Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Validation”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 181 records · Page 10
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA HECC Geometry and Performance Review Part 1: Validation of a Computational Model for the Vaneless Diffuser Configuration with As-Manufactured Impeller Geometry

An investigation of the NASA High Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor (HECC) vaneless diffuser configuration was performed. This multipart investigation focused on validating the computational model against experimental data. The validated model was then used to explore the effects of observed geometric differences between the as-manufactured and design-intent impellers. Lastly, the validated model was used for comparison against an experimental tip clearance study. Details regarding each of the parts are detailed below: A multipart investigation of the NASA High Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor (HECC) vaneless diffuser configuration was performed. Part I of the investigation focused on describing the HECC vaneless computational model and its validation against the experimental data published in GT2023-103128. To generate the model, a verification of the manufactured impeller was performed and was confirmed to match the impeller CAD. Section data from the impeller CAD, referred to as As-Manufactured, were used in the model. Steady RANS simulations using a multiblock structured mesh were used to conduct a mesh convergence study. The resultant mesh was then used for simulations at both design-speed and off-design speed conditions. The simulations compared well to data in both 1D and 2D terms. Based on the observed results the model was deemed validated and was used in the latter two parts of the multipart investigation.

centrifugal compressor↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

In-Situ Scanning Electron Microscope Experiments for Microscale Mechanical Testing and Validated Modeling of Fiber Reinforced Thermoplastics

A novel, in-situ, scanning electron microscope (SEM) mechanical testing capability for materials at the microscale which provides experimental validation to a machine learning (ML) toolset for full-field validation of physics-based micromechanics models is being developed by researchers at NASA Glenn Research Center. These are enabling technologies for the integration of multiscale digital twins for materials into system level models which will result in the improved performance, material discovery, reduced production cost and time, rapid characterization, and prognostic structural health monitoring (SHM) for materials and structures for extreme environments in support of NASA space exploration missions. In order to bridge the material structure-to-system gap for digital twins, physics-based models must be experimentally validated at multiple length scales. Seminal microscale experiments, conducted at the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), were limited to transverse compression of single-layer, unidirectional thermoset polymer matrix composite (PMC) micropillar specimens [1]. The early phases of the current project followed those initial results and setup to reproduce the compression testing of PMC material on the custom-built piezoelectric actuated micromechanical testing rig built by MicroTesting Solutions LLC. In this work, samples of thermoplastic PMC material were first machined into 3 mm cubes, and then further machining and final milling was done using a Focused Ion Beam (FIB). The initial experiment was done on a pillar roughly 20 µm x 20 µm x 40 µm tall. Additional pillars were milled with final sizes ranging from 20 µm x 20 µm x 40 µm tall to 40 µm x 40 µm x 65 µm tall. A speckle pattern for in-situ full-field measurements using Digital Image Correlation (DIC) was applied with platinum, which was coated on the surface, and then the FIB was used to mill away some of the coating to produce an irregular pattern of Pt on the pillar surface. The samples were loaded into the custom testing rig and placed into the SEM and loaded under compression until failure. Images were collected in the SEM during testing. Post-processing of the images was conducted using DIC to obtain full-field displacement and strain measurements elucidating the role of the matrix as well as fiber-fiber interaction at the microscale within the composite subjected to compression loading well into the non-linear regime of the material. Moreover, the evolution of fiber-matrix debonding and matrix cracking is observed in-situ at the microscale. This data, along with images segmented with a newly developed ML toolset [2], was used to create and validate physics-based micromechanics models. An image of the failed micropillar is shown in Figure 1. The techniques developed in the initial compression experiment was tailored to the validation needs of the models and expanded to include different sized samples as well as possibly tension and fatigue.

