SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “LABORATORIES”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 253 records · Page 14

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2017

Characterizing the Laboratory Market

Laboratories are estimated to be 3-5 times more energy intensive than typical office buildings and offer significant opportunities for energy use reductions. Although energy intensity varies widely, laboratories are generally energy intensive due to ventilation requirements, the research instruments used, and other health and safety concerns. Because the requirements of laboratory facilities differ so dramatically from those of other buildings, a clear need exists for an initiative exclusively targeting these facilities. The building stock of laboratories in the United States span different economic sectors, include governmental and academic institution, and are often defined differently by different groups. Information on laboratory buildings is often limited to a small subsection of the total building stock making aggregate estimates of the total U.S. laboratories and their energy use challenging. Previous estimates of U.S. laboratory space vary widely owing to differences in how laboratories are defined and categorized. A 2006 report on fume hoods provided an estimate of 150,000 laboratories populating the U.S. based in part on interviews of industry experts, however, a 2009 analysis of the 2003 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) generated an estimate of only 9,000 laboratory buildings. This report draws on multiple data sources that have been evaluated to construct an understanding of U.S. laboratories across different sizes and markets segments. This 2016 analysis is an update to draft reports released in October and December 2016.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

NASA NTRS2003

The Laboratory for Terrestrial Physics

The Laboratory for Terrestrial Physics is dedicated to the advancement of knowledge in Earth and planetary science, by conducting innovative research using space technology. The Laboratory's mission and activities support the work and new initiatives at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). The Laboratory's success contributes to the Earth Science Directorate as a national resource for studies of Earth from Space. The Laboratory is part of the Earth Science Directorate based at the GSFC in Greenbelt, MD. The Directorate itself is comprised of the Global Change Data Center (GCDC), the Space Data and Computing Division (SDCD), and four science Laboratories, including Laboratory for Terrestrial Physics, Laboratory for Atmospheres, and Laboratory for Hydrospheric Processes all in Greenbelt, MD. The fourth research organization, Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), is in New York, NY. Relevant to NASA's Strategic Plan, the Laboratory ensures that all work undertaken and completed is within the vision of GSFC. The philosophy of the Laboratory is to balance the completion of near term goals, while building on the Laboratory's achievements as a foundation for the scientific challenges in the future.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2010

Professor Created On-line Biology Laboratory Course

This paper will share the creation, implementation, and modification of an online college level general biology laboratory course offered for non-science majors as a part of a General Education Curriculum. The ability of professors to develop quality online laboratories will address a growing need in Higher Education as more institutions combine course sections and look for suitable alternative course delivery formats due to declining departmental budgets requiring reductions in staffing, equipment, and supplies. Also, there is an equal or greater need for more professors to develop the ability to create online laboratory experiences because many of the currently available online laboratory course packages from publishers do not always adequately parallel on-campus laboratory courses, or are not as aligned with the companion lecture sections. From a variety of scientific simulation and animation web sites, professors can easily identify material that closely fit the specific needs of their courses, instructional environment, and students that they serve. All too often, on-campus laboratory courses in the sciences provide what are termed confirmation experiences that do NOT allow students to experience science as would be carried out by scientists. Creatively developed online laboratory experiences can often provide the type of authentic investigative experiences that are not possible on-campus due to the time constraints of a typical two-hour, once-per-week-meeting laboratory course. In addition, online laboratory courses can address issues related to the need for students to more easily complete missing laboratory assignments, and to have opportunities to extend introductory exercises into more advanced undertakings where a greater sense of scientific discovery can be experienced. Professors are strongly encourages to begin creating online laboratory exercises for their courses, and to consider issues regarding assessment, copyrights, and Intellectual Property concerns.

Bowman, Arthur W.↗

DOE OSTI2026

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program: FY 2025 Completed Projects

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) largest multiprogram science, technology, and energy laboratory. It possesses distinctive capabilities in a variety of fields, such as neutron science, computing, advanced materials, and nuclear science and technology. Using these capabilities, ORNL conducts basic and applied research and development (R&D) to support DOE’s overarching mission “to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.” As a national resource, ORNL also applies its capabilities and skills to the specific needs of other federal agencies and customers through the DOE Strategic Partnership Projects (SPP) Program. Information about the laboratory and its programs is available on the ORNL website. The Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program at ORNL operates under the authority of DOE Order 413.2C, Laboratory Directed Research and Development, which establishes DOE’s requirements for the program while providing the laboratory director broad flexibility for program implementation. The LDRD Program funds are obtained through a charge to all laboratory programs. Although it represents a relatively small portion of the overall research budget, the LDRD Program plays an essential role in maintaining the laboratory’s ability to respond to national needs. The program allows ORNL to improve its distinctive capabilities and enhance its ability to conduct cutting-edge R&D. In accordance with the DOE order, R&D projects funded through the LDRD Program at ORNL support the goals of • maintaining the scientific and technical vitality of the laboratory, • enhancing the laboratory’s ability to address future DOE missions, • fostering creativity and stimulating exploration of forefront areas of science and technology, • serving as a proving ground for new concepts in R&D, and • supporting high-risk, potentially high-value R&D. This report provides an overview of the LDRD Program at ORNL in FY 2025 and contains summaries of all the LDRD research projects that concluded between October 1, 2024, and September 30, 2025.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2012

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2011

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is a premier research laboratory that is part of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). As a national security laboratory, LLNL is responsible for ensuring that the nation’s nuclear weapons remain safe, secure, and reliable. The Laboratory also meets other pressing national security needs, including countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and strengthening homeland security, and conducting major research in atmospheric, earth, and energy sciences; bioscience and biotechnology; and engineering, basic science, and advanced technology. The Laboratory is managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), and serves as a scientific resource to the U.S. government and a partner to industry and academia. LLNL operations have the potential to release a variety of constituents into the environment via atmospheric, surface water, and groundwater pathways. Some of the constituents, such as particles from diesel engines, are common at many types of facilities while others, such as radionuclides, are unique to research facilities like LLNL. All releases are highly regulated and carefully monitored. LLNL strives to maintain a safe, secure and efficient operational environment for its employees and neighboring communities. Experts in environment, safety and health (ES&H) support all Laboratory activities. LLNL’s radiological control program ensures that radiological exposures and releases are reduced to as low as reasonably achievable to protect the health and safety of its employees, contractors, the public, and the environment. LLNL is committed to enhancing its environmental stewardship and managing the impacts its operations may have on the environment through a formal Environmental Management System. The Laboratory encourages the public to participate in matters related to the Laboratory’s environmental impact on the community by soliciting citizens’ input on matters of significant public interest and through various communications. The Laboratory also provides public access to information on its ES&H activities. LLNL consists of two sites—an urban site in Livermore, California, referred to as the “Livermore site,” which occupies 1.3 square miles; and a rural Experimental Test Site, referred to as “Site 300,” near Tracy, California, which occupies 10.9 square miles. In 2011 the Laboratory had a staff of approximately 6800.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2013

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2012

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is a premier research laboratory that is part of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). As a national security laboratory, LLNL is responsible for ensuring that the nation’s nuclear weapons remain safe, secure, and reliable. The Laboratory also meets other pressing national security needs, including countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and strengthening homeland security, and conducting major research in atmospheric, earth, and energy sciences; bioscience and biotechnology; and engineering, basic science, and advanced technology. The Laboratory is managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), and serves as a scientific resource to the U.S. government and a partner to industry and academia. LLNL operations have the potential to release a variety of constituents into the environment via atmospheric, surface water, and groundwater pathways. Some of the constituents, such as particles from diesel engines, are common at many types of facilities while others, such as radionuclides, are unique to research facilities like LLNL. All releases are highly regulated and carefully monitored. LLNL strives to maintain a safe, secure and efficient operational environment for its employees and neighboring communities. Experts in environment, safety and health (ES&H) support all Laboratory activities. LLNL’s radiological control program ensures that radiological exposures and releases are reduced to as low as reasonably achievable to protect the health and safety of its employees, contractors, the public, and the environment. LLNL is committed to enhancing its environmental stewardship and managing the impacts its operations may have on the environment through a formal Environmental Management System. The Laboratory encourages the public to participate in matters related to the Laboratory’s environmental impact on the community by soliciting citizens’ input on matters of significant public interest and through various communications. The Laboratory also provides public access to information on its ES&H activities. LLNL consists of two sites—an urban site in Livermore, California, referred to as the “Livermore Site,” which occupies 1.3 square miles; and a rural Experimental Test Site, referred to as “Site 300,” near Tracy, California, which occupies 10.9 square miles. In 2012 the Laboratory had a staff of approximately 7000.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2014

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2013

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is a premier research laboratory that is part of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). As a national security laboratory, LLNL is responsible for ensuring that the nation’s nuclear weapons remain safe, secure, and reliable. The Laboratory also meets other pressing national security needs, including countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and strengthening homeland security, and conducting major research in atmospheric, earth, and energy sciences; bioscience and biotechnology; and engineering, basic science, and advanced technology. The Laboratory is managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), and serves as a scientific resource to the U.S. government and a partner to industry and academia. LLNL operations have the potential to release a variety of constituents into the environment via atmospheric, surface water, and groundwater pathways. Some of the constituents, such as particles from diesel engines, are common at many types of facilities while others, such as radionuclides, are unique to research facilities like LLNL. All releases are highly regulated and carefully monitored. LLNL strives to maintain a safe, secure and efficient operational environment for its employees and neighboring communities. Experts in environment, safety and health (ES&H) support all Laboratory activities. LLNL’s radiological control program ensures that radiological exposures and releases are reduced to as low as reasonably achievable to protect the health and safety of its employees, contractors, the public, and the environment. LLNL is committed to enhancing its environmental stewardship and managing the impacts its operations may have on the environment through a formal Environmental Management System. The Laboratory encourages the public to participate in matters related to the Laboratory’s environmental impact on the community by soliciting citizens’ input on matters of significant public interest and through various communications. The Laboratory also provides public access to information on its ES&H activities. LLNL consists of two sites—an urban site in Livermore, California, referred to as the “Livermore Site,” which occupies 1.3 square miles; and a rural Experimental Test Site, referred to as “Site 300,” near Tracy, California, which occupies 10.9 square miles. In 2013 the Laboratory had a staff of approximately 6,300.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2018

Summary of Observations from the 2017 Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center (FRMAC) Laboratory Analysis Training and Capstone Event

On August 15th thru 17th, 2017 the Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center (FRMAC) Laboratory Analysis division, the FRMAC Fly Away Laboratory (FAL), the FRMAC Assessment division, and the Mobile Environmental Response Laboratory (MERL) held a training and capstone event for staff from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Remote Sensing Laboratory (RSL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL). LAB-100, "Sample Control Training", LAB-200 "QA Specialist Training", and LAB-300 "Laboratory Analysis Manager Training" was given the first two days of the event. The purpose of the training and capstone event was to meet training requirements for billeted FRMAC Lab Analysis staff from RSL, LLNL, and SNL as well as raise awareness of the FRMAC Lab Analysis process with EPA staff as part of a Federal Emergency Management Agency — Nuclear Incident Response Team (FEMA-NIRT) laboratory standardization project. An objective of the standardization project was to help improve the transition of operations from DOE to EPA during a response. To do this effectively, detailed knowledge of the FRMAC Lab Analysis process by the EPA is needed. This training provided a good opportunity for this knowledge transfer. A capstone was held after the two-day training event to allow participants to practice the skills they learned in a realistic scenario. A scenario that was previously developed for a quarterly Consequence Management drill (i.e. Dark Phoenix) was used as the basis for the capstone, with laboratory analysis focused injects used to drive the exercise play. Each position within the FRMAC Lab Analysis Division exercised to specific objectives and helped to uncover gaps in the established processes. The lessons learned during this capstone are broken out in the following categories: Sample Control, In-Situ Gamma Spectroscopy, Analysis Request Forms (ARF), Shipping, QA/QC, Fly Away Laboratory (FAL), and Management.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Materials Challenges and Opportunities for Energy Generation, Conversion, Delivery, and Storage (Applied Energy Tri-Laboratory Consortium Workshop Report)

This report documents the outcomes of the Tri-Laboratory Materials Workshop that was held July 31 and August 1, 2019 to begin addressing the needs, opportunities, and challenges associated with the development, fabrication, and testing of the needed materials and components for integrated hybrid energy systems (i.e., incorporating nuclear, fossil, and renewables for electric and thermal applications). This was accomplished by assembling the research program leads and principal investigators at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), who support the research and development of new technology and system integration. The team then identified and prioritized key materials development needs. This effort was intended to enhance communications and synergy among the Tri-Lab partners. Advanced functional and structural materials are central to transformative energy technologies for energy generation, conversion, delivery, and storage. With that in mind, the workshop focused on identifying and assessing the foundational materials research needs at both the basic and applied levels. Materials challenges include the ability to withstand harsh environments, such as high temperatures and pressures, corrosion, oxidation, or irradiation while maintaining flexible mission profiles and long service lifespans. Advanced energy system material challenges and needs range from materials for the capture, upgrading/concentration, storage, and delivery of low-grade heat to materials for high temperature environments that involve liquid metals, molten salt, and very high temperature gas heat delivery and storage systems. Material improvements are needed for hybrid energy systems due to accelerated corrosion and stress-fatigue failure of materials and equipment, which results from increased frequency and amplitude of thermal, mechanical, and electrical cycling of systems components. Multifunctional materials are needed for high temperature solid-oxide fuel cells, advanced electrochemical reactors, and in-process separation. Relative to materials manufacturing, application of advanced additive and subtractive methods need to be understood to develop both thin-layer homogenous materials and materials of graded composition. Materials modeling and machine learning will be critical to accelerate the design and production of power electronics, and nuclear reactor materials and fuel, as well as to gain an understanding of beneficial materials phenomena or deleterious microstructure evolution. There is also a need for standardized models, computational structures, data reporting protocols and modeling tools across the three laboratories. This would allow consistent results, analysis, and data sharing. Combining computational capabilities between the three laboratories (e.g., hardware, software) would greatly increase computational capabilities and throughput. The workshop identified the need for laboratories to anticipate and address problems that will occur during scale-up. Laboratory work must connect with industry to ensure that research focuses on processes that are scalable and marketable. Industry input and perspective are essential to guide laboratory research to meet these requirements and deploy new technology in industrial demonstrations. Another aspect of scale-up is the integration of multiple systems since new challenges often arise at the subsystem interfaces. Establishing a scale-up manufacturing demonstration/pilot plant, potentially as an industrial user facility, would be beneficial to the laboratories and industry. That modular scale-up manufacturing demonstration/pilot plant would allow researchers to find and resolve interface problems that cannot be identified by focusing only on individual parts. Communication exchanges among the organizers, attendees, and workshop survey responses indicate that the workshop was successful in achieving its goal to identify key technology gaps and research needs. Strong positive feedback was received on the sharing of ideas, capabilities, talent, and passion to move forward on the materials-related action items.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2023

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program: FY 2021 Completed Projects

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) largest multiprogram science, technology, and energy laboratory. It possesses distinctive capabilities in neutron science, computing, advanced materials, nuclear science and technology, and other fields. Using these capabilities, ORNL conducts basic and applied R&D to support DOE’s overarching mission “to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.”1 As a national resource, ORNL also applies its capabilities and skills to specific needs of other federal agencies and customers through the DOE Strategic Partnership Projects (SPP) Program. Information about the laboratory and its programs is available on the ORNL website.2 The Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program at ORNL operates under the authority of the DOE Order 413.2C, “Laboratory Directed Research and Development,”3 which establishes DOE’s requirements for the program while providing the laboratory director broad flexibility for program implementation. The LDRD Program funds are obtained through a charge to all laboratory programs. Although it represents a relatively small portion of the overall research budget, the LDRD Program plays an essential role in maintaining the laboratory’s ability to respond to national needs. The program allows ORNL to improve its distinctive capabilities and to enhance its ability to conduct cutting-edge R&D. In accordance with the DOE order, R&D projects funded through the LDRD Program at ORNL support the following goals: (1) maintain the scientific and technical vitality of the laboratory; (2) enhance the laboratory’s ability to address future DOE missions; (3) foster creativity and stimulate exploration of forefront areas of science and technology; (4) serve as a proving ground for new concepts in R&D; and (5) support high-risk, potentially high-value R&D. This report provides an overview of the LDRD Program at ORNL in FY 2021 and contains summaries of all LDRD research projects that concluded between October 1, 2020, and September 30, 2021.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program: FY 2024 Completed Projects Report

