case study 2 assignment anwesa bagchi

8/2/2019 Case Study 2 Assignment Anwesa Bagchi

1/3

NASA Nanotechnology Program Content: Critique

Materials

Electronics/

computing

Sensors, s/c

components

Single-walled

nanotube fibers

Low-Power CNT

electronic

components

In-space

nanoprobes

Nanotube

composites

Molecular

computing/data

storage

Nano flight

system

components

Integral

thermal/shape

control

Fault/radiation

tolerant

electronics

Quantum

navigation

sensors

Smart skin

materials

Nano electronic

brain for space

Exploration

Integrated

nanosensor

systems

Biomimetic

material

systems

Biological

computing

NEMS flight

systems @ 1 W

2002 2004 2006 2011 2016

NASA Nanotechnology Roadmap

>

Increasing levels of system design and integration

C A P A B I L I T Y

High StrengthMaterials(>10 GPa)

ReusableLaunch Vehicle(20% less mass,20% less noise)

RevolutionaryAircraft Concepts(30% less mass,20% less emission,25% increasedrange)

AutonomousSpacecraft

(40% less mass)

Adaptive Self-RepairingSpace Missions

Multi-Functional Materials

Bio-Inspired Materialsand Processes

Slide 3: NASA Nanotechnology Roadmap

General issues with the entire PowerPoint presentation:-

1. Logo: No consistency (Logo of the first two pages do not match with the rest of the pages)2. Font: Color and Size- No consistency3. Headers: No consistency of Headers4. Diagrams: Poor visual quality of diagrams, illustrations are diagrams are mixed, no consistency5. Arrows: Confusing arrows6. No visual aesthetics, overload of information, poor choice of colors

Upper Half of Slider 3

Comments

1R

2R

3R

4L

3L

4R

2L

1L

5R


2/3

1L: Capability of WHAT? Ambiguous 1R Header Color does not match with the rest of

the slides, Header font not consistent with

other slide headers

2L: Multi-Function Materials is oddly

placed. It is not clear from its positionwhether it is a subheading or a label.

Poor choice of color, not contrasting

with the background

2R NASA logo not on the left side like the NASA

logos on other slides. Graphic quality verypoor. Not the same graphic image as used on

the others.

3L High Strength Material: Vague term,

no example cited, Poor quality graphic

image

3R Adaptive Self-Repairing Space Missions: No

estimate provided, alignment

problem(Sel[space] f-Repairing Space

Mission)

4L What does the main red arrow signify? 4R Autonomous Spacecraft: alignment problem

(40[space] % less mass). Bio-Inspired

Materials and Processes is this second label

for Autonomous Spacecraft or a different

thing?

5R Is the label common for both the upper and

lower half of the slide?

Lower Half of Slide 3

Comments

1L Incomplete name: Structural Material

instead of Material (refer slide 1)

1R Acronym, What does CNT and NEMS stand

for?

2L What does s/c mean? 2R What does this indicate?

3L On all other slides, duration is of

5 years, but on this slide the duration is

of 4 years initially then 5 years.

Inconsistent

1L

2L

3L

1R

2R


3/3

Style Guide

Header

o Font: Verdanao Background: Blueo Font Size: 24o Font Weight: Bold

Sub-heading

o Font: Verdanao Background: Whiteo Font Size: 18o Font Weight: Normal

General

o Page Background: Whiteo Logo: Right-hand side, image must be

consistent.o Image& graphics: Images and content

graphics should be saved at 72dpi,

Clear and simple

o Bullets: Not more than 4 bullets perslide.

o Colors Permitted: Green, Red, Purpleo Labels: Times Roman,12o Captions: Tahoma, 12o Table: Not more than three column

table

Body

o Display Font: Arialo Background: Whiteo Font Size: 14o Font Weight: Normalo Spacing: 2 pto Alignment: Left justified

case study 2 assignment anwesa bagchi

Documents