August 2010 

NASA/TM-2010-216728/Volume I 

NESC-RP-08-75 

 

NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Program 

Recommendations for Technical Requirements for 

Inclusion in Aerospace Battery Procurements 

David S. Jung 

Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland 

Michelle A. Manzo 

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio 
NASA STI Program . . . in Profile

 Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to 

the advancement of aeronautics and space science. 

The NASA scientific and technical information (STI) 

program plays a key part in helping NASA maintain 

this important role. 

 The NASA STI program operates under the 

auspices of the Agency Chief Information Officer. It 

collects, organizes, provides for archiving, and 

disseminates NASA’s STI. The NASA STI program 

provides access to the NASA Aeronautics and Space 

Database and its public interface, the NASA Technical 

Report Server, thus providing one of the largest 

collections of aeronautical and space science STI in 

the world. Results are published in both non-NASA 

channels and by NASA in the NASA STI Report 

Series, which includes the following report types: 

 TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of 

completed research or a major significant phase 

of research that present the results of NASA 

programs and include extensive data or 

theoretical analysis. Includes compilations of 

significant scientific and technical data and 

information deemed to be of continuing 

reference value. NASA counterpart of peerreviewed formal professional papers, but having 

less stringent limitations on manuscript length 

and extent of graphic presentations. 

 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientific 

and technical findings that are preliminary or of 

specialized interest, e.g., quick release reports, 

working papers, and bibliographies that contain 

minimal annotation. Does not contain extensive 

analysis. 

 CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientific and 

technical findings by NASA-sponsored 

contractors and grantees. 

 CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected 

papers from scientific and technical 

conferences, symposia, seminars, or other 

meetings sponsored or co-sponsored by NASA. 

 SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, 

technical, or historical information from NASA 

programs, projects, and missions, often 

concerned with subjects having substantial 

public interest. 

 TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. Englishlanguage translations of foreign scientific and 

technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission. 

 Specialized services also include creating custom 

thesauri, building customized databases, and 

organizing and publishing research results. 

 For more information about the NASA STI 

program, see the following: 

 Access the NASA STI program home page at 

http://www.sti.nasa.gov

 E-mail your question via the Internet to 

help@sti.nasa.gov

 Fax your question to the NASA STI Help Desk 

at 443-757-5803 

 Phone the NASA STI Help Desk at 

443-757-5802 

 Write to: 

 NASA STI Help Desk 

 NASA Center for AeroSpace Information 

 7115 Standard Drive 

 Hanover, MD 21076-1320
National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration 

Langley Research Center 

Hampton, Virginia 23681-2199 

 

August 2010 

NASA/TM-2010-216728/Volume I 

NESC-RP-08-75 

 

NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Program 

Recommendations for Technical Requirements for 

Inclusion in Aerospace Battery Procurements 

David S. Jung 

Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland 

Michelle A. Manzo 

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio 
Available from: 

NASA Center for AeroSpace Information 

7115 Standard Drive 

Hanover, MD 21076-1320 

443-757-5802 

The use of trademarks or names of manufacturers in the report is for accurate reporting and does not 

constitute an official endorsement, either expressed or implied, of such products or manufacturers by the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

1 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

 

 

Volume I: Technical Assessment Report

NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Program

Part 2:

Recommendations for Technical 

Requirements for Inclusion in Aerospace 

Battery Procurements

February 18, 2010
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

2 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

Report Approval and Revision History 

NOTE: This document was approved at the February 18, 2010, NRB. This document was 

submitted to the NESC Director on February 23, 2010, for configuration control.

Approved

Version:

Original Signature on File 2/24/10

1.0 NESC Director Date

Version Description of Revision Office of Primary 

Responsibility Effective Date

1.0 Initial Release

Ms. Michelle A. Manzo, 

Chief, Electrochemistry 

Branch, Glenn Research 

Center

02/18/10
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

3 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

Table of Contents

Volume I: Technical Assessment Report

1.0 Notification and Authorization....................................................................................4

2.0 Signature Page...............................................................................................................5

3.0 Team List.......................................................................................................................6

3.1 Acknowledgements.........................................................................................................6

4.0 Executive Summary......................................................................................................8

4.1 Part 2: Recommendations for Technical Requirements for Inclusion in Aerospace 

Battery Procurements......................................................................................................9

4.1.1 Proposed Solution .............................................................................................10

4.1.2 Mitigation..........................................................................................................10

5.0 Assessment Plan ..........................................................................................................12

6.0 Problem Description and Proposed Solutions..........................................................13

6.1 Problem Description .....................................................................................................13

6.2 Proposed Solution .........................................................................................................15

7.0 Data Analysis...............................................................................................................15

8.0 Findings and NESC Recommendations....................................................................18

8.1 Findings.........................................................................................................................18

8.2 NESC Recommendations..............................................................................................18

9.0 Definition of Terms.....................................................................................................19

10.0 Acronyms List .............................................................................................................21

List of Tables

Table 7.0-1. Specifics of Battery Handling for Ni-H2 and Li-Ion Chemistries........................17

Volume II: Appendix (stand-alone volume)

Appendix A. Hubble Space Telescope (HST) Nickel-Hydrogen Battery and Battery Module

Handling Plan 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

4 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

Volume I: Technical Assessment Report

1.0 Notification and Authorization 

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Working Group (NAFBSWG) was chartered within the NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

(NESC) on October 5, 2006. Under this charter, NAFBSWG was authorized by Mr. Ralph R. 

Roe, the NESC Director, at the NESC Review Board (NRB) to develop an annual plan to address 

critical battery-related issues for the Agency and the aerospace community. Ms. Michelle 

Manzo, Chief of the Electrochemistry Branch at Glenn Research Center (GRC), serves as Chair

of the NAFBSWG.

The Initial Plan was presented to the NRB on January 25, 2007. It involved a series of tasks 

addressing pressing issues related to aerospace battery implementation. The Final Report for 

Year 1 (Part 1) was approved by the NRB on July 10, 2008. The Final Report for Year 1 (Parts 2 

and 3, Volumes I and II each) were approved by the NRB on February 18, 2010.

The key stakeholders for this assessment are the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate 

(ESMD), Science Mission Directorate (SMD), and Space Operations Mission Directorate 

(SOMD).
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

5 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

2.0 Signature Page

Submitted by: 

Team Signature Page on File – 5/24/10

_____________________________________ ______________________________________

Mr. David S. Jung Date Ms. Michelle A. Manzo Date 

Significant Contributor: 

______________________________________

Dr. Hari Vaidynathan Date

Signatories declare the findings and observations complied in the report are factually based from 

data extracted from Program/Project documents, contractor reports, and open literature, and/or 

generated from independently conducted tests, analysis, and inspections.
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

6 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

3.0 Team List

Name Discipline Organization/Location

Core Team

Michelle Manzo NESC Lead GRC

Jeff Brewer Electrical Power MSFC

Ratnakumar Bugga Electrochemistry JPL

Penni Dalton Electrochemistry GRC

Eric Darcy Electrochemistry JSC

Judith Jeevarajan Electrochemistry JSC

David Jung Electrochemistry GSFC

Leonine Lee Electrochemistry GSFC

Barbara McKissock Electrochemistry GRC

Thomas Miller Electrochemistry GRC

David Olsen Electrical Power KSC

Gopalakrishna Rao1 Electrochemistry GSFC

Concha Reid Electrochemistry GRC

Hari Vaidynathan Electrochemistry Lockheed Martin

Pamela Throckmorton MTSO Program Analyst LaRC

Administrative Support 

Terri Derby Project Coordinator LaRC/ATK

Donna Gilchrist Planning and Control Analyst LaRC/ATK

Carolyn Snare Technical Writer LaRC/ATK

3.1 Acknowledgements

In Memoriam: This report is dedicated to the memory of our dear colleague Dr. Gopalakrishna

(Gopal) Rao. Dr. Rao supported the Power Systems Branch at Goddard Space Flight Center 

(GSFC) for 19 years until his untimely death on May 15, 2008.

GSFC, under Dr. Rao’s leadership, was the implementing organization for this task. Mr. David 

Jung, Dr. Hari Viadyanathan, and Ms. Michelle Manzo completed this report after Dr. Rao’s 

passing. 

The assessment team would like to specifically acknowledge contributions from the following:

 Financial/Contracting: Ms. Pam Throckmorton 

 The support team from Alliant Techsystems, Inc. (ATK) at Langley Research Center 

(LaRC) provided excellent support: Ms. Terri Derby for her efforts in meeting

 

1 Dr. Gopalakrishna Rao served as a core member of this team until his death on May 15, 2008.
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

7 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

coordination and documentation, and Ms. Carolyn Snare and Mr. Eric Pope for technical 

editing

 Peer Reviewers: Mr. Mitchell Davis, Mr. George Dakermanji, Mr. Steve Gentz, Mr. 

Denney Keys, Dr. Chris Iannello, and Mr. Tim Trenkle
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

8 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

4.0 Executive Summary

In the summer of 2006, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) requested that all

Super Problem Resolution Teams (SPRTs) (now called Technical Discipline Teams (TDTs)) be 

solicited for proposals for Discipline Advancing work. Guidance for proposals included the 

identification of tasks which address activities that no single program/organization may be able 

(or reasonably expected) to fund, but where critical knowledge (such as fundamental 

understanding, a specification, basis for risk assessment, etc.) was lacking. The NASA 

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems Steering Committee was approached to develop a response to 

this request. Relevant battery-system issues of concern were identified and prioritized. Tasks 

aimed at addressing the most critical of these persistent, Agency-wide technical problems were

identified. These tasks became the basis of the proposal (NESC PL-07-02/06-069-I: NASA 

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems Working Group (NAFBSWG) Annual Plan) that was accepted 

by the NESC Review Board (NRB) on October 5, 2006. 

