Search NASASearch

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Scanning electron microscopy”

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.

473 records · Page 27

UCB-GLOBES: An open-access mass spectral database of identified and unidentified atmospheric organic compounds

Chemical characterization of atmospheric organic aerosols using gas chromatography with 70 eV electron ionization mass spectrometry (GC/EI-MS) has been used for decades in advancing molecular marker detection and identification, though primarily through suspect screening and/or targeted analyses. To advance non-targeted analyses of environmental samples, we have catalogued approximately 27 000 mass spectra (MS) of the trimethylsilyl derivatives of semi-volatile organic aerosol (OA) analytes in the open-access University of California Berkeley Goldstein Library of Organic Biogenic Environmental Spectra (UCB-GLOBES). Analytes were observed in ambient samples from the U.S. and the Central Amazon and/or laboratory simulations of secondary OA (SOA) formation. These samples are representative of OA under urban and biomass burning influences as well as SOA derived from biogenic precursors (e.g., isoprene, monoterpenes, sesquiterpenes) and biomass burning intermediates. MS are documented in UCB-GLOBES without regard to known chemical identity, annotated with extensive metadata such as sample source/experimental conditions, any structural information gained from MS analyses, and predicted chemical properties such as average carbon oxidation state and carbon number. UCB-GLOBES MS are compatible for importing into the NIST MS Search program, and we have also provided a Jupyter Notebook for MS visualization and comparisons. We demonstrate the utility of UCB-GLOBES through MS reanalyses of prior analytes observed in ambient data, finding a 20 % reduction in the number of analytes assigned to OA source categories reliant solely on time series correlation and an overall 11 % increase in new MS-based OA source categorization for the Southeast U.S. For 1513 analytes observed previously in the Central Amazon, we found 375 MS matches using UCB-GLOBES vs. 136 MS matches during prior analyses, representing a 14 % gain in newly confirmed or newly categorized OA species. While OA from laboratory oxidation experiments in UCB-GLOBES are highly diverse chemically, on average only 29 % of UCB-GLOBES MS have a mass spectral match to another MS entry in UCB-GLOBES and/or in databases of known compounds (i.e. NIST MS Database, Adams Essential Oil, MANE Flavor and Fragrance Company). This indicates that roughly 70 % of UCB-GLOBES MS are unique thus far, not observed more than once among the laboratory oxidation samples and ambient data in UCB-GLOBES MS. Further, only 18 % can be positively identified using these databases or known authentic standards. This points to a large gap between these laboratory simulations and ambient OA. Overall, the UCB-GLOBES database can be utilized for improving confidence in OA source categorization and/or identification, novel chemical marker discovery, tracking chemical diversity, de novo structure and properties prediction, and improving MS search and matching algorithms. This can ultimately inform future research priorities for the chemical characterization of atmospheric organic samples.

Mass spectrometry

Introduction to Flight Test Engineering [Introduction Aux Techniques Des Essais En Vol]

Flight test is at the core of what organizations must do in order to validate the operation and systems on an aircraft. While the AGARDograph series 300 and 160 series deal with aspects of this testing, this volume pulls it all together as an introduction to the process required to do effective flight test engineering. This volume was originally published in 1995. Its utility has been proven in that many flight test organizations and universities have requested copies for their engineers and students. It was felt that re-issuing it in a new format designed for electronic publication would be valuable to the community. This second printing changes none of the text, but rather reformats it. All the original references to AGARD (instead of RTO) are left in place so that none of the flavor of the original publication is lost. This is the Introductory Volume to the Flight Test Techniques Series. It is a general introduction to the various activities and aspects of Flight Test Engineering that must be considered when planning, conducting, and reporting a flight test program. Its main intent is to provide a broad overview to the novice engineer or to other people who have a need to interface with specialists within the flight test community. The first two Sections provide some insight into the question of why flight test and give a short history of flight test engineering. Sections 3 through 10 deal with the preparation for flight testing. They provide guidance on the preliminary factors that must be considered; the composition of the test team; the logistic support requirements; the instrumentation and data processing requirements; the flight test plan; the associated preliminary ground tests; and last, but by no means least, discuss safety aspects. Sections 11 through 27 describe the various types of flight tests that are usually conducted during the development and certification of a new or modified aircraft type. Each Section offers a brief introduction to the topic under consideration, and the nature and the objectives of the tests to be conducted. It lists the test instrumentation (and, where appropriate, other test equipment and facilities) required, describes the test maneuvers to be executed, and indicates the way in which the test data is selected, analyzed, and presented. The various activities that should take place between test flights are presented next. Items that are covered are: who to debrief; what type of reports to send where: types of data analysis required for next flight; review of test data to make a comparison to predicted data and some courses of action if there is not good agreement; and comments on selecting the next test flight. The activities that must take place upon completion of the test program are presented. The types of reports and briefings that should take place and a discussion of some of the uses of the flight test data are covered. A brief forecast is presented of where present trends may be leading.

Test facilities

Investigating Laser Beam Welding as an In-Space Joining Technique via Thermal Vacuum and Microgravity and Vacuum Experiments

In-space joining technologies are crucial for stimulating an in-space economy and for enabling sustained space exploration by in-space manufacturing and repair of metallic structures. Compared to brazing or soldering, in-space welding (ISW) can provide highly hermetic, strong, and complex joints, potentially without introducing additional material. However, the influence of extreme temperatures, reduced pressure, and reduced gravity on ISW is not yet fully elucidated. Several efforts at NASA are investigating laser beam welding (LBW) as a joining and repair method in both thermal vacuum (TVAC) and combined vacuum & reduced gravity environments. NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) shepherded several ISW projects in its past, including the 1973 electron beam welding on Skylab, the 1989 low-power LBW on parabolic flights, and the unflown 1990s-era In-Space Welding Experiment. Recent parabolic flights and 3 degree-of-freedom ground testing build upon this heritage. A collaboration with the Ohio State University using NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) hardware retrofitted for LBW achieved the first high-powered laser welds under vacuum and low gravity and developed a workforce capable developing such experimental hardware. A ground testing campaign at the MSFC Flat Floor simulated fit-up and welding representative of ISW in 3 degrees of freedom to emulate microgravity effects on inertial systems. One ongoing effort is a NASA Early Career Initiative project – Lunar Assembly and Servicing by Autonomous Robotics (LASAR). Ruggedized LBW components were developed by an external partner for use in TVAC. A TVAC-rated robotic arm was procured by MSFC and used in the first known robotic laser weld where all components save the laser generator were under vacuum. NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) is advancing supervised autonomy of ISW. NASA LaRC continues to adapt their unique snowflake joint geometry, suitable for connecting segments in trusses and other structures, to LBW. Upcoming TVAC campaigns will focus on testing extreme temperatures, proving out autonomous operations, and demonstrating weld repair. Weld inspection will occur via a non-contact nondestructive evaluation (NDE) technique – electromagnetic acoustic transduction (EMAT). Another ongoing effort based at MSFC is the DISCMAN -- DIsk-Shaped Configurable and Modular vAcuum uNit – which seeks to development a compact, modular payload that can provide a vacuum environment while in a reduced gravity condition. This payload could support multiple in-space manufacturing developmental efforts, with the first demonstration technology being LBW. Currently, the design is targeting operations in the pressurized volume of a space station, but the payload could readily be adapted to other flight platforms such as parabolic or even suborbital vehicles. LASAR elucidates the effects of temperature and vacuum on LBW while DISCMAN probes those of vacuum and gravity. Through these complementary efforts, NASA is addressing the primary challenges of ISW across the space environment while simultaneously developing and maturing technologies including robotic systems and inspection methodologies for future practical implementation on the Moon and beyond. This approach is timely, as upcoming missions requiring sustained human presence in space will depend on reliable ISW capabilities to create robust metallic joints currently unproven in the space environment and to perform repairs in situ .

hypogravity

HydraGNN_Predictive_GFM_2026 - Ensemble of predictive graph foundation models for atomistic materials modeling

This release contains data and parameters of HydraGNN-based graph foundation models trained as a result of the work published in the pre-print "Exascale Multi-Task Graph Foundation Models for Imbalanced, Multi-Fidelity Atomistic Data" by M. Lupo Pasini et al. (https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.15380). We jointly train on 16 open first-principles datasets (544+ million structures covering 85+ elements) using a multi-task architecture with per-dataset heads and a scalable ADIOS2/DDStore data pipeline. On Frontier, we execute six large-scale DeepHyper hyperparameter optimization campaigns in FP64 and promote the top-performing message-passing models to sustained 2,048-node training, yielding a PaiNN-based lead model. The version of HydraGNN used to generate the outputs provided in this release is HydraGNN v5.0 (https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0) The list of datasets used for the training of the graph foundation model is the following: 1) Alexandria [1] 2) ANI1x [2] 3) MPTrj [3] 4) Open Catalyst 2020 (OC20) [4] 5) Open Catalyst 2022 (OC22) [5] 6) Open Catalyst 2025 (OC25) [6] 7) Open Direct ir Capture 2023 (ODAC23) [7] 8) Open Materials 2024 (OMat24) [8] 9) Open Molecules 2025 (OMol25) [9] 10) OMol25-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with zero total charge) 11) OMol25-non-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with non-zero total charge) 12) Open Polymers 2026 (OPoly2026) [10] 13) Nabla2DFT [11] 14) QCML [12] 15) QM7X [reference 13] 16) transition1x [14] Dataset references: [1] J. Schmidt et al., “A dataset of 175k stable and metastable materials calculated with the PBEsol and SCAN functionals,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 64, 2022. [2] J. S. Smith et al., “The ANI-1ccx and ANI-1x data sets, coupled-cluster and density functional theory properties for molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 7, p. 134, 2020. [Online]. Available: https: //www.nature.com/articles/s41597-020-0473-z [3] A. Jain et al., “Commentary: The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation,” APL Materials, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 011002, 07 2013. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4812323 [4] L. Chanussot et al., “Open catalyst 2020 (oc20) dataset and community challenges,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 6059–6072, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.0c04525 [5] K. Tran et al., “Open catalyst 2022 (oc22) dataset and challenges for oxidation electrocatalysts,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 3066–3084, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.2c05426 [6] S. J. Sahoo et al., “The open catalyst 2025 (oc25) dataset and models for solid-liquid interfaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.17862, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.17862 [7] A. Sriram et al., “The open DAC 2023 dataset and challenges for sorbent discovery in direct air capture,” ACS Central Science, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 923–941, 2024. [8] L. Barroso-Luque et al., “Open materials 2024 (omat24) inorganic materials dataset and models,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12771 [9] D. S. Levine et al., “The open molecules 2025 (OMol25) dataset, evaluations, and models,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.08762 [10] D. S. Levine et al., The open polymers 2026 (OPoly26) dataset and evaluations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.23117, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.23117 [11] K. Khrabrov et al., “Nabla2dft: A universal quantum chemistry dataset of drug-like molecules and a benchmark for neural network potentials,” in NeurIPS 2024 Datasets and Benchmarks Track, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=ElUrNM9U8c [12] S. Ganscha et al., “The QCML dataset, quantum chemistry reference data from 33.5M DFT and 14.7B semi-empirical calculations,” Scientific Data, vol. 12, p. 406, 2025. [13] J. Hoja et al., “QM7-X, a comprehensive dataset of quantum-mechanical properties spanning the chemical space of small organic molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 8, p. 43, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-021-00812-2 [14] M. Schreiner et al., “Transition1x - a dataset for building generalizable reactive machine learning potentials,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 779, 2022. The folder "datasets_ADIOS2_format" contains the set of pre-processed datasets in Adaptable I/O System (ADIOS) format (https://www.exascaleproject.org/research-project/adios/) that have been used for the development and training of GFMs in this work. The "datasets_ADIOS2_format" directory contains 2 sub-directories, one for the version "v1" of the datasets and one for the version "v2" of the datasets. The version "v1" of the datasets provides values of the total energy as they are extracted from the original data as it was released by the respective institutions. The version "v2" of the datasets provides values of the energy that have been realigned. The realignment was performed by training a linear regression model that predicts the total energy as a function of the chemical composition of the atomistic structure, and then subtract such prediction from the original value of the total energy. Both folders "v1" and "v2" contain 16 sub-directories, each corresponding to an ADIOS2-formatted dataset The folder "DeepHyper-results" contains the configurational files and model's parameters for all the 186 HPO trials that were successfully completed by the scalable hyperparameter optimization (HPO) runs on Frontier. The content of the folder "DeepHyper-results" I structured as follows: 1) task-list.txt: list of mpnn name, jobid, and deephyper task id 2) gfm_${MPNN}_${JOBID}_0.${TASKID}: run directory with checkpoint files 3) gfm_${MPNN}: deephyper summary directory (*.csv) for each specific MPNN type 4) deephyper-experiment-${JOBID}: output and error logs for each job The file "deephyper-sorted.csv" contains the details of each HydraGNN model built and tested by HPO, obtained by merging the (*.csv) filed from each HPO run executed. Out of all the HPO trials, we selected 10 to continue the training of the respective HydraGNN models. Due to limited computational budget available in the LRN070 allocation we could not complete the training till convergence for all these 10 selected models. The folder "models" contains multiple sub-folders, one per each HydraGNN model trained. Each model sub-folder contains the parameters of each HydraGNN model, with multiple checkpoint-restarts. The list of sub-folders are as follows: 1) multidataset_hpo-BEST1-fp64 2) multidataset_hpo-BEST2-fp64 3) multidataset_hpo-BEST3-fp64 4) multidataset_hpo-BEST4-fp64 5) multidataset_hpo-BEST5-fp64 6) multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64 7) multidataset_hpo-BEST7-fp64 8) multidataset_hpo-BEST8-fp64 9) multidataset_hpo-BEST9-fp64 10) multidataset_hpo-BEST10-fp64 Within each one of these folders, additional auxiliary log files are provided with descriptions about how the training proceeded. The lead PaiNN-model is contained inside "multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64". The file "mlp_branch_weights" contains the parameters of the multi-layer perceptron (MLP) used to reconcile the predictions of the 16 output decoding heads of the HydragNN architectures. The MLP takes in input the chemical composition of the atomistic structure and predicts averaging weights to linearly mix the predictions of each output decoding head toward consolidating them into a single one. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 1.1 billion atomistic structures randomly generated. Each structures is associated with energy and forces predicted with the lead-PaiNN model combined with the MLP model for reconciliation of the multi-branch predictions generated by the 16 output decoding heads. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 9,300 (*.tar.gz) subdirectories, one per Frontier compute node used to execute the inference at exascale. Once uncompressed, each (*.tar.gz) subdirectory contains an ADIOS2 (*.bp) file container, where each atomistic structure is stored as a PyTorch-Geometric Data object. The file "export_dataset_environment_variables.sh" contains the environment variables that need to be set before running the HydraGNN code to reproduce the results provided in this dataset release. The code that can be used to load the ADIOS2 files, load HydraGNN models, and run inference is available at: https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE

Low-energy calibration of SuperCDMS HVeV cryogenic silicon calorimeters using Compton steps

Cryogenic calorimeters for low-mass dark matter searches have achieved sub-eV energy resolutions, driving advances in both low-energy calibration techniques and our understanding of detector physics. The energy deposition spectrum of gamma rays scattering off target materials exhibits step-like features, known as Compton steps, near the binding energies of atomic electrons. Here, we demonstrate a successful use of Compton steps for sub-keV calibration of cryogenic silicon calorimeters, utilizing four SuperCDMS High-Voltage eV-resolution detectors operated with 0 V bias across the crystal. This new calibration at 0 V is compared with the established high-voltage calibration using optical photons. The comparison indicates that the detector response at 0 V is about 30% weaker than expected, highlighting challenges in detector response modeling for low-mass dark matter searches.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS