SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
A group of viewgraphs are presented which seem to be designed to persuade that EER Systems Space Services Div. is capable of designing, testing, and launching spacecraft. Some representative viewgraphs are entitled as follow: corporate profile; corporate revenues; corporate organization; commercial space products; space systems pursuits; space services heritage; capabilities demonstrated; and commercial approach.
The COMmercial Experiment Transporter (COMET) is a set of hardware and related infrastructure used to support orbital experiments of the Commerical Centers for the Development of Space (CCDS's) and their industrial partners. During the three years since the program started, contracts have been signed, design reviews conducted on all components, experiments selected for the first mission, all hardware has been manufactured, the first phase of integrated testing of the satellite, the experiments, and the Launch Facility have all been completed. The program experienced several delays in 1993. A component failure in the Service Module during preparation for environmental testing in January resulted in an eight-week delay for the Service Module part of the FreeFlyer. Discovery of large overruns of the mass budget required a major revision of the mission profile for COMET 1. In the spring of 1993, Space Industries Incorporated (SII) and Westinghouse stopped work because of a lack of funds. EER continued to work toward completion of their launch systems. SII and Westinghouse resumed work in September 1993. Since resumption of work, a technical review of all systems to ascertain their state of readiness has been completed. No major problems were discovered. All systems are proceeding toward a launch date in the first quarter of 1994.
Recommendation 681 of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) provides five models for the prediction of propagation effects on land mobile satellite links: empirical roadside shadowing (ERS), attenuation frequency scaling, fade duration distribution, non-fade duration distribution, and fading due to multipath. Because the above prediction models have been empirically derived using a limited amount of data, these schemes work only for restricted ranges of link parameters. With the first two models, for example, the frequency and elevation angle parameters are restricted to 0.8 to 2.7 GHz and 20 to 60 degrees, respectively. Recently measured data have enabled us to enhance the range of the first two schemes. Moreover, for convenience, they have been combined into a single scheme named the extended empirical roadside shadowing (EERS) model.
The enclosed report provides information on the sixth flight of the Consort suborbital rocket series. Consort 6 is currently scheduled for launch on February 19, 1993, with lift off at 11:00 a.m., Mountain Time. It will carry seven materials and biotechnology experiments, two accelerometer systems, a controller and battery packs in a module nearly 12 feet tall and weighing approximately 1,004 pounds. Consort 6 will reach an apogee of approximately 200 miles providing about 7 minutes of microgravity time. The entire mission, from launch to touchdown, is expected to last approximately 15 minutes. The Consort series is part of a unique suborbital rocket launch services program conducted by the Office of Advanced Concepts and Technology (OACT) in conjunction with its Centers for the Commercial Development of Space (CCDS). This service is managed through the Consortium for Materials Development in Space (CMDS), a CCDS based University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH). This suborbital rocket program provides CCDS investigators with a microgravity environment to achieve commercial development objectives, or to test developmental hardware or techniques in preparation for orbital flights or additional follow-on work. Rocket and launch services for Consort 6, including use of the Starfire 1 launch vehicle, are provided by EER Systems Corporation. Integration of the payload into Starfire 1 will be handled by McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Company.
The Exterior Effects Room (EER) at the NASA Langley Research Center is a 39-seat auditorium built for psychoacoustic studies of aircraft community noise. The original reproduction system employed monaural playback and hence lacked sound localization capability. In an effort to more closely recreate field test conditions, a significant upgrade was undertaken to allow simulation of a three-dimensional audio and visual environment. The 3D audio system consists of 27 mid and high frequency satellite speakers and 4 subwoofers, driven by a real-time audio server running an implementation of Vector Base Amplitude Panning. The audio server is part of a larger simulation system, which controls the audio and visual presentation of recorded and synthesized aircraft flyovers. The focus of this work is on the calibration of the 3D audio system, including gains used in the amplitude panning algorithm, speaker equalization, and absolute gain control. Because the speakers are installed in an irregularly shaped room, the speaker equalization includes time delay and gain compensation due to different mounting distances from the focal point, filtering for color compensation due to different installations (half space, corner, baffled/unbaffled), and cross-over filtering.
