Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Operations coordination plan”

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 577 records · Page 32
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2020

X-HAB 2020: AR Field Treks Summary and Conclusions

As part of the FY20 X-Hab Challenge, BLiSS sought to create an Augmented Reality (AR) toolkit to help with analog field trek operations under the supervision of the Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI). These treks are operational and technical demonstrations at space-like destinations on Earth to test current extra-vehicular activity (EVA) techniques. While BLiSS as an organization has experience studying operational tasks such as this, it has never developed AR software at this scale. For that reason, another team at the University was brought on to work in parallel. The Collaborative Lab for Advancing Work in Space (CLAWS) is a veteran group of the NASA Spacesuit User Interface Technologies for Students (SUITS) challenge in which Hololens displays for astronauts are created within a year. The operational and technological pairing was ideally suited for tackling this problem. The team divided its responsibilities so that BLiSS would handle the research required to shape the project. As this deliverable had an end user, it was decided that interviewing these field geologists and operations specialists would provide the best insight. These interviews paired with literature review would reveal niche applications for AR that remained within feasible bounds. These science-driven EVAs in unknown terrain require more flexible tools than the current generation of EVA assistants. Rather than focus on sequential instructions, there instead needs to be a broad toolkit that's only called upon in specific instances. This AR Toolkit for Lunar Astronauts and Scientists (ATLAS) became the development goal of the project: create a non-intrusive assembly of tools that could be accessed in AR on the field. The current ATLAS design makes use of a geospatially and temporally annotated eld note system called GeoNotes. This allows for data to be collected and coordinated in a way that's synchronized across time, space, and different users. A Mission Control Center (MCC) and Mobile Support Equipment (MSE) were all needed to transport the AR headset into the field with the user. A network infrastructure was designed and set up within the University to enable this functionality. The software is based on a Protocol-Module structure that allows for modular development of each capability. A Protocol Manager coordinates different protocols that make use of modules. Each module tackles a different individual task while the protocol puts each one to use. The protocol manager coordinates when these are called to be used. This software is hosted on a head-mounted display (HMD) with the MCC acting as support from afar. While the software would be unit-tested at each level and each hardware component verified, a final demonstration would serve to prove the system's capabilities: an analog field trek. The team would prepare to support a user in a remote location from the MCC back at the University. A local area near campus would be tested before going out to do sample field geology further away. This unfortunately became impossible with the arrival of COVID-19. Access to all of the facilities to complete the project as planned were shut down. Our team was scattered across the globe and forced to complete the rest virtually. Adjustments were made to produce a small virtual concept in Adobe XD in the meantime. Even digital surveys were created based on the NASA task-load index (TLX) originally intended for testing actual users. The goal shifted towards completing software and getting feedback on the user interfaces (UI) and user experiences (UX). This team has reformed in response to COVID and its focus has shifted to what can be done remotely. There is still an intention to finish the original deliverable described in this report. The work has been expanded beyond the original X-Hab challenge and has instead become its own research e ort to be continued afterwards. This report collects the processes and knowledge gained from a year of studying and working at this problem with two teams. It should preserve it for the time until the world returns to normal and work can resume. CLAWS will be taking over full responsibility from that point forward, eventually surpassing the original needs of the project. While this document captures the work done towards an eventual end, the CLAWS team has written their own proposal alongside it. It outlines a new future for ATLAS beyond X-Hab, BLiSS, and hopefully beyond COVID-19. This project began as a vague goal hoping to place a new technology into the unique setting of exploration science. The project has since comfortably taken root and will hopefully bloom over the next year.

Alex Sena↗
NASA NTRS2000

Propellant Densification Ground Testing Conducted for Launch Vehicles

The NASA Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field has taken the lead in the development of practical densified cryogenic propellants for launch vehicle applications. The technology of subcooling cryogenic propellants below their normal boiling point to produce a denser fluid is one of the key process technologies necessary to meet the challenge of single-stage-to-orbit and reusable launch vehicles. Densified propellants are critical to lowering launch costs because they enable more propellant to be packed into a given unit volume, thus improving the performance by reducing the overall size and weight of the launch vehicle. This two-pronged research and test program has evolved into (1) conducting tank loading tests using densified liquid hydrogen and (2) developing two large-scale propellant densification systems that will be performance tested next year at Glenn. The propellant-loading test program was undertaken at Glenn in coordination with Lockheed Martin Michoud Space Systems. In this testing, the liquid hydrogen recirculation and densification process was simulated, and the thermal stratification of the densified propellant was recorded throughout the tank. The test article was a flight-weight tank constructed from composite materials similar to those to be used on the X-33 launch vehicle. The tank geometry as designed by Lockheed Martin had two cylindrical lobes with a center septum. Liquid hydrogen flow rate, pressure data, and temperature data plotted over time were collected while the subscale tank was filled with 27 R (15 K) densified liquid hydrogen propellant. This testing has validated mathematical models and demonstrated the readiness of densified propellant technology for near-term use. It marks the first time that such a process has been carried out with a multiple-lobe, flight-similar tank. Glenn researchers have also been working on providing a process and critical test data for the continuous production of densified liquid hydrogen (LH2) and densified liquid oxygen (LO2). Each densification production process uses a high-efficiency, subatmospheric boiling bath heat exchanger to cool the working fluid. A near triple-point hydrogen boiling bath is used to condition and subcool hydrogen to 27 R (15 K), and a nitrogen boiling bath is used to cool the liquid oxygen to 120 R (66.7 K). Multistage centrifugal compressors operating at cryogenic inlet conditions maintain the heat exchanger bath vapor pressure below 1 atm. The LO2 propellant densification unit shown in the photograph has a 30 lb/sec capacity, whereas the LH2 unit was designed to process 8 lb/sec of propellant. Each densification unit will be transported to Glenn's South Forty area after all fabrication work is completed sometime late next year. There the LO2 and LH2 densifier performance tests will be conducted with another larger Lockheed Martin tank designated the Structural Test Article (STA). This liquid oxygen tank is a full-scale, flight-weight, prototype aluminum tank designed for the X-33. It has a capacity of 20,000 gallons of LO2. The tank loading and recirculation testing planned for next year with STA will provide the data necessary for full-scale development of propellant densification technology.