At the same time, the NAFBSWG was chartered within the NESC. The NAFBSWG was tasked 

to complete these tasks, and to propose future work to address battery-related, Agency-wide 

issues on an annual basis. In its first year of operation, this effort addressed various aspects of 

the validation and verification (V&V) of aerospace battery systems for NASA missions. 

NAFBSWG members performed studies, discussed issues, and in many cases, tested programs to 

generate recommendations and guidelines to reduce risk associated with implementing battery 

technology in the aerospace industry. 

The reporting on these tasks has been split into three Parts, as identified below2. The subsequent 

Final Report for this assessment has also been split into three documents, one for each Part: 

1) Part 1: Generic Safety, Handling, and Qualification Guidelines for Lithium-Ion (Li-Ion) 

Batteries (NESC Report Number RP-08-75) :

a. Li-Ion Performance Assessment.

b. Generation of a Guidelines Document that Addresses Safety and Handling and 

Qualification of Li-Ion Batteries (a general guidelines document was developed 

that was supplemented by the following studies addressing specific Li-Ion 

batteries concerns).

i. Definition of Conditions Required for Using Pouch Cells in Aerospace 

Missions.

 

2 Current order of outline and Part numbers are different from original outline in Part 1 of Final Report. Part 1 is 

now Part 2, Part 2 is now Part 3, and Part 3 is now Part 1. The current Final Report Part 1 documents (Vols. I and 

II), follow the updated order, reflected in the outline shown above.
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

9 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

ii. High-Voltage Risk Assessment: Limitations of Internal Protective Devices 

in High-Voltage/High-Capacity Batteries using Li-Ion Cylindrical 

Commercial Cell.

iii. Definition of Safe Limits for Charging Li-Ion Cells.

c. Availability of Source Materials for Li-Ion Batteries.

d. Technical Communications Related to Aerospace Batteries (NASA Battery

Workshop).

2) Part 2: Recommendations for Technical Requirements for Inclusion in Aerospace 

Battery Procurements3

3) Part 3: Wet Life of Nickel-Hydrogen (Ni-H2) Batteries.

This document is Part 2 of the Final Report and focuses on Recommendations for Technical 

Requirements for Inclusion in Aerospace Battery Procurements. Assessment 06-069-I Final 

Report Part 1 is complete and has been catalogued as NESC Report RP-08-75. All three Parts of 

the Final Report collectively present the results of the NAFBSWG efforts that were initiated in 

Fiscal Year 2007.

4.1 Part 2: Recommendations for Technical Requirements for Inclusion in 

Aerospace Battery Procurements 

For many NASA missions, the power system is purchased as a package that is separately 

integrated into the spacecraft. The battery specifications for this package generally include only 

top-level functional requirements related to the battery system (i.e., performance-based 

requirements). The high-level specifications often result in limited visibility into the 

manufacturing process and cell and battery handling. This limited access to data on critical 

processes such as cell activation and cell balancing, combined with unspecified conditions for 

reconditioning, temperature limits, and storage conditions, places the NASA technical 

community at a disadvantage and limits their ability to ensure the battery will perform to meet 

mission requirements. 

In recent missions, such as Tracking and Data Relay Satellite (TDRS), Cloud-Aerosol Light 

Detection and Ranging Instrument (LIDAR) and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observations 

(CALIPSO), and Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES), the problems 

associated with limited insight became an issue when performance issues arose and prompted

NASA interventions at the launch readiness phase that resulted in costly launch delays. These

problems could have been mitigated had the battery procurement included detailed technical

specifications and requirements that addressed performance, handling, and storage. 

 

3 Title formally identified as Recommendations for Binding Procurements.
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

10 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

4.1.1 Proposed Solution

Develop recommendations for aerospace batteries which outline the technical requirements, data 

deliverables, and critical processes that require oversight in order to be considered for inclusion 

in the procurement documents of a satellite power system. 

4.1.2 Mitigation

A set of recommendations outlining elements to be considered for inclusion in battery 

procurements was generated to ensure that NASA has the data and insight into processes related 

to battery development, delivery, and handling. These battery system recommendations will be 

made available for consideration at the procurement initiation for a satellite power system. 

Adopting these recommendations would ensure that minimum requirements (from a NASA 

battery system engineering perspective) would be addressed and provide greater involvement 

and definition of the battery portion of the power system. It will help reduce overall costs and 

mitigate risks from the NASA perspective. The recommendations call for a greater level of 

NASA involvement in specification design, verification, qualification, and use of batteries. 

NESC recommendations, directed toward future Programs and Projects that will use aerospace 

batteries, are summarized below: 

 Identified aerospace battery technical requirements contained herein should be 

considered for inclusion in the initial procurement package/contract.

 NASA should verify/confirm that contractors and their sub-contractors are complying 

with NASA standards of workmanship.

 A cell-level manufacturing control document (MCD) containing the items listed below 

should be provided to NASA for review and approval. Approval is required for the 

original document and any subsequent modifications that affect the relevant cell build.

o Cell design data

o Composition of electrodes and electrolytes 

o Source material specification and history

o Mechanical cell part specification and tracking

o Process descriptions and controls

o Procedure for cell activation

 Manufacturing plant audits and additional lot level screening can be considered as 

alternates to the MCD insight for batteries that are fabricated from commercial-off-theshelf (COTS) cells. 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

11 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

 A battery-level MCD containing the items listed below should be provided to NASA for 

review and approval. Approval is required for the original document and any subsequent 

modifications that affect the relevant cell build.

o Battery design data

o Cell specifications

o Battery product information, mechanical cell parts 

o Procedure for cell matching and selection

 A battery-handling plan that addresses the items below should be provided by the 

contractor to NASA for review and approval: 

o Storage and transportation 

o Temperature limits during inactive periods

o Reconditioning procedures and sequence

o Procedures for managing charge/discharge and storage of the batteries if the 

launch is postponed

 Delivery of the defined data and information (MCD and handling plan) should occur at 

least one week prior to review meetings to allow NASA sufficient time for review and 

approval.
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

12 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

5.0 Assessment Plan

The NAFBSWG provided a framework to address manufacturing and performance issues related 

to flight-battery systems technology and applications for NASA missions that require batteries.

This assessment supported the V&V of aerospace-battery systems for NASA missions. It 

enabled the implementation and execution of critical test programs to reduce risk by addressing 

wide-ranging technology issues. These issues affect the safety and success of future NASA 

missions.

The objectives of the NAFBSWG are: 

o Develop, maintain, and provide tools for the validation of aerospace battery technologies.

o Accelerate the readiness of technology advances and provide infusion paths for emerging 

technologies.

o Provide the database and guidelines for technology selection that can be used across 

mission directorates.

o Disseminate validation and assessment tools, along with quality assurance and 

availability information, to the NASA and aerospace battery communities.

o Provide problem-resolution expertise and capability within the Agency and the aerospace 

community.

During this assessment, it was determined that the analysis could be split into three distinct 

parts4: 

1. Part 1: Generic Safety, Handling, and Qualification Guidelines for Lithium-Ion (Li-Ion) 

Batteries (NESC Report Number RP-08-75)

2. Part 2: Recommendations for Technical Requirements for Inclusion in Aerospace 

Battery Procurements5

3. Part 3: Wet Life of Nickel-Hydrogen (Ni-H2) Batteries

As a result, the final report was also divided into three separate documents, each addressing one 

of the three Parts. This document addresses Part 2.

Dr. Gopalakrishna Rao and later, Mr. David Jung, served as Lead for the generation of technical 

recommendations for inclusion in aerospace battery procurements (presented in the Final Report,

Part 2). Lockheed Martin (LM)-Communications Satellite (COMSAT) Technical Services was 

tasked through NESC funding to assist in the document preparation. 

 

4 Current order of outline and Part numbers are different from original outline in Part 1 of Final Report. Part 1 is 

now Part 2, Part 2 is now Part 3, and Part 3 is now Part 1. The current Final Report Part 1 documents (Vols. I and 

II), follow the updated order, reflected in the outline shown above.

5 Title formally identified as Recommendations for Binding Procurements.
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

13 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

The technical approach for Part 2 consisted of:

o Review of current procurement practices for batteries.

o Discussions with NASA Project and Center technical personnel. 

o Development/identification of example procedures, relevant for charge/discharge and for 

storage and handling, that include launch site and transportation practices.

o Determination of the adequacy of data/information to develop on-orbit battery 

management and to resolve on-orbit anomalies.

o Development of procurement guidelines for incorporation into technical requirements for 

inclusion in aerospace battery procurements for power systems.

6.0 Problem Description and Proposed Solutions

6.1 Problem Description

In the past, NASA has acquired batteries in the form of a power system package for integration 

into the spacecraft. This type of performance-based procurement has a drawback, as it addresses 

only top-level performance specifications and provides limited visibility into obtaining batteryhandling procedures during processing and integration and at the launch site. Without such 

definition, it is not uncommon for the opinion of NASA engineers related to battery handling to 

differ from that of the battery manufacturers. This often resulted in protracted discussions about 

processes and procedures related to battery handling. From a contractor’s perspective, technical 

decisions may focus on demonstrating the minimum performance requirements while 

minimizing costs. In contrast, NASA is interested in ensuring long-term performance that could 

be compromised by improper handling or enhanced by special handling.

