Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “hazard avoidance”

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.

511 records · Page 29
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Designing for Advanced Aerial Mobility: Human-Autonomy Teaming and In-Time System-Wide Safety Assurance

The continued growth of aviation shall require new innovative technologies and operational concepts to meet the ever-increasing demands on air transportation. The NASA Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) project focuses on emerging aviation markets, such as Urban Air Mobility (UAM). UAM is defined as “...a safe and efficient system for air passenger and cargo transportation within an urban area. It is inclusive of small package delivery and other urban unmanned aerial system services and supports a mix of onboard/ground-piloted and increasingly autonomous operations” ([1]). The AAM project emphasizes technology development and validating system-level concepts and solutions in coordination with other NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) projects to enable UAM metro- and micro-plex vertiport and airspace concepts of operations. The NASA AAM research portfolio includes the concepts of Remote Supervisor-in-Command (RSC) and Fleet and Airspace Manager (FAM) as possible human roles for consumer fleet providers. NASA research in RSC is focused on development of guidelines and standards for remote pilots/operators passively and actively controlling a large fleet of autonomous aircraft. For FAM, flight and ground system concepts and technologies to enable high density homogeneous operations at increased scale from vertiport(s), and coordination with other humans in the systems (e.g., UAM urban airspace manager, Air Traffic Control) are key research areas. The envisioned UAM operations are posited to require autonomous systems to enable functions ranging from fleet and resource management to vehicle control. Although automation has become increasingly sophisticated and ubiquitous in civil aviation, autonomy represents a significant evolution in automation, which has generally been limited in functional scope and capability. As autonomy takes on increasing responsibilities, humans and machines will be required to work together in new and different ways [2], rather than traditional design approaches focused on how machines (i.e., autonomy) can do the work of people. The emerging field of human-autonomy teaming (HAT) represents a comprehensive and prioritized research-driven approach to enable the success of future emerging aviation market applications through capabilities and principles that facilitate humans and machine working and thinking better together. The NASA Transformational Tools and Technologies (TTT) Autonomous System (AS) Sub-project was created to assist with the transition into higher levels of autonomy to enable new modes of air transportation, such as UAM. TTT-AS has identified HAT as a key research need to enable UAM while maintaining today’s ultra-safe aviation system safety levels. The latter challenge has been taken up by the NASA System-Wide Safety (SWS) Project, which recognizes that aviation safety, as it evolves, shall require new ways of thinking about safety to include integration of a wide-range of existing and new safety systems and practices, enhanced tools and technologies, increased access to data and data fusion, improved data analysis capabilities, enhanced in-time risk monitoring and detection, hazard prioritization and mitigation, safety assurance decision-support, and in-time integrated system analytics [3].The operational concept of UAM represents a variety of work that has been termed, “work-as-imagined” to characterize the idea that how people think that work is done and how work is actually done are often not the same [4]. To ensure design success and system safety, looking at “work-as-done” provides a comparative approach toward UAM concept and technology design through examination of corresponding analogs found today in aviation (e.g., on-demand operations) and other transportation domains (e.g., port operations). The paper shall discuss various alternative applications with specific focus on airline operation center (AOC) operations, and unmanned aerial system (UAS) command-and-control to inform scaled-versions of FAM and RSC, respectively, and with consideration of the national airspace system contextual environment. The tenets and principles of the HAT field and current NASA research efforts under the TTT-AS sub-project shall also be described. Finally, the SWS sub-project efforts to develop In-Time System-Wide Safety Assurance (ISSA) and In-Time Safety Management Systems (IASMS) are discussed in terms of how “in-time” safety assurance may be conceptualized for the on-demand mobility air taxi “work-as-imagined” operational concept [5]. As part of this effort, concepts from the emerging field of resilience engineering, are being studied. Traditional approaches to aviation safety have focused on what can go wrong and how to prevent it. Another approach to thinking about system safety should reflect not only “avoiding things that go wrong” (protective safety) but also “ensuring that things go right” (productive safety), that enables a system to exhibit the resilient performance [6] necessary for the success of the future aviation system emerging concepts of operations. The paper shall describe efforts focused on how productive safety and resilience may enable a more complete approach to system safety thinking and design of ISSA and IASMS for UAM. Future directions and research needs shall also be discussed.

