HR001121S0018.pdf

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 1

Broad Agency Announcement Novel Orbital and Moon Manufacturing, Materials, and Mass-efficient Design (NOM4D) Defense Sciences Office

HR001121S0018

February 26, 2021

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 2

Table of Contents I. Funding Opportunity Description

A. Introduction B. Background C. Program Description/Scope D. Program Structure E. Technical Area Descriptions F. Schedule/Milestones G. Deliverables H. Government-furnished Property/Equipment/Information

II. Award Information A. General Award Information B. Fundamental Research

III. Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants B. Organizational Conflicts of Interest C. Cost Sharing/Matching D. Ability to Receive Awards in Multiple Technical Areas

IV. Application and Submission Information A. Address to Request Application Package B. Content and Form of Application Submission C. Submission Dates and Times D. Funding Restrictions E. Other Submission Requirements

V. Application Review Information A. Evaluation Criteria B. Review and Selection Process C. Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information (FAPIIS)

VI. Award Administration Information A. Selection Notices B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

10. Reporting

VII. Agency Contacts VIII. Other Information

A. Proposers Day B. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) C. Collaborative Efforts/Teaming

BAA Attachments:

Attachment A: ABSTRACT SUMMARY SLIDE TEMPLATE Attachment B: ABSTRACT TEMPLATE Attachment C: PROPOSAL SUMMARY SLIDE TEMPLATE Attachment D: PROPOSAL TEMPLATE VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL & MANAGEMENT Attachment E: PROPOSAL TEMPLATE VOLUME 2: COST Attachment F: MS ExcelTM DARPA COST PROPOSAL SPREADSHEET Attachment G: PROPOSAL TEMPLATE VOLUME 3: ADMINISTRATIVE & NATIONAL POLICY REQUIREMENTS Attachment H: CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION (CUI) GUIDE

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 3

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

Federal Agency Name: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Defense Sciences Office (DSO)

Funding Opportunity Title: Novel Orbital and Moon Manufacturing, Materials, and Mass-efficient Design (NOM4D)

Announcement Type: Initial Announcement

Funding Opportunity Number: HR001121S0018

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): 12.910 Research and Technology Development

Dates (All times listed herein are Eastern Time.)

o Posting Date: February 26, 2021 o Proposers Day: February 26, 2021. See Section VIII.A.

o Abstract Due Date: March 19, 2021, 4:00 p.m.

o FAQ Submission Deadline: April 17, 2021, 4:00 p.m. See Section VIII.B.

o Full Proposal Due Date: April 27, 2021, 4:00 p.m.

Anticipated Types of Instruments that May be Awarded: Procurement contracts or Other Transactions.

Agency contacts o Technical POC: William (Bill) Carter, Program Manager, DARPA/DSO o BAA Email: NOM4D@darpa.mil o BAA Mailing Address:

DARPA/DSO

ATTN: HR001121S0018

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114 o DARPA/DSO Opportunities Website: http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities

Teaming Information: See Section VIII.C for information on teaming opportunities.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ): FAQs for this solicitation may be viewed on the DARPA/DSO Opportunities Website. See Section VIII.B for further information.

Security: NOM4D is an unclassified program. It is anticipated that work in this program may generate controlled unclassified information (CUI) as defined in the accompanying CUI guide. Performers must submit a CUI protection plan as part of Attachment G:

PROPOSAL TEMPLATE VOLUME 3: ADMINISTRATIVE & NATIONAL POLICY

REQUIREMENTS to address their strategy for foreign national participation. Further details in Section IV.B.4.

mailto:NOM4D@darpa.mil https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities?oFilter=DSO https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities?oFilter=DSO

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 4

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

This Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) constitutes a public notice of a competitive funding opportunity as described in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016. Any resultant negotiations and/or awards will follow all laws and regulations applicable to the specific award instrument(s) available under this BAA, e.g., FAR 15.4 for procurement contracts.

A. Introduction The Defense Sciences Office (DSO) at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is soliciting innovative research proposals in the area of new materials, manufacturing, and design technologies to enable future structures to be built on orbit utilizing Earth or lunar-derived materials. The Novel Orbital and Moon Manufacturing, Materials, and Mass-efficient Design (NOM4D) program will provide the foundational proof of concept that new materials science, manufacturing, and design technologies can be brought together to enable future structures to be produced in their native environments without the constraints imposed by launch.

In addition, this program will also explore opportunities to leverage existing materials on the moon (e.g., regolith) as a resource for future lunar-derived materials and structures. Specific technologies of interest include high performance feedstock materials, mass- and energy-efficient off-Earth manufacturing methods, high performance lunar resource utilization capabilities, and new design paradigms that will revolutionize the mass efficiency and precision achievable by future structures. For the purposes of this BAA, “future structures” are defined as large, extended, and/or high precision mechanical structures, typified by three exemplar applications: large solar arrays, large radio frequency reflector antennas, and segmented infrared reflective optics. Responsive proposals should focus on these applications. It is expected that other structures may also fall into this category, such as booms, phased array antennas, instrument arrays and the like, and that progress made against the exemplar applications will benefit these other useful structures. Proposed research should investigate revolutionary advances in materials science, manufacturing, and design that support future DoD space applications.

Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice. DARPA considers the following technologies to be outside of the scope of NOM4D, and they should not be the primary focus of any proposal: robotic assembly (autonomous or human-directed), on-orbit satellite servicing (including rendezvous and proximity operations, repair, refueling, and modular systems), enhancements to future launch capabilities (e.g., larger faring sizes, lower launch costs), disaggregated platform concepts (e.g., satellite formation flying, swarms, sparse apertures), lunar basing operations (e.g. military base or installation construction), high precision metrology, and on-orbit weapons technology.

The NOM4D program may generate CUI. Potential award instruments will be limited to contracts or Other Transactions. Proposers should review BAA Section IV.B.5 regarding DoD requirements related to protection of CUI and CTI. Proposers should review Attachment H:

CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION (CUI) GUIDE to assist in proposal preparation. Based on details provided in the CUI guide, proposers should indicate in their proposal if their proposed solution includes CUI. All proposals indicating CUI requirements must include a draft CUI protection plan in Attachment G, PROPOSAL TEMPLATE VOLUME

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 5

3: ADMINISTRATIVE & NATIONAL POLICY REQUIREMENTS detailing how CUI will be protected at performance sites as well as sub-contractor locations.

B. Background Since the dawn of the rocket age, space systems have been designed, built, and tested on Earth before being launched into a stable orbit and deployed to their final operational configuration.

The constraints imparted by this long-held paradigm impose strict technical and operational challenges on the fielded system and its subsystems. Challenges include volume, mass, and overall size restrictions from the limitations of the launch fairing; materials and mass constraints driven by the need to structurally engineer survival during ground test, handling, transport, and the need for time consuming and expensive ground-based launch assurance testing of every individual component. These constraints are particularly acute for structures such as solar arrays, antennas and optical systems, where size is critical to performance. NOM4D will enable a new paradigm where future structures (as defined in I.A.) that support DoD space systems are built off-Earth using designs optimized for the space environment, enabling enhanced capability, improved robustness, operation in higher orbits, and future cislunar applications.

Integrated satellite structures that exceed the geometrical limitations of the launch faring must today either be deployed, for example, via exquisite mechanisms that unfurl or expand once in their intended orbit or assembled by human hands or tele-operated robotic arms. In most cases baseline designs have not changed for decades, having been optimized for today’s design-build-test-launch-deploy paradigm, resulting in minimal opportunities for dramatic advances in mass efficiency. Past attempts to transcend these limitations, such as on-orbit rigidization of composites, have either required excessive parasitic mass or energy or suffer loss of precision due to creep that often arises due to being stowed for launch. Giant (>100m diameter) structures require multiple launches that increase complexity as well as the time and cost of deployment.

Manufacturing on-orbit using Earth- or lunar-derived materials has the potential to obviate many of the limitations associated with current deployment and assembly methods. However, current materials used in space applications are not immediately suitable for on-orbit manufacturing, as they require high energy processing, mechanical treatment (e.g., work hardening), and a large logistical footprint. Past state-of–the-art lunar resource utilization approaches have focused on large infrastructural needs (e.g., buildings, structural housings, etc.) that require high compressive strength rather than high tensile strength/stiffness materials required for spacecraft and/or relaunch of moon-derived materials structures back into orbit from the moon. Future in-space and lunar-derived manufacturing will require feedstock that is flexible (i.e., capable of being formed into many useful shapes), retains high precision in the formed shape, and require minimal energy to convert from the feedstock state into a final rigid mass-efficient part. The required materials processing must be co-developed with processing equipment that also minimizes size, mass, and power.

From a design perspective, all existing space systems are optimized using design tools that assume traditional manufacturing approaches. The current ground-based design capability does not address the needs of structures manufactured on orbit or from lunar-derived materials and does not generally anticipate servicing, repair, and future upgrades. Moreover, today’s space designs are often developed with ground test in mind, where structures are built so that they behave the same on the ground and on orbit for test, contributing to increased parasitic mass and stiffness requirements. NOM4D will motivate substantial advances in mass-efficient space

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 6

system design to complement and leverage the anticipated advances in materials and manufacturing.

C. Program Description/Scope NOM4D is a three-phase, 54-month effort that will develop and demonstrate foundational new materials, design, and manufacturing technologies to enable future structures (as defined in Section I.A.) to be built on orbit or using lunar-derived materials. Any proposed NOM4D effort should respect the terms and spirit of the Outer Space Treaty, which precludes structures or bases being built on celestial bodies such as the moon. Rather, lunar-related elements submitted as part of proposals should seek to develop the technologies required to build structures derived from lunar resources for use in orbital satellite applications away from the lunar surface. Future manufacturing in space may enable substantial improvements (3-5x) in on-orbit structural efficiency, size, precision, and resiliency. The NOM4D program will aim to enable these substantial gains in efficiency, size, and resilience through development of materials and architectures designed specifically for orbital or lunar needs and designs that significantly reduce the added margin and complexity associated with ground testing, launch survival, and deployment for traditional space systems.