NASA engineers responsible for the batteries on programs like TDRS, GOES, and CALIPSO

faced insufficient technical information regarding battery handling, storage, and reconditioning 

prior to launch.

CALIPSO is a collaboration between LaRC and the French Space Agency, Centre National 

d'Etudes Spatiale. LaRC serves as the lead for the mission and provides overall program 

management, systems engineering, payload missions operations, science data validation, and 

data processing and archival. GSFC, as direct technical support to LaRC, provides program 

management and launch oversight for the CALIPSO mission. During mission development, 

GSFC had limited visibility into the definition of the battery system. This was one of the first 

NASA missions to use Li-Ion batteries and as such, detailed knowledge and approval of the 

battery handling plan were critical to the safety and success of the mission. The limited access to 

this information impeded preparations for the launch. 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

14 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

For the GOES Mission, insufficient or nonexistent documentation related to battery 

reconditioning led to disagreements regarding the specifics of the schedules, methods, and 

support. Similarly, lack of specification on how the battery should be handled during launch 

delays led to debates related to the state-of-charge, the recovery method to be employed after 

extended open circuit stands, the identification of what telemetry should be monitored, and what 

values/limits should be set for action (e.g., cell voltage spread, end-of-discharge voltages, 

temperatures, pressures). These factors were not identified until weeks before the launch and 

vehicle delays required the GOES Project to direct the contractor to initiate actions that the 

contractor felt were unnecessary. This led to disagreements between the contracted GOES 

Project management and NASA engineering that required Agency (Headquarters) intervention. 

The issues previously noted could have been minimized had there been defined technical 

requirements in place for the batteries and their handling. The effort described in this document 

provides a set of recommendations to guide contract document preparation for procuring Ni-H2

and Li-Ion batteries for aerospace applications to avoid the potential pitfalls and problems related 

to the lack of in-depth specifications regarding battery processing, performance, and handling. 

Ni-H2 and Li-Ion batteries have been flight tested in a number of missions. As the more mature 

technology, Ni-H2 has a well-documented history related to design specifications for specific 

mission types. Through experience, certain sizes and capacities have been qualified and 

inappropriate cell designs have been rejected. This extensive experience with Ni-H2 batteries 

provided the basis for the recommendations identified in this document. 

At present, the procurement document for aerospace batteries as part of the power system 

includes a specification for the batteries, statement of work, deliverable items list, and schedule 

milestones. There is a need for a more detailed statement of work that provides for more 

frequent and more detailed inspections of the cells and batteries during construction and 

generally more insight into the processes at the manufacturer’s plant. Document delivery must 

occur at least a week before the major design reviews (Preliminary and Critical Design) to 

provide adequate time for review. 

Acceptance procedures have been developed that are refined for each mission; introducing 

specificity, identifying constraints, and elaborating electrochemical and thermal properties. This 

level of customization is not achieved with performance-based spacecraft bus procurement

requirements. 

For Ni-H2 cells, there are currently a number of options for the cell design (e.g., anode and 

cathode compositions, configuration, active core, electrolyte composition, seals, etc.) and the

advantages and limitations of these options are documented. There have been cell builds where 

manufacturing problems and poor workmanship contributed to anomalous performance that 

resulted in delayed completions of hardware and cost overruns. Customers and in-house 

engineering staff of the cell/battery manufacturers inspected the manufacturing steps and 

unearthed and resolved many problems that had surfaced for Ni-H2 and Li-Ion batteries. In past 

missions there are examples where batteries were exposed to high-temperature excursions or cell 

reversal during battery testing. These types of problems require special handling for recovery 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

15 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

and can manifest as performance issues later in life. Knowledge of this type of information is 

critical to the long-term handling of batteries in order to maximize performance for NASA 

missions. 

6.2 Proposed Solution 

The fabrication and delivery of batteries for aerospace applications consist of several steps, 

including preparation of the performance, manufacturing, qualification, and test specifications 

for the individual cells and the battery; sequencing of the design, readiness, and acceptance 

reviews; and scheduling the manufacturing, assembly, documentation, and final delivery of 

various components. The contract document for the vendor should specify the delivery details 

for various documents and the final product. The most important element in the contract 

documentation is the inclusion of mandatory inspection points that address battery 

manufacturing and test procedures, including sequencing steps in the manufacturing process, and 

application of approved manufacturing procedures. Experience points to the fact that this 

enhanced visibility into the manufacturing process by NASA experts aids in the identification 

and resolution of problems in the early stages, before they can result in costly launch delays. 