The Exterior Effects Room (EER) is a psychoacoustic testing facility at NASA Langley Research Center which primarily focuses on testing human response to aircraft noise. The 39-seat auditorium houses a real-time spatial audio system and flyover simulation environment. The audio server utilizes an implementation of three-dimensional vector base amplitude panning (VBAP), a perceptual spatial audio technique exploiting loudspeaker triplets to place a virtual sound source at an arbitrary spatial position. Due to the irregular room geometry and non-uniform loudspeaker setup, the audio server applies equalization filtering to compensate for spectral coloration attributed to loudspeaker installation, crossover filtering, and delay/gain offsets. These filters can incorporate measurements taken at multiple listening points, allowing a more extensive listening area than filters derived from measurements taken at a single listening point. This work endeavors to update the existing equalization filter generation process by producing a new set of filters for various human subject testing scenarios.
The Exterior Effects Room (EER) is a psychoacoustic testing facility at NASA Langley Research Center which primarily focuses on testing human response to aircraft noise. The 39-seat auditorium houses a real-time spatial audio system and flyover simulation environment. The audio server utilizes an implementation of three-dimensional vector base amplitude panning (VBAP), a perceptual spatial audio technique exploiting loudspeaker triplets to place a virtual sound source at an arbitrary spatial position. Due to the irregular room geometry and nonuniform loudspeaker setup, the audio server applies equalization filtering to compensate for spectral coloration attributed to loudspeaker installation, crossover filtering, and delay/gain offsets. These filters can incorporate measurements taken at multiple listening points, allowing a more extensive listening area than filters derived from measurements taken at a single listening point. This work endeavors to update the existing equalization filter generation process by producing a new set of filters for various human subject testing scenarios.
Introduction Reduced food consumption and loss of body mass and muscle mass have been observed during spaceflight. Hypoxic conditions that astronauts may encounter on exploration missions may further implicate satiety signals and dietary intake. Appetite, food intake, and satiety hormones were investigated under the conditions of mild hypoxia and high energy output during simulated extravehicular activity (EVA) to determine the adequacy of a mission relevant space food system to support energy balance and body composition. Methods Foods realistic to early Artemis missions was packed by meal for each subject for the 11-day test based on estimated energy requirements (EER) and estimated EVA caloric requirements. No hot water or food warmer was provided and only room temperature water was available to rehydrate food and beverages in-mission, mimicking plans for early Artemis missions. Measures included food records (pre-mission, in-mission); fasted body weight (pre-mission, in-mission); Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) (pre-mission, post-mission); subjective ratings and feedback of food acceptability, mealtime and meal preparation sufficiency, appetite, and nausea (in-mission); and circulating ghrelin and leptin concentration in fasted blood samples (pre-mission, in-mission: pre-post EVA). Results All subjects consumed fewer calories in-mission than predicted. On average, subjects consumed 341 calories less on EVA days compared to non-EVA days in-mission (p=0.0511). The total weight loss estimate from daily weight measurements (-1.1 kg, p=0.0028) is consistent with underconsumption and supported by DXA measurements (-1.3 kg total body mass, p=0.0123 and -1.6 kg fat mass, p=0.0016). In general, most foods that were consumed were given acceptable scores, but subject comments indicated that the most acceptable foods were those not intended to be heated. Comments also indicated that subjects found their favorite foods early in the mission and avoided the foods that they did not like throughout the mission. Habitability scores indicated that overall aspects of the food system were considered borderline or unacceptable over the length of this mission. Foods that caused gas were avoided pre-EVA to prevent discomfort during pressure changes. Average fruit and vegetable intake decreased during the mission, dropping from 4.8 servings/d pre-mission to 3.4 servings/d on non-EVA days in-mission (p=0.0872) and 2.3 servings on EVA days (p=0.0020). Fasting ghrelin concentrations tended to be lower pre-EVA and on non-EVA days when exposed to mild hypoxia compared to normoxic conditions pre-mission and post-EVA (p=0.0136). Fasting levels of leptin did not change. Discussion Food intake was reduced in-mission, resulting in a caloric deficit and weight loss for most subjects. Crew food and appetite ratings and comments indicated this was due to a combination of food choices, lack of preference, lack of preparation capability, lack of time for meal preparation, consumption, and cleanup, and physiological challenges with the changing pressure. The regulation of appetite stimulating hormone ghrelin, but not the appetite suppressor leptin, appeared to be sensitive to hypoxic conditions. Conclusions Food preparation capabilities and time for meals are important for promoting adequate food intake. Reduced appetite and food intake during missions may further be aggravated under hypoxic conditions through the suppression of ghrelin. Lack of time for meals on EVA days, and avoidance of potential gas-causing foods (e.g., health promoting fruits and vegetables) prior to EVAs, demonstrate the importance of scheduling ample recovery time between EVA days.
