in the interest of having a vehicle that can operate in a safe manner. Resources:
Previous interviews: July
2003 June
2003 May 2003
|
||||||||