Laura Wilson↗
NASA NTRS2021

Validation of Soil Moisture Data Products from the NASA SMAP Mission

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)Soil Moisture Active Passive(SMAP) mission has been validatingits soil moisture (SM) products since the start of data production onMarch 31, 2015. Prior to launch, the mission defined a set of criteria for core validation sites (CVS) that enable the testing of the key mission SM accuracy requirement(unbiased root-mean-square error <0.04 m3/m3). Thevalidation approach also includes other (“sparse network”) in situSM measurements, satellite SM products, model-based SM products, and field experiments. Over the past six years, the SMAP SM products have been analyzed with respect to thesereference data,and the analysis approaches themselves have been scrutinizedin an effort to best understand the products’ performance. Validation of themost recent SMAP Level 2 and 3 SMretrievalproducts (R17000) shows that the L-band (1.4 GHz) radiometer-based SM record continues to meet mission requirements. The products aregenerallyconsistentwith SM retrievals from the European Space Agency (ESA)Soil Moisture Ocean Salinity mission, althoughthere aredifferencesin some regions. The high-resolution (3-km) SM retrieval product,generated by combining Copernicus Sentinel-1 data with SMAP observations,performswithin expectations. Currently, however,there is limited availability of3-kmCVSdatato support extensive validation at this spatial scale. The most recent (version 5)SMAP Level4 SMdata assimilation productprovidingsurface and root-zone SM with complete spatio-temporal coverageat 9-km resolution also meets performance requirements. The SMAP SM validation program will continue throughout the mission life; futureplans include expanding ittoforestedand high-latituderegions

SMAP↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploitation of a Validation Hierarchy for Modeling and Simulation

Across engineering there is an evolving need to increase reliance on physics-based simulation to develop, design and optimize engineering systems. This increased reliance on modeling and simulation has highlighted a growing need to transform the confidence that modeling and simulation analysts have in their results into credibility for systems engineers to design and field systems more quickly and with less physical testing. For isolated components of a complex system, where a single discipline may drive product design, this is less of a concern as the relationship is often straightforward and easy to explain. However, when these isolated components are integrated, and are expected to operate in a multi-disciplinary context in which safety critical systems are involved, new concepts and model assurance standards are required. In this paper we address this challenge by showing how a model validation hierarchy can be exploited to identify those model validation experiments that will contribute most to increasing confidence and credibility of modeling and simulation predictions. The approach that is adopted contains four main steps. The first step is the construction of a model validation hierarchy that links subsystems, assemblies, and components to a hierarchy of physical experiments that can be used support model validation. This hierarchy connects the concerns of systems engineers to those of the modeling and simulation analyst in a clear and logical way. The structure and content of this hierarchy is then used in a second step to establish which physical phenomena have the greatest impact on overall system performance metrics. A gap analysis technique, based upon modeling and simulation concerns, is then used to prioritize the important physical phenomenon. Unfortunately, a common outcome of such gap analyses is the identification of many important gaps and so, in the final step of our process, we advocate the use of a global sensitivity analysis as a means to complete the prioritization.

Verification and Validation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploitation of a Validation Hierarchy for Modeling and Simulation

Across engineering there is an evolving need to increase reliance on physics-based simulation to develop, design and optimize engineering systems. This increased reliance on modeling and simulation has highlighted a growing need to transform the confidence that modeling and simulation analysts have in their results into credibility for systems engineers to design and field systems more quickly and with less physical testing. For isolated components of a complex system, where a single discipline may drive product design, this is less of a concern as the relationship is often straightforward and easy to explain. However, when these isolated components are integrated, and are expected to operate in a multi-disciplinary context in which safety critical systems are involved, new concepts and model assurance standards are required. In this paper we address this challenge by showing how a model validation hierarchy can be exploited to identify those model validation experiments that will contribute most to increasing confidence and credibility of modeling and simulation predictions. The approach that is adopted contains four main steps. The first step is the construction of a model validation hierarchy that links subsystems, assemblies, and components to a hierarchy of physical experiments that can be used support model validation. This hierarchy connects the concerns of systems engineers to those of the modeling and simulation analyst in a clear and logical way. The structure and content of this hierarchy is then used in a second step to establish which physical phenomena have the greatest impact on overall system performance metrics. A gap analysis technique, based upon modeling and simulation concerns, is then used to prioritize the important physical phenomenon. Unfortunately, a common outcome of such gap analyses is the identification of many important gaps and so, in the final step of our process, we advocate the use of a global sensitivity analysis as a means to complete the prioritization.

Verification and Validation↗
DOE OSTI2026

Validation Studies of RELAP5-3D for High-Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor Analysis Using a Refined RELAP5-3D Model of the High Temperature Test Facility

RELAP5-3D has been used extensively for high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR) analysis, but such analysis lies outside the validation basis for the code. Oregon State University (OSU) and the United States Department of Energy’s (DOE) Advanced Reactor Technologies (ART) – Gas-cooled reactor campaign worked together to design and operate the High Temperature Test Facility (HTTF) at OSU to provide validation data for prismatic HTGR thermal hydraulics analysis. Work using a previous RELAP5-3D model of HTTF demonstrated the ability to reproduce trends in HTTF data but an inability to reproduce the values measured in multiple experiments within the uncertainty. It was hypothesized that a new model with a finer radial nodalization would perform better for HTTF analysis. In this paper, we present the development of that more refined model and analyze HTTF experiments PG-27 and PG-29, a pressurized (PCC) and depressurized conduction cooldown (DCC) transient. Comparing PG-27 results to experimental data shows a better prediction of steady state and transient temperatures; however, a deeper dive reveals that better transient temperature predictions are a result of better initial conditions. The transient temperature rise in the core is comparable between the two models, but the legacy model predicts temperatures in the reflectors better. The new model demonstrates the ability to predict unique temperatures in each sector of the core during PG-29, capturing the azimuthal asymmetry; however, the temperature predictions still differ from measured temperatures. One hypothesis is that differences between the assumed and actual power distribution leads to the underprediction of the individual block temperatures. These results suggest that gaps and uncertainties in the measured boundary conditions for the HTTF tests do not allow to fully validate RELAP5-3D for prismatic HTGR analyses. The authors suspect that some of the differences between predicted and measured temperatures may be a result of uncertainties associated with HTTF itself rather than RELAP5-3D. We demonstrated improved validation for steady-state analysis, but significantly improved transient performance has yet to be recognized.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Extending the Nuclide Inventory Validation Basis for High-Burnup Fuel with New Radiochemical Assay Data

Efforts are underway at Oak Ridge National Laboratory to improve the nuclide inventory validation basis for spent nuclear fuel at high burnups. Recently conducted radiochemical assay experiments provided new measurement data for nine samples of fuel irradiated in a pressurized water reactor, with estimated sample burnups in the 30 to 70 GWd/t range. This type of destructive assay data is essential for validating computational methods, tools, and nuclear data applied in nuclear safety analyses and for improving our understanding of the bias and uncertainty in code predictions. The measurement data include key actinides and fission products that span a gamut of needs and interests for nuclear science and engineering applications in criticality safety, reactor physics, nuclide inventory, decay heat, and radiation shielding. The SCALE 6.3 code system with ENDF/B-VII.1 cross-section libraries was used to simulate the irradiation histories of the measured fuel samples. The calculated nuclide concentrations are compared to corresponding measurement data. The significance of the comparisons is discussed, emphasizing how the addition of the new measurement data fills gaps in the validation basis at high burnups and contributes to the decrease in bias and uncertainty for predicted nuclide concentrations. The discussion addresses the effect of the sample burnup used in the simulation—which is based on reactor operator records or on calibration to measured data for burnup indicator fission products—on the validation results.

Nuclide inventory↗
DOE OSTI2026

Validation of the NLR Pumped Storage Hydropower Cost Model

The National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR) first released its pumped storage hydropower (PSH) cost model in 2023 as the most detailed bottom-up PSH cost model available to the public. It is available both as a spreadsheet and an interactive web tool, enabling users with a variety of PSH interests to transparently characterize costs of alternative PSH sites and designs. The PSH cost model cannot replace detailed site-level studies and design, but it is important to validate it against other industry PSH cost estimates. The initial model methodology report validated the cost model for a single proposed site, the Eagle Mountain Project in California. This slide deck documents an expanded validation exercise using cost data from six other sites: Goldendale (Washington), Seminoe (Wyoming), Gordon Butte (Montana), Swan Lake (Oregon), White Pine (Oregon), and Lewis Ridge (Kentucky). It compares itemized costs from Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) applications and other reported costs with NLR PSH cost model outputs after customizing inputs for each site. The validation exercise finds that the NLR model's conservative indirect cost assumptions often drive overall cost overestimation, with direct cost comparisons typically agreeing more closely. All cost model estimates are well within an Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE) Class 5 estimation range (-50% to +100%), with five within the AACE Class 4 range (-30% to +50%) and four being within 15%. This result is considered reasonable performance for a parametric model applied at a preliminary design stage.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

H2@Scale - Validating an Electrolysis System with High Output Pressure: Cooperative Research and Development Final Report, CRADA Number CRD-18-00741

Electrolysis has been a commercially available product for a while and electrolyzers have been a proven capability to provide additional benefits (e.g. controllable load for grid services) in addition to production of hydrogen. The hydrogen output is typically compressed for storage and dispensing. Compression adds cost and decreases system reliability. Honda’s electrolyzer systems have been developed to include electrochemical compression to leverage the production system itself for at least partial compression. In this project, the team will evaluate Honda’s PEM based electrochemical compression system. The system is capable of compressing hydrogen up to 70 MPa electrochemically. Validation testing is the next step to accelerate this technology into the marketplace, as the validation will provide needed data under a variety of operation conditions and controls. These operating conditions and controls are based on over a decade of NLR research and development with low-temperature electrolysis. The validation testing will include preparing NLR’s site for third party evaluation, benchmark testing of Honda’s stack and system, and simulating operation connected to renewables or in a grid service profile. NLR’s Energy System Integration Lab will be the location for the electrolyzer validation research and integrated into the Hydrogen Infrastructure Test & Research Facility (HITRF). This will build into the existing retail style hydrogen fueling station for a fully integrated experimental setup.

08 HYDROGEN↗
NASA NTRS2001

A semi-automatic method for left ventricle volume estimate: an in vivo validation study

This study aims to the validation of the left ventricular (LV) volume estimates obtained by processing volumetric data utilizing a segmentation model based on level set technique. The validation has been performed by comparing real-time volumetric echo data (RT3DE) and magnetic resonance (MRI) data. A validation protocol has been defined. The validation protocol was applied to twenty-four estimates (range 61-467 ml) obtained from normal and pathologic subjects, which underwent both RT3DE and MRI. A statistical analysis was performed on each estimate and on clinical parameters as stroke volume (SV) and ejection fraction (EF). Assuming MRI estimates (x) as a reference, an excellent correlation was found with volume measured by utilizing the segmentation procedure (y) (y=0.89x + 13.78, r=0.98). The mean error on SV was 8 ml and the mean error on EF was 2%. This study demonstrated that the segmentation technique is reliably applicable on human hearts in clinical practice.

NASA Discipline Cardiopulmonary↗
NASA NTRS2004

Mars Exploration Rover Mission: Entry, Descent, and Landing System Validation

System validation for a Mars entry, descent, and landing system is not simply a demonstration that the electrical system functions in the associated environments. The function of this system is its interaction with the atmospheric and surface environment. Thus, in addition to traditional test-bed, hardware-in-the-loop, testing, a validation program that confirms the environmental interaction is required. Unfortunately, it is not possible to conduct a meaningful end-to-end test of a Mars landing system on Earth. The validation plan must be constructed from an interconnected combination of simulation, analysis and test. For the Mars Exploration Rover mission, this combination of activities and the logic of how they combined to the system's validation was explicitly stated, reviewed, and tracked as part of the development plan.

system validation↗
NASA NTRS2017

Development of Level 2 Calibration and Validation Plans for GOES-R; What is a RIMP?

Calibration and Validation (CalVal) plans for Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite version R (GOES-R) Level 2 (L2) products were documented via Resource, Implementation, and Management Plans (RIMPs) for all of the official L2 products required from the GOES-R Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI). In 2015 the GOES-R program decided to replace the typical CalVal plans with RIMPs that covered, for a given L2 product, what was required from that product, how it would be validated, and what tools would be used to do so. Similar to Level 1b products, the intent was to cover the full spectrum of planning required for the CalVal of L2 ABI products. Instead of focusing on step-by-step procedures, the RIMPs concentrated on the criteria for each stage of the validation process (Beta, Provisional, and Full Validation) and the many elements required to prove when each stage was reached.

Validation↗
NASA NTRS2017

Development of Level 2 Calibration and Validation Plans for GOES-R; What is a RIMP?

Calibration and Validation (CalVal) plans for Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite version R (GOES-R) Level 2 (L2) products were documented via Resource, Implementation, and Management Plans (RIMPs) for all of the official L2 products required from the GOES-R Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI). In 2015 the GOES-R program decided to replace the typical CalVal plans with RIMPs that covered, for a given L2 product, what was required from that product, how it would be validated, and what tools would be used to do so. Similar to Level 1b products, the intent was to cover the full spectrum of planning required for the CalVal of L2 ABI products. Instead of focusing on step-by-step procedures, the RIMPs concentrated on the criteria for each stage of the validation process (Beta, Provisional, and Full Validation) and the many elements required to prove when each stage was reached.

Validation↗
NASA NTRS2017

Development of Level 1b Calibration and Validation Readiness, Implementation and Management Plans for GOES-R

A complement of Readiness, Implementation and Management Plans (RIMPs) to facilitate management of post-launch product test activities for the official Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES-R) Level 1b (L1b) products have been developed and documented. Separate plans have been created for each of the GOES-R sensors including: the Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI), the Extreme ultraviolet and X-ray Irradiance Sensors (EXIS), Geostationary Lightning Mapper (GLM), GOES-R Magnetometer (MAG), the Space Environment In-Situ Suite (SEISS), and the Solar Ultraviolet Imager (SUVI). The GOES-R program has implemented these RIMPs in order to address the full scope of CalVal activities required for a successful demonstration of GOES-R L1b data product quality throughout the three validation stages: Beta, Provisional and Full Validation. For each product maturity level, the RIMPs include specific performance criteria and required artifacts that provide evidence a given validation stage has been reached, the timing when each stage will be complete, a description of every applicable Post-Launch Product Test (PLPT), roles and responsibilities of personnel, upstream dependencies, and analysis methods and tools to be employed during validation. Instrument level Post-Launch Tests (PLTs) are also referenced and apply primarily to functional check-out of the instruments.

Validation↗
NASA NTRS2019

Validation of CERES Flight Model 5 In-Orbit Calibrations Using Lunar Observations

Scientific studies require radiation fluxes over the Earth to be accurate within 1% for shortwave fluxes and 0.5% for outgoing longwave fluxes. The validation of in-orbit instrument performance requires both stability in calibration source and also calibration corrections to compensate for instrument changes. The Moon offers an external source whose signal variance is predictable and non-degrading. CERES detectors register the signal output from the entire face of the Moon. Lunar observations performed by CERES Flight Models (FM) 1 through 4 have been successful in assisting validation of radiances to the required accuracy. CERES Flight Model 5 (FM-5) is on Suomi/NPP spacecraft, orbiting since October 2011. This paper uses lunar measurements to validate detector output of FM-5. These measurements are adjusted to remove orbital effects due to variations in distance between Moon and Sun, distance between the satellite and the Moon and lunar phase angle. These effects create a total variation in lunar irradiance of 20% in the total channel and 8% in the shortwave channel. The change in orientation of the Moon as seen by the detector is called libration and causes variations of about 1% of the irradiance. A consistent dataset spanning at least 2 years in length is required to remove variations due to libration. The major uncertainties remaining in the measurements are assumed to be due to changes of the spectral responses of the channels due to degradation of optical surfaces in orbit. The results demonstrate that lunar observations can be used to validate FM-5 measurements.