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) largest multiprogram science, technology, and energy laboratory. It possesses distinctive capabilities in a variety of fields, such as neutron science, computing, advanced materials, and nuclear science and technology. Using these capabilities, ORNL conducts basic and applied research and development (R&D) to support DOE’s overarching mission “to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.” As a national resource, ORNL also applies its capabilities and skills to the specific needs of other federal agencies and customers through the DOE Strategic Partnership Projects (SPP) Program. Information about the laboratory and its programs is available on the ORNL website. The Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program at ORNL operates under the authority of DOE Order 413.2C, Laboratory Directed Research and Development,3 which establishes DOE’s requirements for the program while providing the laboratory director broad flexibility for program implementation. The LDRD Program funds are obtained through a charge to all laboratory programs. Although it represents a relatively small portion of the overall research budget, the LDRD Program plays an essential role in maintaining the laboratory’s ability to respond to national needs. The program allows ORNL to improve its distinctive capabilities and to enhance its ability to conduct cutting-edge R&D. In accordance with the DOE order, R&D projects funded through the LDRD Program at ORNL support the goals of • maintaining the scientific and technical vitality of the laboratory; • enhancing the laboratory’s ability to address future DOE missions; • fostering creativity and stimulating exploration of forefront areas of science and technology; • serving as a proving ground for new concepts in R&D; and • supporting high-risk, potentially high-value R&D. This report provides an overview of the LDRD Program at ORNL in FY 2024 and contains summaries of all the LDRD research projects that concluded between October 1, 2023, and September 30, 2024.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

NASA NTRS2002

Laboratory for Atmospheres: Philosophy, Organization, Major Activities, and 2001 Highlights

How can we improve our ability to predict the weather? How is the Earth's climate changing? What can the atmospheres of other planets teach us about our own? The Laboratory for Atmospheres is helping to answer these and other scientific questions. The Laboratory conducts a broad theoretical and experimental research program studying all aspects of the atmospheres of the Earth and other planets, including their structural, dynamical, radiative, and chemical properties. Vigorous research is central to NASA's exploration of the frontiers of knowledge. NASA scientists play a key role in conceiving new space missions, providing mission requirements., and carrying out research to explore the behavior of planetary systems, including, notably, the Earth's. Our Laboratory's scientists also supply outside scientists with technical assistance and scientific data to further investigations not immediately addressed by NASA itself. The Laboratory for Atmospheres is a vital participant in NASA's research program. The Laboratory is part of the Earth Sciences Directorate based at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. The Directorate itself comprises the Global Change Data Center; the Earth and Space Data Computing Division; three laboratories: the Laboratory for Atmospheres, the Laboratory for Terrestrial Physics, and the Laboratory for Hydrospheric Processes; and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York, New York. In this report, you will find a statement of our philosophy and a description of our role in NASA's mission. You'll also find a broad description of our research and a summary of our scientists' major accomplishments in 2001. The report also presents useful information on human resources, scientific interactions, and outreach activities with the outside community. For your convenience, we have published a version of this report on the Internet. Our Web site includes links to additional information about the Laboratory's Offices and Branches. You can find us on the World Wide Web at http://atmospheres.gsfc.nasa.gov.

Hoegy, Walter R.↗

NASA NTRS2006

NASA Laboratory Astrophysics Workshop 2006 Introductory Remarks

NASA Laboratory Astrophysics Workshop 2006, is the fourth in a series of workshops held at four year intervals, to assess the laboratory needs of NASA's astrophysics missions - past, current and future. Investigators who need laboratory data to interpret their observations from space missions, theorists and modelers, experimentalists who produce the data, and scientists who compile databases have an opportunity to exchange ideas and understand each other's needs and limitations. The multi-wavelength character of these workshops allows cross-fertilization of ideas, raises awareness in the scientific community of the rapid advances in other fields, and the challenges it faces in prioritizing its laboratory needs in a tight budget environment. Currently, we are in the golden age of Space Astronomy, with three of NASA s Great Observatories, Hubble Space Telescope (HST), Chandra X-Ray Observatory (CXO), and Spitzer Space Telescope (SST), in operation and providing astronomers and opportunity to perform synergistic observations. In addition, the Far Ultraviolet Spectroscopic Explorer (FUSE), XMM-Newton, HETE-2, Galaxy Evolution Explorer (GALEX), INTEGRAL and Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), are operating in an extended phase, while Swift and Suzaku are in their prime phase of operations. The wealth of data from these missions is stretching the Laboratory Astrophysics program to its limits. Missions in the future, which also need such data include the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), Space Interferometry Mission (SIM), Constellation-X (Con-X), Herschel, and Planck. The interpretation of spectroscopic data from these missions requires knowledge of atomic and molecular parameters such as transition probabilities, f-values, oscillator strengths, excitation cross sections, collision strengths, which have either to be measured in the laboratory by simulating space plasma and interactions therein, or by theoretical calculations and modeling. Once the laboratory data are obtained, a key step to making them available to the observer is the creation and maintenance of critically compiled databases. Other areas of study, that are important for understanding planet formation, and for detection of molecules that are indicators of life, are also supported by the Laboratory Astrophysics program. Some examples are: studies of ices and dust grains in a space environment; nature and evolution of interstellar carbon-rich dust; and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. In addition, the program provides an opportunity for the investigation of novel ideas, such as simulating radiative shock instabilities in plasmas, in order to understand jets observed in space. A snapshot of the currently funded program, mission needs, and relevance of laboratory data to interpreting observations, will be obtained at this workshop through invited and contributed talks and poster papers. These will form the basis for discussions in splinter groups. The Science Organization Committee will integrate the results of the discussions into a coherent White Paper, which will provide guidance to NASA in structuring the Laboratory Astrophysics program in subsequent years, and also to the scientific community in submitting research proposals to NASA for funding.

Hasan, Hashima↗

NASA NTRS2012

Investigations Using Laboratory Testbeds to Interpret Flight Instrument Datasets from Mars Robotic Missions

The Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science Directorate at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) has laboratory instrumentation that mimic the capabilities of corresponding flight instruments to enable interpretation of datasets returned from Mars robotic missions. The lab instruments have been and continue to be applied to datasets for the Moessbauer Spectrometer (MB) on the Mars Exploration Rovers (MER), the Thermal & Evolved Gas Analyzer (TEGA) on the Mars Phoenix Scout, the CRISM instrument on the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter Missions and will be applied to datasets for the Sample Analysis at Mars (SAM), Chemistry and Mineralogy (CheMin) and Chemistry & Camera (ChemCam) instruments onboard the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL). The laboratory instruments can analyze analog samples at costs that are substantially lower than engineering models of flight instruments, but their success to enable interpretation of flight data depends on how closely their capabilities mimic those of the flight instrument. The JSC lab MB instruments are equivalent to the MER instruments except without flight qualified components and no reference channel Co-57 source. Data from analog samples were critical for identification of Mg-Fe carbonate at Gusev crater. Fiber-optic VNIR spectrometers are used to obtain CRISM-like spectral data over the range 350-2500 nm, and data for Fephyllosilicates show irreversible behavior in the electronic transition region upon dessication. The MB and VNIR instruments can be operated within chambers where, for example, the absolute H2O concentration can be measured and controlled. Phoenix's TEGA consisted of a calorimeter coupled to a mass spectrometer (MS). The JSC laboratory testbed instrument consisted of a differential scanning calorimeter (DSC) coupled to a MS configured to operate under total pressure (12 mbar), heating rate (20 C/min), and purge gas composition (N2) analogous to the flight TEGA. TEGA detected CO2 release at both low (400-680 C) and high (725-820 C) temperature and an endothermic reaction in concert with the high temperature release. The high-temperature thermal decomposition is consistent with calcite, dolomite, or ankerite, (3-6 wt.%) or any combination of these phase based upon laboratory testbed experiments. Recent laboratory experiments suggest that the low temperature CO2 release was caused by a reaction between calcium carbonate and hydrated magnesium perchlorate; although, CO2 release by the oxidation of organic materials and Fe-/Mg-rich carbonates cannot be ruled out. MSL landed in Gale crater on August 5, 2012. Although numerous analog samples have been analyzed on the JSC laboratory testbeds, no SAM, CheMin, or ChemCam analyses have been acquired by MSL to date. The JSC SAM laboratory testbed consists of a thermal analyzer coupled with a MS configured to operate under total pressure (30 mbar), heating rate (35 C/min), and purge gas composition (He) analogous to the flight SAM. The CheMin and ChemCam laboratory testbeds were developed and built by inXitu, Inc. and Los Alamos National Laboratory, respectively, to acquire datasets relevant to the MSL CheMin and ChemCam flight instruments.

