Exploring the Unknown - NASA's History Office

EXPLORING THE UNKNOWN 559
Document III-30
Document title: Richard L. Chapman, Loretta C. Lohman, and Marilyn J. Chapman, “An
Exploration of Benefits from NASA ‘Spinoff,’ ” Chapman Research Group, Contract
88-01 with NERAC, Inc., June 1989, pp. 1–5, 23–28.
Source: Chapman Research Group, Inc., Littleton, Colorado.
Since 1976, NASA has annually published the book Spinoff, which reports on successful cases of technology
transfer. This study examined the various technologies that have been featured in Spinoff. The
Chapman Research Group concluded that the benefits from more than 400 cases may have been as
great as $21 billion in sales. These figures do not include any costs, nor any unsuccessful technologies.
The primary purpose of this study was to update and expand on the earlier studies of the technology
transfer program that were used to support both the NASA budget and the technology transfer
budget, which historically has always been under scrutiny.
An Exploration of Benefits
From NASA “Spinoff”
June 1989
[1] The focus of this study has been to explore those applications of NASA technology (or
NASA-assisted technology transfer) that have been reported in the annual report, Spinoff.
The primary purpose has been to identify what benefits resulted from those applications,
and, further, to quantify benefits (where possible) toward which the applications made a
contribution.
Part I of this report, “Study Approach and Conduct,” summarizes the methodology
used and the challenges faced by the study team. . . . However, the reader should be aware
of several important, general conditions which affect the scope and inclusiveness of this
study in terms of how fully it captures the benefits of NASA-furnished technology.
First, the Spinoff magazine does not include even all of the “good” examples known.
Some examples have not been published simply because they are difficult to illustrate in
a meaningful way to the general public. Such is the case with the many uses of
NASTRAN—a computer program initially developed by NASA for structural analysis of
large rockets, and considerably modified for literally thousands of non-NASA applications.
Second, in working “backwards” from known applications, one misses those applications
where NASA technology is “embedded” into whatever was applied. That is, the original
NASA-furnished technology may have been the basis for a series of modifications
during which the original technology, now embedded in the changes, has been “lost” as
to its origins.
[2] Third, these benefits resulted from the contributions of only 259 applications of
NASA-sponsored or furnished technology. It excludes a number of important benefits
which should be obvious to even the casual observer: (1) direct NASA or Department of
Defense use: such as NASA commercialization programs, mission-directed applications
(such as weather satellites, communication satellites and the like); and, (2) social benefits:
such as lives saved, lengthened or improved; labor days saved from illness, accident or
death; improvements in the environment or the quality of life; productivity improvements
and the like.
As revealed in this study, the technology transfer process includes not only the hardware
end of technology, but managerial and economic aspects as well. It includes