Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “websites standards 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.

59 records · Page 4

Summary of Data from the Fifth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop

Results from the Fifth AIAA CFD Drag Prediction Workshop (DPW-V) are presented. As with past workshops, numerical calculations are performed using industry-relevant geometry, methodology, and test cases. This workshop focused on force/moment predictions for the NASA Common Research Model wing-body configuration, including a grid refinement study and an optional buffet study. The grid refinement study used a common grid sequence derived from a multiblock topology structured grid. Six levels of refinement were created resulting in grids ranging from 0.64x10(exp 6) to 138x10(exp 6) hexahedra - a much larger range than is typically seen. The grids were then transformed into structured overset and hexahedral, prismatic, tetrahedral, and hybrid unstructured formats all using the same basic cloud of points. This unique collection of grids was designed to isolate the effects of grid type and solution algorithm by using identical point distributions. This study showed reduced scatter and standard deviation from previous workshops. The second test case studied buffet onset at M=0.85 using the Medium grid (5.1x106 nodes) from the above described sequence. The prescribed alpha sweep used finely spaced intervals through the zone where wing separation was expected to begin. Some solutions exhibited a large side of body separation bubble that was not observed in the wind tunnel results. An optional third case used three sets of geometry, grids, and conditions from the Turbulence Model Resource website prepared by the Turbulence Model Benchmarking Working Group. These simple cases were intended to help identify potential differences in turbulence model implementation. Although a few outliers and issues affecting consistency were identified, the majority of participants produced consistent results.

Levy, David W.↗

An Interdisciplinary Method for the Visualization of Novel High-Resolution Precision Photography and Micro-XCT Data Sets of NASA's Apollo Lunar Samples and Antarctic Meteorite Samples to Create Combined Research-Grade 3D Virtual Samples for the Benefit of Astromaterials Collections Conservation, Curation, Scientific Research and Education

New technologies make possible the advancement of documentation and visualization practices that can enhance conservation and curation protocols for NASA's Astromaterials Collections. With increasing demands for accessibility to updated comprehensive data, and with new sample return missions on the horizon, it is of primary importance to develop new standards for contemporary documentation and visualization methodologies. Our interdisciplinary team has expertise in the fields of heritage conservation practices, professional photography, photogrammetry, imaging science, application engineering, data curation, geoscience, and astromaterials curation. Our objective is to create virtual 3D reconstructions of Apollo Lunar and Antarctic Meteorite samples that are a fusion of two state-of-the-art data sets: the interior view of the sample by collecting Micro-XCT data and the exterior view of the sample by collecting high-resolution precision photography data. These new data provide researchers an information-rich visualization of both compositional and textural information prior to any physical sub-sampling. Since January 2013 we have developed a process that resulted in the successful creation of the first image-based 3D reconstruction of an Apollo Lunar Sample correlated to a 3D reconstruction of the same sample's Micro- XCT data, illustrating that this technique is both operationally possible and functionally beneficial. In May of 2016 we began a 3-year research period during which we aim to produce Virtual Astromaterials Samples for 60 high-priority Apollo Lunar and Antarctic Meteorite samples and serve them on NASA's Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation website. Our research demonstrates that research-grade Virtual Astromaterials Samples are beneficial in preserving for posterity a precise 3D reconstruction of the sample prior to sub-sampling, which greatly improves documentation practices, provides unique and novel visualization of the sample's interior and exterior features, offers scientists a preliminary research tool for targeted sub-sample requests, and additionally is a visually engaging interactive tool for bringing astromaterials science to the public.

Blumenfeld, E. H.↗

Creating User-Friendly Tools for Data Analysis and Visualization in K-12 Classrooms: A Fortran Dinosaur Meets Generation Y

During the summer of 2007, as part of the second year of a NASA-funded project in partnership with Christopher Newport University called SPHERE (Students as Professionals Helping Educators Research the Earth), a group of undergraduate students spent 8 weeks in a research internship at or near NASA Langley Research Center. Three students from this group formed the Clouds group along with a NASA mentor (Chambers), and the brief addition of a local high school student fulfilling a mentorship requirement. The Clouds group was given the task of exploring and analyzing ground-based cloud observations obtained by K-12 students as part of the Students' Cloud Observations On-Line (S'COOL) Project, and the corresponding satellite data. This project began in 1997. The primary analysis tools developed for it were in FORTRAN, a computer language none of the students were familiar with. While they persevered through computer challenges and picky syntax, it eventually became obvious that this was not the most fruitful approach for a project aimed at motivating K-12 students to do their own data analysis. Thus, about halfway through the summer the group shifted its focus to more modern data analysis and visualization tools, namely spreadsheets and Google(tm) Earth. The result of their efforts, so far, is two different Excel spreadsheets and a Google(tm) Earth file. The spreadsheets are set up to allow participating classrooms to paste in a particular dataset of interest, using the standard S'COOL format, and easily perform a variety of analyses and comparisons of the ground cloud observation reports and their correspondence with the satellite data. This includes summarizing cloud occurrence and cloud cover statistics, and comparing cloud cover measurements from the two points of view. A visual classification tool is also provided to compare the cloud levels reported from the two viewpoints. This provides a statistical counterpart to the existing S'COOL data visualization tool, which is used for individual ground-to-satellite correspondences. The Google(tm) Earth file contains a set of placemarks and ground overlays to show participating students the area around their school that the satellite is measuring. This approach will be automated and made interactive by the S'COOL database expert and will also be used to help refine the latitude/longitude location of the participating schools. Once complete, these new data analysis tools will be posted on the S'COOL website for use by the project participants in schools around the US and the world.

Chambers, L. H.↗

Land and Atmosphere Near-Real-Time Capability for Earth Observing System

The past decade has seen a rapid increase in availability and usage of near-real-time data from satellite sensors. The EOSDIS (Earth Observing System Data and Information System) was not originally designed to provide data with sufficiently low latency to satisfy the requirements for near-real-time users. The EOS (Earth Observing System) instruments aboard the Terra, Aqua and Aura satellites make global measurements daily, which are processed into higher-level 'standard' products within 8-40 hours of observation and then made available to users, primarily earth science researchers. However, applications users, operational agencies, and even researchers desire EOS products in near-real-time to support research and applications, including numerical weather and climate prediction and forecasting, monitoring of natural hazards, ecological/invasive species, agriculture, air quality, disaster relief and homeland security. These users often need data much sooner than routine science processing allows, usually within 3 hours, and are willing to trade science product quality for timely access. While Direct Broadcast provides more timely access to data, it does not provide global coverage. In 2002, a joint initiative between NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), and the DOD (Department of Defense) was undertaken to provide data from EOS instruments in near-real-time. The NRTPE (Near Real Time Processing Effort) provided products within 3 hours of observation on a best-effort basis. As the popularity of these near-real-time products and applications grew, multiple near-real-time systems began to spring up such as the Rapid Response System. In recognizing the dependence of customers on this data and the need for highly reliable and timely data access, NASA's Earth Science Division sponsored the Earth Science Data and Information System Project (ESDIS)-led development of a new near-real-time system called LANCE (Land, Atmosphere Near-Real-Time Capability for EOS) in 2009. LANCE consists of special processing elements, co-located with selected EOSDIS data centers and processing facilities. A primary goal of LANCE is to bring multiple near-real-time systems under one umbrella, offering commonality in data access, quality control, and latency. LANCE now processes and distributes data from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS), Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS), Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer Earth Observing System (AMSR-E), Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) and Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) instruments within 3 hours of satellite observation. The Rapid Response System and the Fire Information for Resource Management System (FIRMS) capabilities will be incorporated into LANCE in 2011. LANCE maintains a central website to facilitate easy access to data and user services. LANCE products are extensively tested and compared with science products before being made available to users. Each element also plans to implement redundant network, power and server infrastructure to ensure high availability of data and services. Through the user registration system, users are informed of any data outages and when new products or services will be available for access. Building on a significant investment by NASA in developing science algorithms and products, LANCE creates products that have a demonstrated utility for applications requiring near-real-time data. From lower level data products such as calibrated geolocated radiances to higher-level products such as sea ice extent, snow cover, and cloud cover, users have integrated LANCE data into forecast models and decision support systems. The table above shows the current near-real-time product categories by instrument. The ESDIS Project continues to improve the LANCE system and use the experience gained through practice to seek adjustments to improve the quality and performance of the system. For example, anGC-compliant Web Map Service (WMS) will be added shortly that will allow users to download geo-referenced MODIS images for arbitrary bounding boxes. Further, an OGC-compliant Web Coverage Service (WCS) will be added later this year that will expedite user access to arbitrary data subsets or re-formatted products. AIRS images are now served through WMS and available in multiple formats (PNG, GeoTIFF, KMZ). NASA has established a LANCE User Working Group to steer the development of the system and create a forum for sharing ideas and experiences that are expected to further improve the LANCE capabilities. The LANCE system has proved a success by satisfying the growing needs of the applications and operational communities for land and atmosphere data in near-real-time. NASA's Earth Sciences Division was able to leverage existing science research capabilities to provide the near-real-time community with products and imagery that support monitoring of disasters in a timely manner.

Murphy, Kevin J.↗

State-of-the-Art: Small Spacecraft Technology

When the first edition of NASA’s Small Spacecraft Technology State-of-the-art report was published in 2013, 247 CubeSats and 105 other non-CubeSat small spacecraft under 50 kilograms (kg) had been launched worldwide, representing less than 2% of launched mass into orbit over multiple years. In 2013 alone, around 60% of the total spacecraft launched had a mass under 600 kg, and of those under 600 kg, 83% were under 200 kg and 37% were nanosatellites (1). Of the total 1,849 spacecraft launched in 2021, 94% were small spacecraft with an overall mass under 600 kg, and of those under 600 kg, 40% were under 200 kg, and 11% were nanosatellites (1). Since 2013, the fight heritage for small spacecraft has increased by over 30% and has become the primary source to space access for commercial, government, private, and academic institutions. The total number of spacecraft launched in the past 10 years is 5,681 and 45% of those had a mass. As with all previous editions of this report, the 2022 edition captures and distills a wealth of new information available on small spacecraft systems from NASA and other publicly available sources. This report is limited to publicly available information and cannot reflect major advances in development that are not publicly disclosed. We encourage any opportunity to publish mission outcomes and technology development milestones (e.g., via conference papers, press releases, company website) so they can be reflected in this report. Overall, this report is a survey of small spacecraft technologies sourced from open literature; it does not endeavor to be an original source, and only considers literature in the public domain to identify and classify devices. Commonly used sources for data include manufacturer datasheets, press releases, conference papers, journal papers, public filings with government agencies, news articles, presentations, the compendium of databases accessed via NASA’s Small Spacecraft Systems Virtual Institute (S3VI) Information Search, and engagement with companies. Data not appropriate for public dissemination, such as proprietary, export controlled, or otherwise restricted data, are not considered. As a result, this report includes many dedicated hours of desk research performed by subject matter experts reviewing resources noted above. Content in this 2022 edition is based on data available by October 2022. This report should not be considered as a comprehensive overview of all the technologies but a great reference for the current state-of-the-art SmallSat technologies. The organizational approach for each chapter is relatively consistent with previous editions and includes an introduction of the technology, current development status of the technology’s procurable systems, and summary tables of technologies surveyed. The content in each chapter is uniquely organized to present a mini-stand-alone report on spacecraft subsystems. As in previous years, chapters include information from previous editions but are updated with new and maturating technologies and reference missions. Tables in each section provide a convenient summary of the technologies discussed, with explanations and references in the body text. The authors have attempted to isolate trends in the small spacecraft industry to point out which technologies have been adopted after successful demonstration missions. Lastly, the authors tried to use the terms “SmallSat,” “microsatellite,” “nanosatellite,” and “CubeSat” in a consistent manner, even as these terms are often used interchangeably in the space industry. Every subsystem chapter contains updated information to reflect the growth in the small spacecraft market. Significant changes are included in several chapters. The “Complete Spacecraft Platforms” chapter now includes information on the two main market options, hosted payload services and dedicated buses. The “Power” chapter provides information on the development of solid-state batteries with significantly higher energy than the current state-of-theart lithium-ion batteries. A large effort was made to update the “Communications” chapter to appropriately capture the recent technology maturation of optical communications for SmallSats. The “Ground Data Systems and Mission Operations” chapter was updated to reflect the recent establishment of the Near Space Network and influx of SmallSat Optical Ground Stations. The “Guidance, Navigation and Control” chapter was updated to include Lidar sensor technology. The “Deorbit Systems” chapter includes a discussion of recently proposed changes by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to limit a spacecraft’s lifetime to no longer than 5 years after end-of-mission. The “Identification and Tracking” Chapter includes updated information on the progress of SmallSat tracking. Finally, this report now encompasses technology funded by NASA’s Small Spacecraft Technology (SST) program’s SmallSat Technology Partnerships (STP) initiative which is described further in this Introduction. The reader can find the included SST technology in the “On the Horizon” section of the “Thermal Systems”, “Communications”, and “Guidance, Navigation, and Control” chapters. A central element of this report is to list state-of-the-art technologies by NASA standard Technology Readiness Level (TRL) as defined by the 2020 NASA Engineering Handbook, found in NASA NPR 7123.1C NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements. The authors have endeavored to independently verify the TRL value of each technology by reviewing and citing published test results or publicly available data to the best of their ability. Where test results and data disagree with vendors’ own advertised TRL, the authors have attempted to engage the vendors to discuss the discrepancy. Readers are strongly encouraged to follow the references cited in the literature describing the full performance range and capabilities of each technology. Readers of this report should reach out to individual companies to further clarify information. It is important to note that this report takes a broad system-level view. To attain a high TRL, the subsystem must be in a flight-ready configuration with all supporting infrastructure—such as mounting points, power conversion, and control algorithms—in an integrated unit. An accurate TRL assessment requires a high degree of technical knowledge on a subject device, and an in-depth understanding of the mission (including interfaces and environment) on which the device was flown. There is variability in TRL values depending on design factors for a specific technology. For example, differences in TRL assessment based on the operating environment may result from the thermal environment, mechanical loads, mission duration, or radiation exposure. If a technology has flown on a mission without success, or without providing valid confirmation to the operator, such claimed “flight heritage” was discounted. The authors believe TRLs are most accurately determined when assessed within the context of a program’s unique requirements. While the overall capability of small spacecraft has matured since the 2021 edition of this report, technologies are still being developed to make deep space SmallSat missions more routine and more cost effective. Future editions of this report may include content dedicated to the rapidly growing fields of assembly, integration, and testing services, and mission modeling and simulation–all of which are now extensively represented at small spacecraft conferences. Many of these subsystems and services are still in their infancy, but as they evolve and reliable conventions and standards emerge, the next iteration of this report may also evolve to include additional chapters.

Bruce Yost↗