Clouds and Earth Radiant Energy System↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Verification and Validation of Safety-Critical Aircraft Systems Operating under Off-Nominal, Contingency, and Emergency Conditions

Verification and validation (V&V) of safety-critical technologies developed for loss of control (LOC) prevention and recovery and other aviation safety concerns pose significant challenges. Aircraft LOC can result from a wide spectrum of hazards, often occurring in combination, which cannot be fully replicated during evaluation. Technologies developed for LOC prevention and recovery must therefore be effective under a wide variety of hazardous and uncertain conditions, and the verification and validation of these technologies must provide some measure of assurance that the new vehicle safety technologies do no harm (i.e., that they themselves do not introduce new safety risks). V&V technologies must also enable the identification of system limitations and constraints, as well as enable the identification of safe and unsafe operating conditions (and their boundaries). Additionally, the V&V of complex, increasingly autonomous systems is a fundamental concern. Scalable, reproducible and cost-effective techniques for the assurance of safety critical systems during their design and operation is a key barrier to fielding new systems or updating current systems. Moreover, these techniques need to provide artifacts that enable a comprehensive evidence-based approach to certification. This briefing summarizes research performed under NASA’s Aviation Safety Program and follow-on research for the V&V of safety-critical aircraft system technologies developed for LOC prevention and recovery and increasingly autonomous systems, and for a broad assurance capability in both current and emerging aviation applications. Note that, in this briefing, the term “validation” refers to a confirmation that the system implementation (e.g., algorithms etc.) is performing the intended function(s), as well as an affirmation of effectiveness in these functions. “Verification” refers to a confirmation that the system implementation in the software and hardware meets its (hopefully validated) specifications (e.g., correctly executes algorithms as designed).

Validation↗
NASA NTRS2020

The GPM Ground Validation Program

We present a detailed overview of the structure and activities associated with the NASA-led ground-validation component of the NASA-JAXA Global Pre­cipitation Measurement (GPM) mission. The overarching philosophy and approaches for NASA's GV program are presented with primary focus placed on aspects of direct validation and a summary of physical validation campaigns and results. We describe a spectrum of key instruments, methods, field campaigns and data products developed and used by NASA's GV team to verify GPM level-2 precipitation products in rain and snow. We describe the tools and analysis framework used to confirm that NASA's Level-I science requirements for GPM are met by the GPM Core Observatory. Examples of routine validation activities related to verification of Integrated Multi­satellitE Retrievals for GPM (IMERG) products for two different regions of the globe (Korea and the US) are provided, and a brief analysis related to IMERG performance in the extreme rainfall event associated with Hurricane Florence is discussed.

precipitation↗
NASA NTRS2021

The Salinity Pilot-Mission Exploitation Platform (Pi-MEP): A Hub for Validation and Exploitation of Satellite Sea Surface Salinity Data

The Pilot-Mission Exploitation Platform (Pi-MEP) for salinity is an ESA initiative originally meant to support and widen the uptake of Soil Moisture and Ocean Salinity (SMOS) mission data over the ocean. Starting in 2017, the project aims at setting up a computational web-based platform focusing on satellite sea surface salinity data, supporting studies on enhanced validation and scientific process over the ocean. It has been designed in close collaboration with a dedicated science advisory group in order to achieve three main objectives: gathering all the data required to exploit satellite sea surface salinity data, systematically producing a wide range of metrics for comparing and monitoring sea surface salinity products’ quality, and providing user-friendly tools to explore, visualize and exploit both the collected products and the results of the automated analyses. The Salinity Pi-MEP is becoming a reference hub for the validation of satellite sea surface salinity missions by providing valuable information on satellite products (SMOS, Aquarius, SMAP), an extensive in situ database (e.g., Argo, thermosalinographs, moorings, drifters) and additional thematic datasets (precipitation, evaporation, currents, sea level anomalies, sea surface temperature, etc.). Co-localized databases between satellite products and in situ datasets are systematically generated together with validation analysis reports for 30 predefined regions. The data and reports are made fully accessible through the web interface of the platform. The datasets, validation metrics and tools (automatic, user-driven) of the platform are described in detail in this paper. Several dedicated scientific case studies involving satellite SSS data are also systematically monitored by the platform, including major river plumes, mesoscale signatures in boundary currents, high latitudes, semi-enclosed seas, and the high-precipitation region of the eastern tropical Pacific. Since 2019, a partnership in the Salinity Pi-MEP project has been agreed between ESA and NASA to enlarge focus to encompass the entire set of satellite salinity sensors. The two agencies are now working together to widen the platform features on several technical aspects, such as triple-collocation software implementation, additional match-up collocation criteria and sustained exploitation of data from the SPURS campaigns

ocean↗