National Aeronautics and NASA/TM—2020–220557

Space Administration
IS02
George C. Marshall Space Flight Center
Huntsville, Alabama 35812

A Review of Welding in Space

and Related Technologies
N. Naden
The University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama

T.J. Prater
Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama

April 2020
 The NASA STI Program…in Profile

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected
advancement of aeronautics and space science. The papers from scientific and technical conferences,
NASA Scientific and Technical Information (STI) symposia, seminars, or other meetings sponsored
Program Office plays a key part in helping NASA or cosponsored by NASA.
maintain this important role.
• SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, technical,
The NASA STI Program Office is operated by or historical information from NASA programs,
Langley Research Center, the lead center for projects, and mission, often concerned with
NASA’s scientific and technical information. The subjects having substantial public interest.
NASA STI Program Office provides access to
the NASA STI Database, the largest collection of • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION.
aeronautical and space science STI in the world. English-language translations of foreign
The Program Office is also NASA’s institutional scientific and technical material pertinent to
mechanism for disseminating the results of its NASA’s mission.
research and development activities. These results
are published by NASA in the NASA STI Report Specialized services that complement the STI
Series, which includes the following report types: Program Office’s diverse offerings include creating
custom thesauri, building customized databases,
• TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of organizing and publishing research results…even
completed research or a major significant providing videos.
phase of research that present the results of
NASA programs and include extensive data For more information about the NASA STI Program
or theoretical analysis. Includes compilations Office, see the following:
of significant scientific and technical data
and information deemed to be of continuing • Access the NASA STI program home page at
reference value. NASA’s counterpart of peer- <http://www.sti.nasa.gov>
reviewed formal professional papers but has less
stringent limitations on manuscript length and • E-mail your question via the Internet to
extent of graphic presentations. <[email protected]>

• TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientific • Phone the NASA STI Help Desk at

and technical findings that are preliminary or of 757 –864–9658
specialized interest, e.g., quick release reports,
working papers, and bibliographies that contain • Write to:
minimal annotation. Does not contain extensive NASA STI Information Desk
analysis. Mail Stop 148
NASA Langley Research Center
• CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientific and Hampton, VA 23681–2199, USA
technical findings by NASA-sponsored
contractors and grantees.
NASA/TM—2020–220557

A Review of Welding in Space

and Related Technologies
N. Naden
The University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama

T.J. Prater
Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Marshall Space Flight Center • Huntsville, Alabama 35812

April 2020

i
 Acknowledgments

This work was performed under the Virtual Student Federal Service (VSFS) program. Additional thanks to
Fredrick Michael, Josef Cobb, and Jeffrey Sowards of NASA Marshall Space Fight Center.

TRADEMARKS

Trade names and trademarks are used in this report for identification only. This usage does not constitute an official
endorsement, either expressed or implied, by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Available from:

NASA STI Information Desk

Mail Stop 148
NASA Langley Research Center
Hampton, VA 23681–2199, USA
757–864–9658

This report is also available in electronic form at

<http://www.sti.nasa.gov>

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ............................................................................................. 2

2.1 Solidification .................................................................................................................. 2

2.2 Heat and Mass Transfer ................................................................................................. 3
2.3 Fluid Flow ..................................................................................................................... 4

3. CAPABILITIES AND DESIGN OF VARIOUS IN-SPACE WELDING DEVICES ......... 5

3.1 Vulkan Facility .............................................................................................................. 5

3.2 M-551 ............................................................................................................................ 6
3.3 Universal Hand Tool ..................................................................................................... 6
3.4 NASA Laser Welding Apparatus ................................................................................... 7
3.5 International Space Welding Experiment (Modifications of the Universal
Hand Tool ..................................................................................................................... 9
3.6 New Electron Beam Gun ............................................................................................... 10

4. SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS .......................................................................................... 11

4.1 Contamination Issues .................................................................................................... 11

4.2 Arcing Hazards for Electron Beam Welding .................................................................. 11
4.3 Droplet Separation ........................................................................................................ 12
4.4 Laser Reflectance ........................................................................................................... 13

5. APPLICATIONS OF WELDING IN SPACE .................................................................... 14

5.1 Sources of Spacecraft Damage ...................................................................................... 14

5.2 International Space Station External Materials ............................................................. 15
5.3 Benefits of Welding in Space .......................................................................................... 15
5.4 Joint Configurations ...................................................................................................... 16

6. STATE OF THE ART FOR ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING DEVICES

FOR IN-SPACE USE .......................................................................................................... 17

6.1 Vulcan Unit ................................................................................................................... 17

6.2 Ultrasonic Additive Manufacturing Process .................................................................. 18
6.3 Metal Advanced Manufacturing Bot-Assisted Assembly ............................................... 18
6.4 Sintered Inductive Metal Printer With Laser Exposure ................................................. 18
6.5 Techshot Fabrication Laboratory .................................................................................. 19

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

7. RECENT NASA-SUPPORTED RESEARCH ON WELDING IN SPACE ....................... 21

8. SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 23

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 24

iv
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Simple schematic of the laser welding experiment .................................................... 7

Figure 2. Weld ripples in stainless steel post-laser welding ....................................................... 8

Figure 3. Cross-sectional comparisons in the transverse direction of laser-based

welding with varying gravitational acceleration ........................................................ 8

Figure 4. International space welding experimental design ...................................................... 9

Figure 5. Carillon apparatus .................................................................................................... 12

Figure 6. Vulcan apparatus (image from Made in Space) ......................................................... 17

Figure 7. UAM concept (image from Ultra Tech Machinery and Fabrisonic) .......................... 18

Figure 8. SIMPLE device (image from Techshot) .................................................................... 19

Figure 9. FabLab concept configuration .................................................................................. 20

Figure 10. MELD prototype (image from Made in Space) ........................................................ 21

Figure 11. SOUL satellite platform for welding (image from Busek Co. Inc.) ............................ 22

v
 LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ACRONYMS

Al aluminum

AM additive manufacturing

CNC computer numerical control

Cr chromium

Cu copper

EBW electron beam welding

FabLab Fabrication Laboratory

FCC face-centered cubic

ISS International Space Station

ISWE International Space Welding Experiment

MAMBA metal advanced manufacturing bot-assisted assembly

MELD mobile end-effector laser device

Mg magnesium

Ni nickel

OSAM on-orbit servicing, assembly, and manufacturing

SBIR Small Business Innovative Research

Si silicone

SIMPLE sintered inductive metal printer with laser exposure

SOUL satellite on umbilical line

Ti titanium

TM Technical Memorandum

UAM ultrasonic additive manufacturing

UHT universal hand tool

vi
 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

A REVIEW OF WELDING IN SPACE AND RELATED TECHNOLOGIES

1. INTRODUCTION

Deployment of welding and additive manufacturing (AM) technologies in the space envi-
ronment has the potential to revolutionize how orbiting platforms are designed, manufactured, and
assembled. These technologies offer the option for repair of sustained damage to habitat structures
on space missions, as astronauts would be able to manufacture new parts (using welding-derived
AM processes suitable for use in the external space environment) and weld cracks. An added ben-
efit is that required repairs can be achieved more economically, as new parts need not be shipped
from Earth. With further maturation of in-space welding capabilities, astronauts could operate
under given standards and weld damaged structures rather than rely on cargo resupply.

This Technical Memorandum (TM) begins by reviewing the available literature relevant to
welding in space, focusing on solidification, heat and mass transfer, and fluid flows in microgravity.
This survey considers research on the effects of welding in microgravity on a material system. The
various in-space welding devices that have been previously designed and tested are examined to
determine their capabilities and shortcomings, with a focus on the results of their individual weld-
ing experiments. Safety measures are discussed to protect the orbiting International Space Station
(ISS) and crew during welding operations. Finally, the state of the art is examined by focusing on
current approaches to AM and on-orbit welding that are being developed by several companies in
conjunction with NASA.

1
 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 Solidification

Throughout the latter half of the 20th century many solidification experiments were per-
formed in microgravity to understand how manufacturing could be impacted by operation in a space
environment compared to terrestrial manufacturing. It has been observed that surface tension effects
play a more pronounced role in microgravity, as the buoyancy force becomes nearly nonexistent.

The following two quotes from the book, Manufacturing in Space: Process Problems and
Advances,1 aptly summarize microgravity solidification:

“Where convective currents are of low significance and the mass transfer is
governed primarily by diffusion, the dendritic growth will in all probability give
way to the cellular growth. It will happen because the concentration gradient ahead
of the solidifying interface may grow and stability of the interface will be upset as
a result of constitutional supercooling [1].”

“By its effect on the ingot’s microstructure, a decrease in intensity of convective

mixing is equivalent to a decline in the growth rate under normal-gravity conditions.
This implies that in space, the solidification towards ordered directional structure
materials may proceed at a higher rate than on Earth.”

A simplified model for the expected morphology of the microstructure based off the growth
rate and the temperature gradient can be found in reference 2.

It is suggested that supercooling is prevalent in microgravity builds.1–5 The reduction of

mixing in a molten pool creates a concentration gradient that forces supercooling, which tends to
lead to higher ordered dendritic structures and cellular growth. Furthermore, this decline in growth
rate of solidification indicated that heterogenous nucleation is suppressed in microgravity and
homogenous nucleation occurs more easily.2

Furthermore, high segregation of the microstructure is expected in microgravity laser and

electron beam welds due to decreased mixing.1 Decreased mixing causes diffusion to become
the primary mode of mass transfer.6 Diffusion is relatively slow in comparison to mixing, so
solidification will freeze mass concentrations in their locations and segregation would be observed
during metallography of the specimens. For example, aluminum (Al)-silicon (Si) (7% Si) alloy was
remelted and solidified in microgravity. The resulting microstructure showed an odd macrostructure
with a sphere covered in hillocks, where the silicon was between the hillocks and aluminum
solidified to form the hillocks themselves.1

2
 It is difficult to make predictions on how the microstructure will be impacted with use of
various welding methods in microgravity. In aluminum-copper (Cu) alloy casting, grains became
larger in microgravity compared to Earth-based casts.7 In electron beam tests, the microstructures
appear to be fine grained.8 With laser welding, larger grains have been observed.9 However, it is
important to note that these differences in grain structure are most likely due to the material system
as well as the welding method. More research is needed to be able to make generalizations about
microgravity’s effects on various metallic systems.

Weld ripples are also common in the solidification of space welds.9 These ripples are a result
of surface tension effects during the weld process, with surface tension changing with temperature
at a given point in the weld.

Moreover, the Gibbs-Thomson effect suggests that curvature of the melt pool due to
microgravity will reduce the melting temperature of a solid particle in the pool.6 Additionally, it
has been suggested that the presence of weld fumes in the area of the weld would alter the melt-
ing temperature as well, although there does not appear to be data in the literature relating to this
phenomenon. The Gibbs-Thomson effect could be one of the causes of constitutional supercool-
ing microgravity. This shift in melting temperature would cause large supercooling during solidi-
fication. Supercooling is depicted graphically in reference 10. The authors indicate that increased
supercooling would cause a dendritic morphology. It should be noted that this somewhat offsets
the expected coarser structure caused by the reduced growth rate. Increased supercooling can be
seen as a higher temperature gradient, leading to finer grains than expected.

2.2 Heat and Mass Transfer

Heat and mass transfer is significantly impacted in the microgravity environment of space.
Due to the lack of the buoyancy force, natural convection does not occur; therefore, the only
interactions a hot body has with the environment is radiation and conduction. This is important
because heat transfer via conduction through a fluid is significantly lower than heat transfer from
convection. As a result, a melt pool will take longer to cool. This could create problems, as the
material is essentially annealed for a longer time with the application of a heat source such as
a weld stick. This would cause larger grain growth compared to terrestrial processes.9,10

As mentioned previously, diffusion becomes the driving force for mass transfer in micro-
gravity.6 It was noticed that in space, the flow of solute reaches a critical value earlier and begins
to diffuse earlier, allowing for more time for diffusion-controlled growth.1

Moreover, there is a concern that may develop in metallic systems with a high vapor pres-
sure such as those containing magnesium (Mg). In one experiment, a thermal differential was built
on opposite sides of a fluid and nine bubbles were inserted into the fluid. After an hour, the center
of the fluid had not reached a uniform temperature.1 This constant temperature fluctuation may
or may not cause problems in the solidification of a melt pool, but there is a need for additional
research to understand this phenomenon.

