Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “draft”

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.

At least 559 records · Page 31
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

ACES M and S: Unmitigated Factorial Encounter Study on DAA/TCAS Interoperability

Realization of the expected proliferation of Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) operations in the National Airspace System (NAS) depends on the development and validation of standards for UAS Detect and Avoid (DAA) Systems. The RTCA Special Committee 228 is charged with leading the development of draft Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for UAS DAA Systems. NASA, as a participating member of RTCA SC-228 is committed to supporting the development and validation of draft requirements for DAA alerting and guidance systems. This presentation contains the results of two combinatorial encounter analysis studies using NASA's SAA Control fast-time simulation capability for this purpose. In these studies, encounters between two aircraft were simulated one at a time for the full factorial combination of encounter geometries (e.g., encounter angle, CPA offset) and aircraft performance (e.g., ownership and intruder ground speeds and vertical rates). The first study analyzes the relationships (e.g., timeline) between the different alerting-safety regions in the SC-228 MOPS (in order of increasing severity): 1) DAA warning alert, 2) well clear recovery (WCR) guidance, 3) DAA-Collision Avoidance (CA), and 4) TCAS RA. This study will focus primarily on encounter situations in which TCAS RA occurs prior to any of the other alerting-safety boundaries. In particular, this study will investigate whether using vertical distance or vertical distance at closest point of approach (i.e., vertical miss distance or VMD) is more appropriate for the definition of the DAA-CA region. In addition, cases where transitions between different regions skip an intermediate region will be analyzed. The second study in this presentation explores a proposal to use an altitude rate error threshold to determine if vertical maneuvers are acceptable for DAA WCR guidance against non-cooperative intruders. This study incorporates the radar from the Honeywell sensor model and examines a series of pairwise encounters between a non-cooperative intruder and a UAS ownship, with different combinations of intruder states and ownship performance levels. The study uses SAA Control as a simulation platform and pilot model, and Omnibands to provide DWC recovery guidance. Two simulation sets, one that allows vertical DWC recovery guidance and one that does not, are compared to determine if encounters with altitude rate errors above 250 feet-per-minute are more likely to have more severe losses of well clear, as determined by the Loss of Well-Clear Severity metric.

SaaControl↗
NASA NTRS2015

A Path to Planetary Protection Requirements for Human Exploration: A Literature Review and Systems Engineering Approach

As systems, technologies, and plans for the human exploration of Mars and other destinations beyond low Earth orbit begin to coalesce, it is imperative that frequent and early consideration is given to how planetary protection practices and policy will be upheld. While the development of formal planetary protection requirements for future human space systems and operations may still be a few years from fruition, guidance to appropriately influence mission and system design will be needed soon to avoid costly design and operational changes. The path to constructing such requirements is a journey that espouses key systems engineering practices of understanding shared goals, objectives and concerns, identifying key stakeholders, and iterating a draft requirement set to gain community consensus. This paper traces through each of these practices, beginning with a literature review of nearly three decades of publications addressing planetary protection concerns with respect to human exploration. Key goals, objectives and concerns, particularly with respect to notional requirements, required studies and research, and technology development needs have been compiled and categorized to provide a current 'state of knowledge'. This information, combined with the identification of key stakeholders in upholding planetary protection concerns for human missions, has yielded a draft requirement set that might feed future iteration among space system designers, exploration scientists, and the mission operations community. Combining the information collected with a proposed forward path will hopefully yield a mutually agreeable set of timely, verifiable, and practical requirements for human space exploration that will uphold international commitment to planetary protection.

Johnson, James E.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Progress Report on the Airborne Composition Standard Variable Name and Time Series Working Groups of the 2017 ESDSWG

The role of NASA's Earth Science Data Systems Working Groups (ESDSWG) is to make recommendations relevant to NASA's Earth science data systems from users' experiences and community insight. Each group works independently, focusing on a unique topic. Progress of two of the 2017 Working Groups will be presented. In a single airborne field campaign, there can be several different instruments and techniques that measure the same parameter on one or more aircraft platforms. Many of these same parameters are measured during different airborne campaigns using similar or different instruments and techniques. The Airborne Composition Standard Variable Name Working Group is working to create a list of variable standard names that can be used across all airborne field campaigns in order to assist in the transition to the ICARTT Version 2.0 file format. The overall goal is to enhance the usability of ICARTT files and the search ability of airborne field campaign data. The Time Series Working Group (TSWG) is a continuation of the 2015 and 2016 Time Series Working Groups. In 2015, we started TSWG with the intention of exploring the new OGC (Open Geospatial Consortium) WaterML 2 standards as a means for encoding point-based time series data from NASA satellites. In this working group, we realized that WaterML 2 might not be the best solution for this type of data, for a number of reasons. Our discussion with experts from other agencies, who have worked on similar issues, identified several challenges that we would need to address. As a result, we made the recommendation to study the new TimeseriesML 1.0 standard of OGC as a potential NASA time series standard. The 2016 TSWG examined closely the TimeseriesML 1.0 and, in coordination with the OGC TimeseriesML Standards Working Group, identified certain gaps in TimeseriesML 1.0 that would need to be addressed for the standard to be applicable to NASA time series data. An engineering report was drafted based on the OGC Engineering Report template, describing recommended changes to TimeseriesML 1.0, in the form of use cases. In 2017, we are conducting interoperability experiments to implement the use cases and demonstrate the feasibility and suitability of these modifications for NASA and related user communities. The results will be incorporated into the existing draft engineering report.

OGC (Open Geospatial Consortium) WaterML 2 standar↗
NASA NTRS2018

NASA Additive Manufacturing Initiatives for Deep Space Human Exploration

Additive Manufacturing (AM) is being infused into aerospace industries at an accelerated pace. Reasons for this rapid adoption include: (1) Innovation Capability e.g. design features such as topology optimization, integrated fluid passages, and mesh structures; (2) Rapid Development and Optimization - ability to quickly iterate the design, development, and test cycle; (3) Affordability - reductions in part counts, cost, and schedule. NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) has taken a leadership role in application of AM technologies for deep space human exploration, leading the Agency's In Space Manufacturing (ISM) initiative and the application of AM for a broad variety of space propulsion systems. MSFC has championed the development of ISM capabilities since our first reduced-gravity aircraft experiment flew in 1999. Partnering with Made In Space, MSFC placed the first 3D Printer on ISS in 2014 and the second generation printer, the Additive Manufacturing Facility, in 2016. The next ISS technology demonstration will be the Refabricator, a recycler/basic printer scheduled to launch in late Fall 2018. Ground-based development is progressing in common use materials, metals 3D printing, printed electronics, and the new cornerstone of ISM, the FabLab. The latest developments in each area will be described. An overview of NASA's In Space Robotic Manufacturing and Assembly (IRMA) ground-based risk reduction projects will also be presented. MSFC has aggressively incorporated AM capabilities for design and development of space propulsion components. The capabilities have been rapidly matured and extensively exercised to produce and hot-fire test the Additive Manufacturing Demonstrator Engine, an in-space class prototype engine. This experience base has been extended to support Aerojet Rocketdyne in the application of AM to the RS-25, the Space Launch System Core Stage engine, and to small propulsion systems and thrusters for small satellites and cubesats. The latest developments will be described. In responding to a request from NASA's Commercial Crew Program for a consistent methodology for evaluation of AM processes and parts, MSFC began development of a draft standard for AM space flight hardware in late 2014. The draft was broadly disseminated for comments in mid-2015, and subsequently revised into two documents, a standard and a specification for AM space flight hardware, which were formally released by MSFC in October 2017. An overview of the key elements of these documents will be presented.

Clinton, Raymond↗
NASA NTRS2019

ARMS: A Developing Metadata Standard for Describing Astrobiology Research Products

These presentation slides introduce the Astrobiology Resource Metadata Standard (ARMS), a new metadata standard under development at NASA Ames Research Center, in conjunction with the Astrobiology Habitable Environments Database (AHED) project. The intent of this standard is to enable uniform, internet-based search and discovery of astrobiology 'resources', i.e. virtually any product of astrobiology research, including datasets, physical samples, software, publications, websites, images, video, presentations, etc. The current draft of ARMS defines 16 different metadata properties used to describe a given resource, including routine information such as name, resource type, description, personnel, funding, and related publications. But the true power in ARMS lies in four astrobiology-specific pieces of metadata: field site location enables geospatially-restricted search for resources using placenames or geospatial coordinates; research theme associates resources with one of six broad areas of astrobiological research (as identified in the 2015 NASA Astrobiology Strategy document); astrobiology disciplines captures the set of science disciplines most relevant to creation or use of resources; and finally, astrobiology keywords characterize resources in much in the same summarizing way that journal article keywords describe publications. An initial draft of the ARMS standard is being prepared for circulation to the astrobiology community for feedback and revision.

