Search NASASearch

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Wire arc additive manufacturing”

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.

635 records · Page 36

An Overview of Experiments and Modeling of Polysiloxane-Coated Thermal Protection Systems for Missions to Mars, Titan, and Beyond.

Phenolic Impregnated Carbon Ablator (PICA) gained heritage during the historic Stardust mission, where it successfully returned samples from a comet’s tail and has since been instrumental in delivering payloads to the surface of Mars [1-3]. Most recently, PICA enabled the safe return of samples collected from asteroid Bennu as part of the OSIRIS-REx mission. This rich legacy underscores PICA’s critical role in allowing NASA’s most ambitious exploration missions. However, the friable nature of its phenolic phase presents challenges during handling and pre-launch activities. To mitigate this issue, PICA is coated with a polysiloxane resin system, which serves to suppress particulate dispersion and thereby safeguard spacecraft components. A comprehensive understanding of the polysiloxane resin’s behavior is imperative, as it profoundly shapes the material response of PICA during atmospheric entry by influencing its thermal and oxidative stability. This influence extends to thermocouple plugs embedded within thermal protection systems. These plugs have demonstrated their significance in missions such as Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) and Mars 2020, where the MEDLI and MEDLI2 instrumentation suites delivered in-valuable insights into the performance of thermal protection systems during entry into the Martian atmosphere [4]. Looking ahead, missions such as Dragonfly, set to descend into Titan’s dense atmosphere, aim to leverage advanced sensor technologies to further refine our understanding of thermal protection response [5]. Moreover, thermocouple plugs play an essential role in validating cutting-edge material response models, such as those pioneered under NASA’s Entry Systems Modeling Project (ESM), designed, in-part, to predict the operational integrity of thermal protection systems under the extreme stresses of atmospheric entry. To achieve these modeling goals, ground-based experiments are crucial to provide the foundational data necessary for developing and refining these predictive tools. To this end, an extensive test campaign was conducted at the Hypersonic Materials Environmental Test System (HyMETS) to investigate the high-temperature behavior of the polysiloxane resin in an air environment [6]. These experiments revealed critical phenomena, including the formation of a silicon oxycarbide layer that enhances oxidation resistance, moderates surface temperatures, and alters in-depth thermal response. Building on these findings, subsequent tests were designed to simulate atmospheric entry conditions in reactive gases, such as CO2 and N2, to mimic the environments of Mars and Titan, respectively, as well as non-reactive gases representing the atmospheres of the Ice Giants (Neptune and Uranus). A heating rate dependent decomposition mechanism has been identified for the polysiloxane resin under oxidizing conditions (Fig. 1). In the initial stage, the resin and the underlying thermal protection system undergo pyrolysis, rapidly generating a thin amorphous silicon oxycarbide interwoven with carbonaceous char and residual fibers from PICA. During the second stage, the nascent oxide layer establishes a robust, oxidation-resistant thermal barrier coating, which significantly impedes heat transfer to the underlying carbonaceous char, resulting in a stagnation of the surface temperature. A key factor contributing to this thermal resistance is the low recombination efficiency of atomic oxygen (γ), which further diminishes the heat load on the material’s interior layers [7]. Moreover, as the surface temperature stagnates, the silicon oxycarbide phase separates into distinct regions of silica and free graphite. Ultimately, when the heat flux reaches a critical threshold, a third stage is triggered, leading to the breakdown of the coating through carbothermal reduction, exposing the underlying char layer. This exposure leads to a dramatic surface temperature spike, driven by highly exothermic reactions between atomic oxygen and the char layer, further accelerating material degradation. A detailed mass and heat transfer model of PICA coated with polysiloxane resin was implemented in the Porous material Analysis Toolbox based on OpenFOAM, PATO [8]. The initial stage was considered negligible in this model because the resin decomposition occurs rapidly within a thin surface layer. Instead, the coating was directly considered as an oxygen-resistant thermal barrier coating. For the second stage, the thin amorphous silicon oxycarbide was treated as a pure silica surface to simplify the thermochemical behavior. The model ac-counts for surface equilibrium processes using representative elements of the coating-environment system. For the third stage, specific boundary conditions were developed to estimate the onset and progression of the coating removal. Two-dimensional material response simulations were conducted to compare uncoated and coated PICA using boundary conditions calibrated with HyMETS data. Fig. 2 illustrates that the simulations closely align with experimental data, successfully reproducing measured temperature profiles. This work will include the latest advancements in the coating model, including the calibration of recombination of atomic oxygen at the surface during the second phase. These simulated results will be further validated against additional CO2 data points from HyMETS, reinforcing the models’ predictive capabilities. These mechanisms and their effects on thermal protection systems, including thermochemical behavior and thermocouple probe performance in extreme environments, provide crucial insights for optimizing spacecraft designs that safeguard scientific payload and ensure mission success in future planetary exploration endeavors.

Active Oxidation

Evidence for large baryonic feedback at low and intermediate redshifts from kinematic Sunyaev-Zel’dovich observations with ACT and DESI photometric galaxies

Recent advances in cosmological observations have provided an unprecedented opportunity to investigate the distribution of baryons relative to the underlying matter. In this work, we show that the gas is more extended than the dark matter, and the amount of baryonic feedback at $z \lesssim 1$ disfavors low-feedback models such as that of state-of-the-art hydrodynamical simulation IllustrisTNG compared with high-feedback models such as that of the original Illustris simulation. This has important implications for bridging the gap between theory and observations and understanding galaxy formation and evolution. Furthermore, a better grasp of the baryon-dark matter link is critical to future cosmological analyses, which are currently impeded by our limited knowledge of baryonic feedback. Here, we measure the kinematic Sunyaev-Zel'dovich (kSZ) effect from the Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT), stacked on the luminous red galaxy (LRG) sample of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) imaging survey. This is the first analysis to use photometric redshifts for reconstructing galaxy velocities. Due to the large number of galaxies comprising the DESI imaging survey, this is the highest signal-to-noise stacked kSZ measurement to date: we detect the signal at 13$σ$, finding strong evidence that the gas is more spread out than the dark matter, as well as a preference for larger feedback compared to some commonly used state-of-the-art hydrodynamical simulations. Here, our work opens up the possibility of recalibrating large hydrodynamical simulations using the kSZ effect. In addition, our findings highlight the importance of properly accounting for baryonic feedback with future surveys such as LSST through direct probes such as the kSZ, and shed light on long-standing enigmas in astrophysics, such as the “missing baryon” problem.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS

Water Observations of Flow/No-Flow for the East-Taylor Watershed, Colorado (June-July 2025 and 2026)