3
 2.3 Fluid Flow

In the microgravity environment, thermocapillary flows are pronounced and cause a change
in the fluid flow of a molten pool.1,2,6,11 Convection in terrestrial molten pools tends to be domi-
nated by the buoyancy force. The thermocapillary flow convection velocity is about an order of
magnitude below the buoyancy force and causes reduced mixing in the melt pool.12,13

Interestingly, g-jitter amplitude has a smaller effect on suspended particles than expected.
High-frequency g-jitter is countered by surface tension effects but low-frequency jitter tends to have
a greater impact on the stability of particles in a molten pool.14,15

Moreover, it has been proven that the Marangoni number alone is insufficient to predict
the onset of oscillatory flow within a fluid in microgravity.11,16 This means that more research is
needed to determine what could cause oscillatory flow, a phenomenon that could become useful in
weld pools to cause greater mixing.

4
 3. CAPABILITIES AND DESIGN OF VARIOUS IN-SPACE WELDING DEVICES

3.1 Vulkan Facility

The Vulkan facility8,17 was the first welding apparatus in space and was designed by the Rus-
sians to perform experiments pertaining to microgravity welding. The device was equipped with a
low-pressure arc welder using a consumable electrode, a low-pressure arc and hollow cathode, and
an electron beam welder. To shield the crew from the possible unknown dangers of welding in  space,
Vulkan was an automatic system to be operated remotely by cosmonauts in a separate
compartment.

Furthermore, Vulkan consisted of two sections: a low-pressure nonhermetic section and the
hermetically sealed section. The nonhermetic section was able to be exposed to the environment
and held three specimens to be welded along with a rotating table to facilitate the welding process.
The hermetic section contained most of the operating equipment including an independent accu-
mulator electric power source, secondary power source, control units, and measurement devices.
In all, the device weighed 50 kg and had a 0.6 to 1 kW capacity.

Vulkan was first tested in 1969 aboard the Soyuz 6 spaceship within the airlock section while
the cosmonauts remained in the reentry system to operate the device remotely. The airlock pressure
was reduced to less than 1.33 × 10–2 Pa for the duration of the tests.

The low-pressure constricted arc and hollow cathode were tested first to weld butt joints
with and without flanged edges in 1-mm-thick stainless and titanium (Ti) sheets. These experiments
were determined null as the high pumping rate of the atmosphere from the living section of the
Soyuz 6 made it difficult to ensure a concentration of the plasma-forming gas in the arc gap zone
necessary for constricting the high-current arc. This low-current discharge made was too low to
melt and weld the joints.

Next, electron beam welding (EBW) was used to weld butt joints with and without flanged
edges, butt joints in a depression, and lap joints. 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel, a titanium alloy, and
an AlMg-6 aluminum were the materials of choice and the thicknesses of the welded specimens
were between 1.5 and 2 mm. Additionally, the electron beam was used to cut 1-mm-thick sheets
of titanium and aluminum. The results showed that the processes of welding, melting, and cutting
with EBW were stable in the space environment. The necessary conditions for formation of welded
joints and cut areas were met in this experiment. Unfortunately, long high-quality welding joints
could not be produced because of the nonuniform speed of the rotating table, which was caused by
a failure in the displacement mechanism.

Finally, the low-pressure arc and consumable electrode were tested on 1-mm-thick 1Cr18Ni9Ti
stainless steel with a 0.5-mm-thick backing strip. As mentioned in the preceding paragraph, high-

5
quality welds were not obtained due to the failure in the rotating table. However, it was shown that
consumable electrode welding in space is stable at a high pumping rate, as in the vacuum chambers
of Earth. It is interesting to note that Boris Paton, the researcher for this work, characterized these
results as ambiguous.

3.2 M-551

In response to Russia’s demonstration of the Vulkan facility in 1969, NASA tested the
M-551 automatic electron beam welder aboard Skylab in 1972. The M-551 was equipped with an
electron beam welder for cutting and melting in microgravity with 20 kV and 80 mA operating
conditions.18

The conclusion of this experiment was that puddle control techniques on Earth should be
readily adapted to the space environment. Large, elongated grains in Skylab specimens indicated
that there was a major difference in convection during solidification of three metals with a variety
of physical properties.

3.3 Universal Hand Tool

The universal hand tool (UHT) was a manual electron beam gun developed to address
automatic welding, specifically the ability to reach spots that are difficult to access such as crevices
or corners.8,17,18

Intended to be used by a cosmonaut, the UHT had some interesting design points. To pro-
tect the cosmonaut and prevent puncturing the space suit or the space vehicle, the electron beam
would be deflected if the actions of the operator became uncontrollable. The device had the form
of a single unit, whose main element was the box body held in the right hand with a special handle
shaped to fit the glove of a spacesuit. Under the left hand was a control panel to toggle power of
the weld gun.

On the front of the box body there were two electron beam guns covered with a heat-shield-
ing jacket. Each gun was able to be fitted with a focusing device or a crucible attachment. With the
focusing device, the gun could be used for welding, brazing, or heating with a concentrated heat
source. With the crucible attachment, it can be used for evaporation to deposit coating or heat
with a distributed source. The latter would be useful for homogenizing temperatures across a joint
before welding to prevent cracking that may occur due to large temperature fluctuations.

Within the body there was a high-voltage power source consisting of a high-voltage trans-
former common to both guns, an anode rectifier, and separate filament transformers. Each of these
devices were covered with epoxy to form a single body. During the development of the UHT, it was
recommended that the anode voltage of the high-voltage power source should not exceed 10 kV
to prevent hard x-ray radiation during operation which would endanger the user. In all, the UHT
weighed about 20 kg.

6
 The UHT was first used in space on July 25, 1984, on stainless steel and a titanium alloy
0.5-mm thick for cutting and 1-mm specimens for welding and brazing. Results of this experiment
confirmed the high quality of the majority of specimens produced in space, although not much
information is available about the actual microstructure of the welds.