NOM4D program metrics have been derived from dual-use exemplar problems that drive the mass and precision goals for each phase of the program. Phase I will address megawatt (MW)-class solar power arrays, Phase II will address >100m diameter RF reflector antennas, and Phase III will address scalable longwave infrared (LWIR) optical systems. By focusing on metrics that enable these general applications, future space capabilities can be optimized for efficient operation both in traditional orbits as well as new orbits (e.g., beyond GEO).

Proposed research should investigate innovative approaches that enable revolutionary advances in the design, material property tailoring, and manufacturability of future structures and systems manufactured on orbit and from lunar-derived materials. Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice, for example, novel deployable technology and approaches that do not scale sufficiently (e.g., principal reliance on additive manufacturing of monolithic structural components). Disaggregated platform concepts (e.g., satellite formation flying, swarms, sparse apertures) and lunar basing concepts will not be considered.

The NOM4D program assumes the following technologies will be sufficiently developed independently within the next decade, and therefore such topics lie outside of the scope of acceptable proposals. Assuming current space technology trends continue, we expect that in the 10-20-year future:

Robotic manipulation sufficient to enable assembly of large structures from NOM4D-manufactured components will be available natively on future platforms. Such manipulation may be autonomous or supervised. This technology is rapidly advancing through programs like OSAM-1, RSGS, and other capabilities hosted on the ISS.

Modularization of space systems is maturing, enabling routine assembly of modules or subcomponents, or components at the decimeter to meter scale.

Platforms are available for in-space transportation (for example, cargo delivery vehicles, space tugs, etc.). Additionally, protocols for routine rendezvous/proximity operation (RPO) are available and maturing.

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 7

Commercial launch providers will continue to advance affordable space access, and launch costs will continue to decrease to LEO, GEO, the lunar surface and beyond.

The lunar environment is visited more routinely. For example, NASA’s Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program and potential follow-on efforts will enable relatively affordable access to lunar resources.

Re-fueling of on-orbit assets is routine.

On-orbit mobility is enhanced (e.g. via increasingly efficient electric propulsion) – as exemplified by the capability to launch fuel and payload to a space mobility platform that can then be positioned in final orbit where manufacturing and assembly occur.

In-space verification and validation (IV&V) is maturing, including stand-off metrology (with mm-level accuracy at 100m distance) and structural vibration analysis (either stand-off, or using vibration sensors on the satellite bus).

Extra-terrestrial photovoltaic power systems and energy storage methods continue to modestly improve in efficiency, consistent with current technology trends.

D. Program Structure

The NOM4D program is a three-phase program with each phase lasting 18 months. The program is divided into two TAs: TA1 – Materials and Manufacturing and TA2 – Design for Precision Operation (see Table 1 below). Proposers may address both TAs, however separate proposals are required for each TA.

Table 1: Program Structure

NOM4D TAs

TA1: Materials and Manufacturing (M2)

FA1: M2 for future structures in space

FA2: M2 for lunar-derived structures

TA2: Design for Precision Operation

NOM4D Phases (18 months each) and Exemplar problems

Phase I Exemplar:

MW solar arrays

Phase II Exemplar:

100 m diameter RF antennas

Phase III Exemplar:

Segmented LWIR optics

TA1 will develop and demonstrate new material and manufacturing technologies that will enhance traditional space system designs through improved materials and reduction in the number of ground test, launch, and deployment constraints. Because of the different requirements associated with on-orbit and lunar-derived materials manufacturing, TA1 is further broken down into two focus areas (FAs): FA1 – Materials and manufacturing (M2) for future structures (as defined in I.A) in space and FA2 – M2 for lunar-derived structures. Only one FA may be proposed under each TA1 proposal. However, proposers can submit multiple TA1 proposals provided each proposed approach is substantively different. Note FA1 and FA2 are

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 8

exclusive to TA1.

TA2 will develop new designs that harness new material-agnostic approaches to stabilization and precision that transcend traditional implementations. TA2 proposals must be primarily focused on orbital applications, but new designs for lunar-derived structures may be included along with designs for orbital structures that utilize high performance materials launched from Earth.

In each phase of the program, performers will develop materials, manufacturing, and/or design technology driven by metrics derived from generic exemplar problems: Phase I – MW solar arrays,1 Phase II – 100 m diameter RF antennas,2 and Phase III - segmented LWIR optics.3 Metrics for the program are given in Table 2 below.

Table 2: NOM4D Defined Program Metrics

(1) System must maintain precision through dynamic events (e.g., maneuvers, thermal cycles, lunar day/night, etc.)

