Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “open R&D issues”

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.

22 records · Page 2

Herschel's "Cold Debris Disks": Background Galaxies or Quiescent Rims of Planetary Systems?

Infrared excesses associated with debris disk host stars detected so far peak at wavelengths around approx, 100 micron or shorter. However, 6 out of 31 excess sources studied in the Herschel Open Time Key Programme, DUNES, have been seen to show significant-and in some cases extended-excess emission at 160 micron, which is larger than the 100 micron excess. This excess emission has been attributed to circumstellar dust and has been suggested to stem from debris disks colder than those known previously. Since the excess emission of the cold disk candidates is extremely weak, challenging even the unrivaled sensitivity of Herschel, it is prudent to carefully consider whether some or even all of them may represent unrelated galactic or extragalactic emission, or even instrumental noise. We re-address these issues using several distinct methods and conclude that it is highly unlikely that none of the candidates represents a true circumstellar disk. For true disks, both the dust temperatures inferred from the spectral energy distributions and the disk radii estimated from the images suggest that the dust is nearly as cold as a blackbody. This requires the grains to be larger than approx. 100 micron, even if they are rich in ices or are composed of any other material with a low absorption in the visible. The dearth of small grains is puzzling, since collisional models of debris disks predict that grains of all sizes down to several times the radiation pressure blowout limit should be present. We explore several conceivable scenarios: transport-dominated disks, disks of low dynamical excitation, and disks of unstirred primordial macroscopic grains. Our qualitative analysis and collisional simulations rule out the first two of these scenarios, but show the feasibility of the third one. We show that such disks can indeed survive for gigayears, largely preserving the primordial size distribution. They should be composed of macroscopic solids larger than millimeters, but smaller than a few kilometers in size. If larger planetesimals were present, then they would stir the disk, triggering a collisional cascade and thus causing production of small debris, which is not seen. Thus, planetesimal formation, at least in the outer regions of the systems, has stopped before "cometary" or "asteroidal" sizes were reached.

Herschel↗

Open-source Numerical Modeling of Solidification Cracking Susceptibility: Application to Refractory Alloy Systems

Introduction. Alloys such as aluminum, nickel-base, and austenitic stainless steels are susceptible to solidification cracking during welding and 3D printing. Compositional optimization is one method used to effectively mitigate solidification cracking of those alloy systems. With the surge in hypersonic and in-space propulsion activities, refractory metals (Nb, Mo, Ta, W, and Re) and their alloy derivatives are increasing in importance due to their extreme high melting point and retention of high-temperature strength; however, their chemistry was most typically optimized to promote ductility during mechanical operations such as drawing and forming. Welding of such alloys has been a challenge due to a number of issues including solidification cracking, atmospheric contamination (O, C, and N), as well as a shift in ductile-to-brittle transition to higher temperature following grain growth induced by welding. Compositional optimization of refractory alloys for solidification cracking resistance in particular is desirable as their usage increases with the advent of advanced manufacturing methods such as 3D printing. This work evaluates the effect of compositional variation in refractory metal systems on the solidification cracking susceptibility with the goals of optimizing existing alloys and joining process techniques, and formulating new alloys with increased solidification cracking resistance. Experimental Procedures. A python code was developed in a Jupyter notebook environment (Michael and Sowards, 2023) to facilitate the calculation of crack susceptibility index proposed by Kou (2015). Composition is entered as a single point, or as a 1-D or 2-D array. The notebook calls pycalphad (Otis and Liu, 2017 and Bocklund et al, 2020) to calculate the evolution of fraction solid as a function of temperature (under either Scheil or equilibrium assumptions) and then evaluates steepness of the fraction solid curve near the terminal stage of solidification to predict solidification cracking resistance. Open source thermodynamic databases available at online repositories are used (van de Walle). The process is setup in an automated fashion to generate plots that show variation in solidification cracking susceptibility according to composition on 1-D line plots or 2-D contour plots. The Jupyter notebook and crack susceptibility algorithm was also integrated with a widely used commercial CALPHAD code for validation and alloy exploration. Results and Discussion. The crack susceptibility model was first validated against a series of refractory alloy compositions evaluated in past work which utilized a specialized Varestraint test built inside a vacuum chamber environment (Lessman and Gold, 1971). The alloys tested in the Varestraint apparatus included T-111 (Ta-8W-2Hf), ASTAR-811C (Ta-8W-1Re-0.7Hf-0.025C), FS-85 (Nb-27Ta-10W-1Zr), T-222 (Ta-9.6W-2.4Hf-0.01C), Ta-10W, B-66 (Nb-5Mo-5V-1Zr), and SCb-291 (Nb-10W-10Ta). The initial test of the model showed a strong correlation with empirical Varestraint data, i.e., a Spearman rank correlation between model predictions and hot cracking measurements was observed to be greater than 0.8. Following the validation, a set of refractory metal binary mixtures was investigated to evaluate sensitivity of Nb, Mo, W, and Ta to C, N, and O content. A series of plots were produced that suggest ppmw ranges of C, N, and O where solidification cracking increases significantly and reaches a maximum. Also comparative ranking of each primary refractory metal to each interstitial was produced. For example C produces greater cracking response in Mo whereas O produces greater cracking response in Ta and Nb. Such compositional values have utility in setting limits on pickup of these interstitial elements during welding and printing rather than using a one-size-fits-all approach. Furthermore, the results have use in determining additive powder recycling requirements, which is especially pertinent for refractory metal powders due to their high cost compared to conventional alloys. Another application created thousands of hypothetical alloys within the nominal specified composition range of two widely used refractory alloys C103 (Nb-10Hf-1Ti) and TZM (Mo-0.5Ti-0.1Zr). The cracking index was calculated for the alloys and results were fed into machine learning regression techniques including Multiple Linear Regression, Ridge Regression, and Lasso Regression to determine relative potency each alloying element had on computed solidification cracking index. A series of linear equations were produced that relate composition of C103 and TZM to solidification cracking index. The crack susceptibility of C103 for example is described by an equation of the form: cracking index ~ O + 0.667*C + 0.635*N + 0.00037*Ta – 0.0008*Hf (in wt.%) From that equation, it is clear that O has strong propensity to induce solidification cracking. Interestingly, Hf is shown to reduce calculated cracking response. Finally, realizing the potential of this method to discover new refractory alloy formulations across the period table that have low solidification cracking sensitivity, the code was applied to new untested alloy systems including W-Zr-C, W-Ta-C, and others. Conclusions. In summary, an open source numerical method has been developed using Python code to calculate Kou’s crack susceptibility index. The method was applied to refractory metals which are inherently difficult to study from a weldability testing standpoint since inert shielding gas is not sufficient and welding is typically done in vacuum, especially in light of findings presented here where oxygen has profound influence on solidification cracking. This work revealed the effect of compositional variations on a series of refractory metals and showed the framework defined here will be useful in 1) the development of new alloys that have improved weldability and 3D printability, 2) placing compositional limits on existing alloys, and 3) ensuring adequate controls of manufacturing processes such as 3D printing where powder reuse is critical. Keywords. pycalphad; Python; refractory metals; solidification cracking. References. B. Bocklund et. al. (2020) http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3630657. S. Kou. (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2015.01.034. G.G. Lessmann and R.E. Gold. Welding Journal, issue 1, pp. 1-s – 8-s (1971). F.N. Michael and J.W. Sowards. NASA/TM-20230002218 (2023). R. Otis and Z.-K. Liu. (2017) http://doi.org/10.5334/jors.140. A. Van de Wallle et. al. (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.calphad.2018.04.003.

