Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Thinking Systems”

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.

367 records · Page 21

Dividing the Concentrator Target From the Genesis Mission

The Genesis spacecraft, launched in 2001, traveled to a Lagrangian point between the Earth and Sun to collect particles from the solar wind and return them to Earth. However, during the return of the spacecraft in 2004, the parachute failed to open during descent, and the Genesis spacecraft crashed into the Utah desert. Many of the solar wind collectors were broken into smaller pieces, and the field team rapidly collected the capsule and collector pieces for later assessment. On each of the next few days, the team discovered that various collectors had survived intact, including three of four concentrator targets. Within a month, the team had imaged more than 10,000 fragments and packed them for transport to the Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office within the ARES Directorate at JSC. Currently, the Genesis samples are curated along with the other extraterrestrial sample collections within ARES. Although they were broken and dirty, the Genesis solar wind collectors still offered the science community the opportunity to better understand our Sun and the solar system as a whole. One of the more highly prized concentrator collectors survived the crash almost completely intact. The Genesis Concentrator was designed to concentrate the solar wind by a factor of at least 20 so that solar oxygen and nitrogen isotopes could be measured. One of these materials was the Diamond-on-Silicon (DoS) concentrator target. Unfortunately, the DoS concentrator broke on impact. Nevertheless, the scientific value of the DoS concentrator target was high. The Genesis Allocation Committee received a request for approximately 1 cm(sup 2) of the DoS specimen taken near the focal point of the concentrator for the analysis of solar wind nitrogen isotopes. The largest fragment, Genesis sample 60000, was designated for this allocation and needed to be precisely cut. The requirement was to subdivide the designated sample in a manner that prevented contamination of the sample and minimized the risk of losing or breaking the precious requested sample fragment. The Genesis curator determined that the use of laser scribing techniques to "cut" a precise line and subsequently cleave the sample (in a controlled break of the sample along that line) was the best method for accomplishing the sample subdivision. However, there were risks, including excess heating of the sample, that could cause some of the implanted solar wind to be lost via thermal diffusion. Accidentally breaking the sample during the handling and cleaving process was an additional risk. Early in fiscal year 2013, to address this delicate, complicated task, the ARES Directorate assembled its top scientists to develop a cutting plan that would ensure success when applied to the actual concentrator target wafer; i.e., to produce an approximately 1 cm(sup 2) piece from the requested area of the wafer. The team, subsequently referred to as the JSC Genesis Tiger Team, spent months researching and testing parameters and techniques related to scribing, cleaving, transporting, handling, and holding (i.e., mounting) the specimen. The investigation required considerable "thinking outside the box," and many, many trials using nonflight wafer analogs. After all preliminary testing, the following method was adopted as the final cutting plan. It was used in two final end-to-end practice runs before being used on the actual flight target wafer. The wafer was oriented on the laser cutting stage with the 100 and 010 directions of the wafer parallel to the corresponding X and Y directions of the cutting stage. The laser was programed to scribe 31 lines of the appropriate length along the Y stage direction. The programed scribe lines were separated by 5 micron in the X direction. The laser parameters were set as follows: (1) The laser power was 0.5 watts; (2) each line consisted of 50 passes, with the Z position being advanced 5 micron per pass; and (3) 30 s would elapse before the next line was scribed to allow for wafer cool down from any possible heating via the laser. The ablated material that "stuck" in the "scribe-cut" was removed from the "cut" using an ultrasonic micro-tool. After all the ablated silicon was removed from the wafer, the wafer was repositioned in exactly the same orientation on the laser stage. The laser was focused using the bottom of the wafer channel, and the 31-line scribing pattern described above was reprogrammed using the Z position of the groove bottom as the starting Z value instead of the top wafer surface, which was used previously. Upon completion of the second set of scribes, the ultrasonic micro-tool was again used to clean out the cut. The wafer was remounted on the stage in exactly the same orientation as before. The laser was again focused on the bottom of the groove. This time, however, the laser was.programed to scribe only one line down the exact center of the channel. The final scribe line consisted of 100 passes with a Z advance of 5 micron per pass and with the laser power set at 0.5 watts. As mentioned above, the final cutting plan was practiced in two end-to-end trials using non-flight, triangular-shaped silicon wafers similar in size and orientation to the actual DOS 60000 target sample. The actual scribing of the triangular-shaped wafers required scribing two lines and cleaving (i.e. scribe-cleave, then scribe-cleave) to obtain the piece requested for allocation. Early in December 2012, after many months of experiments and practicing and perfecting the techniques and procedures, the team successfully subdivided the Genesis DoS 60000 target sample, one of the most scientifically important samples from the Genesis mission (figure 2). On December 17, 2012, the allocated piece of concentrator target sample was delivered to the requesting principal investigator.The cutting plan developed for the subdivision of this sample will be used as the model for subdividing future requested Genesis flight wafers (appropriately modified for different wafer types).

Lauer, H. V., Jr.↗

Assessing the cumulative effects of nearshore habitat restoration actions for multiple populations of juvenile salmon in Whidbey Basin, Washington: foundation and approach for synthesis and evaluation

Ecosystem restoration is a common tool for re-establishing ecosystem processes, structures, and functions to improve biodiversity and services in coastal and estuarine ecosystems. In the Salish Sea, salmon habitats have been fragmented, reduced in size, and diminished in quality, and the ecosystem processes that form and sustain these habitats have been degraded and disrupted as well. This loss is especially prevalent in estuaries, where up to 90% of former salmon habitat has been lost or compromised. Salmon species are integral to the identities and cultures of people in the Pacific Northwest, yet salmon abundances remain at historic lows, especially in urbanized areas. Recent investments in restoration are creating rearing habitat and repairing lost ecosystem function. However, restoration efforts in this region have largely proceeded at the site scale, with less attention to big-picture thinking regarding how restoration will effectively recover degraded or lost habitats for target species. As a result, no landscape-scale evaluation program exists, and the cumulative benefits of multiple interventions are unknown. We describe innovative methods for science synthesis related to the evaluation of cumulative effects of ecosystem restoration for Pacific salmon, using years of existing, but disparate data. Building from previous work on cumulative effects evaluation and incorporating a hierarchy of hypotheses approach, we propose using causal inference across numerous hypotheses in a framework to assess the cumulative benefits to Pacific salmon from multiple estuarine restoration projects. We present the framework as a method that can be used to address many complex questions and provide examples from the Salish Sea where the approach is being implemented. The framework draws on science synthesis from numerous fields and uses a hierarchy of hypotheses, causal analysis at multiple scales, and a new hierarchy of synthesis for assessing multiple lines of evidence documenting restoration effects on Pacific salmon. We propose causal inference to synthesize dissimilar data streams, in our case, to identify various manifestations of cumulative effects of restoration and benefits to salmon, and to further inform restoration and recovery planning. A unifying framework would allow for the detection of thresholds at which restoration provides measurable improvement and would greatly advance understanding of the effects of restoration on ecosystems.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

[Redesign of the Spacesuit Long Life Battery and the Personal Life Support System Battery]

This fall I was working on two different projects that culminated into a redesign of the spacesuit LLB (long life battery). I also did some work on the PLSS (personal life support system) battery with EC. My first project was redlining the work instruction for completing DPAs (destructive physical analysis) on battery cells in the department. The purpose of this document is to create a standard process and ensure that the data in the same way no matter who carries out the analysis. I observed three DPAs, conducted one with help, and conducted two on my own all while taking notes on the procedure. These notes were used to write the final work instruction that will become is the department standard. My second project continued the work of the summer co-op before me. I was testing aluminum heat sinks for their ability to provide good thermal conduction and structural support during a thermal runaway event. The heat sinks were designed by the summer intern but there was not much time for testing before he left. We ran tests with a heater on the bottom of a trigger cell to try to drive thermal runaway and ensure that it will not propagate to adjacent cells. We also ran heat-to-vent tests in an oven to see if the assembly provided structural support and prevented sidewall rupture during thermal runaway. These tests were carried out at ESTA (energy systems test area) and are providing very promising results that safe, high performing (greater than 180 Wh/kg) designs are possible. My main project was a redesign of the LLB battery. Another summer intern did some testing and concluded that there was no simple fix to mitigate thermal runaway propagation hazards in the current design. The only option was a clean sheet redesign of the battery. I was given a volume and ideal energy density and the rest of the design was up to me. First, I created new heat sink banks in Creo using the information gathered in the metal heat sink tests from the summer intern. After this, I made capture plates to hold the cells in place and I worked on nickel bussings for the electrical connections between the cells. Finally, I designed the test box enclosure that included sections for flame arresting materials. The battery brick design, which is the heart of the battery, promises to become the first for a manned spacecraft application to achieve greater than 180 Wh/kg. My work in redlining the DPA work instructions will also be used in selecting the cells for the battery. We had a few options of cells that would provide the necessary power output and needed to make a choice. We repeatedly charged and discharged cells for around a month until they went through 100 lifecycles. The plan is to compare the DPA results on fresh and cycled cells from each manufacturer to see if cycling introduces any differences. After the complete LLB design was approved, the parts were ordered and testing should begin the first week of December. Some of my side projects included working on the CAD data for the PLSS with EC and attending the NASA Aerospace Battery Workshop in Huntsville. I was also a member of the Tours and Lectures Committee for the USRA and Pathways interns. I coordinated Apollo Evening and was on the committee for touring KSC and seeing an Atlas 5 launch. I really enjoyed my time at JSC and I would like to continue working for NASA or another aerospace company in the future. I have worked other internships prior to this, but I think the heavy research and development focus is the best fit for me. I originally thought I would need to go to grad school to work in an environment like this, but I now see it is possible with a bachelor’s degree and hard work. I would like to go into the workforce and maybe continue my education with night classes.

Scharf, Stephanie↗

Controversy and consensus: common ground and best practices for life cycle assessment of emerging technologies

This manuscript explores six controversial topics regarding LCA of emerging technologies: (1) appropriate use of LCA, (2) uncertainty assessment, (3) comparison with incumbents, (4) adopting standards, (5) system scale-up, and (6) stakeholder engagement. These topics encompass key issues vigorously debated during a series of workshop-style discussions convened by the LCA of Emerging Technologies Research Network (currently hosted by ACLCA). This paper represents the main points of support and opposition for a declarative resolution representing each topic, along with points of consensus, held amongst research network of LCA practitioners and experts. These debates and associated open questions are intended to build awareness amongst practitioners and decision-makers of the common challenges associated with assessing emerging technologies, while fostering evidence-based and context-informed discussions that are both transparent and impactful for the broader community.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Close Range Photogrammetry in Space - Measuring the On-Orbit Clearance between Hardware on the International Space Station

When photogrammetrists read an article entitled "Photogrammetry in Space" they immediately think of terrestrial mapping using satellite imagery. However in the last 19 years the roll of close range photogrammetry in support of the manned space flight program has grown exponentially. Management and engineers have repeatedly entrusted the safety of the vehicles and their crews to the results of photogrammetric analysis. In February 2010, the Node 3 module was attached to the port side Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM) of the International Space Station (ISS). Since this was not the location at which the module was originally designed to be located on the ISS, coolant lines containing liquid ammonia, were installed externally from the US Lab to Node 3 during a spacewalk. During mission preparation I had developed a plan and a set of procedures to have the astronauts acquire stereo imagery of these coolant lines at the conclusion of the spacewalk to enable us to map their as-installed location relative to the rest of the space station. Unfortunately, the actual installation of the coolant lines took longer than expected and in an effort to wrap up the spacewalk on time, the mission director made a real-time call to drop the photography. My efforts to reschedule the photography on a later spacewalk never materialized, so rather than having an as-installed model for the location of coolant lines, the master ISS CAD database continued to display an as-designed model of the coolant lines. Fast forward to the summer of 2015, the ISS program planned to berth a Japanese cargo module to the nadir Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM), immediately adjacent to the Node 3 module. A CAD based clearance analysis revealed a negative four inch clearance between the ammonia lines and a thruster nozzle on the port side of the cargo vehicle. Recognizing that the model of the ammonia line used in the clearance analysis was "as-designed" rather than "as-installed", I was asked to determine the real clearance between the ammonia lines and expected position of the thruster bell using existing on-orbit imagery. Imagery of the area of interest, taken several years earlier from the Space Shuttle during a fly-around of the ISS, was found and used to set a stereo pair. Space Vision System Targets and Handrail bolts measured in the ISS analytical coordinate system (ISSACS) prior to launch, were used to obtain an absolute orientation so all photogrammetric measurement's would be in the ISSACS coordinate system. Coordinates for the design location of the edges of the thruster bell, when the cargo vehicle was fully berthed to the ISS, were displayed in 3-D relative to the as-installed ammonia lines. This immediately revealed a positive clearance, which was later quantified to be a minimum of 10" +/0.5". The analysis was completed over a single weekend by a single analyst. Using updated imagery, acquired from the station's robotic arm, a complete as-installed model of the coolant lines was generated from stereo photography and replaced the design model in the master ISS CAD database.

Liddle, Donn↗

Computing and combustion

Coming into the Combustion Branch of the Turbomachinery and Propulsion Systems Division, there was not any set project planned out for me to work on. This was understandable, considering I am only at my sophmore year in college. Also, my mentor was a division chief and it was expected that I would be passed down the line. It took about a week for me to be placed with somebody who could use me. My first project was to write a macro for TecPlot. Commonly, a person would have a 3D contour volume modeling something such as a combustion engine. This 3D volume needed to have slices extracted from it and made into 2D scientific plots with all of the appropriate axis and titles. This was very tedious to do by hand. My macro needed to automate the process. There was some education I needed before I could start, however. First, TecPlot ran on Unix and Linux, like a growing majority of scientific applications. I knew a little about Linux, but I would need to know more to use the software at hand. I took two classes at the Learning Center on Unix and am now comfortable with Linux and Unix. I already had taken Computer Science I and II, and had undergone the transformation from Computer Programmer to Procedural Epistemologist. I knew how to design efficient algorithms, I just needed to learn the macro language. After a little less than a week, I had learned the basics of the language. Like most languages, the best way to learn more of it was by using it. It was decided that it was best that I do the macro in layers, starting simple and adding features as I went. The macro started out slicing with respect to only one axis, and did not make 2D plots out of the slices. Instead, it lined them up inside the solid. Next, I allowed for more than one axis and placed each slice in a separate frame. After this, I added code that transformed each individual slice-frame into a scientific plot. I also made frames for composite volumes, which showed all of the slices in the same XYZ space. I then designed an addition companion macro that exported each frame into its own image file. I then distributed the macros to a test group, and am awaiting feedback. In the meantime, a am researching the possible applications of distributed computing on the National Combustor Code. Many of our Linux boxes were idle for most of the day. The department thinks that it would be wonderful if we could get all of these idle processors to work on a problem under the NCC code. The client software would have to be easily distributed, such as in screensaver format or as a program that only ran when the computer was not in use. This project proves to be an interesting challenge.

Thompson, Daniel↗

Advancing Dust Tolerant Mechanisms for a Sustained Exploration of the Moon

Introduction: “I think dust is probably one of our greatest inhibitors to a nominal operation on the Moon. I think we can overcome other physio-logical or physical or mechanical problems except dust.”– Gene Cernan, Apollo 17 Technical Debrief The Apollo missions revealed the impact of lu-nar dust on mechanisms. Lunar dust particles are jagged and electrostatically charged, giving them the ability to bind or damage mechanisms and alter thermal properties. Reports documented clogged equipment and jammed mechanisms in every mission, regardless of surface duration, as well as clogged mechanisms in the Extravehicular Mobility Suit (EMS), including zippers, wrist and hose locks, faceplates, and sunshades [1-2]. Several astronauts remarked they could not have sustained surface activity much longer because clogged joints would have frozen up completely [2]. Effective dust mitigation strategies are need-ed to support longer duration stays on the lunar surface [3-4]. State of the Art: Technology for mechanisms able to operate in dusty enviroments is advancing rapidly due to the needs of both Mars rovers and the Artemis program. Vacuum-tight connectors are essential for spacesuits and habitats, and their performance can be dependent on cleaning technologies, which have proven difficult on the lunar surface. Several TRL 3-5 technologies are undergoing tests with the expectation to reach TRL 6 within 1-2 years. Some mechanisms will be infused and tested on the VIPER (Volatiles Inves-tigating Polar Exploration Rover) mission planned for mid-2020s. NASA Funded Efforts: NASA has recognized the need for dust tolerant mechanisms, and has partnered with industry to advance the state-of-the-art. At NASA GRC, KSC, and JSC, the Dust Tolerant Mechanisms Project is working to devel-op advanced actuator seals for rotary joints and rotary bearing technologies for long-term sus-tained operation in lunar dust environments. An-other NASA project at NASA GRC, partnered with GSFC, JPL, and KSC is Motors for Dusty & Ex-treme Cold Environments (MDECE). MDECE is developing an unheated magnetically-geared mo-tor that can operate continuously for a long dura-tion at an ambient temperature of -243 ºC (33 K). NASA GRC has the capability to characterize the effects of dust on seals, mechanisms, and other mating surfaces and components under lunar conditions [5]. Through the SBIR/STTR program, NASA has funded several companies to advance dust toler-ant mechanisms via the Dust Tolerant Mecha-nisms sub-topic with applications in surface mobil-ity, spacesuits, connectors, joints, and more. LSIC and Community Efforts: The Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC) Dust Miti-gation focus group has fostered collaborations across NASA, industry, and academia to develop solutions that minimizes the impact of lunar dust on robotic and human systems. Community ef-forts have included topical meetings on dust tol-erant mechanisms, featured technology presenta-tions, and feedback to NASA on potential gaps and needs. Testing: In 2021, NASA released NASA-STD-1008 [6]. This NASA Technical Standard estab-lishes minimum requirements and provides guid-ance for testing systems and hardware to be ex-posed to dust in planetary environments. The standard has specific sections dedicated to Mechanisms Testing (e.g. bearings, gears) as well as Seals and Mating Surfaces Testing (e.g. hatches, docking systems). Gaps and Needs: NASA is tracking dust tol-erant mechanisms as a gap in a cross-directorate analysis of capability areas needed to enable fu-ture human space-flight architectures. Two high-priority gap areas include additional facilities for testing mechanisms in lunar-surface conditions, and a better understanding of vulnerabilities to the smallest, nanometer-scale dust particles. Conclusion: Understanding and mitigating lu-nar dust is critical to successful, sustained opera-tions on the lunar surface – whether autonomous or otherwise. This presentation will discuss both the state-of-the-art and open needs in lunar dust tolerant mechanisms, technology impacts, mitiga-tion approaches, testing, LSIC community efforts, and more. References: [1] Gaier, J. R. (2020). The Im-pact of Dust on Lunar Surface Equipment During Apollo. Lunar Dust 2020. [2] GRC, & Gaier, J. R. (2005). The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Sys-tems During the Apollo Missions. [3] Johansen, M. R. (2020). An Update on NASA’s Lunar Dust Mitigation Strategy. Lunar Dust 2020. [4] ASI, CSA, ESA, JAXA, & NASA. (2016). Dust Mitiga-tion Gap Assessment Report. [5] Jimenez, N. et al (2022), LPSC Abstract 2572. [6] NASA-STD-1008, 2021.

J I Nunez↗