Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “disaster prevention”

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.

57 records · Page 4

Cs absorption capacity and selectivity of crystalline and amorphous Hf and Zr phosphates

Removal of radioactive Cs from sodium-rich solutions is a technical challenge that goes back to post World War II nuclear waste storage and treatment; and interest in this topic was reinvigorated by the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster, 10 years ago. Since the 1960's there has been considerable focus on layered Zr phosphates as robust inorganic sorbents for separation of radionuclides such as Cs. Here we present synthesis and characterization, and direct comparison of Cs sorption capacity and selectivity of four related materials: 1) crystalline α-Zr phosphate and α-Hf phosphate, and 2) amorphous analogues of these. Powder X-ray diffraction, thermogravimetry, solid-state 31P magic angle spinning nuclear magnetic resonance (MAS-NMR) spectroscopy, and compositional analysis (inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy and mass spectroscopy, ICP OES and ICP MS) provided formulae; respectively M(HPO4)2∙1H2O and M(HPO4)2∙4H2O (M = Hf, Zr) for crystalline and amorphous analogues. Maximum Cs loading, competitive Cs-Na selectivity and maximum Cs-Na loading followed by the above characterizations plus 133Cs MAS-NMR spectroscopy revealed that amorphous analogues are considerably better Cs-sorbents (based on maximum Cs-loading and selectivity over Na) than the well-studied crystalline Zr-analogue. Additionally, crystalline α-Hf phosphate is better Cs-sorbent than crystalline α-Zr phosphate. All these studies consistently show that Hf phosphate is less crystallize than Zr phosphate, when obtained under similar or identical synthesis conditions. We attribute this to lower solubility of Hf phosphate compared to Zr phosphate, preventing ‘defect healing’ during the synthesis process.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

Use of Remote Sensing Data to Enhance NWS Storm Damage Toolkit

In the wake of a natural disaster such as a tornado, the National Weather Service (NWS) is required to provide a very detailed and timely storm damage assessment to local, state and federal homeland security officials. The Post ]Storm Data Acquisition (PSDA) procedure involves the acquisition and assembly of highly perishable data necessary for accurate post ]event analysis and potential integration into a geographic information system (GIS) available to its end users and associated decision makers. Information gained from the process also enables the NWS to increase its knowledge of extreme events, learn how to better use existing equipment, improve NWS warning programs, and provide accurate storm intensity and damage information to the news media and academia. To help collect and manage all of this information, forecasters in NWS Southern Region are currently developing a Storm Damage Assessment Toolkit (SDAT), which incorporates GIS ]capable phones and laptops into the PSDA process by tagging damage photography, location, and storm damage details with GPS coordinates for aggregation within the GIS database. However, this tool alone does not fully integrate radar and ground based storm damage reports nor does it help to identify undetected storm damage regions. In many cases, information on storm damage location (beginning and ending points, swath width, etc.) from ground surveys is incomplete or difficult to obtain. Geographic factors (terrain and limited roads in rural areas), manpower limitations, and other logistical constraints often prevent the gathering of a comprehensive picture of tornado or hail damage, and may allow damage regions to go undetected. Molthan et al. (2011) have shown that high resolution satellite data can provide additional valuable information on storm damage tracks to augment this database. This paper presents initial development to integrate satellitederived damage track information into the SDAT for near real ]time use by forecasters and decision makers.

Jedlove, Gary J.↗

Analysis of Launch Vehicle Liftoff Debris: Historical Perspective from Space Shuttle and Application to Artemis I

