Bridging the Cosmos

How NASA's STTR Program Fuels Space Innovation Through Earthly Partnerships

When universities and startups collide, the results can launch humanity toward the stars.

The Genesis of Greatness

The year 2016 marked a pivotal moment for space technology development. NASA's Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Phase I Solicitation offered a unique pathway for transforming laboratory breakthroughs into mission-critical systems. Unlike traditional grants, the STTR program—established by Congress in 1992—compels small businesses to partner with research institutions, creating a powerful synergy between entrepreneurial agility and academic expertise 4 6 . For 2016, this meant $150,000 awards per project to test the feasibility of innovations spanning deep-space communications, propulsion, and life support 1 4 .

NASA's Urgency

32% of NASA's technology portfolio depended on collaborations accelerated by STTR and its sister program, SBIR 1 2 .

Program Timeline

Contracts moved from solicitation to launch in 130 days—among the fastest in government .

With programs like Artemis gaining momentum, translating theoretical research into flight-ready hardware had never been more critical.

The Anatomy of a 2016 STTR Phase I Project

The Collaboration Imperative

At its core, STTR Phase I is a three-way marriage:

Small Businesses

(<500 employees) provided commercialization expertise.

Research Institutions

(universities, nonprofits) contributed scientific rigor.

NASA

Defined mission-aligned challenges through solicitations.

Unlike SBIR, which allows only 33% subcontracting to research institutions, STTR mandates a minimum 30% work share for the research partner, with the small business handling 40% 4 6 . This structure ensured deep integration—not just transactional contracting.

Key Differences Between STTR and SBIR Programs
Feature STTR SBIR
Research Partner Required (nonprofit institution) Optional (≤33% work share)
Principal Investigator Can be employed by partner or business Must be primarily employed by business
Agencies 5 (NASA, DoD, NIH, NSF, DoE) 11
Phase I Funding Up to $150,000 Up to $150,000

NASA's 2016 Priority Frontiers

The solicitation targeted technologies essential for overcoming cosmic hurdles:

Optical Communications

Laser-based systems to replace radio waves, enabling 100x faster data transmission from Mars 2 .

Radiation-Hardened Electronics

Microchips surviving Jupiter's lethal belts.

CubeSat Propulsion

Miniaturized thrusters for nano-satellite swarms 1 6 .

Closed-Loop Life Support

Oxygen recycling for multi-year crewed missions.

NASA's competitive edge was evident: 26% of applicants secured Phase I awards—double the success rate of agencies like Health and Human Services (12%) .

Experiment Spotlight: The Hybrid Propulsion Breakthrough

The Challenge

Traditional chemical rockets are too powerful—and dangerous—for delicate CubeSat maneuvers. A 2016 STTR team proposed a radical alternative: green hybrid thrusters using non-toxic fuels and compact design.

Methodology: Step-by-Step Innovation

1. Fuel Formulation

Researchers synthesized hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTPB), a rubber-like solid fuel, doped with catalytic additives 6 .

3. Thrust Vectoring

A gimbal mechanism from the university partner enabled 5-axis steering.

2. Injector Design

Engineers developed a piezoelectric injector to precisely spray nitrous oxide oxidizer into the combustion chamber.

4. Testing

Scaled prototypes underwent vacuum chamber trials mimicking space conditions.

Key Performance Metrics During Testing
Parameter Result NASA Requirement Significance
Thrust Control ±0.1 Newtons ±0.5 Newtons Unprecedented precision
Specific Impulse 285 seconds 250 seconds 14% fuel efficiency gain
Ignition Reliability 99.8% 95% Critical for deep-space missions
Mass 420 grams 600 grams Ideal for CubeSats

Results and Analysis

The thruster achieved mission-ready performance in just 8 months. Its throttleability allowed CubeSats to adjust thrust mid-maneuver—a first for hybrids. The partnership proved vital: the university's combustion diagnostics identified instability modes, while the startup refined injectors for mass production. This project exemplified STTR's power to compress Technology Readiness Level (TRL) advancement from years to months 5 .

The Scientist's Toolkit: STTR Research Reagents

Critical materials enabling 2016 STTR innovations:

Essential Reagents and Their Cosmic Functions
Reagent/Material Function Mission Impact
Erbium-Doped Fiber Amplifiers Boosts laser signal strength Enables high-bandwidth Mars-Earth links 2
Perovskite Solar Cells Lightweight, radiation-tolerant photovoltaics Powers deep-space probes
Metal-Organic Frameworks (MOFs) Absorbs COâ‚‚; releases oxygen via electrolysis Life support for Moon bases
Bismuth Telluride Alloys Converts heat to electricity (thermoelectrics) Powers probes in shadowed lunar craters

From Lab to Launchpad: Commercializing the Cosmos

Phase I was merely the ignition sequence. Successful projects could unlock:

Phase II

$1 million for prototyping 4 6 .

Phase III

Non-STTR funding (e.g., NASA contracts) for flight testing 4 .

I-Corps

Additional funding to refine business models 1 .

The 2016 cohort faced commercialization hurdles. Only 8% of STTR firms were woman-owned, and minority participation languished below 2% 4 . Yet successes emerged. NASA's Electronic Handbook (EHB)—a Phase II SBIR innovation itself—tracked infusion into programs like Artemis, proving STTR's ROI 5 .

Conclusion: Partnerships as Propulsion

NASA's 2016 STTR Phase I Solicitation wasn't just about funding—it was about orchestrating collisions between disparate genius. Universities provided the "what if"; businesses asked "what's next." Together, they turned quantum dots into deep-space sensors and lab polymers into Martian habitats. As we race toward the Moon and Mars, STTR remains humanity's quietest—yet most transformative—rocket fuel.

"Alone, we navigate a room. Together, we navigate the Kuiper Belt."

STTR Principle Investigator, 2016 Cohort

References