Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Quick Reference”

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 217 records · Page 12
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1972

Investigation of the tone-burst tube for duct lining attenuation measurement

The tone burst technique makes practical the laboratory evaluation of potential inlet and discharge duct treatments. Tone burst apparatus requires only simple machined parts and standard components. Small, simply made, lining samples are quickly and easily installed in the system. Two small electromagnetric loudspeaker drivers produce peak sound pressure level of over 166 db in the 3-square-inch sample duct. Air pump available in most laboratories can produce air flows of over plus and minus Mach 0.3 in the sample duct. The technique uses short shaped pulses of sound propagated down a progressive wave tube containing the sample duct. The peak pressure level output of the treated duct is compared with the peak pressure level output of a substituted reference duct. The difference between the levels is the attenuation or insertion loss of the treated duct. Evaluations of resonant absorber linings by the tone burst technique check attenuation values predicted by empirical formulas based on full scale ducts.

Soffel, A. R.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Post-composing ontology terms for efficient phenotyping in plant breeding

Abstract Ontologies are widely used in databases to standardize data, improving data quality, integration, and ease of comparison. Within ontologies tailored to diverse use cases, post-composing user-defined terms reconciles the demands for standardization on the one hand and flexibility on the other. In many instances of Breedbase, a digital ecosystem for plant breeding designed for genomic selection, the goal is to capture phenotypic data using highly curated and rigorous crop ontologies, while adapting to the specific requirements of plant breeders to record data quickly and efficiently. For example, post-composing enables users to tailor ontology terms to suit specific and granular use cases such as repeated measurements on different plant parts and special sample preparation techniques. To achieve this, we have implemented a post-composing tool based on orthogonal ontologies providing users with the ability to introduce additional levels of phenotyping granularity tailored to unique experimental designs. Post-composed terms are designed to be reused by all breeding programs within a Breedbase instance but are not exported to the crop reference ontologies. Breedbase users can post-compose terms across various categories, such as plant anatomy, treatments, temporal events, and breeding cycles, and, as a result, generate highly specific terms for more accurate phenotyping.

Mathematical & Computational Biology↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ISS EVA80 EMU Water in the Helmet Failure and Associated Analytical Response

On March 23rd, 2022, during Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) 80 aboard the International Space Station (ISS) crew identified an 8-10-inch diameter thin film of water in the pressure bubble of the suit during repress. This launched an investigation to determine the cause of the water in the helmet as well as short- and long-term mitigation efforts to enable return to EVA as quickly as possible. The investigation analysis efforts in combination with hardware inspection and testing determined the most likely cause of the water in the helmet to be sublimator carryover as a result of high latent loading put on the system. In parallel with this investigation, efforts were being made to mitigate any future water in the helmet events. The short-term mitigation strategy developed is to install absorbent material in the pressure bubble to capture water as it enters the helmet before it can impact the astronauts. This hardware is referred to as the Helmet Absorption Band (HAB) and Helmet Absorption Pad – Extender (HAP-E). Longer-term mitigation strategies include a device to capture small water events before entering the helmet by installing a water capture system in the vent loop of the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU). This effort is coined the T2 Water Capture System. Additionally, developing an on-orbit sublimator challenge test which will be able to verify sublimator performance before and after EVAs. The sublimator is the hardware which condenses water vapor and removes it from the vent loop, and this hardware is referred to as the EMU Moisture Injection Test System (EMITS). Based on the investigation and short-term water capture solutions the ISS Program decided to return to nominal EVAs on October 7, 2022. With the addition of the long-term mitigation strategies, the team hopes to be able to prevent any future water in the helmet events.

Veronica Lee Pizor↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
NASA NTRS2007

Nonlinear Structural Analysis Methodology and Dynamics Scaling of Inflatable Parabolic Reflector Antenna Concepts