Tomsik, Thomas M.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Reconstruction of the 4D beam matrix

The widely used transverse parameters characterizing particle beams are the Twiss parameters. These parameters can be measured experimentally but they do not fully characterize the beam since they do not account for possible correlations in particle distribution between two transverse coordinates. These correlations may occur due to uncompensated magnetic field at the cathode or misalignment of focusing quadrupoles in the transport beamline. We test a novel diagnostic for diagnosing full 4D beam matrix which may be used to identify such imperfections. The diagnostic is based on transporting the beam through the beamline which includes a quadrupole and a skew quadrupole magnets and measuring the resulting 2D beam distribution at the screen downstream. Such a measurement can be viewed as measuring a 2D projection of the 4D distribution. Different settings of the quads provide measurements of different slices of the phase space. The reconstruction of the original beam matrix from a number of measurements is done using machine learning algorithm, which provides a fast and reliable way of reconstruction for an arbitrary configuration of the scanning beamline. In August 2024, we set up the diagnostic beamline to perform a quadrupole scan of the beam. The setup includes a skew quadrupole, a regular quadrupole, and a screen. The images on the screen were post-processed to remove experimental artifacts and enhance contrast by eliminating background noise outside the core of the distribution=. The rms parameters of the distribution were then calculated and used as inputs for the reconstruction algorithm. This algorithm attempts to determine the initial beam matrix that produces expected images on the screen closely matching the observed images across all quadrupole settings. The algorithm found a solution in which the expected rms parameters closely align with the observations. Validation of the results is planned for FY25.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Initial Development of A Digital Twin Model for an Electrified Aircraft Propulsion Emulation Rig

In support of aviation fuel burn and emission reduction goals, NASA is pursing high-payoff research investments that promise to transform aviation. This includes investments in Electrified Aircraft Propulsion (EAP), which relies on the generation, storage, transmission, and use of electrical power for producing thrust and optimizing propulsion system efficiency. Multiple technology challenges must be addressed to unlock the full potential of EAP. This includes advances in propulsion controls, which will be vital for ensuring coordinated efficient operation of the complex integrated subsystems that comprise EAP architectures. To support EAP controls research, the NASA Glenn Research Center has developed the Hybrid Propulsion Emulation Rig (HyPER). The HyPER laboratory hardware includes shaft-mounted electric machines, power converters, power supplies, power distribution cables, and an energy storage device that can be reconfigured to represent a variety of EAP architectures. It also includes an integrated real-time computer system that hosts developed EAP control software and turbomachinery simulations. This enables the electrical system and rotating shafts of EAP designs to be implemented in actual hardware and integrated with turbomachinery simulations and system-level EAP control logic implemented in software. In this form, the HyPER laboratory provides a partially simulated, partially hardware-in-the-loop test environment enabling the initial development and evaluation of EAP control technology. A prerequisite for the development of EAP control designs is the availability of a system model that accurately reflects the operation of the electrical system hardware. To support this need, a digital twin model of the HyPER electrical system hardware is under development. This model is being coded in the MATLAB Simulink environment and uses the NASA-developed Electrical Modeling and Thermal Analysis Toolbox (EMTAT) to construct a digital twin framework. EMTAT contains generic electrical component building blocks that are simulated at turbomachinery timescales. Associated inputs and outputs allow the blocks to be combined to model complete electrical systems. The EMTAT blocks also contain adjustable internal maps and parameters that can be set to reflect the operation of a specific electrical component. For the HyPER digital twin, the settings of these EMTAT block internal maps and parameters is determined through machine learning approaches applied to characterization run data collected from the laboratory. During characterization runs the laboratory electrical system hardware is subjected to a full range of torque, speed, and power settings. Acquired data is then used to estimate EMTAT block parameters using a variety of machine learning techniques. The resulting digital twin model is found to match the operation of actual HyPER hardware with an accuracy suitable for control development purposes. It also holds promise for other applications including modeling the performance of HyPER laboratory reconfigurations and model-based anomaly detection. Planned follow-on work to automate post-processing of acquired laboratory data to update the HyPER digital twin model will also be presented and discussed.

Electrified Aircraft Propulsion↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
NASA NTRS2017

Evaluating the Subjective Straight Ahead Before and After Spaceflight

Introduction. This joint European Space Agency/NASA pre- and post-flight study investigates the influence of exposure to microgravity on the subjective straight ahead (SSA) in crewmembers returning from long-duration expeditions to the International Space Station (ISS). The SSA is a measure of the internal representation of body orientation and to be influenced by stimulation of sensory systems involved in postural control. The use of a vibrotactile sensory aid to correct the representation of body tilted relative to gravity is also tested as a countermeasure. This study addresses the sensorimotor research gap to "determine the changes in sensorimotor function over the course of a mission and during recovery after landing." Research Plans. The ISS study will involve eight crewmembers who will participate in three pre-flight sessions (between 120 and 60 days before launch) and then three post-flight sessions on R plus 0/1 day, R plus 4 days, and R plus 8 days. Sixteen control subjects were also tested during three sessions to evaluate the effects of repeated testing and to establish normative values. The experimental protocol includes measurements of gaze and arm movements during the following tasks: (1) Near & Far Fixation: The subject is asked to look at actual targets in the true straight-ahead direction or to imagine these targets in the dark. Targets are located at near distance (arm's length) and far distance (beyond 2 meters). This task is successively performed with the subject's body aligned with the gravitational vertical, and with the subject's body tilted in pitch relative to the gravitational vertical using a tilt chair. Measures are then compared with and without a vibrotactile sensory aid that indicates how far one has tilted relative to the vertical; (2) Eye and Arm Movements: The subject is asked to look and point in the SSA direction in darkness and then make horizontal and vertical eye or arm movements, relative to Earth coordinates (allocentric) and to the subject's head/body reference (egocentric). This task is successively performed with the subject's body aligned with the gravitational vertical, and with subject's body tilted in roll using a tilt chair; (3) Linear Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex: The subject is asked to fixate actual visual targets at near and far distances in the true straight-ahead direction, and to evaluate the distance of these targets. The subject is asked to continue fixating the same imagined targets in darkness while he/she is passively accelerated up and down on a spring-loaded vertical linear accelerator. Results. In the control subject population, the perceived tilt angles, translations, and distances were remarkably close to the actual values. The pointing tasks indicated that the orientation of arm saccades was influenced by both the gravitational vertical and the body idiotropic vector. Repeating the testing did not reveal any significant changes. Preliminary results obtained in three crewmembers before and after flight will also be presented. Applications. A change in an individual's egocentric reference might have negative consequences on evaluating the direction of an approaching object or on the accuracy of reaching movements or locomotion. Consequently, investigating how microgravity affects the target location will have theoretical, operational, and even clinical implications for future space exploration missions. The use of vibrotactile feedback as a sensorimotor countermeasure is applicable to balance therapy applications for patients with vestibular loss and the elderly to mitigate risks due to loss of spatial orientation.

