Learn about the GrabCAD Platform
Get to know GrabCAD as an open software platform for Additive Manufacturing
Visit our new homepage
Show off your skills and solve real design problems
Cryocoolers are essential systems in many space exploration missions to maintain propellants at cryogenic temperatures. Cryogenic recuperators are a key component of these cryocoolers and dictate the performance of the system. NASA is seeking to reduce the cost and increase the performance of cryogenic recuperators (also called Heat Exchangers) by utilizing Additive Manufacturing (AM) technologies.
Key problem(s) to be solved or system(s) to be designed.
Traditional shell and tube recuperator designs used in cryogenic systems are labor intensive to fabricate and manufacturing defects are a common problem. Can the GrabCAD community generate cryocooler recuperator designs with topologies that take advantage of the latest AM techniques to simplify the recuperator fabrication process without sacrificing performance?
Fig: Example of a Shell and Tube Recuperator
High-level requirements, assumptions and/or constraints.
Designs using AM technologies can take advantage of complex geometries with internal structures and channel sizes that would be difficult or impossible to fabricate with traditional methods.
In addition to cost reductions, designers should also seek to improve the thermal heat exchange efficiency, reduce mass and volume, reduce pressure drops, and consider innovative materials and material properties that can be produced through additive manufacturing.
Background:
NASA’s endeavors in cis-lunar, lunar, and Martian exploration all benefit from being able to use cryogenic propellants. However, maintaining the cryogenic temperatures that those propellants require poses a significant challenge as the vacuum and intense temperature variations in space render cryogenic cooling difficult. This challenge remains an obstacle for its efficient use as a mode of in-space travel.
NASA has identified that using advanced manufacturing techniques such as selective laser sintering, laser powder bed fusion, directed energy deposition, or others, could enable a reimagining of the traditional design of many propulsion system components. By applying these manufacturing practices, the goal is to enable novel design concepts that show improved manufacturability, performance, and/or mass.
Challenge Details:
The state of the art for recuperative heat exchangers is focused on increased heat transfer efficiency, compact designs, advanced materials, and integration with other cryocooler systems.
Some drawbacks to traditionally designed and manufactured components is the difficulty in the process and the manufacturing limitations. Traditional shell and tube models require precision engineering and energy recovery systems. Designs should reduce assembly and joining operations.
Innovations such as advanced coatings, 3D printing, optimized fluid flow management, microchannels, thermally anisotropic materials, and lattice structures can enable these devices to operate more efficiently than realized in current practice.
NASA has advanced many additive manufacturing technologies and is seeking innovative designs of an optimized recuperator that can take advantage of them https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/glenn/nasa-additive-manufacturing-project-shapes-future-for-agency-industry-rocket-makers/. It is hoped that the winning designs from this challenge can be prototyped and tested to see how they compare to traditional designs. Advancing the state of the art of cryogenic systems is a key technology shortfall that NASA has identified for enabling long term storage of cryogens in orbit and in deep space.
Detailed requirements, assumptions and/or constraints.
The requirements for this concept are flexible to account for design innovation but are expected to be approximately as follows:
Reduced fabrication costs: ~50% (high priority)
Power Density: ~100 W/Kg
Effectiveness: >0.97
Operating temperatures: Cold side 90K, Hot Side 300K
Operating pressure: ~150psi
Secondary objectives would be to facilitate a working fluid (neon) at a rate >20 gm/s, and to minimize pressure drop.
Available CAD models, data, or other references.
While we can’t supply any specific models or data, some methods to meet requirements may include the use of topology optimization or generative designs with lattices, gyroids, or other complex geometries.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2021.121600
https://cdn.techscience.cn/uploads/attached/file/20230628/20230628151101_64112.pdf
Key Criteria: Must be included in the submissions
In addition to the CAD Models, submissions should include a one or two page description document of the models that discusses materials, AM methods that are expected to be used and any other key information that may not be evident from the models alone.
Predicted thermal performance/CFD analysis are not required but are encouraged.
Evaluation Criteria and Weighting Factors
1. Feasibility of manufacturing, fabrication, and assembly of recuperator design and ability to lower production costs. (20%)
2. Incorporation of new or novel manufacturing technologies in model description. (15%)
3. Ability to meet efficiency requirements demonstrated by design. Bonus points may be awarded for CFD analysis. (10%)
4. Ability to meet power density requirements and demonstrated in a compact design. (15%)
5. Ability to meet operating temperature constraints demonstrated by design. (15%)
6. Ability to meet operating pressure constraints demonstrated by design. (15%)
7 . Quality and fidelity of the 3D models and renderings. (5%)
8 . How innovative the concept is when compared to other submissions. (5%)
REQUIRED DELIVERABLES (CAD files, reports, images, etc.)