Ultra-light weight and ultra-thin membrane inflatable antenna concepts are fast evolving to become the state-of-the-art antenna concepts for deep-space applications. NASA Langley Research Center has been involved in the structural dynamics research on antenna structures. One of the goals of the research is to develop structural analysis methodology for prediction of the static and dynamic response characteristics of the inflatable antenna concepts. This research is focused on the computational studies to use nonlinear large deformation finite element analysis to characterize the ultra-thin membrane responses of the antennas. Recently, structural analyses have been performed on a few parabolic reflector antennas of varying size and shape, which are referred in the paper as 0.3 meters subscale, 2 meters half-scale, and 4 meters full-scale antenna. The various aspects studied included nonlinear analysis methodology and solution techniques, ways to speed convergence in iterative methods, the sensitivities of responses with respect to structural loads, such as inflation pressure, gravity, and pretension loads in the ground and in-space conditions, and the ultra-thin membrane wrinkling characteristics. Several such intrinsic aspects studied have provided valuable insight into evaluation of structural characteristics of such antennas. While analyzing these structural characteristics, a quick study was also made to assess the applicability of dynamics scaling of the half-scale antenna. This paper presents the details of the nonlinear structural analysis results, and discusses the insight gained from the studies on the various intrinsic aspects of the analysis methodology. The predicted reflector surface characteristics of the three inflatable ultra-thin membrane parabolic reflector antenna concepts are presented as easily observable displacement fringe patterns with associated maximum values, and normal mode shapes and associated frequencies. Wrinkling patterns are presented to show how surface wrinkle progress with increasing tension loads. Antenna reflector surface accuracies were found to be very much dependent on the type and size of the antenna, the reflector surface curvature, reflector membrane supports in terms of spacing of catenaries, as well as the amount of applied load.

Sreekantamurthy, Tham↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
NASA NTRS1998

Summary of Proton Test on the Quick Logic QL3025 at Indiana University

This issue of the Programmable Logic Application Notes is a compilation of topics: (1) Proton irradiation tests were performed on the Quick Logic QL3025 at the Indian University Cyclotron facility. The devices, tests, and results are discussed; (2) The functional failure of EEPROM's in heavy ion environment is presented; (3) the Act 1 architecture is summarized; (4) Antifuse hardness and hardness testing is updated; the single even upset (SEU) response of hardwired flip-flops is also presented; (4) Total dose results of the ACT 2 and ACT 3 circuits is presented in a chart; (5) Recent sub-micron devices testing of total dose is presented in a chart along with brief discussion; and (6) a reference to the WWW site for more articles of interest.

Katz, Richard↗
NASA NTRS2000

EOS Data Products Handbook

The EOS Data Products Handbook provides brief descriptions of the data products that will be produced from a range of missions of the Earth Observing System (EOS) and associated projects. Volume 1, originally published in 1997, covers the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM), the Terra mission (formerly named EOS AM-1), and the Data Assimilation System, while this volume, Volume 2, covers the Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitor Satellite (ACRIMSAT), Aqua, Jason-1, Landsat 7, Meteor 3M/Stratospheric Aerosol and Gas Experiment III (SAGE III). the Quick Scatterometer (QuikScat), the Quick Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer (Quik-TOMS), and the Vegetation Canopy Lidar (VCL) missions. Volume 2 follows closely the format of Volume 1, providing a list of products and an introduction and overview descriptions of the instruments and data processing, all introductory to the core of the book, which presents the individual data product descriptions, organized into 11 topical chapters. The product descriptions are followed by five appendices, which provide contact information for the EOS data centers that will be archiving and distributing the data sets, contact information for the science points of contact for the data products, references, acronyms and abbreviations, and a data products index.

Parkinson, Claire L.↗
NASA NTRS2008

An Uncertainty Structure Matrix for Models and Simulations

Software that is used for aerospace flight control and to display information to pilots and crew is expected to be correct and credible at all times. This type of software is typically developed under strict management processes, which are intended to reduce defects in the software product. However, modeling and simulation (M&S) software may exhibit varying degrees of correctness and credibility, depending on a large and complex set of factors. These factors include its intended use, the known physics and numerical approximations within the M&S, and the referent data set against which the M&S correctness is compared. The correctness and credibility of an M&S effort is closely correlated to the uncertainty management (UM) practices that are applied to the M&S effort. This paper describes an uncertainty structure matrix for M&S, which provides a set of objective descriptions for the possible states of UM practices within a given M&S effort. The columns in the uncertainty structure matrix contain UM elements or practices that are common across most M&S efforts, and the rows describe the potential levels of achievement in each of the elements. A practitioner can quickly look at the matrix to determine where an M&S effort falls based on a common set of UM practices that are described in absolute terms that can be applied to virtually any M&S effort. The matrix can also be used to plan those steps and resources that would be needed to improve the UM practices for a given M&S effort.

Green, Lawrence L.↗
NASA NTRS2015

De-Aliasing Through Over-Integration Applied to the Flux Reconstruction and Discontinuous Galerkin Methods

High-order methods are quickly becoming popular for turbulent flows as the amount of computer processing power increases. The flux reconstruction (FR) method presents a unifying framework for a wide class of high-order methods including discontinuous Galerkin (DG), Spectral Difference (SD), and Spectral Volume (SV). It offers a simple, efficient, and easy way to implement nodal-based methods that are derived via the differential form of the governing equations. Whereas high-order methods have enjoyed recent success, they have been known to introduce numerical instabilities due to polynomial aliasing when applied to under-resolved nonlinear problems. Aliasing errors have been extensively studied in reference to DG methods; however, their study regarding FR methods has mostly been limited to the selection of the nodal points used within each cell. Here, we extend some of the de-aliasing techniques used for DG methods, primarily over-integration, to the FR framework. Our results show that over-integration does remove aliasing errors but may not remove all instabilities caused by insufficient resolution (for FR as well as DG).

High-Order↗
NASA NTRS1990

Navier-Stokes computation of compressible turbulent flows with a second order closure, part 1

A second order closure turbulence model for compressible flows is developed and implemented in a 2D Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes solver. From the beginning where a kappa-epsilon turbulence model was implemented in the bidiagonal implicit method of MACCORMACK (referred to as the MAC3 code) to the final stage of implementing a full second order closure in the efficient line Gauss-Seidel algorithm, numerous work was done, individually and collectively. Besides the collaboration itself, the final product of this work is a second order closure derived from the Launder, Reece, and Rodi model to account for near wall effects, which has been called FRAME model, which stands for FRench-AMerican-Effort. During the reporting period, two different problems were worked out. The first was to provide Ames researchers with a reliable compressible boundary layer code including a wide collection of turbulence models for quick testing of new terms, both in two equations and in second order closure (LRR and FRAME). The second topic was to complete the implementation of the FRAME model in the MAC5 code. The work related to these two different contributions is reported. dilatation in presence of stron shocks. This work, which has been conducted during a work at the Center for Turbulence Research with Zeman aimed also to cros-check earlier assumptions by Rubesin and Vandromme.

Haminh, Hieu↗
NASA NTRS2004

From Runway to Orbit: Reflections of a NASA Engineer

In his remarkable memoir Runway to Orbit, Dr. Kenneth W. Iliff - the recently retired Chief Scientist of the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center- tells a highly personal, yet a highly persuasive account of the last forty years of American aeronautical research. His interpretation of events commands respect, because over these years he has played pivotal roles in many of the most important American aeronautics and spaceflight endeavors. Moreover, his narrative covers much of the second half of the first 100 years of flight, a centennial anniversary being celebrated this year. aerospace knowledge. He arrived at the then NASA Flight Research Center in 1962 as a young aeronautical engineer and quickly became involved in two of the seminal projects of modern flight, the X-15 and the lifting bodies. In the process, he pioneered (with Lawrence Taylor) the application of digital computing to the reduction of flight data, arriving at a method known as parameter estimation, now applied the world over. Parameter estimation not only enabled researchers to acquire stability and control derivatives from limited flight data, but in time allowed them to obtain a wide range of aerodynamic effects. Although subsequently involved in dozens of important projects, Dr. Iliff devoted much of his time and energy to hypersonic flight, embodied in the Shuttle orbiter (or as he refers to it, the world s fastest airplane). To him, each Shuttle flight, instrumented to obtain a variety of data, represents a research treasure trove, one that he has mined for years. This book, then, represents the story of Dr. Ken Iliff s passion for flight, his work, and his long and astoundingly productive career. It can be read with profit not just by scientists and engineers, but equally by policy makers, historians, and journalists wishing to better comprehend advancements in flight during the second half of the twentieth century. Dr. Iliff's story is one of immense contributions to the nation s repository of

Iliff, Kenneth W.↗
DOE OSTI2024

In Situ Liquid Electron Microscope Cells Strongly Attenuate Electrochemical Behavior