Maneuver loads for on-orbit applications are 0.1 m2/s for phase I solar array, 0.05 m2/s for phase II RF antenna, and 0.01 m2/s for Phase III LWIR optic. Thermal cycles must be modeled for the chosen orbit.

(2) For the purposes of build rate estimation, mission system must be built in a single launch, using current or planned launch vehicle (e.g., Falcon, Starship, New Glenn, etc.)

(3) Includes structure, hardware, and fabricator masses but excludes solar cell blanket, which, for the purposes of the calculation, has a mass areal density of 1 kg/m2

(4) Includes mass of all system constituents brought from Earth or not produced from lunar-derived materials

(5) Baseline designs given for on-orbit applications only, based on publicly available orbital systems (e.g., Government Reference Array, Harris’ 12m reflector, and the James Webb Space Telescope’s optical elements).

Metrics for structures comprised of lunar-derived materials must be proposer-defined.

TA1 will focus on solving challenges in materials and manufacturing to maximize material

1 Reference solar array design: Pappa, R. S. et al., “Solar Array Structures for 300 kW-Class Spacecraft,” Presented at the Space Power Workshop, April 24, 2013. PDF: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/42735272.pdf 2 Reference RF antenna design: Thomson, M. (1999). The AstroMesh Deployable Reflector. Antennas and Propagation Society International Symposium. 3. 1516 - 1519 vol.3. 10.1109/APS.1999.838231. and https://www.l3harris.com/sites/default/files/2020-06/sas_ss_prebuilt_12m_unfurlable_mesh_reflector.pdf 3 Reference LWIR optic design: https://jwst.nasa.gov/content/observatory/ote/mirrors/index.html https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/42735272.pdf https://www.l3harris.com/sites/default/files/2020-06/sas_ss_prebuilt_12m_unfurlable_mesh_reflector.pdf https://jwst.nasa.gov/content/observatory/ote/mirrors/index.html

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 9

performance. It is expected that traditional stiffness-driven approaches to design will be utilized under TA1 to build future structures for one of two distinct use cases: on orbit utilizing Earth-derived materials (FA1) or utilizing primarily lunar-derived materials (FA2). Within TA1, proposals should detail the orbit(s) where the technology would operate—circular orbits no lower than geosynchronous orbit (GEO) or highly elliptical orbits of similar apogee—and provide a discussion of the environmental and operational requirements that must be met for that selected orbit. TA2 will focus on developing new material-agnostic approaches to mass-efficient designs that do not achieve stability through traditional means (e.g., structural stiffness alone) for each of the exemplar problems described above. TA2 proposals should focus on revolutionizing the ability to utilize significantly lower mass designs to maintain the precision necessary for a wide range of orbital applications (GEO and higher) under the expected environmental and operational constraints. TA2 must focus on orbital applications but can include development of compelling designs that utilize lunar-derived materials in addition to designs enabled by traditional Earth-derived materials.

For both TAs, ground-based validation is required. Ground demonstration should be of sufficient scope to achieve a high level of confidence that the proposed technology will work in the relevant off-Earth environment and will provide the proposed benefits. Ground demonstration should not be at the full scale of these exemplar applications. Rather, demonstrations and prototype manufacturing units should be developed at a scale that ultimately results in high confidence that the new materials, manufacturing technologies, and designs developed under the program will enable future space systems to be designed and built at full scale either on orbit or on the moon for relaunch back to orbit. Furthermore, ground demonstrations should provide the basis for projecting how the NOM4D technologies will enhance future space systems’ operational capability. Possible enhancement examples include increasing system mass efficiency, resistance to damage, operation in higher orbits without trading performance, and the necessary features to enable successful use of lunar-derived materials.

Designs (TA2) should optimize characteristics including mass efficiency (e.g., extended structure area per unit mass launched) and manufacturing precision, stability and maintenance of the precision of the structure under impulse, vibration, or thermal excitation. Consideration should be given to relevant thermal and radiation environmental conditions for high orbits (e.g., GEO or higher). Methods to validate thermal and structural models should be discussed. These models should be applicable to subscale and full-scale structures. Both the manufacturing system and the produced extended structure must be designed with considerations for other satellite and/or subsystem requirements to the maximum extent possible.

The NOM4D exemplar problems increase in complexity in progression with program phases.

The Government anticipates performing independent validation and verification (IV&V) testing near the completion of each phase to assess technical maturity and inform subsequent phase award decisions. For TA1, Phase I is considered the proof of concept for materials and designs that meet stringent structural efficiency targets. Phase II focuses on risk reduction and technical maturation of the technology to meet structural mass efficiency targets, while demonstrating precision manufacturing capability in a laboratory setting sufficient to support the RF reflector exemplar. Phase III provides a substantial leap in precision to enable an IR reflective structure exemplar. Although at a smaller size relative to the RF exemplar, precision is substantially increased as is the need to control parasitic structural aspects such as bond lines and joints. Phase III hardware may be designed and built on Earth in preparation for independent testing, where

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 10

the most promising technologies may be launched and tested in a space environment. As such, proposers should plan to build the prototype in Phase III in anticipation that the Government may choose to launch it. Note that the Phase III prototype can address any of the three exemplars provided but must demonstrate the precision required for Phase III (see Table 2). A launch opportunity is not guaranteed, but if NOM4D technology development warrants, and Government resources are available, launch costs will be covered by the Government.