The implementation of recommendations for the battery system that cover cell design;

acceptance and qualification tests; cell buyoff; cell receipt and handling instructions; and special 

tests such as reconditioning, rejuvenation, and cell storage conditions will provide the increased 

visibility to address issues throughout the process. 

COTS cells are currently being used in aerospace battery builds. In these cases, the cell-level 

manufacturing controls required for aerospace cell manufacturing are not practical. These 

practices can be replaced with additional cell-level screening tests and manufacturing plant 

audits to ensure the fidelity of the practices for the cells under consideration.

7.0 Data Analysis

A summary of the efforts involved in developing the Recommendations for Technical 

Requirements for Inclusion in Aerospace Battery Procurements follows: 

 Review of current procurement practices for batteries.

Discussions of issues with NASA Project and Center technical personnel. The design, 

schematics, manufacturing and test procedures, compliance matrix, and timely delivery of test 

data and hardware were addressed. As part of the work, discussions were held with Ms. 

Michelle Manzo (GRC); Dr. Judith Jeevarajan (Johnson Space Center (JSC)); Dr. Ratnakumar 

Bugga (Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)); Dr. Margot Wasz (The Aerospace Corporation

(TAC)); Mr. Leonine Lee, Ms. Diane Yun, Dr. P.R.K Chetty, Mr. Ronald Zaleski, and Mr. 

Joseph Springer (GSFC).
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

16 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

 Development/identification of example procedures, relevant for charge/discharge and storage 

and handling, that include launch site and transportation practices. During the generation of 

this report, the HST Ni-H2 Battery and Battery Module Handling Plan (see Appendix A of 

Volume II) was identified as an example of a well-documented practice.

 Determination of the adequacy of data/information to develop in-orbit battery management 

and resolve in-orbit anomalies. During this assessment it was found that current practices 

implemented by the contractors did not always comply with NASA standard practices. The 

NASA standard for verification of thermal gradients in a battery in all conditions of 

charge/discharge for Li-Ion and Ni-H2, nickel precharge level for Ni-H2, low-voltage limits for 

resistive discharge during reconditioning for Ni-H2, and end-of-charge voltage limits for LiIon with aging and cycling are not in practice and reworking of cells to meet a performance 

criteria is allowed but with insufficient controls.

 Development of technical requirements for inclusion in aerospace battery procurements for 

power systems.

Questions were prepared to assess responses from various Government satellite facilities and 

obtain a better understanding of the broader requirements of the battery contract document. 

The questions that provided the basis of the discussions related to Ni-H2 and Li-Ion cell 

procurement involved the following:

1. Complete cell-design document including proprietary items.

2. Cell and battery heat-dissipation characteristics during charge, discharge, and selfdischarge, thermal models to predict these characteristics.

3. Specifications of individual cell components including purchased items.

4. Composition of the anodes, cathodes, electrolytes, and separators.

5. Storage history of positive and negative plates and the electrolyte composition at the time 

of cell construction.

6. Cell activation procedure.

7. Cell handling and storage procedures.

8. Gas-leakage rates of the cells.

9. Chronology and details of charge and discharge cycles following cell activation.

10. Reconditioning procedure after receipt of battery.

11. Limits for voltages during charge and discharge cycles at various rates and temperatures.

12. Predicted capacity as a function of life.
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

17 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

13. Cell balancing and bypass circuitry for batteries, in particular, Li-Ion batteries.

14. Extended storage for activated cells/batteries.

15. Component sample delivery for analysis.

In view of the differences in the electrochemistry of the cells, Ni-H2 and Li-Ion batteries are 

handled differently during spacecraft integration and launch-site charging and reconditioning. 

Ni-H2 is amenable to overcharge, tolerant of low-rate overdischarge, can sustain trickle charge 

for extended periods, and operates at internal pressures up to 1,200 psi with a temperature of 

operation range from -10 to +15°C. Li-Ion, however, cannot be overcharged or overdischarged, 

electrolyte conductivity decreases as the temperature decreases, which limits the operational 

temperature range when not using low-temperature electrolytes, cannot be trickle charged for 

extended periods of time, and the electrolyte is flammable and fails catastrophically if charged at 

high temperatures. Table 7.0-1 shows a comparison of Li-Ion and Ni-H2 battery-handling 

features.

Table 7.0-1. Specifics of Battery Handling for Ni-H2 and Li-Ion Chemistries

Item Li-Ion Ni-H2

Cell balancing during operation Required1 Not commonly used

Voltage clamp during charge Required Preferred

Extended trickle charge Prohibited Applicable

Operation at very low 

temperature

Requires customized electrolyte Possible at −10°C

Resistive drain reconditioning Applicable2 Applied to equalize the pressure 

and redistribute the electrolyte

Charge temperature at launch site 10 to 30°C < 20°C

Storage during launch < 20°C < 20°C

Cell orientation Limited data Vertical preferred for some 

applications3

1 Batteries comprised of 18650 cells may not require cell balancing during operation.

2 Can be used but not recommended, voltage generally should not go below 2.5 volts.

3 Recommendations for orientation differ by supplier. Boeing prefers to have their cells 

mounted vertically for ground tests.
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

18 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

8.0 Findings and NESC Recommendations 

8.1 Findings

The following Findings related to current procurement practices for aerospace batteries were 

identified:

F-1. Current practices for procurement of spacecraft power systems specify battery 

requirements at a high level (i.e., performance-based).

F-2. Current battery-related practices implemented by the contractor do not always comply 

with NASA standards.

F-3. There is limited visibility into the documentation and the cell construction and handling 

processes. This lack of in-depth technical knowledge limits NASA’s ability to rapidly 

respond to real-time issues and can result in launch delays as the contractor is brought 

onboard and/or NASA technical experts obtain and digest information.

8.2 NESC Recommendations

The following NESC Recommendations were identified and directed toward the key 

stakeholders unless otherwise identified:

R-1. Identified aerospace battery technical requirements outlined herein, should be considered 

for inclusion in the generation of the initial procurement package/contract. (F-1, F-3)

R-2. NASA should verify/confirm that contractors and their sub-contractors are complying 

with NASA standards of workmanship. (F-2)

R-3. A cell-level MCD that includes the items listed below should be provided to NASA for 

review and approval. Approval is required for the original document and any subsequent 

modifications that affect the relevant cell build: (F-1, F-3)

 Cell design data

 Composition of electrodes, electrolytes, and separators 

 Source material specification and history

 Mechanical cell part specification and tracking

 Process descriptions and controls
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

19 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

 Procedure for cell activation/formation

 Procedure/criteria for cell matching and selection

R-4. Manufacturing plant audits and additional lot level screening can be considered as 

alternates to the MCD insight for batteries that are fabricated from COTS cells. 

(F-1, F-3)

R-5. A battery-level MCD that includes the items listed below should be provided to NASA 

for review and approval. Approval is required for the original document and any 

subsequent modifications that affect the relevant cell build: (F-1, F-3)

 Battery design data

 Cell specifications

 Battery product information, mechanical cell parts 

 Procedure/criteria for cell matching and selection

R-6. A battery-handling plan that addresses the items below should be provided by the 

contractor to NASA for review and approval. (F-1, F-3)

 Storage and transportation 

 Temperature limits during inactive periods

 Reconditioning procedures and sequence

 Procedures for managing charge/discharge and storage of the batteries if the launch is 

postponed

R-7. Delivery of the defined data and information (MCD and handling plan) should occur at 

least 1 week prior to review meetings to allow NASA sufficient time for review. (F-3)

9.0 Definition of Terms

Acceptance A determination that the product meets the design specifications.

Active Core The material in the cell that is undergoing oxidation or reduction during 

the electrochemical reaction.

Anode The electrode where oxidation occurs during the electrochemical reaction 

during discharge.
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

20 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

Battery One or more electrochemical cells that are electrically connected.

Catastrophic Thermal runaway, venting with fire, violent venting with expulsion of cell 

contents, or expulsion of cell from multi-cell module configuration, 

resulting in loss of mission or life.

Cathode The electrode where reduction occurs during the electrochemical reaction 

during discharge.

Cell A single-unit device within one cell case that transforms chemical energy 

into electrical energy at characteristic voltages when discharged.

Cell Activation The addition of electrolyte to a cell that enables the electrochemical 

reaction to take place. 

Cell Balancing The process of charging and discharging the cells in a battery in a manner 

such that they are brought closer to the same voltage levels.

Cycle A discharge (where the capacity of the battery is used) and subsequent 

recharge (where the capacity of the battery is restored) of a rechargeable 

battery.

Electrode The location where the electrochemical reactions occur.

Finding A conclusion based on facts established by the investigating authority. 

Insight Surveillance mode requiring the monitoring of customer-identified metrics 

and contracted milestones. Insight is a continuum that can range from low 

intensity, such as reviewing quarterly reports, to high intensity, such as 

performing surveys and reviews. (Definitions from source document: 

NPR 8735.2, Management of Government Safety and Mission Assurance 

Surveillance Functions for NASA Contracts.) NPR 7150.2 NASA 

Software Engineering Requirements, APPENDIX B: Definitions.

Lessons Learned Knowledge or understanding gained by experience. The experience may 

be positive, as in a successful test or mission, or negative, as in a mishap 

or failure. A lesson must be significant in that it has real or assumed 

impact on operations; valid in that it is factually and technically correct; 

and applicable in that it identifies a specific design, process, or decision 

that reduces or limits the potential for failures and mishaps, or reinforces a 

positive result. 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

21 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

Observation A factor, event, or circumstance identified during the assessment that did 

not contribute to the problem, but if left uncorrected has the potential to 

cause a mishap, injury, or increase the severity should a mishap occur. 

