![\"\"](\"https:\/\/d3.harvard.edu\/platform-rctom\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2018\/11\/Tom_Challenge_Pic_1.png\")
<\/a>- \n
- Manufacturing Responsiveness: NASA spent about $334M in spare parts for the International Space Station (ISS) over a 5 year period from 1995 to 2000. [3]\u00a0 Due to launch schedules, spare parts cannot be delivered just in time, but instead a large stock needs to constantly be maintained on-orbit.\u00a0 Additive manufacturing could allow creation of emergency replacement parts as required, significantly reducing inventory expenses. [1]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
Made In Space, Inc. is applying additive manufacturing to the challenge of ISM through two primary programs.\u00a0 In the short term, they have begun to launch and maintain a series of 3D printers for use on the space station. The Additive Manufacturing Facility (AMF) has been used by astronauts to print tools, biomedical devices and test the capabilities of 3D printing in space. [4]<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/d3.harvard.edu\/platform-rctom\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2018\/11\/TOM_Challenge_Pic_2.png\")
<\/a>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 AMF installed in ISS rack, with printed part floating in front [4]<\/figcaption><\/figure>Outside of the AMF project, Made In Space, Inc. is developing long term solutions for orbital manufacturing.\u00a0 Their Archinaut robotic vehicle is being designed and built in conjunction with Northrop Grumman and Oceaneering. [5]<\/p>\n The Archninaut project is intended to combine additive manufacturing techniques with robotic assembling systems to construct large orbital structures remotely.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/d3.harvard.edu\/platform-rctom\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2018\/11\/TOM_Challenge_Pic_3.png\")
<\/a>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Artist\u2019s impression of Archinaut manufacturing a truss on a space station [5]<\/figcaption><\/figure>Although Made In Space is building significant progress in leveraging additive manufacturing in a new arena, there are still significant challenges ahead. First, orbit is not a single location- it\u2019s an array of different orbital velocities that are costly to move between. Archinaut needs an \u2018anchor\u2019 customer, or to be solely used in a highly utilized plane such as geosynchronous orbit.<\/p>\n The second issue with the Archinaut introduction is the long development cycle in space manufacturing. Partnering with NASA or other government customers also carries difficulties, including very limited service opportunities or, for international customers, ITAR restrictions.<\/p>\n
Given these challenges, I would argue that Made In Space should pursue two strategies in the short term<\/p>\n
- \n
- Develop a smallsat interchangeable module that would allow in-space fabrication of antennae or solar panels. The shorter design and production cycles of smallsats will allow quicker testing and introduction, and provide technological validation of the technology<\/li>\n
- Although ultimately programs like the Archinaut show incredible potential, revenues from those sorts of projects are highly risky and far out. Significant investment should be made into attaining NASA research grants and becoming a highly reliable and valuable partner. Dependence on NASA seems unavoidable for the near term.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
In the long term, I believe that creating antennae or solar arrays for communication or earth observation satellites is unsustainable.\u00a0 The challenges in servicing the broad requirements of different vehicles, combined with the energy requirements to move between service locations pose incredible challenges. Instead, Made In Space should shift focus to growing and supporting new industries in space. Primary among the emerging new industries is space tourism, with organizations like Bigelow Aerospace and Axion developing commercial space stations.<\/p>\n
Moving forward, I think Made In Space needs to answer a few key questions about the path they\u2019ve set themselves on.\u00a0 First, I\u2019d like to see how past companies have transitioned from government grant funded models to commercial models in emerging technology markets. Second, I believe they need to develop strong partners in the commercial satellite manufacturing arena as soon as possible, and they need to find out the best way to partner and prove their capabilities to these new partners. I\u2019d like to know the roadmap for creating strong partnerships with existing players, and what partners they expect to target.<\/p>\n
(Word Count: 776)<\/strong><\/p>\n
References<\/strong><\/p>\n
[1] Alejandro E. Trujillo, \u201cFeasibility Analysis of Commercial In-Space Manufacturing Applications\u201d AIAA 2017-5360,<\/p>\n
http:\/\/spacearchitect.org\/pubs\/AIAA-2017-5360.pdf<\/p>\n
[2] Space Exploration Technologies, “Capabilities,”\u00a0 https:\/\/www.spacex.com\/about\/capabilities<\/a>, accessed November 2018<\/p>\n
[3] National Aeronautics and Space Administration, \u201cInternational Space Station Spare Parts Cost Audit Report\u201d, IG-02-11, https:\/\/oig.nasa.gov\/docs\/ig-02-011.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n
[4] Made In Space, \u201cAdditive Manufacturing Facility,\u201d http:\/\/madeinspace.us\/projects\/amf <\/a>, accessed November 2018<\/p>\n