For a more practical test, in 1986 cosmonauts were given the task to weld and braze manu-
ally in free space individual sections of girder structures, which were placed in special cassettes and
manipulators. A total of 10 individual hinged sections of TiAl4Mn1.5 titanium alloy were welded.
Next, the cosmonauts carried out a complex operation of welding a tubular boom girder. Each
section had the form of a fragment of an open pipe made of 36NiCrTiAl steel onto which rings
of Cr18Ni10Ti steel were fitted by brazing. Later investigations on Earth showed that the joints
produced in space were of high quality.

In the 1990s and early 2000s, the UHT was modified in the in-space welding experiment to
meet American standards for human use of a device in space.

3.4 NASA Laser Welding Apparatus

Few laser welding devices were developed for use in space; the most notable is a device
designed by Workman show in figure 1,9 that was tested in 1989 on a KC-135. This device was built
mainly for simplicity and ease of use. It included a Nd-YAG laser that produced the 1-μm wave-
length used for melting, diode pumping to give high efficiency with low power consumption and
reduce cooling problems to a minimum, and fiber optic delivery to simplify the welding process.

Laser Power
Supplies

0.31 m
Experiment
Controller

Translation Rotation Motor

Diode Pumped Motor
Laser Array 0.81 m

Sample Mount

Fiber Optics

0.64 m

Figure 1. Simple schematic of the laser welding experiment.9

7
 The device was designed for 38 W in continuous multimode with a 2-mm beam diameter.
A 10-kW YAG-Drive from ALE Solutions, Inc. was used to power the system. Notice that the
38-W laser is much lower than the electron beam guns mentioned previously, thus increasing the
utility of the apparatus as it requires less power to run.

During the tests on the KC-135, 0.127-mm stainless steel was welded. Rippling was
observed in the space builds as can be observed in figure 2.9 The resulting microstructure yielded
more elongated structures in microgravity compared to similar tests in high gravity, as depicted in
figure 3.9

Figure 2. Weld ripples in stainless steel post-laser welding.9

Figure 3. Cross-sectional comparisons in the transverse direction of

laser-based welding with varying gravitational acceleration.9

8
 3.5 International Space Welding Experiment (Modifications of the Universal Hand Tool)

By the late 1990s, the last time the United States had welded in space was on Skylab using
the laser welding apparatus in 1972, leaving a gap in our understanding of welding phenomena in
the space environment. Moreover, an opportunity was presented to build international collabora-
tion with former Soviet bloc states. This made it possible for the Paton Welding Institute to col-
laborate with the United States. The Paton Institute previously designed the UHT and the Vulkan
facility demonstrated on Soviet space missions. The International Space Welding Experiment
(ISWE)19 was meant to strengthen these bonds with former Soviet nations and to maintain tech-
nology supremacy in space for the United States.

The ISWE gun shown schematically in figure 419 was a modification on the UHT that was
designed about 15 years prior. First, the device was built to be more modular and have five different
attachments that can be replaced, depending on the job being performed. Initially, NASA wanted
to simply have five guns fitted with different modules to decrease the risk of changing modules. To
exchange the guns, the power needed to be removed, the integral power cable was disconnected from
the block, the hand tool was stowed, and the power cable for the new tool connected.

Beam Impingement
Shield (BIS)
Rotating Sample Holder (RSH)
Technological Block (TB)

Contamination Curtain Power Interface Box (PIB)

Support (MPE) Data Interface Box (DIB)
(Behind TB and TSA)
Tool Stowage Assembly (TSA)
Cathode Alignment Tool (CAT)

BIC Yoke

Control Panel (CP)

Sliding Foot Restraint

Trolly (SLFR) CCTV Camera
Observer Crewman
BETA Cloth Structural
Portable Foot Restraint
Closeout (MPE)

Rail Support
Assembly (MPE)

Figure 4. International space welding experimental design.17

9
 The electron beam tool weighed between 4.5 and 6.5 kg, including the integral cable. The
precise weight depended on the attached module. It was planned that the ISWE gun be tested on 2219
aluminum, 5316-T6 aluminum, 304 stainless steel, and Ti6Al-4V titanium alloy. However, the ISWE
payload was cancelled prior to flight.

3.6 New Electron Beam Gun

It is important to note that the same researcher who supervised the designs of the Vulkan
and the UHT, Boris Paton, published the design for the ‘new gun’ in 2018. Paton is perhaps the
world’s best authority on EBW in space. With persistent platforms such as the ISS and NASA’s pro-
posed Gateway, there is an increased interest in welding in space at the present time.

The electron beam concept was used instead of a laser method due to the decreased chance
of reflectance of the beam and the fact that quality welds have previously been produced with EBW
in a space environment. This new design, detailed in reference 20, was a response to the limitations
that were found in the UHT, such as the inability to easily weld thicknesses greater than 1 mm thick.
The ISS structure (for the Columbus module) is 2.57 mm in thickness. The power output of the elec-
tron beam was increased while improving safety, reliability, and ergonomics.

The new design featured a new small-sized gun weighing about 1.8 kg with a power of
2.5 kW. A triode emission system with inertial control of the beam was chosen in contrast to the
diode system used in previous welding systems. Lanthanum hexaboride cathodes were used to reduce
required wattage for the device. Accelerating voltage was capped at 10 kV as mentioned before for
the same reasons, but the current was increased to 250 mA to increase the power. Higher penetrat-
ing power was further obtained by increasing the quality of beam formation. Aluminum oxide was
chosen as the insulation material for its resistance to voltage breakdown and its ability to focus heat
easily. Reference 20 compares the new design with previous welding gun designs. The main difference
between the new gun is that it can be used manually, is 50% lighter than the UHT at 1.8 kg, and has
a higher beam power. The voltage being twice the voltage of the UHT with a voltage of 250 kV and
0.25 A compared to the 5 kV and 0.1 A present in the UHT.

Subsequent Earth tests of the device were reported. The measured bending strength of
brazed joints was equal to 200 MPa (material not specified). Furthermore, vacuum tightness showed
that all welded-brazed joints allowed getting and keeping the vacuum at 10–5 Pa. High-voltage
testing in a 5 × 10–5 Pa environment showed that metal-ceramic components can withstand voltage
greater than 1.5 times the operating voltage.

Various joint configurations were welded using the new electron beam gun (shown in sec. 6.5,
fig. 9).20 The welds appear to have high quality on terrestrial builds, but it is as of yet unknown how
this may change in microgravity.

10
 4. SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS

4.1 Contamination Issues

During the ISWE, concerns were raised that particulates produced during the welding pro-
cess may contaminate the weld environment. If welding is performed within the orbiting ISS, there
is a concern that particulates may interact with various systems such as carbon scrubbers and pay-
loads, causing required repairs to various systems to occur more frequently. This would reduce the
time astronauts could spend on other scientific projects and repairs may present additional hazards
to the astronauts that need to be assessed. Furthermore, there is the real hazard that particulates
can be inhaled by the astronauts causing health problems to the crew. To mitigate these risks, it was
suggested that a contamination curtain be constructed around the welding area to prevent contam-
ination of the various systems and crew.

The concern was then raised that if welding is performed outside the orbiting Station during
maintenance, particulates could accumulate on space systems (particularly optical surfaces or elec-
tronics) and cause damage. An example would be that particulates could accumulate on heat rejec-
tion units and cause a given module to burn up as a result. In actuality, this may not be as large of
a concern. The chances that the particulates would happen to land in these areas and continue to
accumulate until a measured change in output of the system can be detected appears to be quite
low. For a new long-term system such as Gateway, this concern deserves to be addressed and quan-
tified, as accumulation over a period of several years may be significant.

Moreover, it was suggested that the users wear an expendable secondary visor during weld-
ing so that the primary visor would not get contaminated and cloudy during the welding process.
It may be possible to recycle expendable devices in coming years as recycling systems and processes
for exploration missions are matured.

4.2 Arcing Hazards for Electron Beam Welding

During the ISWE,17,21 the possibility that the electron beam gun would cause arcing and
cause damage to the system or the astronaut was investigated. At the time, it was noted that in all
prior tests of the UHT, no arcing was observed, but these experiments all occurred in the vacuum
of space. There was a concern that, in the shuttle bay, pressure fluctuations or leaky suits could
make it more likely that arcing could occur. To test the possibility of arc discharging, tests were run
for pressures between 10–4 and 10–3 Pa with argon used to pressurize the chamber. No arcing was
observed during these tests. It is important to note that if arcing were to occur, it would most likely
occur inside the gun between the high-voltage filament and the grounded accelerating anode.

11
 4.3 Droplet Separation

In space welding, there is the concern that molten droplets could separate from the weld
pool due to a mechanical shock in the weld region, such as the astronaut putting a hand on the
weld structure with too much force. To determine the risk associated with droplet separation, James
Fragomeni and Arthur Nunes22 carried out tests using the carillon apparatus (shown in fig.  522),
where a striker was designed to fall from a preset height to impact the weld plate during the weld
process. The impact energy was then calculated to determine when a droplet would most likely
detach. The test was performed in a vacuum with standard gravity.

Weld or
Cut Site
Pendulum
Striker (4)
Beam From
UHT

Specimen
Support

Droplet

Fabric Test
Sample

Figure 5. Carillon apparatus.22

It was determined from this experiment that droplet detachment would most likely occur.
It would require a significant shock coupled with the astronaut not conforming to proper weld-
ing procedures. In the experiment, the droplet was more likely to simply flow down the plate due
to gravity. As a secondary experiment performed during the same tests, Teflon® fabric was placed
below the weld plate to catch the molten droplets and determine the effectiveness of the fabric in
resisting damage from the molten metal. The metallic droplets melted through the Teflon fabric.
However, this complete melt-through may not occur in microgravity, as the force of gravity will not
serve to accelerate the metal droplet toward the fabric. More tests are suggested to determine the
risks of metallic droplets impinging on more modern space suits.

12
 4.4 Laser Reflectance

Significant reflectance of the laser beam is expected when using a laser-based welding
method due to metallic surface’s reflectivity. There are three scenarios where laser reflectance could
present a danger to the crew or the orbiting Station:

(1) If the astronaut was improperly pointing the gun at an angle towards themselves, the
laser could be reflected back and damage the space suit.
(2) It is likely that this welding operation would involve at least two astronauts where one
can supervise the other. It is possible that the welder could point the gun at an angle, which would
reflect and damage their partner’s space suit.
(3) The laser could be reflected and damage another part of the Station, requiring addi-
tional repair in another location.

This problem will likely require a few different solutions:

(1) The laser could be designed to scatter significantly with distance such that if the laser
were to reflect back on an astronaut or another system, the power density of the beam would be
low enough to cause no damage. This would limit the working distance for the welder.
(2) The surface itself may be painted or roughened to reduce the reflectance, thereby limit-
ing possible harm to the Station or crew.
(3) Several low-power lasers could converge to a point at a desired distance from the weld-
ing apparatus. These low-power lasers may be designed with a power density such that a single
beam could not penetrate the space suit or the Station.

13
 5. APPLICATIONS OF WELDING IN SPACE

5.1 Sources of Spacecraft Damage

Space is harsh environment and orbiting stations have a variety of unique hazards they will
face throughout their lifetimes. This section seeks to explain the various ways in which cracking/
damage may occur, illustrating why welding in space is a necessity for future projects such as Gate-
way.

First, radiation from the Sun is a major factor that can have deleterious effects on space
structures. Radiation will have two effects that are important to a space structure: the inducement
of thermal cycles on the structure, and the dislodging of atoms from their lattices to interstitial
locations on the structure. Thermal cycles will occur as a result of the orbit of the Space Station.
The orbiting structure will go behind the Earth in relation to the Sun for a given period of time,
cooling the Station, and then reemerge to be heated by the Sun. These thermal cycles will weaken
the structure, causing cracking along the surface.

When electromagnetic waves of a critical range of wavelengths impinge on the surface, some
atoms will be knocked from their original lattices and move to interstitial sites and create vacancies
in their original locations. This tends to cause embrittlement of the metal, making the material less
resistant to shock and more prone to cracking.

Second, micrometeoroids and space debris will strike an orbiting Station throughout its
lifetime, as is evident on the ISS, where several solar arrays show damage caused by micrometeor-
oids. The hope is that the meteoroids will not hit any critical areas and cause emergency evacuation
of the structure. Damage from meteoroids may include damage to habitation modules, solar array
structures, pipelines, etc. An example of this form of damage appears in reference 23.