pycalphad↗

A METHOD TO REDUCE BIOBURDEN IN ASTROMATERIALS CURATION FACILITIES WITHOUT INTRODUCING UNWANTED CONTAMINATION

Introduction: NASA curates its Astromaterials collections in cleanrooms that are carefully monitored for particulate, inorganic and trace metal contamination. Current sample collections are not particularly susceptible to organic contamination or biological alteration. However, new collections like those from the OSIRIS-REx and Hayabusa2 missions will have organic contamination requirements and are susceptible to biodegradation. It will be necessary sterilize or at least disinfect curation labs, as well as tools and equipment in a manner that does not introduce additional contamination and does not affect the samples 1. Current curation cleaning procedures utilize isopropyl alcohol which offers some bioburden reduction, but is not effective against spore-forming bacteria or fungal spores 2. We present a modified disinfection method that uses ultrapure hydrogen peroxide to reduce bioburden inside curation labs and glove boxes without introducing contamination or damaging curation equipment. We tested this method in the meteorite processing lab as well as on a glovebox being cleaned for use in processing ANGSA (Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis) samples and present the results of those tests. We discuss the limitations of this method and describe potential situations in which it will not be applicable. The CDC guidelines for disinfection andsterilization in healthcare facilities discusses over 15different methods for reducing bioburden in hospitalsettings 3. The most common method, steamsterilization, is well suited to sterilizing curationprocessing tools but cannot easily be used to sterilizecleanroom surfaces or large equipment likegloveboxes. Chemical sterilization with bleach(NaOCl) is also a common strategy in healthcare andpharmaceutical settings that presents materialcompatibility issues as well as serious inorganiccontamination concerns for curation facilities.Introducing a new source of Na and Cl into curationlabs is not acceptable. Other chemical methods likeethylene oxide, formaldehyde, iodophors andquaternary ammonium compounds could introduceorganic and inorganic contamination. We chose tofocus on hydrogen peroxide because it is generallycompatible with commonly used curation materialslike stainless steel, aluminum and Teflon and becauseit decomposes to oxygen and water. The CDCguidelines for hydrogen peroxide specify using a 7.5wt% solution at 25 ̊C with a contact time of 30 minutesfor high level disinfection and 6 hours for sterilization.High level disinfection is defined as a technique thatwill kill all microorganisms except large numbers ofbacterial spores 3. Methods: We prepared a solution of 7.5 wt%hydrogen peroxide from a stock solution of ultrapure30 wt% peroxide (JT Baker) and curation gradeultrapure water. This ultrapure water is already used incuration cleaning procedures and thus is not consideredand additional source of contamination. We conducteda materials compatibility test by exposing unanodizedand anodized 6061 T6 Al alloy to the peroxide solutionfor up to six hours and periodically inspecting thesurfaces for visible defects. We used this peroxide todisinfect the floor of the meteorite processing lab andthe interior of a curation glovebox by exposing thesesurfaces to the peroxide solution for 30 min. Thesurfaces were swabbed with a dry macrofoam swabbefore (Puritan Brand 2518051PFRNDFD) and afterperoxide treatment to collect microbes present on thesurfaces. Microbes were extracted by sonication fromthe swab into 15 ml of PBS (phosphate buffered saline)and inoculated onto the following media: TSA (trypticsoy agar) BA (blood agar), R2A (Reasoners 2 agar),Potato Dextrose Agar, Saboraud Dextrose Agar andSaboraud Dextrose Agar with 0.1 mg/ mlchloramphenicol. Four TSA plates and two BA plateswere inoculated with 0.1 ml of PBS each andincubated at 35 and 37 for 48 hours. Two R2A°C°Cplates (0.1 ml of PBS each) were incubated at 25 .°CThe remaining plates were inoculated with 0.2ml ofPBS and incubated at 30 ̊C for seven days. Afterincubation bacterial and fungal isolates were countedand transferred to new plates for identification usingthe VITEK24 automated system or by sequencing aportion of the barcode gene (16S rRNA for bacteria,small subunit gene for fungi) on an ABI 3500 Sangersequencer. Negative controls consisted of swabs thatwere opened in the sampling environment andanalyzed alongside the experimental samples.Results: A 6 hour exposure to hydrogen peroxideresulted in visible pitting on un-anodized 6061 Al, butnot on anodized surfaces. No visible pitting occurredafter a 30 minute exposure. Therefore, we decided tolimit our experimental tests to 30 min. exposures. 17bacterial CFU (colony forming units) representing 4distinct organisms were isolated from the meteorite processing lab floor prior to hydrogen peroxidetreatment. We were unable culture any organisms afterperoxide treatment. In the glovebox we were able toculture three bacterial CFU representing three distinctspecies, including a spore forming bacterium prior todisinfection with peroxide. After the peroxidetreatment we were unable to culture any organisms.Routine monitoring of the meteorite processing lab andthe glovebox did not indicate any increase in unwantedinorganic contamination after these peroxidetreatments. Discussion: A 30 minute treatment with 7.5 wt%peroxide appears to be an effective method forreducing bioburden on typical cleanroom surfaces. Themethod does not introduce unwanted organic orinorganic contamination and is compatible withcommonly used curation materials like stainless steel,Teflon and anodized aluminum alloys. Special careshould be taken with un-anodized aluminum.Prolonged exposure to hydrogen peroxide can causepitting on this material. We recommend using thismethod to disinfect curation labs and equipment whenbiological alteration is a concern. This method iseffective at room temperature and cannot be used todisinfect labs and equipment where the ambienttemperature is < 0 ̊C. Astromaterials samples shouldbe removed from the area where disinfection is tooccur. Hydrogen peroxide is a powerful oxidizingagent and will react with any organic carbon present inthe sample. References: [1.] Mccubbin, F. M. et al.Sp. Sci Rev(2019) doi:10.1007/s11214-019-0615-9. [2.] Mogul, R.et al.Astrobiology 18, ast.2017.1814 (2018). [3.]Rutala, W. A. & Weber, D. J. Guideline for Disinfection and Sterilization in Healthcare Facilities, 2008. [4.] Pincus, D. H. in Encyclopedia of Rapid Microbiological Methods (2005).