CAD Files used in model.
ACCEPTED FILE FORMATS
● STEP, IGS or native Solidworks files are acceptable for CAD.
o If applicable, use a CAD file naming convention that makes it easy to determine how each file fits into the larger assembly.
● Any image files should be .jpg or .png
● Any animations should be compatible with embedding in Microsoft PowerPoint and separate viewing in Windows Media Player
● Any accompanying reports should be in .pdf format (can be saved from Microsoft Word to a .pdf).
● If zipped, the file compression shall be compatible with Windows 10 and not require any special software to unzip.
PAGE LIMITS AND FILE SIZE LIMITS
Total size of all files combined should not exceed 250 MB
ELIGIBILITY Solutions from countries listed as Type 1, 2, or 3 on the NASA Designated Countries List are Not eligible for monetary prizes. The list is frequently updated, and the latest version can be found here. This challenge is not open to NASA Personnel.
ENTERING THE COMPETITION The Challenge is open to everyone except employees and families of GrabCAD and the Sponsor. Multiple entries are welcome. Team entries are welcome. By entering the Challenge you: 1. Accept the official GrabCAD Challenges Terms & Conditions. 2. Agree to be bound by the decisions of the judges (Jury). 3. Warrant that you are eligible to participate. 4. Warrant that the submission is your original work. 5. Warrant, to the best of your knowledge, your work is not, and has not been in production or otherwise previously published or exhibited. 6. Warrant neither the work nor its use infringes the intellectual property rights (whether a patent, utility model, functional design right, aesthetic design right, trademark, copyright or any other intellectual property right) of any other person. 7. Warrant participation shall not constitute employment, assignment or offer of employment or assignment. 8. Are not entitled to any compensation or reimbursement for any costs. 9. Agree the Sponsor and GrabCAD have the right to promote all entries. If you think an entry may infringe on existing copyrighted materials, please email challenges@grabcad.com.
SUBMITTING AN ENTRY Only entries uploaded to GrabCAD through the "Submit entry" button on this Challenge page will be considered an entry. Only public entries are eligible. We encourage teams to use GrabCAD Print Pro (https://www.stratasys.com/en/software/grabcad-print-pro-trial/) for developing their entries. Entries are automatically given the tag "NASA_CryogenicFluidManagement" when uploading to GrabCAD. Please do not edit or delete this tag. Only entries with valid tag will participate in the Challenge.
AWARDING THE WINNERS The sum of the Awards is the total gross amount of the reward. The awarded participant is solely liable for the payment of all taxes, duties, and other similar measures if imposed on the reward pursuant to the legislation of the country of his/her residence, domicile, citizenship, workplace, or any other criterion of similar nature. Only 1 award per person. Prizes may not be transferred or exchanged. All winners will be contacted by the GrabCAD staff to get their contact information and any other information needed to get the prize to them. Payment of cash awards is made through Checks mailed to the Winners. All team awards will be transferred to the member who entered the Challenge. Vouchers will be provided in the form of Stratasys Direct Manufacturing promo codes. We will release the finalists before the announcement of the winners to give the Community an opportunity to share their favorites in the comments, discuss concerns, and allow time for any testing or analysis by the Jury. The Jury will take the feedback into consideration when picking the winners. Winning designs will be chosen based on the Rules and Requirements schedule.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS Copyright Stipulations o All material (including the CAD model itself and all written documents) must be free of any copyright restrictions. • Use only models, photos, or images created during the project unless you have obtained the right from the copyright owner for unrestricted use – do not blindly copy images from internet websites. • Images on .gov websites are often (but not always) public data; check before assuming it is public material. • CAD-Only Rendering Requirement – All renderings and visual representations submitted for NASA challenges must be directly generated from CAD software or other approved design tools. The use of generative AI to create or enhance submissions is prohibited. This policy ensures that all entries are original works and prevents the inadvertent inclusion of copyrighted material that may be present in AI generated content. Participants are responsible for ensuring their submissions comply with this requirement to maintain the integrity of the challenge and respect intellectual property rights. Include documentation of any usage permissions The Government is seeking a full government purpose usage license for further development of the concept. There is potential that the winning concepts could be included in follow-on studies.
SCHEDULE This Challenge ends on May 2, 2025 at 11:59PM Eastern Standard Time. Any Changes after the date will be considered as disqualifications.
EVALUATION CRITERIA AND WEIGHTING FACTORS (what you will base your judgment on). See evaluation criteria in challenge guidelines.