Campbell, D. J.↗
NASA NTRS2024

Flight Mechanics Modeling and Simulation of the Earth Entry System

Introduction: The Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign being planned by NASA and ESA has the ambitious goal to return Mars samples back to Earth. This international collaboration had developed a concept of operations that included a ESA-designed Earth Return Orbiter (ERO) and NASA-designed Capture, Containment, and Return System (CCRS). The Earth Entry System (EES), consisting of a protective aeroshell that houses the samples as well as sample containment vessels, would conduct entry, descent, and landing (EDL) on a direct Earth trajectory. The EES would enter on a spin-stabilized ballistic trajectory with the goal to passively achieve aerodynamic stability throughout all regions of flight. The EDL sequence would end with the EES impacting the soft playa soil of the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR). As of the submission of this abstract, the MSR campaign is undergoing a re-architecture leading to a pause in EES development. However, the novel approaches developed in flight mechanics modeling and simulation can significantly benefit the greater IPPW community in the development of Earth return vehicles. This paper will present the latest state of EES flight mechanics modeling and simulation. The paper will highlight the simulation architecture developed and key lessons learned from understanding of EDL trajectory sensitivities. Modeling and Simulation: Figure 1 provides a high-level concept of operations for the approach, entry, descent, and landing (AEDL) phase of the CCRS-portion of MSR. The objective of EES flight mechanics is to model and simulate the EES trajectory from ERO separation to ground impact at UTTR. A variety of flight mechanics simulation models were utilized to model both exo-atmopsheric and atmospheric portions of flight. 42, a 6-DOF simulation developed at Goddard Space Flight Center, is utilized for propagating the attitude of EES during exo-atmospheric flight. 42 allows for a variety of spin eject mechanism scenarios to be simulated for analysis. 10 minutes prior to entry, the 42 states are handed off to the EDL sims. The prime EDL sim utilized by EES is the Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories II (POST2), a 6-DOF sim developed at Langley Research Center, and the independent verification and validation EDL sim utilized is DSENDS, a 6-DOF sim developed at Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Figure 2 provides a visualization of the flight mechanics simulation model flow through various points in the AEDL phase. Due to the existence of a variety of sim models, the EES flight mechanics team developed processes for data hand-off. These processes included the development of a centralized coordinate frame document, utilization of a single, centralized simulation input document for all sims to reference, and hand-off files containing both the technical data to be ingested by other flight mechanics sims as well as annotations of modeling assumptions utilized to generate the data. Figure~\ref{fig:post2simarchitecture} provides an overview of the POST2 sim architecture wherein POST2 ingests numerous subsystem models and input files. The dispersed state file generated by MONTE provides the position/velocity state of the trajectory while the 42 Handoff file provides the attitude. The aerodynamics database, delivered by the EES aeroscience team, is utilized to simulate the aerodynamic forces and moments experienced during EDL. A custom atmosphere model, developed by EES atmosphere team, is utilized to simulate the anticipated atmosphere environment around the region of Earth through which the EES trajectory flys. These inputs and subsystem models can be varied depending on the AEDL flight mechanics scenario being simulated. Monte Carlo simulations are utilized to generate statistical AEDL performance metrics in the form of scorecards and violin plots. Furthermore, outputs from the POST2 simulation are utilized for follow-on analyses including aerothermal and landing performance. \section{Flight Mechanics Lessons Learned} Though the EES flight mechanics team uncovered a variety of lessons learned through the analysis conducted to support CCRS through preliminary design review, this paper will highlight the most important lessons. A key AEDL performance goal is to ensure the landing footprint of EES remains on the UTTR south range. A common modeling strategy used in EDL analysis is One-Variable-At-a-Time (OVAT). OVAT analysis provides insight into the key drivers that affect AEDL performance metrics. Figure 3 shows the landing ellipses for single dispersion sources as compared to the baseline aggregate of all dispersions. The figure shows that atmosphere winds alone dominate the size of the footprint ellipse (note: EES does not use a parachute unlike previous Earth-return missions and is in wind-driven free fall for ~5min). The significance of the wind led the EES flight mechanics team to pursue the development of a Custom Atmosphere Model [4], in lieu of EarthGRAM [1], built on actual radiosonde wind measurements around the UTTR-region. This decision was driven by the realism in the generated footprint ellipses and lessons-learned from Stardust [5]. These findings will be invaluable for future Earth-return missions in providing an early understanding of the key drivers affecting footprint size and modeling considerations for which to account. Another lesson learned is tied to the AEDL performance goal of achieving passive stability throughout all regions of flight. It is well understood that blunt-body aeroshells are less stable as they transition from supersonic to subsonic. Eliminating a backshell does help improvestability; however, other phenomena such as roll-induced instability during terminal descent can still arise. The EES flight mechanics team developed stability metrics as tools to better understand the causes of and better predict the onset of dynamic instability. These tools were built upon analytical models developed by Jaffe [3] and Murphy [2]. The tools were shown to both be very accurate in correlation with actual unstable cases and useful in developing stability margin policies based on the vehicle design and simulation considerations (e.g. sphere-cone angle change, mass change, wind turbulence). These tools allowed for the current EES design to demonstrate the ability to achieve passive stability and can be an invaluable tool for consideration in the design of parachute-less Earth-return vehicles.

Rohan Deshmukh↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Neuro-Vestibular Examination During and Following Spaceflight (Vestibular Health)

BACKGROUND Adaptation to microgravity during spaceflight causes neurological disturbances that are either directly or indirectly mediated by the vestibular system. These disturbances could include space motion sickness, spatial disorientation, and cognitive impairment, as well as changes in head-eye coordination, vestibulo-ocular reflexes, and control of posture and locomotion. Otolith-mediated reflex gains appear to adapt rapidly during spaceflight and after landing. However, animal studies have shown that structural modifications of the vestibular sensory apparatus develop during long-duration spaceflight. To date, no studies have characterized the severity of vestibular syndromes experienced by astronauts as a function of the duration of spaceflight or whether the effects are caused by changes at the peripheral end organs, midbrain, cerebellum, or vestibular cortex. OBJECTIVES We will investigate temporal vestibular changes in crewmembers of short, 6-month, and one-year missions to identify trends in adaptation of vestibular health and performance in orbit and after landing. We will also determine whether the vestibular organs and/or the central vestibular system undergo structural changes during long-duration exposure to microgravity, which could cause vestibular disorders when transitioning to a different gravitational environment. METHODS Recordings of eye, head, and body movements, as well as subjective reports of perception of motion, will be used to determine the presence of abnormal eye movements, dysmetria, motion sickness symptoms, and illusions of motion during head or body movements. This includes characterization of temporal trends in central compensation for vestibular (otolith) asymmetry. Pre-flight data will be collected 90 days before the flight. In-flight tests will be performed early in the mission and once every one or two months thereafter. Post-flight examinations will be performed on the following days after return (R) from the mission: R+0, R+4, R+9, and R+30. Ground-based control tests will be performed on healthy volunteers in the laboratory to estimate mean normative responses. CONTROL RESULTS Thirty-two healthy (non-astronaut) control subjects performed the same ground test procedures as planned for crewmembers. In addition to establishing a normative database, these data were used to calculate vestibular asymmetries from perceptual reports during unilateral centrifugation, oculomotor responses during visual-alignment tasks, vestibulo-ocular reflex gain during head-impulse tests, and body rotation during stepping tests. A significant correlation was observed between asymmetries of subjective visual vertical and verbal report during unilateral centrifugation. Another significant correlation was observed between the asymmetries of ocular alignment, vestibulo-ocular reflex gain, and body rotation. These findings in a healthy cohort may help us better understand changes in vestibular asymmetries in crewmembers during and following spaceflight. RELEVANCE If the observed symptoms in crewmembers are more deleterious after the year-long missions than those documented after 6-month missions, then relevant countermeasures will be required to maintain the health and operational performance of astronauts during longer missions. Depending on the etiology of the vestibular syndrome revealed by these tests, countermeasures will be proposed based on vestibular rehabilitation therapies currently used in patients with vestibular disorders, such as habituation, gaze stabilization, and/or balance training exercises. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This work is supported by the NASA’s Human Research Program Human Health Countermeasures Element.

T R Macaulay↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Data items will occasionally be removed from OSM if they are misidentified, if they no longer exist, if they are duplicates of another item, or similar. For that reason, updated versions of this database may not contain all data center locations included in previous versions. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2025

Site and endmember spectra of terrestrial vegetation and soils for the Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study, June-July 2025

This dataset provides site and endmember spectra collected during the 2025 Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) campaign. The site spectra were collected to help validate airborne hyperspectral data acquired by the National Ecological Observatory Network's aerial observation platform (NEON AOP). Endmember spectra were collected to augment existing spectral libraries with additional samples of bare surfaces and non-photosynthetic vegetation. All measurements were acquired with an Analytical Spectral Devices (ASD) FieldSpec4 Hi-Res NG (Next Generation) spectroradiometer, which records radiance at 1nm (nanometer) intervals from the ultraviolet to the short-wave infrared (350-2500 nm). The dataset includes spectra measured at meadow sites where the CHESS team also collected vegetation samples for trait analyses. The site spectra were collected with the ASD FieldSpec4 palm grip attachment using an 8° field-of-view foreoptic. Site spectra are integrated measurements of the entire surface within the foreoptic’s field of view. For site-level spectra, the sun is the illumination source. A Spectralon panel mounted on a tripod was used for instrument optimization and white reference measurements for all site spectra. Site spectra were acquired within two hours of solar noon and within 48 hours of a NEON AOP overflight. Site spectra are labeled by date, sampling area, and site number according to the naming conventions of the CHESS campaign’s data management plan. The dataset also contains endmember spectra in the following categories: photosynthetic vegetation (PV), non-photosynthetic vegetation (NPV), bare (soil/rock), and flowers. Endmember measurements were acquired using either the contact probe or the leaf clip attachments of the ASD FieldSpec4. In these configurations, the bulb inside the spectrometer provides the light source for the measurements. The spectrometer was optimized and white reference measurements were recorded using the circular white pucks attached to the contact probe and leaf clip. Because they do not rely on solar illumination, contact probe and leaf clip measurements were collected during a broader time frame than the palm grip site spectra. Some endmembers were measured at CHESS meadow sites, while others were collected within the larger sampling area or in nearby locations (e.g. Gothic Townsite) with similar characteristics. Radiance, reflectance, and metadata files are split into three subfolders according to measurement type: proximal/palm grip (prx), contact probe (cp), and leaf clip (lc). Radiance spectra are provided in ASD file format (.asd file extension). All ASD files can be opened using the provided scripts. Metadata is provided in two formats: CSV file format (no geolocation) and GEOJSON file format (includes geolocation for each spectra). The dataset includes a set of pre-processed reflectance spectra as CSV files (yyyymmdd_rfl.csv). The python scripts and jupyter notebook used to calculate reflectance spectra from the ASD radiance data is included here and was previously published at: https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/2446. There is also a folder of JPEG photographs corresponding to selected spectra. We include a protocol document with detailed steps for ASD FieldSpec4 assembly and operations. This data additionally contains a file level metadata (flmd.csv) and data dictionary (dd.csv) file. Geospatial information: Geospatial data for mapping measurement site locations are in the files CHESS_polygons_lai_UTM.geojson, CHESS_polygons_shrub_UTM.geojson, and CHESS_polygons_meadow_UTM.geojson in the companion geospatial package for the 2025 CHESS campaign, ‘CHESS 2025: Location data for field observations and sampling’ (Henderson et al., 2026). CHESS Project Description: The Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) comprised a multi-week airborne remote sensing and field observation campaign in the Upper Gunnison Basin, Colorado, conducted in June and July of 2025. Airborne remote sensing was conducted by the National Ecological Observatory Network Airborne Observation Platform (NEON AOP), concurrent with a field campaign run by the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory (RMBL), the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Watershed Function Science Focus Area (SFA), and NASA-JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) Earth Surface Mineral Dust Source Investigation (EMIT) program. Between June 10 and July 18, 2025, the NEON AOP flight team collected high-resolution aerial imaging spectroscopy and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data over three domains: the Upper East River (CRBU), Almont Triangle (ALMO), and the Upper Taylor Basin (UPTA). In coordination with the flights, a field campaign acquired ground-truth observations, including observations of vegetation composition, foliar traits, forest demography, and subsurface properties in 18 core sampling areas within the domains. Additional surface water observations were taken at over 380 point locations. All CHESS campaign datasets can be found within the CHESS ESS-DIVE data portal: https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/chess. Funding Acknowledgment: This research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NM0018D0004) and was funded by EMIT Extended Mission Phase E Science.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗
DOE OSTI2025