A. B. Regberg↗

EVA Swab Kit: Tools and Techniques for Collecting Aseptic Samples from Crewed Space Missions

Introduction: When we send humans to search for life on other planets, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed spacecraft meet planetary protection requirements—and to protect our science from human contamination—we'll need to assess and verify whether micro-organisms may be leaking/venting from our spacesuits. This requires collecting samples under Extravehicular Activity (EVA) conditions. Detailed, systematic research on forward contamination from robotic spacecraft has been steadily progressing since the Viking missions, but systematic studies of contamination from space suits has not been conducted in many years. The modern EMU (Extravehicular Mobility Unit) suit used by NASA is designed to leak at rates as high as 100 cc/min. Before humans land on Mars there is a critical need to understand the types and quantities of microbes that could be introduced via space suits. The Human Forward Contamination Assessment team at NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC) has developed a prototype EVA swab tool [1,2,3,4] designed for use in space to sample cleaned and uncleaned space suits to determine the present day microbial load and eventually the rate of leakage. The ability to assess microbial leakage early in advanced space suit and life support system design cycles will help avoid costly hardware redesign later. Test Objectives: The primary objective of EMU testing was to characterize the type of micro-organisms typically found on or near selected suit pressure joints under suit differential pressure conditions. Most human-borne microbes can fit through a 0.5 to 1.0 µm gap. Knowing which joints are more likely to leak will inform hardware design decisions. Knowing which types of micro-organisms may leak from EVA suits provides a basis for subsequent studies to characterize the viability of those organisms under destination conditions, as well as how far they might spread through natural or human-influenced processes. That data, in turn, will inform exploration mission operations and hardware design. The secondary objective of testing was to evaluate the interface between a fully suited test subject and the EVA swab tool at vacuum. Bulky EVA suits can restrict movement and limit visibility through the helmet visor. Fully suited testing is important for identifying tool design issues prior to flight. At exploration destinations, such as Mars, suited crew may be required to periodically sample their suits as part of an environmental monitoring protocol. Suit Microbial Sampling Results: This report details results of microbial swabs collected from current flight suit configurations worn by crew members assigned to upcoming ISS expedition missions as well as swabs collected from prototype suits intended for use on the Orion spacecraft. These tests were intended to characterize the types of contaminants found on flight suits under current, typical handling conditions. No attempt was made to change suit handling procedures, provide additional sterilization, or to limit typical potential contaminant sources. Using culture based techniques, we cultivated 235 CFU (colony forming units) comprised of 26 bacterial species and one fungal species on the outside of the suits. The fungal species and 14 of the bacterial species were unique to the suit surfaces and were not detected in any of the background samples collected within the chambers. We sequenced 755,434 ribosomal fragments on all of the suit surfaces from swab samples. 557,016 of these sequences represent DNA that survived at least 4 hours at vacuum. These sequences formed 2,464 OTU's (Operational Taxonomic Units, 97% similarity) showing low diversity in the samples. The most abundant sequences that survived vacuum belong to the genera Staphyloccocus, Ralstona, Bacillus and Rhodobacter all of which are common to the human microbiome. [5] See Danko et al., (2021) for more complete details of these first analyses. Further analysis of EVA suit materials with respect to the efficacy of various cleaning protocols and engineered containment solutions is planned to inform suit design for NASA’s Artemis Moon to Mars program crew testing. Swab Tool Function Results: The kit was demonstrated for fit and function in suited subject vacuum tests to determine how well the tool worked as an aseptic microbial sampling device as well as to identify any design elements that could be upgraded for EVA task specific improvement. It was found that sample acquisition efficacy could be enhanced by redesign of the sample canister to end-effector interface. Several modifications of the sample caddy assemblies to optimize EVA safety and functionality were also identified. Consequently, fabrication of the redesigned sample canister to end-effector assembly interfaces and and the sample caddy assemblies are required. Fabrication of sixteen flight sample canister assemblies (8 per each of two EVA Swab Kits) and two sample caddy assemblies are in process to be followed by hardware testing and certification to produce two flight-certified EVA Swab Kits for transport to ISS no earlier than summer of 2022. Sampling Strategy: The International Space Station is an ideal testbed for systematic studies of contamination from crewed vehicles since it has been continuously occupied for 20 years and exposed to non-terrestrial conditions. We will sample the exterior of the ISS during EVA using a purpose-built swab tool capable of maintaining sterility while undergoing temperature changes from -151 to +121°C under hard vacuum. Prior to each EVA, the project team will work with ISS mission managers to identify precise sampling locations, which will vary by EVA based on the translation paths and worksites scheduled for that particular EVA. Ideally, translation path handrails and areas near ECLSS (Environmental Control and Life Support System) external vent openings on a spacecraft would be assessed. There are currently more than a dozen ECLSS external vents on the ISS. Some are connected to systems that vent waste products, while others are intended to equalize cabin pressure. As EVA opportunity allows, microbial samples from any of these external vents would provide a valuable data point, though some will be more useful than others. Four criteria have been identified to help prioritize sampling sites near vents: • EVA Accessibility: To minimize cost, it is desired to piggy-back onto a planned EVA. Therefore, the sampling location must be readily accessible by an EVA crew • Type of Vented Products: Vent products that have been in direct contact with crew, such as cabin air, are more likely to contain microorganisms than vent products associated with isolated systems, such as experiment module combustion products. • Mass of Vented Products: Higher-flow vents are more likely to contain detectible levels of microbial contaminants than lower-flow vents. • Local Environment: Sample locations with relatively benign local conditions, such as warm surfaces shielded from direct ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure, may be more likely to support microbial growth than locations with harsher local environmental conditions. Because EVA accessibility is the most important criteria, the proposal team worked with an astronaut and flight controllers using the Dynamic Onboard Ubiquitous Graphics (DOUG) tool. The DOUG virtual environment allows an operator to “fly” around the current ISS vehicle configuration to assess EVA translation paths, attach points, and keep-out zones. While analysis on station or rapid return to Earth would be preferable, samples collected from the exterior of the ISS have already been exposed to temperature variations between -157 and +121 °C as well as hard vacuum. Therefore, they should be fairly stable and robust. We hypothesize that samples collected from the ISS exterior could be stored for up to 6 months at -80°C without degradation. Sample canisters will be returned to Earth while frozen at -80°C for analysis, and sterilized canisters can be re-flown back to ISS to support additional sampling opportunities Relevance to NASA Exploration Objectives: These data will allow us to identify new or improved methods, technologies, and procedures for spacecraft sterilization and leakage mitigation to minimize the amount of contamination introduced to the environment by human explorers. This work is funded by NASA research grant: NNH18ZDA001N-PPR References: [1] Bell, M.S. et al. (2015) LPS XLVI, Abst. #1832 [2] Rucker et al. (2018) 42nd COSPAR (PPP.3) [3] Bell, M.S. et al. (2019) Mars Extant Life Conference, Abst. #5096.[4] Bell, M.S. et al., (2020) 43rd COSPAR (BO.2).[5] Danko D, et.al.,(2021)Front.Microbiol.12:608478.

Mary Suzanne Bell↗