Science Metadata↗
NASA NTRS2015

Airspace Safety Threshold Study: NAS-Wide Encounter Rate Evaluation Using Historical Radar Data and ACES

Realization of the expected proliferation of Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) operations in the National Airspace System (NAS) depends on the development and validation of performance standards for UAS Detect and Avoid (DAA) Systems. The RTCA Special Committee 228 (SC-228) is charged with leading the development of draft Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for UAS DAA Systems. NASA, as a participating member of RTCA SC-228 is committed to supporting the development and validation of draft requirements as well as the safety substantiation and end-to-end assessment of DAA system performance. With regard to the safety aspect being studied by the SC-228 DAA Safety sub-group, NASA has conducted a study using the ACES (Airspace Concept Evaluation System) simulation capability to determine: 1) the rate at which IFR aircraft encounter other IFR and VFR aircraft, and 2) the rate at which UAS aircraft encounter VFR aircraft as well as the corresponding encounter geometries. Five different separation thresholds were used (two for encounter and one each for well-clear, near mid-air collision, and closest point of approach). The results will be used by the SC-228 DAA Safety sub-group to inform decisions about the safety aspect of UAS DAA systems and future requirements development and validation efforts.

encounter geometry↗
NASA NTRS2020

Defining Handling Qualities of Unmanned Aerial Systems: Phase II Final Report

Unmanned Air Systems (UAS) are no longer coming, they are here, and operators from first responders to Google and Amazon are demanding access to the National Airspace System (NAS) for a wide variety of missions. This includes a proliferation of small UAS or sUAS that will operate beyond line of sight at altitudes of 500 ft and below. A myriad of issues continues to slow the development of verification, validation, and certification methods that will enable the safe introduction of UAS to the NAS. These issues include the lack of both a consensus in UAS categorization process and quantitative certification requirements, including the definition of handling qualities. Because of the wide variety of UAS types (fixed wing, rotary wing from traditional helicopters to multirotor configurations, ducted fans, airships, etc.) and vehicle size from micro vehicles to the Global Hawk with a wing span similar to that of a Boeing 737, there cannot be a one-size-fits-all set of requirements. To address these issues, Systems Technology Inc. (STI) has developed the UAS Handling Qualities Assessment (UAS-HQ) process and corresponding draft specification that will guide UAS stakeholders through a systematic evaluation process. The work described herein builds on the existing, highly successful, military rotorcraft handling qualities specifications that features a mission-oriented approach, a concept that originated at STI. The vehicle is first identified by a simple weight-based classification and then the associated vehicle mission task elements are considered. These missions have specific tasks inclusive to them that then dictate the criteria and demonstration maneuvers necessary to evaluate the UAS handling qualities. An assessment of both modeled responses and flight test data can then be conducted to examine the predicted versus actual handling qualities and, if required, design modifications can then be made. Mr. David Klyde, Vice President and Technical Director, Engineering Services, served as Principal Investigator, while Dr. Natalia Alexandrov served as the NASA LaRC technical representative. In the Phase II program, STI was joined by David Mitchell of Mitchell Aerospace Research and the University of Minnesota. Mr. Mitchell led the draft specification development effort, while the University of Minnesota UAV Lab conducted sUAS flight tests under the direction of Dr. Peter Seiler.

Klyde, David H.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Wearable Protective Technologies

We are currently creating protective garments to be worn during the duration of SPE (solar particle events). Several garment prototypes have been created to protect the body, but nothing has been created for head protection. My focus during this internship was creating headgear designs. Some of the big requirements of an effective headgear design is that the hood design needs to cover the forehead and not have any gaps between the hood and neckline, and the areal density of radiation shielding needs to be at least 1.5 g/cm2. My designs were inspired by many different brands and designers including Nike’s outerwear selection, Moncler’s Fall 20 Genius collaborations with Simone Rocha, Craig Green, and Alyx, Marine Serre F/W 20, and A-Cold-Wall S/S 19. All of these had great examples of hood and vest designs. Many sketches were created from these and many other inspirations. Pattern development began by taking several measurements of the head and neck. I drafted the hood to cover the forehead and cover the neck. After the initial draft, the pattern was modified to accommodate a center panel to contour and shape the hood further. I also created a shoulder drape based on a kimono sleeve to add extra coverage over the neckline of the garment from a basic sloper’s neckline and shoulders. Radiation shielding was a special consideration in my design work. I did extensive research on different materials and ways to incorporate them into garments and found that I was not limited to polypropylene or polyethylene. Many common textiles are hydrogen rich, such as cotton, polyester, and silk, and could be incorporated into designs as radiation shielding. From this research, I am in the process of creating a prototype that uses these materials as shielding. I will be returning for the summer and hope to put more of the ideas I have into production.

Nicole Dugan↗
NASA NTRS2021

Overview of Dragonfly Entry Aerosciences Measurements (DrEAM)

NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) leads the Dragonfly Entry Aerosciences Measurements (DrEAM) project, which is an aeroshell instrumentation suite on the Dragonfly mission that fulfills the Engineering Science Investigation requirement for the New Frontiers mission. NASA ARC is partnering with NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) and the German Aerospace Center (DLR) to provide a comprehensive sensor suite, including a DLR-provided Data Acquisition System (DAS). DrEAM will provide key aerothermodynamic data and performance analysis for Dragonfly’s forebody and backshell Thermal Protection System (TPS). Titan’s atmosphere predominantly consists of ni-trogen (~98% by mole) with small amounts of me-thane (~2% by mole) and other trace gases. CN is a strong radiator, and is found in nonequilibrium con-centrations for Titan entry. The accurate modeling of nonequilibrium CN radiation has proven to be a diffi-cult task. Prompted by the Huygens mission, many experimental campaigns and analyses were performed to better understand the aerothermal environments experienced by the probe during Titan entry [1]. How-ever, the Huygens probe carried no heatshield instru-mentation. Therefore, the DrEAM sensor suite will sig-nificantly advance the state-of-the-art not only by documenting the environment and performance of Dragonfly’s entry system but also by making key in situ measurements in Titan’s atmosphere for the first time. Aerothermal environments and TPS response will be measured using sensors whose flight heritage is tak-en from the Mars Entry, Descent, and Landing In-strumentation 2 (MEDLI2) thermocouple plugs and the COMbined Aerothermal and Radiometer Sensor (COMARS) suite [2], with the latter supplied by DLR. The MEDLI2 project used embedded thermocouples to directly measure the in-depth TPS temperature-time history at several locations on the heat shield and backshell of the Mars 2020 entry vehicle. These tem-perature measurements, in turn, can be used to infer surface environments via an inverse analysis proce-dure analogous to that used for MEDLI. For DrEAM, the thermocouple plug subsystem will be known as Dragonfly Sensors for Aero-Thermal Reconstruction (DragSTR). On Schiaparelli, the COMARS suite in-cluded three total surface-mounted heat flux sensors, three pressure sensors, and one radiometer. For DrEAM, the COMARS package will be known as the COmbined Sensor System for Titan Atmosphere (COSSTA). Since the methane concentration in the Titan atmos-phere is directly proportional to the radiative heat flux, the COSSTA measurements will be used to reduce the current uncertainty in the methane volume fraction. Atmospheric density measurements and capsule aero-dynamic data will be obtained through the onboard Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU), supplemented by pressure transducers similar to those used by the MEDLI and MEDLI2 projects. The DrEAM pressure sensors will be known as the Dragonfly Atmospheric Flight Transducers. (DrAFT). The pressure measure-ments, when combined with data from the on-board IMU, will allow for reconstruction of such quantities as vehicle Mach number, freestream density, and atmos-pheric winds. DrAFT measurements will enhance Dragonfly trajectory reconstruction and enable a sepa-ration of the aerodynamics from the atmosphere, as was done for MEDLI [3] and is currently in process for the MEDLI2 flight data set.