Controlled environment agriculture: An opportunity to strengthen interagency research collaboration in the US government

Challenges facing food production and agricultural systems are increasingly interconnected with economic, security, health, and equity issues, among others. Threats such as extreme weather, economic volatility, and shrinking water resources and arable land, influence our ability to maintain a safe and resilient food supply. One promising solution to these threats is controlled environment agriculture (CEA). In many cases, CEA can drastically reduce the amount of water and land used in crop production while increasing productivity. Operations may be established in nearly any environment and harvests can take place year-round, supporting food system resiliency and sustainability. CEA sits at the nexus of a number of disciplines and industries, making it well suited for transdisciplinary and multi-institutional research coordination. Herein, authors from multiple US government agencies present CEA as a case study in improving cross-agency research collaboration. The federal government houses a range of scientific expertise and research capabilities, positioning scientists to lead national and global efforts in transdisciplinary, interagency approaches to complex challenges. Navigating cross-agency collaboration can be a challenge, especially coordinating across different scientific disciplines, geographic locations, and funding mechanisms. To enhance multiagency efforts, collaborators could prioritize (i) organizing personnel and resources, (ii) enhancing existing multiagency collaborations, and (iii) focusing on further opportunities for coordination. Adopting these approaches could enable federal researchers to reinforce and advance academic and industry efforts to address current CEA challenges while solidifying the United States as a leader in this arena.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
NASA NTRS2014

Preliminary Sensorimotor and Cardiovascular Results from the Joint Russian and U.S. Pilot Field Test with Planning for the Full Field Test Beginning with the Year Long Intenational Space Station

Ongoing collaborative research efforts between NASA's Neuroscience and Cardiovascular Laboratories, and the Institute of Biomedical Problems' (IBMP) Sensory-Motor and Countermeasures Laboratories have been measuring functional sensorimotor, cardiovascular and strength responses following bed rest, dry immersion, short duration (Space Shuttle) and long duration (Mir and International Space Station) space flights. While the unloading paradigms associated with dry immersion and bed rest does serve as acceptable flight analogs, testing of crew responses following the long duration flights previously has not been possible until a minimum of 24 hours after landing. As a result, it is not possible to estimate the nonlinear trend of the early (<24 hr) recovery process, nor is it possible to accurately assess the full impact of the decrements associated with long duration flight. To overcome these limitations, both the Russian and U.S. sides have implemented testing at landing site. By joint agreement, this research effort has been identified as the functional Field Test (FT). For practical reasons the FT has been divided into two phases: the full FT and a preliminary pilot version (PFT) of the FT that is reduced in both length and scope. The primary goal of this research is to determine functional abilities in long duration space flight crews beginning as soon after landing as possible (< 2 hr) with one to three immediate follow-up measurements on the day of landing. This goal has both sensorimotor and cardiovascular elements, including evaluations of NASA's new anti-orthostatic compression garment and the Russian Kentavr garment. Functional sensorimotor measurements will include, but are not limited to, assessment of hand/eye coordination, ability to egress from a seated position, walk normally without falling, measurement of dynamic visual acuity, ability to discriminate different forces generated with both the hands and legs, recovery from a fall, a coordinated walk involving tandem heel-to-toe placement, and determination of postural ataxia while standing. The cardiovascular portion of the investigation includes blood pressure and heart rate measurements during a timed stand test in conjunction with postural ataxia testing (quiet stance sway) as well as cardiovascular responses during other functional tasks. In addition to the immediate post-landing collection of data for the full FT, postflight data will be acquired at a minimum of one to three more other times within the 24 hr following landing and continue until functional sensorimotor and cardiovascular responses have returned to preflight normative values. The PFT represents a single trial run comprised of jointly agreed upon subset of tests from the full FT and relies heavily on IBMP's Sensory-Motor and Countermeasures Laboratories for content and implementation. The PFT was first conducted following the September 2013 landing of the Soyuz spacecraft (34S) and again following the landing of Soyuz 35S in November. Testing included: (1) a sit-tostand test, (2) recovery from a fall where the crewmember began in the prone position on the ground and then stood for 3 min while cardiovascular stability was determined and postural ataxia data were acquired, and (3) a tandem heel-to-toe walk test to determine changes in the central locomotor program. Video, cardiovascular parameters (heart rate and blood pressure), data from body-worn inertial sensors and severity of postflight motion sickness were collected for analysis. In summary, the level of functional deficit is expected to be most profound during the acquisition of gravity loads immediately after landing when the demands for crew intervention in response to emergency operations will be greatest. Clearly measureable performance parameters such as ability to perform a seat egress, recover from a fall or the ability to see clearly when walking, and related physiological data (orthostatic responses) are required to provide an evidence base for characterizing programmatic risks and the degree of variability among crewmembers for exploration missions where the crew will be unassisted after landing. Overall, these early functional and related physiological measurements will allow estimation of nonlinear sensorimotor and cardiovascular recovery trends to an accuracy that has not been previously captured in over 50 years of space flight.