This dataset provides multi-year, ground-truth visual observations of surface water flow/no-flow conditions within the East-Taylor Watershed, Colorado, collected during June and July of 2025 and 2026. In June and July 2025, on-the-ground visual observations of flow/no-flow were collected as part of the Watershed Function Scientific Focus Area (SFA) and Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory (RMBL) Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) campaign (further details are provided within the CHESS Project Description). We obtained 377 water observations of flow/no-flow within the East-Taylor Watershed, Colorado. These ground-truth observations were collected to validate classification maps from remote sensing data and model results within the East-Taylor Watershed. In 2025, flow/no-flow measurements were collected using a field-based app for the CHESS Campaign (Zerion iForm). Within the field app, a water observation form was created to collect coordinates and metadata about the observation. Information collected for the water observation points included information about visually-assessed streamflow presence/absence (standard question obtained from Colorado State University’s StreamTracker project), flow estimate, stream or ponded area width, canopy cover, manganese films, iron seeps, and beaver activity. For 2025 water observations, this dataset contains: (1) a data file with the water observations and coordinates (2025_Water_Observations.csv); (2) a Keyhole Markup Language Zipped (KMZ) with the water observation locations and metadata (2025_Water_Observations_Locations.kmz); (3) photos (.jpg and .jpeg) of the water observation points, organized by location, contained within 2025_Water_Observations_FieldPhotographs.zip file; and (4) water observation protocols and figures (2025_Water_Observation_Protocols.pdf). In June and July 2026, on-the-ground visual observations of flow/no-flow were collected as part of the Watershed Function SFA project. We obtained 365 water observations of flow/no-flow within the East-Taylor Watershed, Colorado. The 2026 observations focused on collecting repeat measurements at the 2025 flow/no-flow observation locations conducted as part of the CHESS campaign. These ground-truth observations were collected to understand differences in flow/no-flow in 2026, given the unprecedented 2026 drought in Colorado. In 2026, flow/no-flow measurements were collected using ArcGIS (Geographic Information System) Survey123. Within the field app, a water observation form was created to collect coordinates and metadata about the observation. Information collected for the water observation points included repeat information from the 2025 water observation effort, including visually-assessed streamflow presence/absence (standard question obtained from Colorado State University’s StreamTracker project), flow estimate, stream or ponded area width, canopy cover, manganese films, iron seeps, beaver activity, and a new metadata component of estimated stream depth (for select locations). For 2026 water observations, this dataset contains: (1) a data file with the water observations and coordinates (2026_Water_Observations.csv); (2) a Keyhole Markup Language Zipped (KMZ) with the water observation locations and metadata (2026_Water_Observations_Locations.kmz); (3) photos (.jpg) of the water observation points, organized by location, contained within 2026_Water_Observations_FieldPhotographs.zip file; and (4) water observation protocols and figures (2026_Water_Observation_Protocols.pdf). For 2025 and 2026 water observations, this dataset contains: (1) a location metadata file (locations.csv); (6) a file-level metadata (flmd.csv) file that lists each file contained in the dataset with associated metadata; and (7) a data dictionary (dd.csv) file that contains column/row headers used throughout the files along with a definition, units, and data type. 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. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. 2026-09-02: This dataset was updated to include 2026 water observation measurements. The 2025 observation files were also updated to ensure a consistent file naming convention across water observation years.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns

Weak Lensing Mass Calibration of the ACT DR5 Galaxy Clusters with the DES Year 3 Weak Lensing Data

We use weak gravitational lensing measurements from Year 3 Dark Energy Survey data to calibrate the masses of 443 galaxy clusters selected via the Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect from Atacama Cosmology Telescope Data Release 5 maps of the cosmic microwave background. We incorporate redshift and SZ measurements for individual clusters into a hierarchical model for the stacked lensing signals and perform Bayesian analyses to constrain the hydrostatic mass bias of the clusters. Our treatment of systematic uncertainties includes a prescription for measuring and accounting for the weak lensing boost factor, consideration of a miscentering effect, as well as marginalization over uncertainties in the source galaxy photometric redshift distributions and shear calibration. The resultant constraints on the normalization of the mass-observable relation have a precision of approximately 7%, with the mean WL halo mass of M $_{500c}$ = 5.4 × 10$^{14}$ M $_{⊙}$. We measure the bias between the true cluster mass and the mass estimated from the SZ signal based on an X-ray-calibrated scaling relation assuming hydrostatic equilibrium, to be 1 - b = 0.74$^{+0.06}$ $_{-0.05}$ over the full sample. When splitting the clusters into high (z = 0.43-0.70) and low (z = 0.15-0.43) redshift bins, we measure 1 - b = 0.58$^{+0.06}$ $_{-0.05}$ and 0.81$^{+0.08}$ $_{-0.06}$, respectively. When introducing additional freedom in redshift and mass to the hydrostatic bias model, we find that 1 - b decreases with redshift (with the power law of -1.8$^{+0.5}$ $_{-0.6}$, 99.95% confidence), consistent with findings from other recent studies, while we do not find any significant trend in mass. We also demonstrate that our result is robust against various systematics such as a scale cut, priors on baryonic and miscentering parameters, and degree of scatter in mass-observable relation. The weak-lensing mass calibration presented in this study will be a useful tool for using the ACT clusters as probes of astrophysics, and as a step towards using their abundance as a cosmological probe.

Shin, T. [Carnegie Mellon U.] (ORCID:0000000263895

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

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

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE