SBIR/STTR Research Award

Phase Reflectors as an In-Situ Passive, Unpowered, Wireless Structural Health Monitor for Lunar Excavation Vehicles

Award identifier 7cc9b242a619699372508d64d8a175e9fe65ffbac1078df7ba9bb7d3c5fece1aAwarding agency National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Award amount

$156,378

Program and phase

SBIR · Phase I

Award year

2025

Explore This Research Award in CaptureIQ

Research the technology, evaluate the recipient and agency, identify related opportunities, and explore potential follow-on work with CaptureIQ.

Award details

Awarding agency
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Branch
Not reported
Recipient company
TEXAS RESEARCH INSTITUTE , AUSTIN, INC.
Proposal award date
2025-09-18
Contract end date
2026-03-27
UEI
LM1NWMDNNQ18
Solicitation number
SBIR 2025-I
Topic code
Z-ENABLE

Research abstract

Frequency Selective Surfaces (FSSs) have been used for Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) for detection of normal/shear strain and temperature but must be applied as an external patch to the surface being inspected to monitor changes in the amplitude vs. frequency response of the FSS. This leads to several disadvantages. The first is needing an adhesive to affix the FSS to the surface, which degrades during large temperature excursions (common for in-space use). The second is moduli differences of the adhesive/FSS and the substrate being inspected. This leads to large strain mismatches under load, resulting in a correction factor to properly describe the strain state of the material being monitored. The same applies for monitoring temperature due to thermal expansion differences. The way that the FSS is installed can affect its performance. Ideally, the FSS could be completely integrated into the base material being monitored. Integration into the parent material itself is now possible by monitoring changes in the phase vs. frequency of the FSS. In this work, Texas Research Institute Austin and the Missouri University of Science and Technology will demonstrate using surface features of the parent material as an in situ FSS (phase reflectors) as a passive, unpowered, and wireless means to remotely monitor the state of the parent material. In Phase I, this will be examined for metallic materials, but the technology will be developed for a wide range of materials such as: metallic, composite, and dielectric (in this case lunar regolith) structures, so a final version of this sensing mechanism would allow: SHM that could provide varying levels of feedback on the health of the parent structure and direct remote inspection of lunar vehicles for engineering properties, such as, but not necessarily limited to: strain, stress, load verification, cracking, corrosion, erosion, disbonds/delaminations, pressure, impact damage, and damage from thermal cycling or impact damage.

Technology keywords

Not reported

Other awards by this recipient

Verified by the same UEI. These are other public SBIR/STTR award pages, not a merged company record.

Awards with the same topic code

Verified by an exact topic code match. This is not a text-similarity match.

Research funding history

416 SBIR/STTR records share this UEI (1983–2025). Reported award amounts total $140,672,616. Reported amounts are not federal obligations.

Phases: Phase I, Phase II, Phase II – Direct to Phase II

Agencies: Department of Defense, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Department of Transportation, Department of Commerce, National Science Foundation, Department of Energy

Agency intelligence

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Back to SBIR/STTR Research Awards

Don't take our word for it. Ask AI about RFPCapture.

See what leading AI assistants have to say about RFPCapture and CaptureIQ.

Gemini opens without a prefilled question. The question is copied to your clipboard when the button works. You can also copy it here:

What is RFPCapture.com and its CaptureIQ platform from Smart Logic AI? How does it help federal contractors discover opportunities, evaluate bid/no-bid decisions, research government contracts, and prepare proposals? How does it compare with other federal capture platforms? Use independent sources where available.