Reschke, M. F.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Securing the Modern Grid: Federal Investments, Digitization, and Supply Chain Strategy

Across the United States (U.S.) grid expansion and modernization is underway, paving the way for accelerated load growth and intelligent resource management. Digitization of the grid is supported by several state and federal programs, providing support for utilities installing advanced metering infrastructure (AMI), AI-powered analytics systems, battery energy storage systems (BESS), and distributed energy resource management systems (DERMS) to transform the grid from a one-way power delivery system into an intelligent, responsive network that will enable faster load growth and power expansion of data centers for advanced artificial intelligence (AI) applications. The digital transformation of America's grid presents opportunity for increased efficiency and resiliency but also introduces new digital risks that require careful management. Digital equipment often contains several vulnerabilities such as unencrypted communication protocols, and persistent remote access capabilities that could be exploited to manipulate device settings, coordinate service disruptions, or inject false data into grid operations. These digital risks become particularly important as the grid must rapidly scale to support AI-driven data centers, which the administration has identified as essential for maintaining U.S. technological leadership and economic competitiveness. These vulnerabilities are compounded by supply chain realities: Chinese manufacturers currently produce 70-90% of essential grid components including inverters, batteries, and control systems, with the U.S. lacking domestic manufacturing capacity for critical assets like extra-high voltage transformers. Recent federal legislation has established Foreign Entity of Concern (FEOC) restrictions to address these risks, requiring projects to achieve escalating thresholds of non-FEOC content to receive tax credits while utilities work to expand sourcing channels for their supply chains and strengthen security measures. These restrictions arrive precisely when utilities face unprecedented electricity demand growth driven by the rapid growth in data centers, creating a considerable challenge: rapidly expanding infrastructure while navigating complex compliance requirements while lacking viable alternatives for many critical components. Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and its partners have developed practical approaches to help utilities navigate these intersecting challenges as they leverage federal investment to strengthen and grow the grid. These solutions include Cyber-Informed Engineering (CIE) principles that build resilience directly into systems, the Cirrus tool for secure cloud migration, and enhanced procurement guidance that embeds security requirements throughout equipment lifecycles. Federal initiatives, such as the Technical Assistance for Digital Assurance (TADA) project, provide direct support to utilities implementing these approaches while facilitating knowledge sharing across the industry. While these tools and frameworks cannot eliminate all risks inherent in foreign supply chain dependencies, they offer pragmatic pathways for strengthening security posture without sacrificing the deployment momentum essential to meeting surging electricity demand. Ultimately, securing America's digital energy infrastructure demands dedicated coordination across multiple fronts: building domestic supply chains, implementing robust digital assurance practices, and maintaining the aggressive modernization timeline necessary for reliability, resilience, and energy independence.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Scheduling Position, Navigation and Time Service Requests from Non-dedicated Lunar Constellations

This paper presents a centralized scheduler that satisfies user requests for Position, Navigation, and Time (PNT) services from an ad-hoc, non-dedicated orbital constellation around the Moon. Traditional, dedicated GNSS networks provide service 24/7, which allows users to acquire localization services at-will. For ad-hoc networks, a coordinated schedule is needed to ensure Quality of Service (QoS) guarantees for user localization, while satisfying non-dedicated assets’ usage constraints. This scheduler bridges this coordination gap by leveraging Mixed Integer-Linear Programming (MILP) to schedule this “as-needed” localization service while respecting the constraints on each asset. In upcoming decades there is expected to be a substantial increase in Lunar missions. Many of these missions will feature low-cost surface assets near the moon’s polar regions and small-sat science missions in orbit. Most missions need PNT capabilities to ensure safe operations and meet their science objectives, but low-cost missions may not be able to support the large power, mass, and weight that a weak GNSS or DSN based navigation solution would entail. Asset localization has been demonstrated using a decentralized extended Kalman Filter (DEKF) in the previously presented Lunar Autonomous PNT System (LAPS). Within the LAPS simulation environment, a module has been developed to generate the coordinated user-asset schedules described above; this Service Scheduler Module (SSM) allows for complete end-to-end testing of the entire system. Within SSM, a user service request consists of a location on the Lunar surface, a cumulative service duration, and a window in which service must occur. SSM takes as input these requests and the LAPS-predicted positional degree of precision as the QoS for each available set of orbital assets. A simple, baseline MILP model is formulated to provide the highest-precision service balanced across all requests. To reflect the non-dedicated nature of the constellation, this baseline model is augmented with additional asset-specific load capacity constraints or availability constraints. The load capacity constraints limit total time spent providing service, and the availability constraints reflect blockout times or availability windows when the assets are not otherwise occupied. SSM outputs two schedules: the user schedule to indicate their service times and expected QoS, and a satellite schedule to be transmitted to the orbiting constellation, describing when each non-dedicated asset provides PNT service. SSM is predominantly implemented in MATLAB and allows the use of any MILP solver to generate the resulting schedules. This paper describes the SSM - LAPS interface, how the output of LAPS is used to construct the MILP, and how SSM provides user localization service while satisfying constraints. It will also demonstrate the tool’s flexibility for formulating schedules for the end user and the constellation, focusing on scenarios that match real-world proposed missions. It will detail how SSM can be used to compare the addition of load capacity constraints, satellite availability constraints, and QoS guarantees for the users. Finally, we describe how SSM can be used to support the design of the ad-hoc constellation itself. The resulting integrated capability will support the design of future ad-hoc Lunar PNT networks, enabling high-quality, low-cost Lunar exploration

Swarm↗
DOE OSTI2024

Value of Nuclear Energy to the Reliability of the North American Power System: Results for Western and Eastern Interconnections

This report documents the fulfillment of a milestone for the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Light Water Reactor Sustainability Program: completing a baseline study of regional impact of nuclear power plants and hydrogen production in maintaining grid services and power quality. Models have been comprehensively demonstrated for the Western Interconnection, or Western Electric Coordinating Council area, and in the Eastern Interconnection for scenarios representative of past extreme events (e.g., drought and heat waves). Understanding the impact on the reliability of the bulk electric system of any reduction in generation capacity from nuclear power, for any reason, is the motivation of this work. Factors that might lead to the premature or unplanned closure of nuclear plants, extended outages, or repurposing of nuclear power include: • Aging infrastructure: Many nuclear power plants in the U.S. are nearing the end of their designed operating lives. Upgrading aging infrastructure can be expensive, and some utilities may choose to retire plants rather than invest in costly upgrades. • Low wholesale electricity prices: The deregulation of the electricity market in many states has led to increased competition and driven down wholesale electricity prices, causing nuclear power operators to seek other revenue sources for their heat and power such as clean hydrogen production. • Renewables growth: The rapid growth of renewable energy sources like solar and wind power is posing a challenge to traditional generation sources like nuclear. While many see renewables as a key part of the clean energy transition, their intermittent nature requires additional grid solutions for reliable power supply. • The potential for regulatory decisions to be in conflict: In its 2021 rulemaking, EPA rule (86 FR 880), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set a compliance date for the ban on processing and distribution in commerce of Decabromodiphenyl Ether (DecaBDE). Since DecaBDE is in many components, particularly wiring, of nuclear power plants which are deemed safety-related or important to safety, three plants would not have been able to restart after their 2023 spring outages, and numerous others would have faced issues in the near future. Fortunately, in this case, the EPA provided relief to the nuclear energy industry. The report provides a summary of the significant role nuclear energy plays in the United States’ power generation mix, supplying around 20% of the nation’s electricity generation, spread across 28 U.S. states. Nuclear power is reliable, mostly unaffected by weather and seasonal changes, and provides a consistent source of baseload power. In terms of capacity, nuclear power plants account for as much as 26% of balancing area power generation capacity. Nuclear power also provides a substantial contribution (e.g., 10% of the inertia in the Eastern Interconnection) of the synchronous spinning mass/inertia that buffers the rate at which frequency changes when a load and generation imbalance occurs (e.g., a large plant trips or a load is suddenly shed due to a transmission outage). This contribution is critical for maintaining grid stability during sudden changes in load or generation.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
NASA NTRS2016