Third, vibrations within the orbiting structure may become significant. Sources of vibration
may include docking of shuttles carrying crew or supplies, space junk bouncing off the surface of
the Station, or a result of the Station maneuvering to maintain a desired altitude.

Fourth, hermetic seals could become ruptured during the operational lifetime, causing
decompression and stress on the surrounding materials.

Sources of damage are not limited to the possibilities above. However, it is clear from the
discussion presented that a space welding device is necessary for any long-term space platform.
A  welding device can decrease risk to the structure substantially by offering the ability to repair
the  Station quickly and effectively.

14
 5.2 International Space Station External Materials

A comprehensive list of the materials present on the ISS is not publicly available, so the
focus here will be on the main structural materials present externally. By surface area, aluminum
2219-T6, an age-hardened Al-Cu alloy, is by far the most ubiquitous, as it makes up the thin shell
surrounding the various modules of the Space Station. Titanium and steel are used internally as
large load-bearing members due to their high strengths and densities. The aluminum modules are
covered with layers of Kevlar®, ceramic fabrics, and other materials to form a blanket up to 10  cm
thick around the shells to reduce damage caused by micrometeoroids.

Al-2219 was chosen as the main structural material due to its high strength-to-weight ratio,
face-centered cubic (FCC) structure, and isotropic properties. It may be noteworthy to perform cal-
culations to determine if FCC materials are superior to back-centered cubic materials in radiative
environments, as it may be more difficult to dislodge atoms from a lattice if they are FCC.

Each of these three metals are readily able to be welded. However, there are concerns that
need to be addressed with each of these. When welding steel, the various cooling rates across the
weld can cause anodic/cathodic sections that may affect the structural integrity of the welds. Based
on existing literature, it is unclear if this same phenomenon may occur in aluminum and titanium.

5.3 Benefits of Welding in Space

There are several ways in which damage could occur to an orbiting Station. Currently, the
best way to fix these issues is to send replacement parts to the Station with extremely detailed proce-
dures for carrying out the repairs by the astronaut. This is costly, as space vehicle launches often run
over $100 million. The solution is to develop tools and standards astronauts may use to carry out
repairs quickly and economically. Adding an in-space welding apparatus to this arsenal could cut
costs significantly and improve repair capabilities at the same time.

Hermetic seals are perhaps the most important structures to an orbiting Station as they
often keep astronauts alive to carry out their tasks. If a leak occurs in a seal, it will need to be fixed
quickly, lest further damage occur to the structure. Welding is one of the best ways to create her-
metic seals. The ability to weld these structures without waiting for new equipment may limit the
risks to astronauts in the event of damage.

This ability for rapid repair may also become more significant as orbiting Stations such as
Gateway move further from Earth and the associated cost of shipping parts increases. It is impor-
tant to develop these technologies now so that they will be ready for future exploration missions.

At the same time, designers should maintain awareness of the various metal AM devices
that may be tested aboard the ISS in the next few years; these are discussed in a  later section.
Assuming that these devices are successfully demonstrated on the ISS, they will greatly aid repair
operations in the future by enabling broken parts to be rapidly manufactured and replaced aboard
the Station. This creates an opportunity that furthers the utility of an in-space welding apparatus.
For example, suppose a large crack develops on the outside structure of the ISS and a simple weld

15
will not work. These AM devices could produce a plate of the desired size and an astronaut can
weld the plate to the outside structure as a quick repair. As technology improves, it is the right time
to develop repair methods for space vehicles to increase cost effectiveness and therefore increase
opportunities for sustained and safer human space exploration.

Currently, many spacecraft structures are designed to withstand high launch loads. Struc-
tures built in the space environment can be designed only for their operational use scenario.
Removing launch load requirements means material can be used only where it is needed to ensure
survival of their structure, resulting in more optimized and efficient designs. However, fusion weld-
ing processes operated in the space environment may result in greater porosity due to a lack of
buoyancy-driven convection. On-orbit welding experiments will be necessary to derive knockdown
factors to facilitate welded joint design.

One challenge to implementation of on-orbit assembly, repair, and manufacturing technolo-

gies is the current design of systems based on orbital replacement units. If a system is not designed
for servicing, the utility of these techniques to extend a system’s life or provide an on-demand
repair will be limited.

5.4 Joint Configurations

There appears to be no limit to the types of joints that may be welded in space, but an issue
would arise if an older gun, such as the UHT, were chosen as the standard device. The penetration
depth for this machine is low at about 1 to 2 mm. Any joint configuration that would require a section
behind the surface material, such as a finger-flanged weld, would not work well as a result. The ‘new’
electron beam gun solves this problem by increasing the power. By designing a weld gun with a higher
power, there does not appear to be a reason why a specific joint configuration would be unweldable.

16
 6. STATE OF THE ART FOR ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING DEVICES
FOR IN-SPACE USE

There are several processes currently being considered for manufacture of metallic parts in
the microgravity, crewed environment. A summary of these technologies is provided for complete-
ness. Due to the upper limit on component size imposed by the build chamber, it may become
necessary to weld parts together to form an assembly or to integrate a component into an existing
system. Several of the technologies use welding-based processes to additively manufacture metal-
lics. Welding-derived AM processes could also be used in the external space environment, including
on planetary surfaces, to produce large structures.

6.1 Vulcan Unit

Vulcan23,24 is a metal AM device currently being developed by Made in Space for use
aboard the ISS. The project is currently in a Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) contract
SBIR phase II-E development effort. The Vulcan system will include a metal AM unit for metals
and polymers, a computer numerical control (CNC) mill, an environmental control unit, and
a robotic arm to assist in removing the part from the build plate and fixturing the part for machin-
ing. The Vulcan uses a hybrid additive process incorporating wire feed and arc deposition. In
ground-based trials, Vulcan has successfully printed aluminum alloys and titanium. A concept
design for the Vulcan is given in figure 6, along with a part printed using the system.25

Figure 6. Vulcan apparatus25 (image from Made in Space).