Independent of a launch opportunity, performers will be expected to demonstrate material properties, precision, and a final ground test in Phases I, II, and III, respectively. For TA2, each performer will produce a design specific to that phase’s exemplar problem, along with updated models that simulate system performance, dynamic response, and performance across the operational envelope. Ground demonstrations to validate proposed designs are expected in each phase under TA2, at a scale sufficient to give confidence that the design concept is sound. TA2 will deliver detailed designs that include parametric models, performance predictions, stability, and operational envelope for each of the three exemplars, with experimental validation of the new design concepts. All proposals must conform to the same schedule (detailed in Section F) to enable coordination of Government testing and uniform assessment of funded technologies.

The NOM4D program will use a phased acquisition approach. Proposals should be structured as an 18-month Phase I base with an option for an 18-month Phase II. Proposers must provide a draft Statement of Work (SOW) and Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost estimate for the 18-month Phase III. Proposals that do not address Phase III goals may be deemed nonconforming.

Near the end of Phase II, the Government may issue proposal instructions to Phase II performers requesting final SOWs and revised cost proposals for Phase III. Competition for Phase III will be limited to only Phase II performers.

Evaluation of Phase III proposals will be based on criteria to be specified in the Phase III proposal requests. The Phase III evaluation criteria will be consistent with the evaluation criteria in this solicitation, but may be tailored to the Phase III requests for updated proposals. Phase III proposal evaluations will be conducted through a scientific and technical review process in accordance with Section V.A and V.B. The Government reserves the right to issue a new solicitation for Phase III with a new award instrument if programmatic circumstances dictate.

Participation in Phase II does not guarantee funding in Phase III. Progression to the next phase will be contingent on evaluation of Phase III proposals and availability of funds.

E. Technical Area Descriptions Proposers may submit a proposal to either or both TAs. Within TA1, proposals must address either FA1 or FA2, not both. However, multiple TA1 proposals may be submitted provided the proposed approaches are substantively different. If submitting to both TA1 and TA2, separate proposals are required. NOM4D technologies are required to meet the program metrics detailed in Table 2 by TA and phase. In addition to meeting the program metrics detailed in Table 2, all proposers must include performer-defined interim metrics and milestones that can be used to measure performance and augment the NOM4D program metrics provided in Table 2 for each phase, as appropriate.

TA1: In space materials and manufacturing. The TA1 goal is to develop materials, architectures, and scalable manufacturing methods that enable production of extended structures on orbit utilizing earth-derived materials (FA1) or utilizing lunar-derived materials (FA2). It is anticipated that proposers will use traditional design approaches to drive material

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 11

property targets and develop manufacturing technologies that can meet the goals of TA1. All TA1 proposals must include detailed estimates of expected materials and manufacturing performance and specifically address how the proposed material and manufacturing technology will meet TA1 metrics. Proposers must use the design exemplars (detailed in Table 2,) specific to each phase to discuss how materials will be developed; provide a size, weight and power (SWaP) estimate of the proposed manufacturing approach (with sufficient flexibility to enable minimizing SWaP for any eventual manufacturing unit); and provide a maturation strategy to meet the metrics laid out in the program. To augment the materials and manufacturing proposal narrative, FA1 proposals must discuss the state of the art for large space structures, including attributes such as on-orbit size, launch volume, affordability, and complexity and how their proposed materials and manufacturing technology improves upon the state of the art. For FA2, proposals must discuss the state of the art for lunar materials and manufacturing relevant to the exemplar challenges. For both FA1 and FA2, the proposal must include a narrative detailing the assumptions made about the attributes of the future infrastructure environment in which the NOM4D M2 technology will operate. Capabilities that are assumed to be available to complement NOM4D materials and manufacturing technology (once mature) should be stated (e.g., autonomous robotic manipulation, rendezvous and proximity operation capability, logistical capabilities, relevant aspects of future launch capabilities, lightweight precision metrology, and/or any other relevant capability). FA1 and FA2 proposals must discuss methods for the design, build, and test of a subscale ground demonstration unit and justify how the chosen scale validates structural feasibility for each phase. Additional specific requirements for each TA1 FA are provided below.

FA1: Materials and manufacturing (M2) for large precision structures. Proposals must detail the manufacturing advancements (e.g., designs, materials, high rate manufacturing processes, in-process verification, integration strategy, etc.) to be developed during NOM4D or assumed to be available commercially or through other concurrent development efforts. If the proposed design or materials structure has multiple length scales, detail should be provided for each length scale, where appropriate. Proposers should detail the range of feasible geometries or dimensions of specific system designs (minimum thickness, maximum length-to-diameter aspect ratio, topological considerations, etc.) along with any limit to the performance of the proposed solution as those dimensions vary (i.e., expected specific stiffness, thermal distortions, shape fidelity under acceleration, etc.).

In Phase I, FA1 performers are required to develop preliminary parametric performance models for mass-efficient structures that describe performance as a function of design and operating conditions (orbit, acceleration, durability to particle impact, etc.) in order to meet the structural mass fraction and precision requirements for the exemplar application of a MW-scale solar array by phase end. These models must be validated by manufacturing and testing a subcomponent in order to demonstrate the structural design’s critical function as well as structural mass fraction. Phase I should also include a task to estimate the manufacturability (e.g., parametrically the required power/energy, build rate, build resolution, dimensional limits, etc.) and cost of the proposed technology.

In Phase II, selected FA1 performers must update their performance models and increase the precision of the materials and manufacturing system to enable the exemplar

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 12

application of a >100m diameter RF reflector antenna. A frequency of 10 GHz can be assumed for antenna operation. The models should be further validated by manufacturing and testing a higher precision subcomponent to demonstrate the dynamic response (e.g., shape fidelity under acceleration, thermal distortion, etc.), precision, and ability to meet the area built per mass launched metric in a laboratory setting. Parametric performance models should be updated to include the effects of manufacturing variations on performance and operating margin. The manufacturing and cost models should be refined based on the fabrication of the higher precision subcomponent(s).

In Phase III, selected FA1 performers will prove that their technology is launch-worthy and provide evidence that scaling to higher performance, higher precision assemblies in space are possible for the exemplar application of a 1m size LWIR segmented reflector optic. An imaging wavelength of 10 m can be assumed. Performers will produce a subcomponent to demonstrate the extreme precision capability at the required area built per mass launched metric. Flight quality demo units need not be full scale but should demonstrate feasibility of the full-scale structure, including hardware and mechanism development/fabrication, test fixture design, environmental and functional testing, identification of critical performance parameters, identification of material or performance limits, survivability analysis, interface design, flight data analysis, and preparation for flight demonstration. Although the Government aims for the most promising NOM4D TA1 FA1 technologies to be matured during Phase III by demonstrating static and dynamic subcomponent performance in space, it may substitute ground-based testing at the end of Phase III at the Government’s discretion. Proposers should specifically include a task in the draft Phase III SOW to demonstrate manufacturing scaleup of a parametric part to inform the cost model developed in previous phases. Performers should also provide uncertainty quantification for both the performance and manufacturing/cost models.

All FA1 proposals must include modeling and modeling validation tasks that result in a component model capability to simulate response under transient and steady state thermo-mechanical loading conditions that might be experienced during operation, station keeping, and orbital maneuvering.

FA2: Materials and manufacturing (M2) for lunar operations. For FA2, building a precision structure while minimizing the required mass fraction brought from Earth will enable a spectrum of DoD systems to be built using lunar-derived materials. For the purposes of understanding the hypothetical use case, proposers may consider fabrication of structures on-orbit or on the lunar surface for relaunch back into orbit as long as the proposed system is consistent with the Outer Space Treaty. The required mass fraction encompasses all system constituents brought from Earth or not produced from lunar materials (e.g., terrestrial binders, catalysts, integrated circuits, solvents, exquisitely processed subcomponents, etc.). It is expected that FA2 performers will perform detailed trade studies and targeted demonstrations to prove their solution’s viability. Proposers must detail and substantiate their expected advancements in in-situ resource utilization over the existing state of the art (e.g., expected material properties, production rate, in-process verification, integration/automation strategy, etc.) as well as demonstrate material properties using available regolith simulants. Launch-ready prototypes are not anticipated for FA2, but suitable ground demonstrations should be performed in each phase that give

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 13

increasing confidence that, when produced at full scale, major risks have been addressed, including hardware and mechanism development/fabrication, test fixture design, environmental and functional testing, identification of critical performance parameters, identification of material or performance limits, survivability analysis, interface design, flight data analysis, and preparation for flight demonstration. In addition to meeting the program metrics detailed in Table 2, proposers must also include for each phase performer-defined metrics for material properties as defined by structural modeling of each exemplar problem.

In Phase I, FA2 performers will focus on the exemplar problem of -a MW-class solar array primarily composed of lunar-derived materials. Proposers should develop preliminary parametric performance models for processed lunar materials that describe performance as a function of processing and/or operating conditions (reactant composition, available power, lunar day/night, durability to particle impact, immunity to dust, etc.). FA2 should develop manufacturing models and materials property databases that have been validated by early manufacturing trials to demonstrate achievable material properties and build rate using an appropriate regolith simulant. Phase I performers must also estimate the mass fraction required from Earth for their proposed regolith processing method via simulation for the MW-class solar array exemplar application.