Ming, D. W.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

AIAA ASCEND 2023 Panel Session Proposal: Community Perspectives on Establishing a Government-Funded National Laboratory in a Commercially-Driven LEO Ecosystem

AIAA ASCEND 2023 Panel Session Proposal: Community Perspectives on Establishing a Government-Funded National Laboratory in a Commercially-Driven LEO Ecosystem Submitted by the NASA Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy March 8, 2023 Session Format: Panel Session Topic: Expanding and Evolving the Space Economy Session Title: Community Perspectives on Establishing a Government-Funded National Laboratory in a Commercially-Driven LEO Ecosystem Short Session Description: NASA is preparing for the retirement of the ISS and transition of government-sponsored low-Earth orbit (LEO) activities to Commercial LEO Destinations (CLDs), which includes a government-funded national lab. This transition necessitates new models to connect government-funded users of the LEO environment to CLDs. This panel will highlight updates on what may constitute a national laboratory, share perspectives from members of LEO user communities, and open the discussion for additional comments. Requested Session Duration: 90 minutes Extended Session Description: NASA is preparing for the retirement of the ISS and transition of low-Earth orbit (LEO) activities to Commercial LEO Destinations (CLDs), including planning for a national laboratory. This transition necessitates new models for connecting government-funded users of the LEO environment to CLDs. NASA has made progress on models and a stepwise strategy to enable this national laboratory. This session will discuss guiding national strategies and highlight perspectives on what constitutes a national laboratory from current user communities. A NASA panel participant will introduce the rationale for continuing a national laboratory utilizing CLDs and speak on progress-to-date. This includes furthering national priorities to continue a space-based microgravity national laboratory. It also may include a brief overview of a study conducted by NASA which elucidates a trade space of models for a national laboratory and highlights from an interagency working group on microgravity for additional context. A moderator and five panelists representing diverse LEO user communities will then share perspectives on topics relating to this new dynamic ecosystem, expectations for models and activities, and other thoughts on NASA’s progress. Panelists may consist of members from the following communities: NASA, other U.S. government agencies, startups, small businesses, academia, and non-profits. The panel then plans to open discussion to the audience for questions, input, and additional feedback. Session Goal(s)/Outcome(s): By hosting a panel session, NASA aims to accomplish two goals. First, NASA wishes to update the community on progress towards establishing a national laboratory in low-Earth orbit. This includes sharing key perspectives heard from stakeholder communities. The second goal is to highlight the collaborative nature of such an undertaking and to facilitate additional discussion with other current and future users of the LEO community. Participants (not exhaustive): Erica Rodgers; Robyn Gatens

Erica Marie Rodgers Heusinkveld↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Laboratory Astrophysics in the United States

Laboratory astrophysics is a strong and vibrant field in the US with its primary national representation as a full Division of the American Astronomical Society (AAS). Laboratory Astrophysics is also represented in other major scientific societies such as the Astrochemistry subdivision of the American Chemical Society (ACS), the High Energy Density Laboratory Astrophysics (HEDLA) and the Division of Astrophysics (DAP) of the American Physical Society (APS) to cite a few. Laboratory Astrophysics and Astrochemistry is also well represented in federal agencies such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) where research programs are fully dedicated to the support of laboratory astrophysics research. Laboratory Astrophysics is also well represented in the Academic arena where Physics, Astronomy and/or Chemistry Departments in many universities host a laboratory Astrophysics or Astrochemistry curriculum. The increasing recognition of the field of laboratory astrophysics has been recently reinforced by its inclusion into the recommendations of the two most recent Decadal Surveys of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). I will discuss and present the many aspects and representations of Laboratory Astrophysics in the US and summarize the current efforts in the field.

Laboratory Astrophysics↗

DOE OSTI2024

Exploring Grid-Interactive Efficient Building Strategies for Laboratories Through Energy Modeling

Laboratories are often overlooked in demand flexibility research due to constraints on their operations as mission critical facilities, despite the major role they play in an organization's emissions. Laboratories consume 3-4 times more energy than a typical office building and are commonly the largest energy users on any campus. Consequently, most laboratories in the United States are significant contributors to their organization's carbon footprint if their energy needs are met through the combustion of fossil fuels. As part of the initiative to decarbonize laboratories, this report documents an analysis on specifically grid-interactive efficient building (GEB) opportunities for reducing energy costs and emissions associated with laboratory operations. The goal of this initiative was to provide a case study and guidance on how to use OpenStudio and REopt as modeling tools for GEB technologies and strategies in laboratory environments across different climate zones in the United States. The analysis found that efficiency-based GEB strategies had the most significant impact on laboratory operations, while load-shedding and load-shifting GEB strategies produced smaller results. The culmination of these approaches applied across all five climate zones generated on average: 1) 28% energy cost savings and 30% greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions, and 2) 4% enhanced energy cost savings under a time-of-use (TOU) pricing schedule compared to traditional pricing schemes. Grid-interactive efficiency building measures were found to produce the greatest energy savings in both electricity and natural gas, particularly in regions with high electrical loads, such as warm climates for cooling. Laboratories that had high levels of natural gas consumption, meanwhile, experienced the greatest emission reductions. The report concludes with an analysis on the opportunities for flexible loads in lab spaces and how small-scale measures in addition to opaque pricing structures for peak demand could become barriers to demand flexibility planning. The report also explores how electrifying laboratory buildings with heat pumps could reduce energy costs and GHG emissions.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2011

Analyses by the Defense Waste Processing Facility Laboratory of Thorium Glasses from the Sludge Batch 6 Variability Study

The Savannah River Remediation (SRR) Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) is currently processing Sludge Batch 6 (SB6) with Frit 418. At times during the processing of this glass system, thorium is expected to be at concentrations in the final wasteform that make it a reportable element for the first time since startup of radioactive operations at the DWPF. The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) supported the qualification of the processing of this glass system at the DWPF. A recommendation from the SRNL studies was the need for the DWPF Laboratory to establish a method to measure thorium by Inductively Coupled Plasma - Atomic Emission Spectroscopy (ICPAES). This recommendation led to the set of thorium-bearing glasses from the SB6 Variability Study (VS) being submitted to the DWPF Laboratory for chemical composition measurement. The measurements were conducted by the DWPF Laboratory using the sodium peroxide fusion preparation method routinely employed for analysis of samples from the Slurry Mix Evaporator (SME). These measurements are presented and reviewed in this report. The review indicates that the measurements provided by the DWPF Laboratory are comparable to those provided by Analytical Development's laboratory at SRNL for these same glasses. As a result, the authors of this report recommend that the DWPF Laboratory begin using its routine peroxide fusion dissolution method for the measurement of thorium in SME samples of SB6. The purpose of this technical report is to present the measurements generated by the DWPF Laboratory for the SB6 VS glasses and to compare the measurements to the targeted compositions for these VS glasses as well as to SRNL's measurements (both sets, targeted and measured, of compositional values were reported by SRNL in [2]). The goal of these comparisons is to provide information that will lead to the qualification of peroxide fusion dissolution as a method for the measurement by the DWPF Laboratory of thorium in SME glass samples.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