Human exploration-class launch vehicles are inherently prone to debris due to the extreme environments generated during pre-launch operations, liftoff, and flight. The use of cryogenic propellants often requires thermal protection system (TPS) coatings, typically foam, to maintain the propellant conditions in the tank and prevent an accumulation ice on the external surface of the vehicle. Some ice growth is to be expected at umbilical interfaces, vents, flanges, or brackets where it is difficult to apply TPS. This ice may come loose at any time due to wind on the launch pad, structural vibration and acoustics after rocket ignition, or aerodynamic forces during flight. This phenomena is especially apparent on vehicles with no TPS, such as the Saturn V rockets used in the Apollo Program, see Figure 1. During propellant tanking, the thermal contraction of the underlying substrate may generate cracks in the TPS (Figure 1). Chunks of TPS can release due to the expansion of ingested gas from cryopumping or from aerodynamic forces if the crack creates an offset surface. Most foams will also have a certain amount of “popcorning” where small pieces of foam will pop off during flight because of the differential between the static surface pressure and the pressure of the gas trapped in the foam cell structure. There are a number of other coating or closeout materials that may be shed from the vehicle and become debris. During pre-launch operations and liftoff, the vehicle may also be exposed to debris originating from the launch pad or ground support equipment. This debris is separate from foreign object debris, or FOD, which is not intended to be present and is strictly controlled through operations and maintenance procedures. In this case, debris is generated from hardware and materials that are necessary for launch and are subject to the intense vibration, acoustics, and direct plume impingement of the launch environment. Examples include ice from umbilicals, tape and tie wraps that protect cables, and rust or corrosion from the launch platform. While NASA has historically been aware of debris as a potential issue that could cause a failure resulting in loss of mission, loss of vehicle, or loss of crew, the likelihood and severity of that risk was not always well understood or given sufficient weight in program and flight decisions. After the Space Shuttle Columbia accident (STS-107), the investigation found that foam TPS debris shed from the external tank was the proximate cause of the damage to the orbiter wing. Six previous observations of debris released from the foam ramp that covered the bipod connecting the forward end of the orbiter to the external tank resulted in minor changes or were determined to be accepted flight risks. Two occurrences of bipod ramp foam loss were not identified until the STS-107 investigation. Despite the damage inflicted by these debris strikes, the Shuttle Program Requirements Control Board deemed the vehicle safe to fly. During the Return to Flight effort following the Columbia disaster, NASA Engineering developed a process for the assessment of debris transport, impact, and damage tolerance to support independent assessments of risk by NASA Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA). Under this system, each element (vehicle or ground system) defines a catalog of all expected debris based on launch history, component testing, or analysis. Debris transport analysis (DTA) is conducted using the debris catalog characteristics and potential flow transport mechanisms (e.g., vehicle aerodynamics, gravity, wind, plume-driven). The predicted debris impact locations and velocities are provided to the hardware owners, who use available test data and analysis to determine whether each component can withstand the impacts. In cases where the element hardware may be severely damaged or fail, the options are to mitigate the debris source through some change in design or operation, or to work with S&MA to try to characterize the probability of the impact and damage for program risk acceptance. Because of the differences in debris characteristics and transport, the DTA has been divided between the Liftoff and Ascent regimes. The development and application of Liftoff DTA methodology from the Shuttle Program to the current Artemis Program is the subject of this paper. Liftoff DTA covers the time from the start of pre-launch operations at the launch pad, up until the vehicle clears the launch tower and there is no longer any interaction with ground systems. Debris transport during this period is broadly classified as either gravity, wind, and plume-entrained (GWPE) or plume driven (PD). GWPE debris is generally lower speed, travelling in a forward-to-aft direction. PD transport includes flow features from the rocket ignition transient, as well as plume impingement and recirculation that occur as the vehicle lifts off the launch platform. In these cases, the debris typically moves in an aft-to-forward direction at higher speeds. The applicable transport mechanisms must be considered for each piece of debris depending on the material, and release location and time. For example, rust or metallic debris from the tower could fall (GWPE) and impact the vehicle before landing on the launch platform deck where it could be also be transported by plume impingement (PD). However, falling ice (GWPE) from an umbilical is unlikely to survive impact with the vehicle or launch platform and be available for PD transport. Modeling of debris transport is accomplished using a set of DTA tools which simulate debris trajectories subject to a reference frame acceleration (i.e., gravity) and aerodynamic drag. Where the trajectory encounters a solid surface, the debris is allowed to rebound with a specified coefficient of restitution. The drag is calculated by interpolating the fluid state at each point in the debris trajectory from high-fidelity computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations of the launch vehicle and pad. The CFD data may either be static (steady state or time averaged), typically for GWPE transport, or dynamic (time-accurate) for PD flow features like the ignition transient. Examples of the CFD flow field solutions for the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and launch pad are shown in Figure 2. Typical SLS debris trajectory predictions from DTA are illustrated in Figure 3. The final version of this paper will include a more detailed examination of the Liftoff DTA process developed during the Shuttle Program, and how it has been augmented and applied to the SLS rocket under the Artemis Program. Comparisons with debris observations from the Artemis I launch will demonstrate validation of the tools and methodology.

Debris↗