EDL↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Technology Maturation Plan for the Development of Nuclear Electric Propulsion

Over the last two years NASA’s Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) Project formulated a Technology Maturation Plan (TMP) for development of the sub-systems needed for a MW-class Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) system which, combined with a high thrust chemical propulsion stage, would be suitable for human missions to Mars. Two recent assessments, independently conducted by the National Academies for Science, Engineering, and Medicine and the NASA Engineering & Safety Center, concluded that the technologies required for a high-power NEP system are immature and the attendant risks insufficiently quantified to justify initiating a flight project. For NEP to be available as a viable option to meet flight opportunities in the late 2030s / 2040s time frame, development of the key sub-systems must begin now. SNP has subdivided the NEP system into five Critical Technology Elements (CTE): the nuclear reactor, power conversion, power management and distribution, electric propulsion sub-system, and the primary heat rejection system. Development plans for each of these CTEs have been drafted which will serve as the template for a focused milestone-driven research and development campaign intended to advance each CTE to Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 5. This will be accomplished by building and testing hardware at relevant power levels (~ 1 MW) and for relevant durations (2,500 hours, ~10% of the required operational lifetime) and conducting numerical modeling of the CTEs anchored by the accumulated test data to predict system performance and reliability. Concurrent with this work, high-level coupled system/mission modeling will be carried out to refine the key performance parameters that the various CTEs must achieve. Non-advocate reviews will be held at milestone points to assess progress and inform down-select decisions. The strategy for formulating the TMP was described previously; this paper describes ongoing progress on the drafting and baselining of the plan, including key specific details.

Space Nuclear Propulsion↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Technology Maturation Plan for the Development of Nuclear Electric Propulsion

Over the last two years NASA’s Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) Project formulated a Technology Maturation Plan (TMP) for development of the sub-systems needed for a MW-class Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) system which, combined with a high thrust chemical propulsion stage, would be suitable for human missions to Mars. Two recent assessments, independently conducted by the National Academies for Science, Engineering, and Medicine and the NASA Engineering & Safety Center, concluded that the technologies required for a high-power NEP system are immature and the attendant risks insufficiently quantified to justify initiating a flight project. For NEP to be available as a viable option to meet flight opportunities in the late 2030s / 2040s time frame, development of the key sub-systems must begin now. SNP has subdivided the NEP system into five Critical Technology Elements (CTE): the nuclear reactor, power conversion, power management and distribution, electric propulsion sub-system, and the primary heat rejection system. Development plans for each of these CTEs have been drafted which will serve as the template for a focused milestone-driven research and development campaign intended to advance each CTE to Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 5. This will be accomplished by building and testing hardware at relevant power levels (~ 1 MW) and for relevant durations (2,500 hours, ~10% of the required operational lifetime) and conducting numerical modeling of the CTEs anchored by the accumulated test data to predict system performance and reliability. Concurrent with this work, high-level coupled system/mission modeling will be carried out to refine the key performance parameters that the various CTEs must achieve. Non-advocate reviews will be held at milestone points to assess progress and inform down-select decisions. The strategy for formulating the TMP was described previously*; this paper describes ongoing progress on the drafting and baselining of the plan, including key specific details. * “Strategy for Developing Technologies for Megawatt-class Nuclear Electric Propulsion Systems”, K.A. Polzin, et. al., International Electric Propulsion Conference IEPC 2022, IEPC-2022-155

Nuclear Electric Propulsion↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of the Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Board Playbook

National Security Presidential Memorandum #20 (NSPM-20) directed the NASA Administrator to establish an Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Board (INSRB), replacing the ad hoc safety review panels used for space nuclear system launch reviews since the 1960s. NSPM-20 provides over-arching direction regarding the Board’s purpose and intent. Upon formation of this new entity, its members recognized that more detailed guidance was needed to ensure predictable and reliable performance of the Board’s functions. The Board drafted and later approved a guidance document referred to as “the Playbook” for this purpose. This paper will summarize the main features of this publicly-available document, along with providing context for its initial drafting and revision. The goal of this paper is to broaden the degree of awareness by the space nuclear system community of INSRB’s activities and intents.

INSRB↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Harnessing Artificial Intelligence for Medical Diagnosis and Treatment During Space Exploration Missions

From May 8th to June 9th, 2023, I had the opportunity to participate in an experiential learning experience at Johnson Space Center in Houston, TX with Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC), an element of the NASA Human Research Program. During this research experience, I was not only able to work on the above titled research project, but also gain an immense exposure to the field of aerospace medicine, make numerous connections within the field, tour NASA facilities, as well as travel to the Aerospace Medical Association Annual Conference (AsMA) in New Orleans. To briefly introduce my project, it is well understood that the medical capabilities available to crew medical officers (CMOs) on the International Space Station will be different than the capabilities available and needed during deep space exploration missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. Ground support is particularly limited due to distance, communication delays (or lack of communication), and lack of resupply. Therefore, to support medical care by CMOs on these missions, robust clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) must be designed. The recent publication and public launch of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools based upon large language models (LLM) such as ChatGPT provides the opportunity to create a smart assistant for onboard triage, diagnosis, and treatment of medical conditions. Ultimately, the overall purpose of the project was to research what AI tools currently exist or are in development, and to see how they might be implemented onboard during exploration class spaceflights of the future. The ExMC element is actively developing several tools to be used in preparation for and during deep space exploration missions. One of those tools, known as IMPACT, is a probabilistic risk assessment model which can be used to propose a desired medical system (based on mass and volume) and suggest the clinical outcomes likely to occur for a design reference mission (DRM). The group recently presented the IMPACT model and a DRM of interest titled “Modified Long Duration Lunar Orbital and Lunar Surface” (mLDLOLS) at the recent AsMA conference. The mLDLOLS mock mission is a 9 month and 6-day deep space exploration mission consisting of time in Moon’s orbit (3 months on the Gateway space station), on the lunar surface (3 months within habitat), and another 3 months on Gateway before return to Earth. For this DRM, IMPACT ultimately outlined a preferred medical system that was then associated with medical conditions considered to be most likely based on frequency, most likely to cause astronaut task time loss (TTL), most likely to cause return to definitive care (RTDC), and most likely cause loss of crew life (LOCL). IMPACT also highlighted the medical capabilities/skills that would be required to care for those medical conditions, such as performing a history of present illness or musculoskeletal exam with ultrasound. The primary objective of the project was to perform a survey of the AI tools and systems applicable to the conditions outlined for the proposed mLDLOLS mission. Using PubMed (including most relevant MeSH terms) and Google Scholar, we then created a robust annotated bibliography organized by condition. The 56-page and over 500 reference annotated bibliography was subsequently used to create a review outline that would become the basis for drafting of a future publication. For the review outline, we took those medical conditions researched within the annotated bibliography (condition-based approach) and deployed a systems-based approach, combining those medical conditions and related tools into ten categories. These categories included general/all-purpose CDSSs, tools to diagnose or manage respiratory, dermatologic, neurologic, auditory and vestibular, ophthalmic, musculoskeletal, infection-associated, and gynecologic conditions, as well as tools that could be deployed in the setting of trauma/emergency. With the completion of the 30-page outline, we then began drafting the review paper. To conclude the research experience, I presented the findings from our survey to the ExMC Clinical and Science team. With these objectives, I ultimately learned about the number of AI tools that exist today to assist medical professionals with the triage, diagnosis, and management of several medical conditions. These tools can span from chatbot assistants to help triage knee pain to vision transformer models that can identify ophthalmic conditions based on ocular surface images captured with a cell phone. We also highlighted the current gaps that exist in the literature alongside the advancements that are needed to make the desired CDSS for deep space exploration missions. With this experience, I certainly confirmed an existing career goal and identified several additional skills needed to become an aerospace medical doctor including knowledge of critical care in an extreme medicine setting, aerospace engineering and human integration systems, artificial intelligence, machine learning, and risk models. I also identified numerous transferable skills for this career goal including the basic knowledge of medicine (MD), deployment of the scientific method for critical thought about new scientific questions (PhD), review of published literature, including creating an annotated bibliography (PhD), as well as detailed scientific writing (PhD). The results of my research will likely guide the design of an all-encompassing onboard medical assistant for use during deep space exploration missions of the future. I plan on sharing the outcomes from this experience with my peers at a student seminar in the Fall semester on August 30th. During the seminar, I will detail the project, my experience at NASA and AsMA, as well as offer best practice guidelines for students entertaining similar experiences or careers. In conclusion, I would like to thank the WVU School of Medicine, Research and Graduate Education office, as well as NASA ExMC for the unwavering support of this life-changing experience.

Ryan A. Lacinski↗
DOE OSTI2017

Passive filtration of air egressing from nuclear containment

A nuclear reactor includes a reactor core comprising fissile material disposed in a reactor pressure vessel. A radiological containment contains the nuclear reactor. A containment compartment contains the radiological containment. A heat sink includes a chimney configured to develop an upward-flowing draft in response to heated fluid flowing into a lower portion of the chimney. A fluid conduit is arranged to receive fluid from the containment compartment and to discharge into the chimney. A filter may be provided, with the fluid conduit including a first fluid conduit arranged to receive fluid from the containment compartment and to discharge into an inlet of the filter, and a second fluid conduit arranged to receive fluid from an outlet of the filter and to discharge into the chimney. As the draft is developed passively, there is no need for a blower or pump configured to move fluid through the fluid conduit.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2018

The 2018 Edition of the IRPhEP Handbook

The International Reactor Physics Experiment Evaluation Project (IRPhEP) was established to preserve and evaluate integral reactor physics experiment data, including separate or special effects measurements for nuclear energy and technology applications. Numerous international experiments have been performed over the past several decades to support reactor operations, safety, measurements, and design. Those experiments represent a significant investment of infrastructure, cost, and expertise that, in many instances, cannot be as easily reproduced. They represent valuable resources of data for present and future research, and provide the basis for recording, development, and validation of methods. Contributors worldwide collaborate to evaluate and review selected benchmark experiments for inclusion in the International Handbook of Evaluated Reactor Physics Benchmark Experiments (IRPhEP Handbook). Several new evaluations, and revisions to existing benchmarks have been prepared for inclusion in the 2018 edition of the IRPhEP Handbook. Additionally, an IRPhEP Uncertainty Guide was discussed to provide further guidance regarding the evaluation of reactor physics measurements besides criticality. Recent changes to the IRPhEP Handbook include five minor revisions, the revision of a previous benchmark evaluation to include new data, publication of a new draft benchmark evaluation, final approval for the formal publication of two formerly draft benchmark evaluations, and the inclusion of ten new benchmark evaluations. The IRPhEP Handbook now contains a total of 159 experimental measurement series from 54 unique reactor facilities. International participants are actively engaged in ongoing evaluation activities to prepare content for future editions of the IRPhEP Handbook. There are numerous experiment and reactor facilities worldwide from which benchmark data can be evaluated. Those interested in serving as evaluators and/or reviewers for the IRPhEP are encouraged to participate.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2018

Policy, Regulatory, Legal, and Permitting Case Study Subtask 3.2 – Topical Report

This report summarizes the policy, regulatory, legal, and permitting requirements to-date for the siting of a CO 2 injection and storage project in the CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin pre-feasibility study area. Where applicable, the East Sub-Basin case study focuses on a proposed carbon capture and storage (CCS) site location in West Terre Haute, Indiana. Indiana has established the legal mechanisms to obtain rights to the subsurface mineral estate with the expectation to apply to reservoir pore space for CO 2 storage in an analogous manner to storage of natural gas, which is a common practice in Indiana. There is, however, no precedent in Indiana to take liability for stored CO 2 . There are currently no Indiana State incentives for CCS, but at the Federal level, tax credits for carbon capture and storage under 26. U.S. Code § 45Q constitute the greatest incentive targeted at CCS projects. The amendment to these credits put forth in the Bipartisan Budget Act (the FUTURE Act) of 2018 substantially increases the per-ton incentive for CCS—from $22.66 per ton in tax year 2017 up to $50 per ton in tax year 2027, for CO 2 not used as an injectant (i.e. saline storage). Additional economic opportunities may exist for the provision of CO 2 for potential EOR in the Illinois Basin. Policies that may support the development of CO 2 pipelines and/or CCS projects in Indiana include: 1) Title 41 of the FAST Act (2015), which created a new governance structure, procedures, and funding authorities in order to improve and expedite Federal review and authorization of covered infrastructure projects, including pipelines, and 2) the Eminent Domain for Transportation of Carbon Dioxide by Pipeline (IC 14-39, Indiana State, 2011), which declares pipeline transportation of CO 2 exclusively to a carbon management application, including sequestration, enhanced oil recovery, and deep saline injection as a benefit to the welfare of Indiana and the people. The US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program Class VI rule and permit requirements address all components pertaining to CO 2 injection and monitoring for long-term storage, and outline the minimum technical criteria to protect underground sources of drinking water at, and surrounding, injection well sites. The Class VI requirements also address financial responsibility for corrective action, post-injection site care, and site closure. In addition, UIC Program public notice requirements include that the EPA issue notice of the draft permit preparation to key stakeholders, and open a public comment period of not less than 30 days. A public hearing about the permit would also be held, if specifically requested by the public. A potential Class VI CO 2 injection well permit for the East Sub-Basin case study site would be obtained through the US EPA Region 5, because the State of Indiana does not have UIC Class VI primacy. Although no CO 2 injection wells have been permitted in Indiana, the US EPA Region 5 (which covers Illinois and Indiana) and the East Sub-Basin CarbonSAFE team (via the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium [MGSC]) have Class VI permitting experience from several projects located in Illinois. Based on our experience, applying for a Class VI permit can be an intensive and iterative process requiring clear communication and numerous interactions with EPA staff. In addition to gathering and preparing the data/models and documentation necessary for a permit application’s initial submittal, the subsequent public comments, EPA response and review, and answering of any follow-up questions/requests by the EPA could significantly increase the timeframe of draft permit issuance. The US EPA offers guidance documents regarding the specific Class VI permit requirements, and shows a general permitting timeline example from the FutureGen Alliance 2.0 covering one-and-a-half years from permit submittal to issuance. However, the overall permitting process to-date has a high degree of variability, and in MGSC’s project experience we observed a more extended timeline to receive Class VI permits for each of two CO 2 injection wells.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2019