In situ electrochemical Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy (ec-S/TEM) probes the dynamics of electrochemical processes in real time and at high spatial resolution. This method utilizes microfabricated electrochemical cells, with enclosed dimensions of 800 μm wide, 800 μm long, and 1–2 μm tall, with electron-transparent silicon nitride windows. Working, counter, and reference electrodes in the configuration studied are deposited Pt with a planar surface area of about 1 μm 2 and a height of 50 nm. The cell confines the electrolyte within a 1 μm tall channel, and the microfabricated electrodes have a non-standard geometry, are coplanar, and are not front-facing. As such, standard assumptions of electrochemical experiments do not apply. COMSOL modeling was used to compare and contrast differences in electrochemical behavior between conventional experimental setups and the in situ ec-S/TEM cells. Cell height strongly affected voltammogram measurements: peak magnitudes and shifts correlate directly to cell height. Reactant concentration above the electrode quickly decreases during deposition, leading to a planar diffusion-dominated regime. The concentration gradient prioritizes particle growth along the thin edges of the electrode and not on the planar part of the electrode. Experiments done in the ec-S/TEM ex situ of a TEM verify the model’s accuracy.

Wittman, Reed M. [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (O↗
NASA NTRS2002

Performance of a Model Rich Burn-quick Mix-lean Burn Combustor at Elevated Temperature and Pressure

As interest in pollutant emission from stationary and aero-engine gas turbines increases, combustor engineers must consider various configurations. One configuration of increasing interest is the staged, rich burn - quick mix - lean burn (RQL) combustor. This report summarizes an investigation conducted in a recently developed high pressure gas turbine combustor facility. The model RQL combustor was plenum fed and modular in design. The fuel used for this study is Jet-A which was injected from a simplex atomizer. Emission (CO2, CO, O2, UHC, NOx) measurements were obtained using a stationary exit plane water-cooled probe and a traversing water-cooled probe which sampled from the rich zone exit and the lean zone entrance. The RQL combustor was operated at inlet temperatures ranging from 367 to 700 K, pressures ranging from 200 to 1000 kPa, and combustor reference velocities ranging from 10 to 20 m/s. Variations were also made in the rich zone and lean zone equivalence ratios. Several significant trends were observed. NOx production increased with reaction temperature, lean zone equivalence ratio and residence time and decreased with increased rich zone equivalence ratio. NOx production in the model RQL combustor increased to the 0.4 power with increased pressure. This correlation, compared to those obtained for non-staged combustors (0.5 to 0.7), suggests a reduced dependence on NOx on pressure for staged combustors. Emissions profiles suggest that rich zone mixing is not uniform and that the rich zone contributes on the order of 16 percent to the total NOx produced.

Peterson, Christopher O.↗
NASA NTRS2004

High-Temperature Probe Station Developed to Characterize Microwave Devices Through 500 C

A photograph and a block diagram of the high-temperature probe station are shown. The system consists of the ceramic heater mounted on a NASA shuttle tile insulator, a direct current power supply, a personal-computer-based data acquisition and temperature controller, microwave probes, a microscope, and a network analyzer. The ability to perform microwave tests at high temperatures is becoming necessary. There is now a need for sensors and communication circuits that can operate at 500 C and above for aircraft engine development and monitoring during flight. To address this need, researchers have fabricated devices using wide bandgap semiconductors such as SiC with targeted operating temperatures of 500 to 600 C. However, the microwave properties of these devices often change drastically with temperature, so any designs that are intended to be used in such an environment must be characterized at high temperatures. For some reliability, lifetime, and direct-current testing, the device under test can be packaged and characterized in an oven. However, for RF and microwave measurements, it is usually not possible to establish a calibrated reference plane at the device terminals within a package. In addition, the characteristics of the package would vary over a 500 C temperature range, and this would have to be accounted for when the data were analyzed. A high temperature probe station allows circuits and devices to be characterized through on wafer measurements across a broad temperature range with known reference plane. The conventional, commercially available thermal wafer-probe stations that are used to evaluate microwave devices across a controlled temperature range have a typical upper limit of 200 C. Standalone thermal heating chucks are available with an extended upper temperature range of 300 to 400 C. To effectively characterize devices at temperatures up to and surpassing 500 C, Glenn researchers developed a custom probe station. In the past, custom probe stations have been developed to test devices under other extreme environments, such as cryogenic temperatures as low as 37 K. Similarly, this custom probe station was specifically modified for high-temperature use. It allows devices to be measured quickly and flexibly, without the use of wire bonds and test fixtures. The probe station is shown making scattering parameter measurements from 1 to 50 GHz with a Hewlett-Packard 8510C Network Analyzer. There is a half-wafer of silicon directly on top of the heater to provide a uniform heated platform for our sample. A quarter wafer of silicon carbide forms the substrate for our test circuit of several transmission lines.

Downey, Alan N.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Sonic Boom Prediction and Minimization of the Douglas Reference OPT5 Configuration

Conventional CFD methods and grids do not yield adequate resolution of the complex shock flow pattern generated by a real aircraft geometry. As a result, a unique grid topology and supersonic flow solver was developed at Northrop Grumman based on the characteristic behavior of supersonic wave patterns emanating from the aircraft. Using this approach, it was possible to compute flow fields with adequate resolution several body lengths below the aircraft. In this region, three-dimensional effects are diminished and conventional two-dimensional modified linear theory (MLT) can be applied to estimate ground pressure signatures or sonic booms. To accommodate real aircraft geometries and alleviate the burdensome grid generation task, an implicit marching multi-block, multi-grid finite-volume Euler code was developed as the basis for the sonic boom prediction methodology. The Thomas two-dimensional extrapolation method is built into the Euler code so that ground signatures can be obtained quickly and efficiently with minimum computational effort suitable to the aircraft design environment. The loudness levels of these signatures can then be determined using a NASA generated noise code. Since the Euler code is a three-dimensional flow field solver, the complete circumferential region below the aircraft is computed. The extrapolation of all this field data from a cylinder of constant radius leads to the definition of the entire boom corridor occurring directly below and off to the side of the aircraft's flight path yielding an estimate for the entire noise "annoyance" corridor in miles as well as its magnitude. An automated multidisciplinary sonic boom design optimization software system was developed during the latter part of HSR Phase 1. Using this system, it was found that sonic boom signatures could be reduced through optimization of a variety of geometric aircraft parameters. This system uses a gradient based nonlinear optimizer as the driver in conjunction with a computationally efficient Euler CFD solver (NIIM3DSB) for computing the three-dimensional near-field characteristics of the aircraft. The intent of the design system is to identify and optimize geometric design variables that have a beneficial impact on the ground sonic boom. The system uses a simple wave drag data format to specify the aircraft geometry. The geometry is internally enhanced and analytic methods are used to generate marching grids suitable for the multi-block Euler solver. The Thomas extrapolation method is integrated into this system, and hence, the aircraft's centerline ground sonic boom signature is also automatically computed for a specified cruise altitude and yields the parameters necessary to evaluate the design function. The entire design system has been automated since the gradient based optimization software requires many flow analyses in order to obtain the required sensitivity derivatives for each design variable in order to converge on an optimal solution. Hence, once the problem is defined which includes defining the objective function and geometric and aerodynamic constraints, the system will automatically regenerate the perturbed geometry, the necessary grids, the Euler solution, and finally the ground sonic boom signature at the request of the optimizer.

Siclari, Michael J.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Reference Atmosphere for Mercury

We propose that Ar-40 measured in the lunar atmosphere and that in Mercury's atmosphere is due to current diffusion into connected pore space within the crust. Higher temperatures at Mercury, along with more rapid loss from the atmosphere will lead to a smaller column abundance of argon at Mercury than at the Moon, given the same crustal abundance of potassium. Because the noble gas abundance in the Hermean atmosphere represents current effusion, it is a direct measure of the crustal potassium abundance. Ar-40 in the atmospheres of the planets is a measure of potassium abundance in the interiors, since Ar-40 is a product of radiogenic decay of K-40 by electron capture with the subsequent emission of a 1.46 eV gamma-ray. Although the Ar-40 in the Earth's atmosphere is expected to have accumulated since the late bombardment, Ar-40 in the atmospheres of Mercury and the Moon is eroded quickly by photoionization and electron impact ionization. Thus, the argon content in the exospheres of the Moon and Mercury is representative of current effusion rather than accumulation over the lifetime of the planet.

Killen, Rosemary M.↗