Alternatively, an observation could be a positive acknowledgement of a 

Center/Program/Project/Organization’s operational structure, tools, and/or 

support provided.

Oversight Surveillance mode that is in line with the supplier's processes. The 

customer retains and exercises the right to concur or nonconcur with the 

supplier's decisions. Nonconcurrence must be resolved before the supplier 

can proceed. Oversight is a continuum that can range from low intensity, 

such as customer concurrence in reviews (e.g., Preliminary Design 

Review, Critical Design Review), to high intensity oversight, in which the 

customer has day-to-day involvement in the supplier's decision-making 

process (e.g., hardware inspections). (Definition from source document: 

NPR 8735.2, Management of Government Safety and Mission Assurance 

Surveillance Functions for NASA Contracts.)

Problem The subject of the independent technical assessment/inspection.

Recommendation An action identified by the assessment team to correct a root cause or 

deficiency identified during the investigation. The recommendations may 

be used by the responsible Center/Program/Project/Organization in the 

preparation of a corrective action plan. 

Reversal The changing of the normal polarity of a cell, typically due to 

overdischarge of the cell.

10.0 Acronyms List

ATK Alliant Techsystems, Inc.

CALIPSO Cloud-Aerosol Light Detection and Ranging Instrument (LIDAR) and Infrared 

Pathfinder Satellite Observations Mission

COMSAT Communications Satellite

COTS Commercial-Off-the-Shelf

ESMD Exploration Systems Mission Directorate

GOES Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite

GRC Glenn Research Center

GSFC Goddard Space Flight Center

HST Hubble Space Telescope

JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratory
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report 

Document #:

NESC-RP06-069

Version:

1.0

Title:

Aerospace Flight Battery Systems

Page #:

22 of 22

NESC Request No.: 06-069-I (Part 2)

JSC Johnson Space Center

KSC Kennedy Space Center

LaRC Langley Research Center

LIDAR Light Detection and Ranging Instrument

Li-Ion Lithium-Ion

LM Lockheed Martin

MCD Manufacturing Control Document

MSFC Marshall Space Flight Center

MTSO Management and Technology Support Office

NAFBSWG NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Systems Working Group

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NESC NASA Engineering and Safety Center

Ni-H2 Nickel-Hydrogen 

NRB NESC Review Board

SMD Science Mission Directorate

SOMD Space Operations Mission Directorate

SPRT Super Problem Resolution Team (now called Technical Discipline Team (TDT))

TAC The Aerospace Corporation

TDRS Tracking and Data Relay Satellite

TDT Technical Discipline Team

V&V Validation and Verification

Volume II: Appendix (stand-alone volume)

Appendix A. Hubble Space Telescope (HST) Nickel-Hydrogen Battery and Battery Module 

Handling Plan 
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved

OMB No. 0704-0188

2. REPORT TYPE 

Technical Memorandum

 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Program

Recommendations for Technical Requirements for Inclusion in Aerospace 

Battery Procurements

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

 6. AUTHOR(S)

Jung, David S.; Manzo, Michelle A.

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

NASA Langley Research Center

Hampton, VA 23681-2199

 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Washington, DC 20546-0001

 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

 REPORT NUMBER

L-19890 NESC-RP-08-75

10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)

NASA

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Unclassified - Unlimited

Subject Category 16-Space Transportation and Safety

Availability: NASA CASI (443) 757-5802

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

STI Help Desk (email: help@sti.nasa.gov)

14. ABSTRACT

This NASA Aerospace Flight Battery Systems Working Group was chartered within the NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

(NESC). The Battery Working Group was tasked to complete tasks and to propose proactive work to address battery related, 

agency-wide issues on an annual basis. In its first year of operation, this proactive program addressed various aspects of the 

validation and verification of aerospace battery systems for NASA missions. Studies were performed, issues were discussed 

and in many cases, test programs were executed to generate recommendations and guidelines to reduce risk associated with 

various aspects of implementing battery technology in the aerospace industry. This document contains Part 2 - Volume I: 

Recommendations for Technical Requirements for Inclusion in Aerospace Battery Procurements of the program's operations.

15. SUBJECT TERMS

Aerospace; Battery; International Space Station; Light Detection and Ranging Instrument; Lithium-ion; Nickel Hydrogen

18. NUMBER

 OF 

 PAGES

27

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

(443) 757-5802

a. REPORT

U

c. THIS PAGE

U

b. ABSTRACT

U

17. LIMITATION OF 

 ABSTRACT

UU

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

January 2007 - February 2010

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

869021.03.07.01.09

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT

 NUMBER(S)

NASA/TM-2010-216728/Volume I

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:

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 Operations 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)

01- 08 - 2010