Field Test: Results of Tandem Walk Performance Following Long-Duration Spaceflight

BACKGROUND: Coordinated locomotion has proven to be challenging for many astronauts following long duration spaceflight. As NASA's vision for spaceflight points toward interplanetary travel, we must prepare for unassisted landings, where crewmembers may need to perform mission critical tasks within minutes of landing. Thus, it is vital to develop a knowledge base from which operational guidelines can be written that define when astronauts can be expected to safely perform certain tasks. Data obtained during the Field Test experiment (FT) will add important insight to this knowledge base. Specifically, we aim to develop a recovery timeline of functional sensorimotor performance during the first 24 hours and several days after landing. METHODS: FT is an ongoing study of 30 long-duration ISS crewmembers. Thus far, 9 have completed the full FT (5 U.S. Orbital Segment [USOS] astronauts and 4 Russian cosmonauts) and 4 more consented and launching within the next year. This is in addition to the eighteen crewmembers that participated in the pilot FT (11 USOS and 7 Russian crewmembers). The FT is conducted three times preflight and three times during the first 24 hours after landing. All crewmembers were tested in Kazakhstan in either the medical tent at the Soyuz landing site (~one hour post-landing), or at the airport (~four hours post-landing). The USOS crewmembers were also tested at the refueling stop (~12 hours post-landing) and at the NASA Johnson Space Center (~24 hours post-landing) and a final session 7 days post-landing. Crewmembers are instrumented with 9 inertial measurement unit sensors that measure acceleration and angular displacement (APDM's Emerald Sensors) and foot pressure-sensing insoles that measure force, acceleration, and center of pressure (Moticon GmbH, Munich, Germany) along with heart rate and blood pressure recording instrumentation. The FT consists of 12 tasks, but here we will focus on the most challenging task, the Tandem Walk, which was also performed as part of pilot FT. To perform the Tandem Walk, subjects begin with their feet together, their arms crossed at their chest and eyes closed. When ready, they brought one foot forward and touched the heel of their foot to their toe, repeating with the other foot, and continuing for about 10 steps. Three trials were collected with the eyes closed and a fourth trial was collected with eyes open. There are four metrics which are used to determine the performance level of the Tandem Walk. The first is percent correct steps. For a step to be counted as correct, the foot could not touch the ground while bringing it forward (no side stepping), eyes must stay closed during the eyes closed trials, the heel and toe should be touching, or almost touching (no large gaps) and there shouldn't be more than a three second pause between steps. Three judges score each step and the median of the three scores is kept. The second metric is the average step speed, or the number of steps/time to complete them. Thirdly, the root mean squared (RMS) error in the resultant trunk acceleration is used to determine the amount of upper body instability observed during the task. Finally, the RMS error of the mediolateral center of pressure as measured by the Moticon insoles is used to determine the mediolateral instability at the foot level. These four parameters are combined into a new overall Tandem Walk Parameter. RESULTS: Preliminary results show that crewmembers perform the Tandem Walk significantly worse the first 24 hours after landing as compared to their baseline performance. We find that each of the four performance metrics is significantly worse immediately after landing. We will present the results of tandem walk performance during the FT thus far. We will also combine these with the 18 crewmembers that participated in the pilot FT, concentrating on the level of performance and recovery rate. CONCLUSION: The Tandem Walk data collected as part of the FT experiment will provide invaluable information on the performance capabilities of astronauts during the first 24 hours after returning from long-duration spaceflight that can be used in planning future Mars, or other deep-space missions with unassisted landings. FT will determine the average sensorimotor recovery timeline and inform return-to-duty guidelines for unassisted landings.

Rosenberg, M. J. F.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Basic Energy Sciences Roundtable: Foundational Science to Accelerate Nuclear Energy Innovation

Energy security, availability, and reliability are among the greatest challenges facing the nation and the planet. An abundant potential source of energy resides in the fundamental atomic building blocks of the universe in the form of nuclear fission and fusion reactions. In fact, energy from nuclear fission currently provides the majority of the world’s zero-carbon electricity, and future fusion energy systems offer great promise; carbon-free nuclear energy technologies can be key to the world’s decarbonized energy future. Although contemporary fission systems use well-established technologies to supply safe and efficient baseload power, they could be more fuel efficient and less costly. Moving beyond massive light-water fission reactors to a variety of advanced nuclear systems—which will vary in size and operate in extremes of temperature, corrosivity, and other parameters—will place stringent conditions on materials and chemical systems. New demands will be placed on the coolants and solvents, the materials, and the monitoring tools used in these reactors. Fusion-based nuclear energy will require superior materials to withstand extremely high temperatures, plasma exposure, radiation damage, and implanted gases. The advantages associated with these new fission and fusion technologies will be realized only through continued advancements in the fundamental science underpinning our knowledge of the physics and chemistry of nuclear systems gained via improved experimental and computational methods. In July 2022, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Basic Energy Sciences—in coordination with the Offices of Nuclear Energy, Fusion Energy Sciences, and Advanced Scientific Computing Research—held a virtual roundtable titled “Foundational Science to Accelerate Nuclear Energy Innovation” to discuss the scientific and technical barriers for advanced nuclear energy systems. Five priority research opportunities were identified to address these scientific and technical challenges and to accelerate progress toward the realization of next-generation fusion and fission energy systems. The foundational science gaps inhibiting the advancement of nuclear energy technologies are identified and tackled in five priority research opportunities. These opportunities pave the way to accelerate the development and ultimately the adoption of new nuclear energy systems. They include the fundamental aspects of ion-electron interactions; novel properties of next-generation coolants and solvents; interfacial dynamics, not only in solids, but in other aspects of nuclear reactors; novel operando and in situ monitoring and sensing; and artificial intelligence to accelerate condensed phases discovery. Building on the foundation established by previous Basic Energy Sciences workshops, these opportunities encompass recent advances in fundamental knowledge and focus on the experimental and computational methods needed to resolve major technical challenges for nuclear energy technologies. Through developing fundamental scientific insight as well as pushing the frontiers of modeling complex systems and probing the operation of materials and chemical systems in extreme environments, research motivated by the priorities identified here will further develop the promise, potential, and utilization of nuclear energy for a clean energy future.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Notional Artemis Lunar Surface Exploration Package (ArLSEP) based on the Gandalf Staff Platform

Introduction: The Artemis program is planning to deliver crew and cargo to the lunar surface, but there is no current package for supporting lunar in-struments and experiments similar to the Apollo Lunar Surface Exploration Package (ALSEP). This abstract provides a possible concept for such a package using the Gandalf Staff Platform as a common core. Gandalf Staff: The Gandalf Staff is an early prototype system developed over FY’21/FY’22 using NASA Science Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) Center Information Fund (CIF) grants to de-sign, build and test “proof-of-concept” components. These components include a 24v battery powered monopole that powers a suite of subsystems, including a Graphical User Interface (GUI) for crew, surface voice and data communications, Lunar Search and Rescue (LunaSAR) navigation and communications, LiDAR, field site external lighting, 360-degree camera, and a geothermal instrument for measuring sub-surface temperature gradient. The staff can be carried independently by an Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) astronaut, or can be mounted into a tripod for “hands free” support at a surface site being investigated. The staff can be attached to an external solar array and power storage system for long-duration operations. [1,2] ALSEP: An ASLEP flew on each mission Apollo 12 to Apollo 17. For Apollo 11, a simplified packaged called the Early Apollo Scientific Experiments Pack-age (EASEP) was flown. Each package included a “Central Station” that provided the power and communications connected to a variety of instruments and sensors. The power was provided by a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (RTG) fueled by Plutoni-um-238 generating 70 watts of power (initially, decayed over time) [3]. The communications system provide for direct to Earth data transfer from the lunar surface. Each pack-age was stowed externally in the Lunar Module (LM) Scientific Equipment (SEQ) bay with a mass up to 163 kg (Apollo 17). The crew unloaded the ALSEP from the LM and deployed the instruments on the lunar surface. Although designed to operate for only 1 year, many sites operated for up to 8 years successfully [4]. The Active Seismic Experiment (ASE) included 3 geophones for detecting seismic waves created by mortars and thumpers deployed by the crew. Other active experiments measured the lunar atmosphere, the heat flow in the subsurface, the lunar gravity and potential gravity waves, the lunar magnetic field, the solar wind and plasma interactions in cislunar space. Passive experiments included collectors for dust and cosmic rays, and retroreflectors for precise measurements of distance using a laser from Earth. The ALSEP program continues to generate insights into lunar formation and evolution. ArLSEP Concepts: The lunar surface science package for the Artemis program will hopefully exceed the capability of the ALSEP. There are multiple issues for discussion leading to the design of a new ArLSEP, needing requirements definition from the science community, NASA mission architecture, and NASA budget planners. 1. Delivery Mechanism Two possible projects currently provide capability to deliver scientific cargo to the lunar surface: 1) the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) [5] and the Human Landing System (HLS) [6, 7]. Each project is controlled by a different organization within NASA and budgeted with different criteria although both support lunar exploration. The HLS system delivers crew (and potentially cargo) to human landing sites. If an ArLSEP is “predeployed” to such a site, the design must include power (either from the vehicle or independently) to keep the electronics functioning until deployed by the crew. If an ArLSEP is delivered on a vehicle after the crew is present on the lunar surface, safety protocols require adequate distance from the humans for impact from descent propelled sur-face regolith ejecta. This distance can not exceed the capability of the crew to walk (if no rover) to the vehicle for ArLSEP deployment. 2. Overall Guidelines The general design of ArLSEP will likely follow the ALSEP with a common system for communications and power; however, significant architecture differences between Apollo and Artemis exist. Power: The RTG will not be available for early Artemis missions nor likely follow-on Lunar Exploration Transportation Services (LETS) missions [8]. Thus, ArLSEP power must be supplied by solar arrays with sufficient battery capability to “keep alive” necessary electronics during any lunar surface eclipse period. Communication: The Artemis program is developing a series of communications satellites for lunar orbit to provide surface transmission of data and voice to Earth. Called “LunaNET”, this network is component useful for ArLSEP since south polar locations may not always have direct “line-of-sight” to Earth [9]. 3. Concept of Operations (ConOps) The general ConOps for ArLSEP is to deliver the package to lunar surface before the crew arrives, and then have the crew deploy the package after some period of time. This requires coordinated design (for power systems) and launch window (for schedule) on both the cargo and crew missions. Once the ArLSEP is deployed, it will operate autonomously for a number of years. It should be designed to be EVA compatible for crew maintenance and upgrade. 4. Notional Design (for discussion purpose only) The landing site near the South Pole is expected to have no eclipse cycle exceeding 5 days, so the “keep alive” power is 144 hours (6 days to include margin). A 12v ArLSEP will use rechargeable LiFePO4 cells, which are common in the Electric Vehicle (EV) industry. With a current of 5 amps and a 125 watt system, the mass is about 90kg. The comm. system and structure adds another 10kg, thus the “Central Station” is approximately 100kg. The solar power is collected on four arrays (each 2m above the surface), and the entire ArLSEP is designed to stow in a 2m x 1m x 1m volume. The experiment and instrument design will vary for each installation and add mass to the total (although they are expected to fit within the 2m3 volume). Seismic wave generation will likely not be provided with mortars, thus an electric “thumper” will be required. Active instruments such as imaging systems and sensing instruments will benefit from the additional power and communication capability provided by ArLSEP. Passive systems such as retroreflectors, witness plates, and cosmic dust collectors can be added to either the landing vehicle and/or the ArLSEP. With repeated HLS missions to the same human site, the ArLSEP can be expanded and easily maintained for long duration science collection on the lunar surface.

ALSEP↗