In Phase II, FA2 performers selected to move forward must update their performance models to address the exemplar problem of a 100m diameter RF reflector antenna primarily composed of lunar-derived materials. A frequency of 10 GHz can be assumed for the antenna. Materials and manufacturing models should be further validated by manufacturing and testing a subcomponent relevant to the RF antenna exemplar application from a suitable regolith simulant to demonstrate that the required precision and RF properties can be achieved. The parametric performance models should be updated to include the effects of manufacturing variations on performance and operating margin. Models for overall mass fraction brought from Earth should be refined based on the fabrication of suitable small-scale subcomponent(s).

In Phase III, selected FA2 performers will need to substantiate that their technology is launch-worthy and provide evidence that scaling to lower mass fraction brought from Earth is possible. Performers will also need to produce a subcomponent relevant to the 1m scale LWIR optic exemplar application to demonstrate the required extreme precision in a final ground test. Performers should provide uncertainty quantification for the performance model and produce an initial manufacturing cost model. The draft Phase III SOW for FA2 proposals must include modeling and modeling validation tasks that result in a component model capability to simulate response under expected operational transient and steady state thermo-mechanical loading conditions.

TA2: Design for precision operation. The TA2 goal is to develop new approaches to satellite design that dramatically improve mass-efficiency of robust and resilient precision DoD systems. TA2 proposals must be primarily focused on design for space applications. It is acceptable to also develop compelling lunar-derived designs under TA2, but these must be proposed in addition to space-based designs. TA2 proposals cannot focus solely on lunar-derived designs. The key parameters TA2 proposers must address (listed in Table 2) are mass efficiency compared to baseline designs, post-damage (10cm hole) precision, and precision stability during operation (e.g., due to thermal flux, pointing operations, or maneuvers). Note

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 14

that designs should account for damage occurring anywhere on the structure, and precision should be maintained once the system reaches structural equilibrium. The properties for traditional materials utilized for space applications may be assumed (e.g., traditional IM7 composites, aluminum alloys) and, if considering lunar-derived designs, reasonable expected properties for lunar-derived materials. Regardless of constituent, TA2 seeks to develop novel design strategies that enable high precision extended structures with mass efficiencies that are resilient to damage well beyond the capability of traditional (e.g., stiffness-driven) designs. Consequently, all TA2 proposals must include detailed estimates of expected performance of their designs and specifically address how the proposed solution provides an improvement beyond that achievable through optimizing traditional designs. The damage tolerance mechanisms that enable these new designs must be described. A description of the specific design features that enable the ability to meet the metrics should be laid out in the proposal along with an analysis of the SWaP of the chosen approach. Specific manufacturing (e.g., build rate, resource requirements, duty cycles, metrology, etc.) and materials (e.g., material properties, quantities, purity, manufacturing tolerance, etc.) requirements needed to physically produce the design must be also be included for each phase. All TA2 proposals must include detailed estimates of expected structural, thermal, and electrical performance.

Ground demonstrations to validate proposed designs are expected in each phase under TA2, but these need not be with optimal materials. For example, proposers can choose, with justification, reasonable proxy materials, scales, and/or sizes for each demonstration that give confidence that the design concept is sound once scaled to full dimensions and utilizing high performance materials.

In Phase I, TA2 performers are required to develop preliminary parametric models for the design of a >1 MW solar array. The steady state system performance for each novel design should be simulated across the expected operational regime (e.g., orbital day/night or eclipse cycles, through maneuvers and orbital adjustments, pointing corrections, etc.) The ability to meet the program metrics must be shown by modeling/simulation, and the design’s capability to meet damage tolerance should be clearly detailed. Phase I should also include a task to estimate the manufacturability and performance of the proposed technology within an assumed manufacturing variability threshold.

Selected Phase II TA2 performers must update their performance models to include the RF environment and produce a design for a >100m minimum diameter space-based reflector antenna. The models should be further refined by integrating the ability to simulate the dynamic response to external forces relevant to the chosen environment (e.g., damage, thermal distortion, pointing adjustments or maneuvers for orbital applications, etc.). The ability to maintain RF precision in response to several types of external forces must be calculated and documented during Phase II execution.

In Phase III, selected TA2 performers will update their performance models to address the LWIR exemplar problem and produce a design for a 1m segmented LWIR optic using launched or lunar-resourced materials with the required ultrahigh precision. The performance models must be further improved such that the static and dynamic performance of the system can be simulated across the entire operational envelope.

All TA2 proposals must include modeling and modeling validation tasks that result in a component model capability to simulate response under transient and steady state thermo-mechanical loading conditions that might be experienced during operation.

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 15

F. Schedule/Milestones

Proposers must provide a technical and programmatic strategy that conforms to the entire program schedule and presents an aggressive plan to fully address all program goals, metrics (both NOM4D defined metrics (Table 2) and performer defined interim metrics), milestones, and deliverables.