resilience↗
NASA NTRS2012

Comparison of Four Strong Acids on the Precipitation Potential of Gypsum in Brines During Distillation of Pretreated, Augmented Urine

In this study, three different mineral acids were substituted for sulfuric acid (H2SO4) in the urine stabilizer solution to eliminate the excess of sulfate ions in pretreated urine and assess the impact on maximum water recovery to avoid precipitation of minerals during distillation. The study evaluated replacing 98% sulfuric acid with 85% phosphoric acid (H3PO4), 37% hydrochloric acid (HCl), or 70% nitric acid (HNO3). The effect of lowering the oxidizer concentration in the pretreatment formulation also was studied. This paper summarizes the test results, defines candidate formulations for further study, and specifies the injection masses required to stabilize urine and minimize the risk of mineral precipitation during distillation. In the first test with a brine ersatz acidified with different acids, the solubility of calcium in gypsum saturated solutions was measured. The solubility of gypsum was doubled in the brines acidified with the alternative acids compared to sulfuric acid. In a second series of tests, the alternative acid pretreatment concentrations were effective at preventing precipitation of gypsum and other minerals up to 85% water recovery from 95th-percentile pretreated, augmented urine. Based on test results, phosphoric acid is recommended as the safest alternative to sulfuric acid. It also is recommended that the injected mass concentration of chromium trioxide solution be reduced by 75% to minimize liquid resupply mass by about 50%, reduce toxicity of brines, and reduce the concentration of organic acids in distillate. The new stabilizer solution formulations and required doses to stabilize urine and prevent precipitation of minerals up to 85% water recovery are given. The formulations in this study were tested on a limited number of artificially augmented urine batches collected from employees at the Johnson Space Center (JSC). This study successfully demonstrated that the desired physical and chemical stability of pretreated urine and brines can be achieved using alternate pretreatment formulations under laboratory conditions. Additional testing and hazard assessments will be required to determine the feasibility of utilizing the proposed urine pretreatment formulations on ISS.

Muirhead, Dean↗
NASA NTRS2013

First Cloud-to-Ground Lightning Timing Study

NASA's LSP, GSDO and other programs use the probability of cloud-to-ground (CG) lightning occurrence issued by the 45th Weather Squadron (45 WS) in their daily and weekly lightning probability forecasts. These organizations use this information when planning potentially hazardous outdoor activities, such as working with fuels, or rolling a vehicle to a launch pad, or whenever personnel will work outside and would be at-risk from lightning. These organizations would benefit greatly if the 45 WS could provide more accurate timing of the first CG lightning strike of the day. The Applied Meteorology Unit (AMU) has made significant improvements in forecasting the probability of lightning for the day, but forecasting the time of the first CG lightning with confidence has remained a challenge. To address this issue, the 45 WS requested the AMU to determine if flow regimes, wind speed categories, or a combination of the two could be used to forecast the timing of the first strike of the day in the Kennedy Space Center (KSC)/Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) lightning warning circles. The data was stratified by various sea breeze flow regimes and speed categories in the surface to 5,000-ft layer. The surface to 5,000-ft layer was selected since that is the layer the 45 WS uses to predict the behavior of sea breeze fronts, which are the dominant influence on the occurrence of first lightning in Florida during the warm season. Due to small data sample sizes after stratification, the AMU could not determine a statistical relationship between flow regimes or speed categories and the time of the first CG strike.. As expected, although the amount and timing of lightning activity varies by time of day based on the flow regimes and speed categories, there are extended tails of low lightning activity making it difficult to specify times when the threat of the first lightning flash can be avoided. However, the AMU developed a graphical user interface with input from the 45 WS that allows forecasters to visualize the climatological frequencies of the timing of the first lightning strike. This tool should contribute directly to the 45 WS goal of improving lightning timing capability for its NASA, US Air Force and commercial customers.

statistical analysis↗
NASA NTRS2004

Analysis of Droplet Size during the Ice Accumulation Phase Of Flight Testing

There are numerous hazards associated with air travel. One of the most serious dangers to the pilot and passengers safety is the result of flying into conditions which are conducive to the formation of ice on the surface of an aircraft. Being a pilot myself I am very aware of the dangers that Icing can pose and the effects it can have on an airplane. A couple of the missions of the Icing branch is to make flying safer with more research to increase our knowledge of how ice effects the aerodynamics of an airfoil, and to increase are knowledge of the weather for better forecasting. The Icing Branch uses three different tools to determine the aerodynamic affects that icing has on a wing. The Icing research tunnel is an efficient way to test various airfoils in a controlled setting. To make sure the data received from the wind tunnel is accurate the Icing branch conducts real flight tests with the DHC-6 Twin Otter. This makes sure that the methods used in the wind tunnel accurately model what happens on the actual aircraft. These two tools are also compared to the LEWICE code which is a program that models the ice shape that would be formed on an airfoil in the particular weather conditions that are input by the user. One benefit of LEWICE is that it is a lot cheaper to run than the wind tunnel or flight tests which make it a nice tool for engineers designing aircraft that don t have the money to spend on icing research. Using all three of these tools is a way to cross check the data received from one and check it against the other two. industries, but it is also looked at by weather analysts who are trying to improve forecasting methods. The best way to avoid the troubles of icing encounters is to not go into it in the first place. By looking over the flight data the analyst can determine which conditions will most likely lead to an icing encounter and then this information will aid forecasters when briefing the pilots on the weather conditions. am looking at the weather data from certain flights and analyzing the type of precipitation that the plane is flying through. During flight tests there is a probe on the bottom of the aircraft that gathers information on the size and shape of the particles that it is flying through. The data can then be viewed on a computer. After grouping the weather into certain groups we can then pick certain groups which we think should be analyzed farther. The goal is to remove all the ice particles because they do not contribute to the icing on an aircraft. We use a 2D analyzer which measures the droplet size and categorizes the drops into bins of certain sizes. We can then look at what the characteristics of the weather that we were flying through such as the temperature and dew point and compare this with the size of the drops that the 2D analyzer measured. We can then look at what type and shape of ice that formed on the wing during this time period. Having this data will help us to reproduce these conditions using LEWICE and the wind tunnel. Having consistency among the tests will make things more accurate. With respect to weather forecasting we will be able to learn which conditions can lead to icing. Better accuracy in weather reporting will lead to fewer run-ins with icing which will also lead to fewer accidents.

Miller, Eric James↗
NASA NTRS2004

Icing Research Tunnel

The Icing Research Tunnel in Building 11 at the NASA Glenn Research Center is committed to researching the effects of in flight icing on aircraft and testing ways to stop the formation of hazardous icing conditions on planes. During this summer, I worked here with Richard DelRosa, the lead engineer for this area. address one of the major concerns of aviation: icing conditions. During the war, many planes crashed (especially supply planes going over the.Himalayas) because ice built up in their wings and clogged the engines. To this day, it remains the largest ice tunnel in the world, with a test section that measures 6 feet high, 9 feet long, and 20 feet wide. It can simulate airspeeds from 50 to 300 miles per hour at temperatures as low as -50 Fahrenheit. Using these capabilities, IRT can simulate actual conditions at high altitudes. The first thing I did was creating a cross reference in Microsoft Excel. It lists commands for the DPU units that control the pressure and temperature variations in the tunnel, as well as the type of command (keyboard, multiplier, divide, etc). The cross reference also contains the algorithm for every command, and which page it is listed in on the control sheet (visual Auto-CAD graphs, which I helped to make). I actually spent most of the time on the computer using Auto-CAD. I drew a diagram of the entire icing tunnel and then drew diagrams of its various parts. Between my mentor and me, we have drawings of every part of it, from the spray bars to the thermocouples, power cabinets, input-output connectors for power systems, and layouts of various other machines. I was also responsible for drawing schematics for the Escort system (which controls the spray bars), the power system, DPUs, and other electrical systems. In my spare time, I am attempting to build and program the "toddler". Toddler is a walking robot that I have to program in PBASIC language. When complete, it should be able to walk on level terrain while avoiding obstacles in real-time. It features an infrared detector that can keep it from falling over edges, as well as follow or avoid a light source. The toddler is giving me a much better understanding of the basics of electronic circuitry and computer programming.

Chennault, Jonathan↗
NASA NTRS2004

The effects of proton exposure on neurochemistry and behavior

Future space missions will involve long-term travel beyond the magnetic field of the Earth, where astronauts will be exposed to radiation hazards such as those that arise from galactic cosmic rays. Galactic cosmic rays are composed of protons, alpha particles, and particles of high energy and charge (HZE particles). Research by our group has shown that exposure to HZE particles, primarily 600 MeV/n and 1 GeV/n 56Fe, can produce significant alterations in brain neurochemistry and behavior. However, given that protons can make up a significant portion of the radiation spectrum, it is important to study their effects on neural functioning and on related performance. Therefore, these studies examined the effects of exposure to proton irradiation on neurochemical and behavioral endpoints, including dopaminergic functioning, amphetamine-induced conditioned taste aversion learning, and spatial learning and memory as measured by the Morris water maze. Male Sprague-Dawley rats received a dose of 0, 1.5, 3.0 or 4.0 Gy of 250 MeV protons at Loma Linda University and were tested in the different behavioral tests at various times following exposure. Results showed that there was no effect of proton irradiation at any dose on any of the endpoints measured. Therefore, there is a contrast between the insignificant effects of high dose proton exposure and the dramatic effectiveness of low dose (<0.1 Gy) exposures to 56Fe particles on both neurochemical and behavioral endpoints. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of COSPAR.

Non-NASA Center↗
DOE OSTI2024

An editorial to the Special Issue on “Severe climate Risks”

The history of this Special Issue (https://www.sciencedirect.com/special-issue/10JD7LNJNQ0) indirectly dates back to the early 1990s, when the signature of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change kicked-off an international political process based on one overarching and foundational principle: to avoid “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” at the global level. More than three decades later, such a principle remains central, though complementary aims made their way through the climate negotiation process, such as the importance of ensuring equity and justice, to give just one example here. Scientific knowledge also considerably progressed and we know more about the range of risks that climate change imposes and will continue to impose to the biosphere and humankind, worldwide and at all territorial levels. It is also clear that societal responses to these risks —“climate adaptation” as we know it— are increasingly happening, but definitely not at the pace of climate risk trends (Berrang-Ford et al., 2021, Erisken et al., 2021, Olazabal and Ruiz De Gopegui, 2021, Magnan et al., 2023a, Reckien et al., 2023, UNEP, 2023). As a result, concerns have emerged over the recent years in both the scientific and policy arenas around the idea that societies may not be able to address all climate risks, and that limits to adaptation and induced residual risks need to be considered more seriously. Such concerns further highlight the continuing importance of the imperative to minimise dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system, at any scale. But what does “dangerous interference” mean? How can we decide that we are entering the “dangerous” space, compared to a broader range of climate risks that would qualify as problematic but not necessarily “dangerous”? Who should make such a decision? Which conditions drive risk severity over time, including in the future? And what would be the environmental, economic, social and cultural implications of prioritising some climate risks over others? The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was a pioneer in addressing such questions through the development of the “Key Risks” framing that describes those climate risks having the potential to become dangerous or “severe” over the course of this century (Schellnhuber et al., 2006, Schneider et al., 2007, Oppenheimer et al., 2014, O’Neill et al., 2022). The Fifth and Sixth assessment cycles (AR5 and AR6) went a step further by identifying about 120 Key Risks across regions and sectors, and clustering them into 8 “Representative Key Risks” covering a range of geographical systems (low-lying coasts, and to terrestrial and ocean ecosystems), sectors (critical infrastructure, living standards, human health, food security, and water security) and human dimensions (peace and mobility) (Oppenheimer et al., 2014, O’Neill et al., 2022). This Special Issue was born of the efforts of a range of authors, during the development of the IPCC AR6 main Assessment Report between 2019 and 2022, to characterise Key Risks and Representative Key Risks, and advance knowledge on what shapes “severe climate risks” conceptually as well as in the real-world. The series of papers forming this Special Issue is not intended to cover the topic exhaustively, but rather to give readers an overview through the following narrative: defining “severe climate risks” is highly challenging (Magnan et al., 2023b), but knowledge is expanding on the driving climate hazards (Tebaldi et al., 2023) and their implications on geographical systems, sectors and human dimensions, using here food security (Mirzabaev et al., 2023), human mobility (Gilmore et al., 2024) and peace (Buhaug et al., 2023) as illustrative examples. The overall intention is to support especially decision-makers, whatever the scale or sector considered, in asking severity-driven questions to identify sector- and context-specific “priority” risks from climate change.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