17
 6.2 Ultrasonic Additive Manufacturing Process

The ultrasonic additive manufacturing (UAM) process23,24 is currently under an SBIR

phase II initiative by UltraTech Machinery and Fabrisonic, Inc. A prototype design is pictured
in figure 7.25 The process operates by vibrating adjoining foils to remove an oxide layer and cre-
ate a metallurgical bond. Under phase II, the companies are implementing a new sonotrode to
scale down the process and CNC mill to finish the parts. The advantage with this method is its low
power usage and that it can occur at room temperature.

Figure 7. UAM concept25 (image from Ultra Tech Machinery and Fabrisonic).

6.3 Metal Advanced Manufacturing Bot-Assisted Assembly

The metal advanced manufacturing bot-assisted assembly (MAMBA)23,24 is a project by

Tethers Unlimited and is currently funded under an SBIR phase II. It is made up of three systems:
a press that processes virgin or scrap metal into a metal ingot, a CNC mill designed for micrograv-
ity to shape a part from the ingot, and a robotic assistant to facilitate automated processing of
materials/parts through the system.

6.4 Sintered Inductive Metal Printer With Laser Explosure

Sintered inductive metal printer with laser explosure (SIMPLE)23,24 is a 3D metal printer in
which a ferromagnetic wire metal filament is heated to its Curie temperature through induction and
the metal is deposited on a build platform where a low-power laser completes the melt. SIMPLE is
currently being developed by Techshot, Inc. A rendering of the system is shown in figure 8.25

18
 Figure 8. SIMPLE device24 (image from Techshot).

6.5 Techshot Fabrication Laboratory

The Fabrication Laboratory (FabLab)23,24 is a fully integrated multimaterial fabrication

apparatus currently being developed by Techshot in a phase A program. The system is intended to
be used aboard the ISS. Phase A focuses on a demonstration of a metal manufacturing capability
and development of a ground-based prototype compatible with ISS constraints. These constraints
include a 2-kW maximum power draw, 260-kg weight limit, and dimensions compatible with an
EXPRESS (Expedite the Processing of Experiments to Space Station) rack. The system must also
include an in-process monitoring capability. Crew time requirements need to be minimized since it
is not anticipated that astronauts will be able to tend to manufacturing systems on long-duration
space missions. The configuration for the Techshot FabLab is shown to the left in figure 9.25

19
 Figure 9. FabLab concept configuration.25

The FabLab seeks to increase astronaut efficiency by providing autonomous process and
verification and validation services in a system designed for microgravity operation. A related tech-
nology to support in-space manufacturing, the Empyrean FabLab, is in development by Tethers
Unlimited. This unit will incorporate a post-process dimensional inspection and a robotic arm for
manipulating manufactured parts.

20
 7. RECENT NASA-SUPPORTED RESEARCH ON WELDING IN SPACE

NASA also has recently funded work on development of in-space welding capabilities
through the SBIR program. Two of the projects are highlighted in this section. These development
efforts represent work under the on-orbit servicing, assembly, and manufacturing (OSAM) initiative.

Under a phase I SBIR, Made in Space is developing a mobile end-effector laser device
(MELD) capable of on-site, on-demand joining and repair of space structures. MELD is a self-
sufficient end-effector that interfaces with a robotic arm and uses the arm for mobility. Key subsys-
tems are directly contained in the end-effector such as a power supply, laser system, cooling system,
vision system, and avionics. This system is programmed to be autonomous and relies on minimal
human interaction. Joining of metal alloys, ceramics, and other natural resources are possible. The
MELD system provides a tool that applies to many use cases and repair functions that are vital to
future long-duration exploration missions. The MELD prototype is shown in figure 10.

Figure 10. MELD prototype (image from

Made in Space).

21
 Also under a phase I SBIR, Busek Co. Inc. is developing a semiautonomous, teleoperated
welding robot for joining metals in space. The welding robot will be an adaptation of a Busek-
developed system called SOUL (satellite on umbilical line) with a suitable weld head attached to it.
The SOUL welding platform is illustrated in figure 11.

Notional space
structure being Image of existing SOUL
welded or repaired carrying simulated
electron beam welder

Welding Electron Beam

Umbilical Line (power and

commands/telemetry) from
host space vehicle (HSV)

Figure 11. SOUL satellite platform for welding (image

from Busek Co. Inc.).

22
 8. SUMMARY

An in-space welding capability is an important supporting technology for long-duration,

long-endurance space missions NASA will undertake beyond ISS. Designs for large structures, such
as habitats and space telescopes, are primarily driven by launch considerations, including payload
fairing constraints and launch loads. An in-space material joining capability can potentially elimi-
nate constraints on the system imposed by launch, enabling the construction of larger, more com-
plex and more optimized structures. Welding is a complementary capability to AM technologies
being developed by NASA and commercial partners to facilitate in-space, on-demand production
of spares and fabrication of larger than launch payload fairing structures. Welding is also a critical
capability for repair scenarios (e.g., repair of damage to a structure from micrometeroid impacts).

23
 REFERENCES

1. Avduevsky, V.S.: Manufacturing in Space: Processing Problems and Advances, MIR Publishers,
Moscow, USSR, 248 pp., 1985.

2. Avduyevsky, V.S.; Grishin, S.D.; Leskov, L.V.; et al.: Scientific Foundations of Space Manufac-
turing. Advances in Science and Technology in the USSR Technology Series, V.S. Avduyevsky
(Ed.), MIR Publishers, Moscow, USSR, 1984.

3. Barta, C.; Triska, A.; Femdrych, F.; and Krcova, E.: “Directional Solidification of the PbCl2-
AgCl Eutectic System Under Various Gravitational Conditions,” Microgravity Sci. Technol.,
Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 26–32, 1991.

4. Ishikawa, M.; Nakamura, H.; and Yoda, S.: “Self-similarity of Later-stage Dendrite Growth
Under Low Gravity,” Microgravity Sci. Technol., Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 214–218, 1994.

5. Minagawa, H.; Suzuki, Y.; Shimokawa, K.; et al.: “Structure and Compositional Analysis
of  In-Sb Alloys Produced by Directional Solidification in Microgravity and Normal Gravity
Conditions,” Microgravity Sci. Technol., Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 58–61, 1996.

6. National Research Council, Microgravity Research Opportunities for the 1990s, The National
Academies Press, Washington, DC, <https://doi.org/10.17226/12284>, 1995.