Introduction Reduced food consumption and loss of body mass and muscle mass have been observed during spaceflight. Hypoxic conditions that astronauts may encounter on exploration missions may further implicate satiety signals and dietary intake. Appetite, food intake, and satiety hormones were investigated under the conditions of mild hypoxia and high energy output during simulated extravehicular activity (EVA) to determine the adequacy of a mission relevant space food system to support energy balance and body composition. Methods Foods realistic to early Artemis missions was packed by meal for each subject for the 11-day test based on estimated energy requirements (EER) and estimated EVA caloric requirements. No hot water or food warmer was provided and only room temperature water was available to rehydrate food and beverages in-mission, mimicking plans for early Artemis missions. Measures included food records (pre-mission, in-mission); fasted body weight (pre-mission, in-mission); Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) (pre-mission, post-mission); subjective ratings and feedback of food acceptability, mealtime and meal preparation sufficiency, appetite, and nausea (in-mission); and circulating ghrelin and leptin concentration in fasted blood samples (pre-mission, in-mission: pre-post EVA). Results All subjects consumed fewer calories in-mission than predicted. On average, subjects consumed 341 calories less on EVA days compared to non-EVA days in-mission (p=0.0511). The total weight loss estimate from daily weight measurements (-1.1 kg, p=0.0028) is consistent with underconsumption and supported by DXA measurements (-1.3 kg total body mass, p=0.0123 and -1.6 kg fat mass, p=0.0016). In general, most foods that were consumed were given acceptable scores, but subject comments indicated that the most acceptable foods were those not intended to be heated. Comments also indicated that subjects found their favorite foods early in the mission and avoided the foods that they did not like throughout the mission. Habitability scores indicated that overall aspects of the food system were considered borderline or unacceptable over the length of this mission. Foods that caused gas were avoided pre-EVA to prevent discomfort during pressure changes. Average fruit and vegetable intake decreased during the mission, dropping from 4.8 servings/d pre-mission to 3.4 servings/d on non-EVA days in-mission (p=0.0872) and 2.3 servings on EVA days (p=0.0020). Fasting ghrelin concentrations tended to be lower pre-EVA and on non-EVA days when exposed to mild hypoxia compared to normoxic conditions pre-mission and post-EVA (p=0.0136). Fasting levels of leptin did not change. Discussion Food intake was reduced in-mission, resulting in a caloric deficit and weight loss for most subjects. Crew food and appetite ratings and comments indicated this was due to a combination of food choices, lack of preference, lack of preparation capability, lack of time for meal preparation, consumption, and cleanup, and physiological challenges with the changing pressure. The regulation of appetite stimulating hormone ghrelin, but not the appetite suppressor leptin, appeared to be sensitive to hypoxic conditions. Conclusions Food preparation capabilities and time for meals are important for promoting adequate food intake. Reduced appetite and food intake during missions may further be aggravated under hypoxic conditions through the suppression of ghrelin. Lack of time for meals on EVA days, and avoidance of potential gas-causing foods (e.g., health promoting fruits and vegetables) prior to EVAs, demonstrate the importance of scheduling ample recovery time between EVA days.
Earlier this year, a psychoacoustic test was conducted in the EER which investigated how members of the public reacted to scenarios containing multiple UAM flyover events. The subjects read books of their choosing for 4 minutes at a time, during which a scenario played. They were asked to register their annoyance reaction to the scenario on an 11 point numerical scale after all of the flyovers had played. The scenarios were formulated to have several different tradeoffs between the number of flyovers played within the 4 minutes, and the level of the flyovers. The results indicate that for paces of operations typical of a busy airport (from .5 to 2 flyovers per minute), subjects seemed to be more sensitive to an increase in the number of operations than would be implied by the equal-energy hypothesis. For numbers of operations greater than this - more than what could be achieved at an airport, but perhaps what is possible in UAM scenarios - the subjects were less sensitive to increases in the number of operations and seemed to revert to the equal-energy tradeoff between level and number.
The Helicopter and Urban Air Mobility (UAM) Laboratory Comparison (HULC) psychoacoustic test was conducted in July 2025 to compare human annoyance responses to noise from UAM vehicles and helicopters. This document provides a literature review, describes the HULC test methodology including stimuli selection and test administration procedures, and presents results from an initial analysis using multilevel statistical modeling. The test utilized 123 sound stimuli from four helicopters and six UAM vehicles across three flight phases (departure, cruise, and approach), presented to 40 subjects in the Exterior Effects Room (EER) at NASA's Langley Research Center. Subjects rated their annoyance on a 0 to 10 scale while imagining hearing these sounds multiple times daily near their homes. Key findings revealed that, at the same A-weighted sound exposure levels, UAM vehicles and helicopters produced similar annoyance responses across all flight phases, with mean differences of only approximately 1 dB and overlapping confidence intervals. However, at equivalent observer distances, UAM vehicles had inherently quieter operations and lower mean annoyance ratings. These results suggest that UAM vehicles and helicopters may be assessed in a similar manner for community noise impact. The quieter noise characteristics of UAM vehicles may provide advantages for operating in communities and integrating into urban environments.
HydroGEN (https://www.h2awsm.org/) Energy Materials Network (EMN) is an U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) EERE Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office (HFTO)-funded consortium that aims to accelerate the discovery and development of advanced water splitting materials (AWSM) for clean, low-cost hydrogen production. This is in line with the H2@Scale initiative (https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/h2-scale), with the goal to meet U.S. DOE's Hydrogen Shot production cost target of $1/kg H2 within 1 decade. Materials innovations are key to enhancing performance, durability, and cost of hydrogen generation technologies. Large scale, low cost hydrogen from diverse domestic resources can enable an economically competitive and environmentally beneficial future energy system across multiple sectors. HydroGEN is focused on low technology readiness level AWS technologies, including low- (alkaline exchanged membrane electrolysis) and high-temperature electrolysis (proton-conducting solid oxide electrolysis), photoelectrochecmical (PEC) and solar thermochemical (STCH) water splitting. This presentation will provide an overview of the HydroGEN EMN and technical highlights of a few lab-led and FOA-awarded R&D projects. HydroGEN continues to grow its community of industry, university, and national laboratories, forming a national innovation ecosystem focused on renewable hydrogen production.
This paper will introduce development and field trial of a residential air-source integrated heat pump for cold climates. The heat pump is multi-functional to meet all the home comfort demands, including space cooling, space heating, domestic water heating. The integrated heat pump is an ideal solution to decarbonize northern homes via providing efficient space heating and water heating to replace natural gas. It uses a three-stage compressor and a single set of heat exchangers and valves to deliver all the functions, and thus achieve cost reduction. We developed an innovative system configuration and related controls to solve typical charge unbalance, accelerate charge migration and smoothen mode transition in integrated heat pumps. Laboratory investigations were conducted for individual modes and verified the control functions. Laboratory tests demonstrated that the unit delivered outstanding performance. It achieved 17.0 SEER (seasonal cooling energy efficiency rating) and 11.0 HSPF (heating seasonal performance factor). In the most efficient mode (combined space cooling and water heating mode), the unit reached a total energy efficiency > 30.0 EER and required only 25 minutes to heat a 50-gallon tank of water. One heat pump prototype is going through a field trial since April, 2023 in Syracuse, New York. The one-year field test results are summarized.
HydroGEN Energy Materials Network (EMN) is an U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) EERE Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office (HFTO)-funded consortium that aims to accelerate the discovery and development of advanced water splitting materials (AWSM) for clean, low-cost hydrogen production. Materials innovations are key to enhancing performance, durability, and cost of hydrogen generation technologies. HydroGEN is focused on low technology readiness level AWS technologies, including low- (alkaline exchanged membrane electrolysis) and high-temperature electrolysis (proton-conducting solid oxide electrolysis), photoelectrochecmical (PEC) and solar thermochemical (STCH) water splitting. This presentation will provide an overview of the HydroGEN EMN and technical highlights of a few lab-led and FOA-awarded R&D projects. HydroGEN continues to grow its community of industry, university, and national laboratories, forming a national innovation ecosystem focused on renewable hydrogen production.
Large-scale, low -cost hydrogen production can enable an economically competitive, secure, and environmentally beneficial future energy system across multiple sectors. Furthermore, clean hydrogen can address specific sectors that are hard to decarbonize (e.g., heavy-duty trucking, load-following electricity, iron, steel, and cement) and can help the U.S. meet the net zero carbon goal by 2050. To achieve this goal, tens of millions of metric tons of clean, reliable, and affordable hydrogen will be needed annually1. In 2021, the Hydrogen Energy Earthshot was launched, and its goal is to reduce the cost of clean hydrogen to $1 per $1 kilogram in 1 decade (1 1 1) 2. One very promising pathway for large-scale hydrogen production is water splitting. Water splitting technologies range from commercial technologies such as electrolyzers to approaches that are at a much earlier stage of development, such as photoelectrochemical (PEC) and thermochemical (TCH) processes. All these water splitting pathways offer diverse benefits in energy storage, grid services, and cross-sector emissions reductions while taking advantage of the diverse domestic resources. However, critical materials-, component- and system-level challenges must be addressed to improve efficiency and durability and reduce cost. To address these barriers and move these promising and high impact technologies forward, the HydroGEN Advanced Water Splitting Materials (AWSM) and the H2 from the Next-generation of Electrolyzers of Water (H2NEW) consortia were formed and supported by the Department of Energy (DOE) EERE Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office (HFTO). HydroGEN (https://www.energy.gov/eere/h2awsm/) consortium, established in 2016, is an Energy Materials Network (EMN) that aims to accelerate the materials R&D of low technology readiness level (TRL) advanced water splitting (AWS) technologies. The consortium comprises five core national laboratories and focuses on four early-stage AWS pathways: alkaline exchange membrane (AEM) electrolysis, proton conducting solid oxide electrolysis (p-SOEC), photoelectrochemical, and thermochemical water splitting. Liquid alkaline and PEM electrolyzers are already commercial and significant advancements in oxygen conducting solid oxide electrolysis cells (o-SOECs) have been realized. Yet, these systems are still too expensive and not sufficiently durable for wide-scale commercialization. To enable high-volume manufacturing of affordable, durable, efficient electrolyzers, H2NEW (https://h2new.energy.gov/), another multi-lab consortium, was established in 2020. This comprehensive, concerted effort is focused on overcoming barriers related to components and materials integration and scale-up to achieve performance, durability, with an initial focus to achieve $2/kg H2 by 2026.
Scientists and stakeholders can inform the process of siting renewable energy facilities in ways that do not perpetuate socioeconomic disparities associated with fossil fuel industries or create new ones. Procedural justice indicators and distributional justice indicators that incorporate environmental, social, and economic objectives can be used to site energy facilities in ways that increase benefits and reduce negative impacts to disadvantaged and underserved populations. A generic list of potential energy justice indicators for siting bioenergy facilities was developed collaboratively between U.S. bioenergy researchers and diverse agriculture, energy, and energy and environmental justice stakeholders and experts. From this list smaller numbers of indicators can be selected or modified with communities for local siting of bioenergy facilities. Groups of indicators can be used to guide biorefinery or biopower siting and permitting decisions, e.g., to compare siting options, to draw early attention to key problems, or to track progress toward justice-related targets.
The United States has seen significant growth in electric vehicle (EV) adoption, leading to increased demand for EV charging infrastructure. Over the past decade, EV charging infrastructure site developers, site hosts, and electric distribution utilities have navigated the process to integrate chargers onto the electric grid. Site developers and site hosts have raised the alarm that the integration process for high-powered EV charging projects does not meet the needs of the EV market for timeliness or cost. High-powered charging stations typically require a load service request or an agreement with the local utility to connect to the grid. The process of energizing a new high-powered charging site can be complex and time-consuming, often taking up to 2 years. This timeline is the result of current utility energization processes having been designed for construction projects that take longer to build (i.e., buildings). The specific challenges stem from various factors, including compartmentalization in application processes, the integration of EV charging process approvals with other distributed energy resources (DERs), and the need to ensure grid reliability. The energization process needs to evolve to meet the growing demand for high-powered EV charging. This white paper compiles information gathered through various conversations with key stakeholders, including utilities, utility regulators, EV charging operators, site developers, and authorities having jurisdiction (AHJ) as well as through an extensive literature review. This document identifies the challenges and provides potential solutions to streamline the process of connecting EV charging infrastructure to the power grid in the United States, serving as a starting point for future conversations around these solutions. The solutions noted in this white paper require collaborative efforts among utilities, regulators, and EV charging infrastructure developers to streamline the grid connection process for EV charging infrastructure. They are broadly organized into four areas: 1. Increase data access and transparency: Develop automated load service request tools, integrate hosting capacity and load service request analyses, incorporate EV adoption forecasts, and provide transparency on the processing queue. 2. Improve energization processes and timing: Create fast-track options based on prescreening criteria, provide flexibility or phased approvals in the load service request/interconnection process, build internal knowledge within utilities about EV charging technologies, and provide standardized workforce training. 3. Promote economic efficiency: Right size distribution components to accurately reflect the load requirements of EV charging infrastructure, make proactive investments in grid infrastructure based on EV adoption forecasts and growth projections, and consider energy equity and environmental justice factors such as equitable access to EV charging when planning infrastructure. 4. Improve grid reliability and resilience: Use load management/power control systems (PCS) at EV charging stations, adopt and implement harmonized standards for communication protocols and information models between the EV charging and grid control infrastructure, and address cybersecurity considerations by implementing robust security measures and standards for EV charging infrastructure—with particular emphasis on clarifying the security requirements for the interface to the grid. The objective of the solutions proposed in this white paper is to accelerate the timeline and decrease costs associated with connecting EV charging infrastructure to the grid. Electric utilities, utility regulators, EV charging infrastructure developers, and site hosts will first need to understand which solutions are available in their service territory, and if warranted, which combination of solutions would support their specific needs. Through the successful implementations of solutions at scale detailed here, industry will demonstrate a new and innovative ecosystem where timely deployment and energization of EV charging infrastructure with greater grid resiliency and reliability is a reality.
Here, the thermally anisotropic building envelope (TABE) is a novel active building envelope that enhances energy efficiency and thermal comfort in buildings by transferring heat and cold between building envelopes and hydronic loops. When coupled with thermal energy storage (TES) units, the TABE + TES enables the storage of both heat and cold energy captured by the TABE roof or exterior walls. This stored energy can be later released by the TABE floor for indoor heating and cooling, benefiting both the grid and the end user. This paper evaluates the merits of TABE + TES for building demand-side management across various US climate conditions, focusing on peak load shaving, annual energy savings, and cost savings under time-of-use (TOU) electric rate schedules. Simulations were conducted by integrating time-of-day–informed, rule-based control strategies in MATLAB, TABE components and TES units in COMSOL Multiphysics, and whole-building energy analysis in EnergyPlus. A case study using the US Department of Energy’s prototype single-family detached house model in Birmingham, Alabama; Los Angeles, California; Oak Ridge, Tennessee; and Denver, Colorado, showed that the TABE + TES system achieved (1) 70 % peak load shaving in Los Angeles and Denver and 20 % in Birmingham and Oak Ridge; (2) significant peak electricity savings of 351–497 kWh, reducing peak energy consumption by 38 %–78 %; and (3) annual heating cost savings of 0.79 $\$$/m2–1.17 $\$$/m 2 and cooling cost savings of 0.60 $\$$/m 2 –1.17 $\$$/m 2 using a normal utility rate or low-TOU rate. The benefits of employing the TABE + TES system are even more significant under high TOU rates.