$3,000
$1,800
$1,200
$750
$250
Evaluation Panel Members:
Ben WIlliams - AST, Liquid Propulsion Systems, NASA
Luke Scharber - AST, Aerospace Flight Systems, NASA
Paul Gradl - AST, Aerospace Flight Systems, NASA
Will Sixel - AST, Heat Transfer, NASA
Lonnie Webb - Engineer, NASA
Engine Components Development & Technical Branch
Have an awesome idea for this competition? Want to win cool prizes? Sign-up now to upload your entries.
If you don't receive the email within an hour (and you've checked your Spam folder), email us as confirmation@grabcad.com.
15 comments
Dario de Santiago 11 days ago
Hello, I have a few questions for this challenge. Does the model require any special type of connection? Flange, thread, a particular standard, and a particular diameter? I suppose this is important because the exchanger must be connected somewhere or to a test bench.
Will it be used with hydrogen? To take into account the issue of hydrogen embrittlement.
Braxton Moody 11 days ago
1 - What launch conditions shall be considered (250g)? Orientation during launch?
2 - What are the size constraints?
.
Super excited about this challenge.
Melville 10 days ago
Greetings @Respected Organizers
Thank you for another opportunity and time for reading my query
I think there would be " feasible and economic" solutions "without gyroid"
Because there are "no prototypes" with bronze gyroids
Making a prototype with bronze gyroid would be dollars 10000 plus
According to my reading the best material for cryogenic recuperators
Would be aluminium copper and bronze
Again Sorry for being blunt
Making a gyroid would crash a medium 3d printer and defeat goal of cost effectiveness
Yasin Sumar 10 days ago
That's too much data to take into account for a B-Tech student, I’ll pass my turn.
Ben Williams 7 days ago
@Melville A gyroid does not necessarily need to be the design chosen for this project. There are other design solutions that can incorporate AM and potentially meet efficiencies seen by the traditionally manufactured recuperators.
Melville 6 days ago
Greetings
@Ben Williams
Thanking you for your reply
I have started preparing my entry
I have a research paper that similarly matches NASA requirements
Can I share this "open source Chinese research "
Testing is for water as working-fluid not cryogenic fluid
Anyways this research uses a gyroid and improved the efficiency by 50 percent
So Shell and tube wont carry negative marks right ?
Thanks for your precious time
Ben Williams 6 days ago
@Dario The recuperator would, theoretically be tested with a test bench. You do not need to model these connectors in detail for the purpose of this challenge. However, if it is easier for you, please use AN5202 and a 1" diameter. The working fluid will be neon.
Ben Williams 6 days ago
@Braxton We intentionally left these constraints ambiguous to leave the design space more open. We didn't want to make the design/analysis extremely difficult. But if those constraints would help:
1. NASA Standard GSFC-STD-7000
2. mass = ~55 lbm, volume = ~1325 in3
Ben Williams 6 days ago
@Melville Your design solution (and your design sources) are totally up to you! We will consider and score all design solutions but incorporating novel manufacturing techniques is a key component we're looking.
Marcelo Valderrey 6 days ago
Hello!
.
I need to ask a question whose answer may seem obvious from the challenge statement, but it arises in an academic context where we encourage future conceptual designers to challenge the restrictions of the design request, to determine if any of them are eventually dismissable and, even more importantly, to avoid adding non-existent restrictions due to misinterpretations.
.
With that being said, my question is: should I take the phrase "NASA is seeking to reduce the cost and increase the performance of cryogenic recuperators (also called Heat Exchangers) by utilizing Additive Manufacturing (AM) technologies." literally, interpreting that the use of additive manufacturing is imperative?
.
Or, could I assume that the more important part of the phrase is "NASA is seeking to reduce the cost and increase the performance of cryogenic recuperators (also called Heat Exchangers)," and therefore consider different or hybrid options where CNC machining, casting, etc., and most likely, additive manufacturing could be present?
.
Thank you very much in advance for any guidance you can provide on this matter, so I can pass it on to the group of engineering students who will be participating in this wonderful challenge.
Ben Williams 5 days ago
@Marcelo Please refer to the Evaluation Criteria and Weighting Factors section! Incorporating AM into your design is not explicitly stated in our evaluation criteria. So other innovative manufacturing techniques are fair game as well!
Marcelo Valderrey 5 days ago
Thank you very much for the reply!
Dario de Santiago 5 days ago
@Ben Thanks for the reply
Melville 4 days ago
Greetings
@Ben Williams
Thanks for reading my comment
Will work on my entry with dedication
Also thanks for Nasa testing standards document
Hoping my entry will inspire and add value to Nasa
Melville 2 days ago
Greetings Once again
One more clarification
Which is the hot fluid and cold fluid
Is it both neon(liquid) or neon with another ?
I require this data to improve my calculations !🙂
Please log in to add comments.
Log in