7. Tandon, K.N.; Saadat, F.; Chaturvedi, M.C.; and Cahoon, J.R.: “Microgravity Effects
on  Directionally Solidified Castings (Ground Based Experiments on Al-4% Cu Alloys),”
Microgravity Sci. Technol., Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 19–25, 1991.

8. Paton, B.E.; and Lapchinskii, V.F.: Welding in Space and Related Technologies, 1st ed.,
Cambridge International Science Publishing, Limited, Kiev, Ukrain, 121 pp., 1997.

9. Workman, G.L.; and Kaukler, W.F.: “Laser Welding in Space,” Houston, TX, <https://ntrs.
nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19910018227 2020-03-10T11:31:42+00:00Z>, 1989.

10. Askeland, D.R.; Fulay, P.P.; and Wright, W.J.: The Science and Engineering of Materials,
SI Edition (6th ed.), CL-Engineering, p. 313, 2011.

11. Wang, G.; and Tandon, K.N.: “The Microstructural Changes During Laser Welding of Stain-
less Steel under Reduced Gravity Environment,” Microgravity Sci. Technol., Vol. 6, No. 2,
pp.  96–100, 1993.

12. Kassemi, S.A.; and Ostrach, S.: “Nature of buoyancy-driven flows in a reduced-gravity environ-
ment,” AIAAJ, Vol. 30, No. 7, pp. 1815–1818, doi.org/10.2514/3.11141, July 1992.

24
13. Kou, S.: Welding Metallurgy, 2nd ed., Wiley-Interscience, 2003.

14. Kamotani, Y.; Ostrach, S.; and Pline, A.: “Analysis of velocity data taken in Surface Tension
Driven Convection Experiment in microgravity,” Phys. Fluids, Vol. 6, No. 11, pp. 3601–3609,
doi.org/10.1063/1.868432, 1994.

15. Tang, H.; Tang, Z.M.; Hu, W.R.; et al.: “Numerical Simulation of g-jitter Effects on Half
Floating Zone Convection Under Microgravity Environment,” Microgravity Sci. Technol.,
Vol.  9, No. 1, pp. 28–34, 1996.

16. Ellison, J.; Ahmadi, G.; Regel, L.; and Wilcox, W.: “Particle motion in a liquid under g-jitter
excitation,” Microgravity Sci. Technol., Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 140–147, November 1995.

17. Yasuhiro, S.; Sato,T.; and Ismaishi, N.: “Three Dimensional Oscillatory Marangoni Flow in
Half-zone of Pr=1.02 Fluid,” Microgravity Sci. Technol., Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 144–153, 1997.

18. Poorman, R.M.: “Skylab M551 Metals Melting Experiment,” NASA-TM-X-64960, NASA
Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL, May 1975.

19. Benfield, M.P.J.; and Landrum, D.B.: “The International Space Welding Experiment,”
J. Technol. Transfer, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 25–38, September 1988.

20. Paton, B.E.; Lobanov, L.M.; Naidich, Y.V.; and Asnis, Y.A.: “New electron beam gun for
welding in space,” Sci. Technol. Weld. Join, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 1–7, October 2018.

21. Nunes, Jr., A.C.; Russell, C.; Vaughn, J.; et al.: “Assessment of Corona/Arcing Hazard for Elec-
tron Beam Welding in Space Shuttle Bay at LEO for ISWE: Test Results,” NASA-TM-108525,
NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL, November 1996.

22. Fragomeni, J.M.; and Nunes, Jr., A.C.: “Dynamics of space welding impact and correspond-
ing safety welding study,” Acta Astronaut., Vol. 54, No. 6, pp. 399–412, doi: 10.1016/s0094-
5765(03)00160-7, 2004.

23. Svemirac, “Space Debris - What is it? Problems and Solutions,” Steemit, <https://steemit.com/
steemstem/@svemirac/space-debris-how-it-s-made-problems-and-solutions>, 2017.

24. Prater, T.; Werkheiser, N.; Ledbetter, F.; and Morgan, K.: “In-Space Manufacturing at NASA
Marshall Space Flight Center: A Portfolio of Fabrication and Recycling Technology Develop-
ment for the International Space Station,” NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville,
AL, <https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20180006401.pdf>, 2018.

25. Prater, T.; Risdon, D.; Edmunson, J.; et al.: “Overview of the In-Space Manufacturing Technol-
ogy Portfolio,” NASA & ISS National Lab Microgravity Materials Science Workshop, Atlanta,
GA, <https://www.issnationallab.org/wp-content/uploads/09_Tracie-Prater_NASA.pdf>,
July  29, 2019.

25
 Form Approved
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188
The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining
the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing
this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operation and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302.
Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid
OMB control number.
PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

01–04–2020 Technical Memorandum
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

A Review of Welding in Space and Related Technologies
5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

N. Naden* and T.J. Prater
5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

REPORT NUMBER
George C. Marshall Space Flight Center
Huntsville, AL 35812 M–1505
9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA

Washington, DC 20546–0001 11. SPONSORING/MONITORING REPORT NUMBER

NASA/TM—2020–220557
12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Unclassified-Unlimited
Subject Category 29
Availability: NASA STI Information Desk (757–864–9658)
13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Prepared by the Materials and Processes Laboratory, Engineering Directorate

*The University of Alabama in Huntsville
14. ABSTRACT

This Technical Memorandum (TM) provides a high-level summary of the history of on-orbit welding
experiments, modeling efforts, and relevant microgravity materials science research. The TM also includes
a survey of recently funded work on the in-space welding process and hardware development. This work
was completed under the Virtual Student Federal Service (VSFS) program.

15. SUBJECT TERMS

welding, in-space welding, microgravity materials science, materials, on-orbit manufacturing

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT 18. NUMBER OF 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON
a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE PAGES STI Help Desk at email: [email protected]

U U U UU 36 19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

STI Help Desk at: 757–864–9658
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)
Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18

26
National Aeronautics and NASA/TM—2020–
Space Administration
IS02
George C. Marshall Space Flight Center
Huntsville, Alabama 35812

A Review of Welding in Space

and Related Technologies
T.J. Prater
Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama

N. Naden
The University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama

March 2020