The International Nuclear Material Transport Security Regime: A. Multi-Modal Tapestry of Conventions and Agreements

The international legal framework for transporting nuclear material is complex. The tapestry of conventions and agreements in place vary based on the material in transport, the mode or modes of transport used, and the location where the transport is taking place. The instruments range in scale from the international Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities and the Amendment to regional conventions and agreements such as those for rail transport (RID), inland waterway (ADN), and road (ADR). As part of their international commitments under the various conventions and agreements, signatories are required to abide by and harmonize their regulations to these international instruments. The challenge for Competent Authorities in drafting regulations consistent with a Member States obligation under international law can be complex. In addition to ensuring their own authority to draft regulations consistent with these conventions, a Competent Authority may need to coordinate with other ministries, departments, or agencies in mapping the various conventions, their annexes, the requirements therein, and understanding how to develop regulations that align both to international law and domestic law. This paper addresses each of these conventions and agreements; providing a summary description of what each means to individual entities that are transporting nuclear material, provide the total number of States Party to each, provide a graphical framework for unpacking the legal complexities at the international level to assist users and competent authorities in orienting themselves to the international instruments and how they apply to specific shipments. A detailed evaluation has been made of the various international and regional conventions and agreements that help govern the security during the international and in some cases the domestic transport of nuclear material, therein providing a tool for understanding the international transport regime for moving these materials.

Fialkoff, Marc↗
DOE OSTI2020

Regulatory Development Challenges and Opportunities for the Safe and Secure Transport of Radioactive Materials

Drafting regulations for transport safety and transport security achieve two separate objectives, which can lead to divergent outcomes. With transport safety, the principle goal is to protect the public and the environment from the effects of ionizing radiation, while in contrast, the principle goal of transport security is to protect the material from malicious actors. While many Member States may have transport safety regulations for radioactive materials, transport security regulatory development is still in its nascent stages globally. Trying to develop harmonized transport safety and transport security regulations could lead to challenges ranging from differences in terminology used in transport safety versus terminology uses in transport security, roles and responsibilities for the variety of stakeholders involved in transport, and finally, the possible role of multiple competent authorities in governing the transport of dangerous goods, which includes radioactive material. While the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is currently developing a process of a methodology for drafting transport security regulations, any process must address both safety considerations and security requirements. (As the most vulnerable part of the life cycle of radioactive materials, the need for harmonized transport safety/transport security regulations is essential.) This paper investigates the regulatory elements of the safety-security interface for nuclear and other radioactive material in transport. Examining challenges including use of terms, the role of multiple competent authorities, and practical challenges involved in the safe and secure transport of radioactive material, the paper analyzes the need for integrated regulatory development for the safe and secure transport of these materials.

Anderson, Kimberly↗