The task structure must be consistent across the proposed schedule, Statement of Work, and cost volume.

A target start date of Oct 1, 2021 may be assumed for planning purposes.

Schedules will be synchronized across performers, as required, and monitored/revised as necessary throughout the program.

All proposals must include the following meetings and travel in the proposed schedule and cost:

o To continue integration and development between TAs, foster collaboration between teams, and disseminate program developments, a two-day Principal Investigator (PI) meeting will be held approximately every six months, with locations split between the East and West Coasts of the United States. For budgeting purposes, plan for nine two-day meetings over the course of 54 months: five meetings in the Washington, D.C. area and four meetings in the San Francisco, CA area.

o Regular teleconference meetings will be scheduled with the Government team for progress reporting as well as problem identification and mitigation.

Proposers should also anticipate at least one site visit per phase by the DARPA Program Manager, during which they will have the opportunity to demonstrate progress towards agreed-upon milestones.

G. Deliverables Performers will be expected to provide at a minimum the following deliverables as detailed in the table below, due on the listed date After Contract Award (ACA):

Table 3: Deliverables

Phase Deliverable Program Quarter

(ACA)

Preliminary parametric models (TA1) Q2 Preliminary parametric models (TA2) Q4 Subcomponent/test coupon (TA1) Q4 Test report detailing critical function/material properties against program metrics (TA1) Q6I

Report detailing simulated system performance for >1 MW solar Array (TA2) Q6

Updated parametric models (TA1) Q9 Updated models for RF performance (TA2) Q10 Subcomponent test coupon (TA1) Q11II

Report detailing testing against program metrics (TA1) Q12

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 16

Report detailing simulated system performance for >100 m diameter RF antenna (TA2) Q12

Updated parametric models (TA1) Q13 Flight test article (TA1) Q15 Updated models for LWIR optic (TA2) Q16 Launch worthiness testing report (TA1, TA2) Q16 Report detailing simulated system performance across operational envelope (all exemplars) (TA2) Q18

III

Report detailing final testing (space or ground) Q19

All parametric models should be delivered to DARPA in the form of a written report accompanied by computer models appropriate for use in common structural analysis (e.g., ANSYS, Abaqus, etc.). Materials models should include stiffness and strength tensors; physical properties relevant to the structure, such as thermal expansion coefficient (full tensor if anisotropic); heat capacity; thermal diffusivity, etc. Manufacturing models must include process parameters relevant to assessing the suitability of a manufacturing method for use in space, such as heating or UV curing rates, energy requirements, efficiency losses, constraints for maintaining precision, etc.

In addition, the following deliverables should also be included:

Comprehensive quarterly technical reports due within ten days of the end of the given quarter, describing progress made on the specific milestones as laid out in the SOW

Monthly technical and financial reports (Monthly technical can be delivered as PowerPoint update)

A phase completion report submitted within 30 days of the end of each phase, summarizing the research done

Annual updates to the CUI protection plan

Other negotiated deliverables specific to the objectives of the individual efforts.

These may include registered reports; experimental protocols; publications; data management plan; intermediate and final versions of software libraries, code, and APIs, including documentation and user manuals; and/or a comprehensive assemblage of design documents, models, modeling data and results, and model validation data.

Reporting as outlined in Section VI.C.

H. Government-furnished Property/Equipment/Information

If the resources are available, and technology development warrants, the Government will provide a ride-along opportunity to those performers selected to participate in Phase III.

II. Award Information

A. General Award Information DARPA anticipates multiple awards.

The level of funding for individual awards made under this BAA will depend on the quality of

HR001121S0018 NOM4D 17

the proposals received and the availability of funds. Awards will be made to proposers4 whose proposals are determined to be the most advantageous to the Government, all evaluation factors considered. See Section V for further information.

The Government reserves the right to:

select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of the proposals received in response to this solicitation;

make awards without discussions with proposers;

conduct discussions with proposers if it is later determined to be necessary;

segregate portions of resulting awards into pre-priced options;

accept proposals in their entirety or select only portions of proposals for award;

fund awards in increments with options for continued work at the end of one or more phases;

request additional documentation once the award instrument has been determined (e.g., representations and certifications); and remove proposers from award consideration should the parties fail to reach agreement on award terms within a reasonable time or the proposer fails to provide requested additional information in a timely manner.

Proposals identified for negotiation may result in a procurement contract or Other Transaction (OT), depending upon the nature of the work proposed, the required degree of interaction between parties, and other factors.

Proposers looking for innovative, commercial-like contractual arrangements are encouraged to consider requesting Other Transactions. To understand the flexibility and options associated with Other Transactions, consult http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions.

In accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 2371b(f), the Government may award a follow-on production contract or Other Transaction (OT) for any OT awarded under this solicitation if: (1) that participant in the OT, or a recognized successor in interest to the OT, successfully completed the entire prototype project provided for in the OT, as modified; and (2) the OT provides for the award…