SATPC0039560 Tab 06 RDSS..pdf
PDF 141 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Nd-YLF Laser System for Particle Image Velocimetry Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 80NSSC25913037Q
About this file
This document is a NASA Shared Services Center Recommendation and Determination to Solicit from One Source, specifically a sole source justification for procuring a Nd:YLF Dual Cavity Diode Pumped Solid State, High Repetition Rate Laser from LaVision, Inc. The request is for a replacement laser system for the Flow Physics and Control Branch (FPCB), with an estimated performance period of 8-10 weeks after order receipt.
The justification emphasizes LaVision's unique compatibility with NASA's existing five-system PIV (Particle Image Velocimetry) infrastructure, highlighting that alternative vendors would require extensive integration work that could disrupt ongoing wind tunnel experiment preparations. The document details LaVision's industry leadership in PIV systems and the technical necessity of acquiring a laser that matches the operational, mechanical, and electrical specifications of their current equipment, thereby protecting NASA's substantial prior investment in LaVision technology.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| SATPC0039560 Tab 07 Capability Statement SAM.gov.pdf | ||
| SATPC0039560 Tab 04 4 SOW.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Page 1 V2.0 3-15-2017
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
NASA SHARED SERVICES CENTER
RECOMMENDATION AND DETERMINATION TO SOLICIT FROM ONE SOURCE
OR BRAND NAME
PICK ONE
Sole Source:
☒I recommend that NASA, NASA Shared Services Center negotiate with LaVision, Inc only for a Nd:YLF Dual Cavity Diode Pumped Solid State, High Repetition Rate Laser. The total estimated cost of this effort is and the estimated period of performance is 8-10 weeks after the order is received.
OR
Brand Name Justification:
☐I recommend that NASA, NASA Shared Services Center negotiate with only with vendors who can provide the subject band name from Manufacture Name for Enter Supply or Service to be procured.
The total estimated cost of this effort is Enter Dollar amount and the estimated period of performance or lead-time for delivery is Date.
This recommendation is for the acquisition of supplies or services determined to be reasonably available from only one source/only one manufacture. Competition is impractical for the following reasons (please answer the questions below):
1. What are the reasons for soliciting only the suggested source/suggested brand name? Please provide the unique characteristics of the items or services along with the supporting rationale and the market research performed to substantiate your reason for the suggested source/brand name.
LaVision leads the industry in providing reliable and efficient PIV systems. The new laser system will replace an existing Particle Image Velocimetry laser system purchased from LaVision, Inc., which is no longer operational. To integrate properly with our existing system, the new laser must be fully compatible from operational, mechanical, and electrical standpoints. The existing laser is a Nd-YLF Dual Cavity, Diode Pumped Solid State laser, which ensures this compatibility requirement is met.The Flow Physics and Control Branch (FPCB) has made a substantial investment in several LaVision PIV systems, data reduction software, and a processing cluster for efficient data handling. While other vendors offer similar laser types, acquiring fully compatible hardware will allow FPCB to maximize the utility of this existing investment
2. What is the impact to the government if another vendor/brand is used? Include any dollar, schedule, or compatibility impacts if possible.
Our organization currently owns and operates five LaVision systems. Purchasing a laser from a different vendor would create significant compatibility challenges with our existing timing and image acquisition hardware. Ensuring compatibility would require extensive work and introduce substantial uncertainty into our operations. This additional work would divert critical time and resources away from planning and preparing for upcoming wind tunnel experiments. We believe that the time and effort required to integrate equipment from another brand would not serve the Government's best interests.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .