Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “fossil energy by-product”

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.

834 records · Page 47
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Small Spacecraft and Distributed Systems: Development and Demonstration of Technologies Enabling Swarms and New Spacecraft Platforms with AI and Edge Computing

NASA’s Small Spacecraft & Distributed Systems (SSDS) within the Research and Technology Mission Directorate (RTMD) expands U.S. capability to execute unique missions through targeted investment, rapid development, and flight demonstration of small spacecraft technologies applicable to exploration, science and the commercial space sector. SSDS strategically invests in technology development and on-orbit demonstrations executed across NASA, other government agencies, industry, and academia. The program’s University SmallSat Technology Partnerships initiative awards academic researchers with the opportunity to collaborate with NASA to mature innovative technology. Capabilities aligned with RTMD’s technology shortfalls and interests - power, processing, propulsion, sensors, communications, autonomous navigation, architectures, and advanced applications like artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, and edge computing - are prioritized in SSDS investments. These investments enable distributed, autonomous, and cooperative small spacecraft systems that support swarm missions extending beyond low Earth orbit into cislunar and deep space. This paper highlights representative SSDS flight demonstrations that mature these capabilities to enable a future operational infrastructure needed to support sustained exploration of the Moon and beyond. SSDS’s investment strategy emphasizes rapid development and on-orbit demonstration to validate spacecraft technologies required for swarms and distributed mission architectures. The Starling swarm technology demonstration mission exemplifies this approach by advancing distributed spacecraft autonomy, cooperative operations, and space situational awareness. Extended flight testing and ongoing studies of next generation swarm configurations and on-orbit space traffic monitoring and management continue to inform future swarm designs. DiskSat’s four-spacecraft demonstration mission represents SSDS’s strategic vision to expand the design space for future small spacecraft through its commitment to advance novel platform concepts that can impact how science is performed on orbit. Continuing to invest in future platforms, the notional PY12 concept is a 12-spacecraft swarm hosting neuromorphic processors and is envisioned as an on-orbit testbed for AI, edge computing, and positioning, navigation and timing technologies. SSDS also invests in single-spacecraft technology demonstrations that underpin the success of future swarm missions and accelerate the availability of validated technologies across the small spacecraft ecosystem. Examples of such demonstrations include Pathfinder Technology Demonstrator-3 (PTD-3), which performed high-rate optical communications; PTD-R, which demonstrated a camera capable of simultaneous ultraviolet and short-wave infrared optical sensing; and CAPSTONE, the Cislunar Autonomous Positioning System Technology and Operations Navigation Experiment, which validated autonomous navigation in cislunar space. Collectively, SSDS-funded demonstrations advance capabilities across swarms and illustrate a coordinated investment strategy to mature high-impact technologies required for autonomous, distributed, and cooperative small spacecraft systems for low Earth orbit, cislunar, and deep space applications. Technology demonstrations strengthen SSDS partnerships with industry, academia, and other government agencies, and promote small spacecraft community adoption of capabilities required to close technical gaps for swarm missions.

Jan Stupl↗
NASA NTRS1999

System Identification for Integrated Aircraft Development and Flight Testing [l'Identification Des Systemes Pour le Developpement Integre des Aeronefs et les Essais en Vol]

Over the last decades flight vehicles such as aircraft and helicopters entering service and requiring increased operational effectiveness have with few exceptions experienced prolonged flight test development to achieve full certification. In many cases the original requirements had later to be reduced to enable release to service. The impact on the customer, and manufacturer has been considerable leading to increased costs and or reduced operational capabilities. These costly experiences are largely a result of the flight vehicle not behaving as modelled and designed. The evaluation of flight test data can be used as a tool for validating windtunnel results and mathematical models describing the flight dynamical behaviour. In this sense the uncertainty of important aerodynamic stability and control parameters can be reduced and the confidence of aircraft mathematical models improved. An additional important factor comes from the implementation of active control systems offering the promise of significantly increased flight vehicle performance and operational capability. This approach extends the traditional trade-offs between aerodynamics, structures and propulsion systems to include full- time, full-authority fly-by-wire/light systems. It is imperative that the aerodynamic stability and control parameters of such integrated flight and propulsion control systems have to turn out inflight as predicted, since inherent stability margins will be lower and the flight control system must correct these deficiencies to provide flight critical redundancy and safety. With the methodology of system identification from flight tests it is possible to sense the control inputs and the flight vehicle reactions Such as accelerations, rates and attitudes. The mathematical model, e.g. the model structure and parameters, has to be determined from the relationship of the measured control inputs and the system's responses. The aim of this symposium was to review the present state of the art of flight vehicle system and parameter identification techniques, and to provide a critical appraisal of current methods developed and applied to flight test data in a number of NATO nations. Particular emphasis was placed on practical aspects and lessons learned in order to generate information useful to the flight test community in industry and government agencies. The technical papers share invaluable experience and emphasize the advances of flight vehicle system identification over the last years to the point where confidence and robustness level is now reasonably high. The symposium covered overviews of identification methodologies, flight test techniques, recent aircraft and helicopter application programs, and a session of short papers covering up-to-the-minute flight test results. A final discussion included prepared comments from experts and concluded with key issues learned in the application of system identification and future research needs. The essential benefits to NATO nations can be condensed as follows: More accurate mathematical models for high bandwidth flight control systems, Improved assessment and evaluation of flying qualities, High fidelity mathematical models for flight vehicle development and mission training simulators, and generally, Reduced flight test time and costs.

Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Developm↗
NASA NTRS2026

Does the International Space Station Leak DNA? Preliminary Results from the ISS External Microorganisms Payload

Existing crewed spacecraft like the ISS (International Space Station) leak by design. The ISS routinely releases gas to maintain life support systems and when astronauts exit the station to perform space walks. The chemical component of this leakage is well characterized, but the biological components are not. The ISS is not subject to planetary protection requirements, but planned missions to Mars will use similar systems and will be subject to planetary protection requirements. If detectable microorganisms are escaping through vents and or airlocks we may need to redesign our crewed habitats to minimize this type of contamination. To test the hypothesis that microorganisms from inside ISS are detectable on exterior surfaces an astronaut used the ISS External Microorganisms sampling kit (Rucker et al. 2018) to sample exterior surfaces of the ISS during an EVA (Extra Vehicular Activity) in January of 2025. These samples were returned to Earth for DNA extraction and sequencing. We successfully, extracted and sequenced bacterial, fungal and viral DNA from these samples that was not present in the negative controls. These results should help NASA refine the planetary protection requirements for crewed missions. Methods: The samples were collected using sterile, DNA free, buccal swabs (23 mm. diameter) housed in custom canisters. Each canister uses a 0.2 μm Teflon filter to maintain sterility as the caddy, holding 8 swabs moves in and out of vacuum. The astronaut sampled the: 1) airlock vestibule, 2) airlock thermal cover, 3) a gap in the micrometeorite shielding near the airlock, 4) a handrail near the airlock, 5) the Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly vent, and 6) the Vacuum Exhaust System vent. The seventh swab was exposed to vacuum during the EVA without touching it to a surface. The eighth swab, a negative control, was not opened until the caddy returned to Earth. DNA was extracted from the swabs using a QIamp UCP Pathogen kit and prepared for sequencing on an Aviti (Element Biosciences) sequencer (Arslan et al. 2024). The resulting sequences were analyzed using the EDGE Bioinformatics platform (Li et al. 2017). The sequences were analyzed individually using tools like BLAST, GOTTCHA2, Kraken2, and PanGIA. The data were also assembled into metagenome assembled genomes) using tools like CONCOCT, MaxBin2 and MetaBAT2. Results: We successfully extracted and sequenced bacterial, archaeal, fungal and viral DNA from all seven samples. The handrail swab had the lowest number of reads (768,651) and the airlock thermal cover had the highest number of reads (8,819,230). These samples contain DNA from human associated bacteria (e.g. Crynebacterium riegelii ), fungi (.e.g. Penicillium rubens ), and viruses (e.g Alphapapillomavirus ). Conclusion: Preliminary interpretation suggest that the airlock and the space suits themselves are the largest sources of contaminant DNA. Most if not all of the DNA is from organisms known to be present inside the ISS. Vents attached to life support systems may be a lesser source of biological contamination. Further analysis should help NASA address planetary protection knowledge gaps for crewed missions.

Aaron B Regberg↗
NASA NTRS2005

Introduction to Flight Test Engineering [Introduction Aux Techniques Des Essais En Vol]

Flight test is at the core of what organizations must do in order to validate the operation and systems on an aircraft. While the AGARDograph series 300 and 160 series deal with aspects of this testing, this volume pulls it all together as an introduction to the process required to do effective flight test engineering. This volume was originally published in 1995. Its utility has been proven in that many flight test organizations and universities have requested copies for their engineers and students. It was felt that re-issuing it in a new format designed for electronic publication would be valuable to the community. This second printing changes none of the text, but rather reformats it. All the original references to AGARD (instead of RTO) are left in place so that none of the flavor of the original publication is lost. This is the Introductory Volume to the Flight Test Techniques Series. It is a general introduction to the various activities and aspects of Flight Test Engineering that must be considered when planning, conducting, and reporting a flight test program. Its main intent is to provide a broad overview to the novice engineer or to other people who have a need to interface with specialists within the flight test community. The first two Sections provide some insight into the question of why flight test and give a short history of flight test engineering. Sections 3 through 10 deal with the preparation for flight testing. They provide guidance on the preliminary factors that must be considered; the composition of the test team; the logistic support requirements; the instrumentation and data processing requirements; the flight test plan; the associated preliminary ground tests; and last, but by no means least, discuss safety aspects. Sections 11 through 27 describe the various types of flight tests that are usually conducted during the development and certification of a new or modified aircraft type. Each Section offers a brief introduction to the topic under consideration, and the nature and the objectives of the tests to be conducted. It lists the test instrumentation (and, where appropriate, other test equipment and facilities) required, describes the test maneuvers to be executed, and indicates the way in which the test data is selected, analyzed, and presented. The various activities that should take place between test flights are presented next. Items that are covered are: who to debrief; what type of reports to send where: types of data analysis required for next flight; review of test data to make a comparison to predicted data and some courses of action if there is not good agreement; and comments on selecting the next test flight. The activities that must take place upon completion of the test program are presented. The types of reports and briefings that should take place and a discussion of some of the uses of the flight test data are covered. A brief forecast is presented of where present trends may be leading.

Test facilities↗
NASA NTRS2003

Ultra-High-Temperature Ceramics Evaluated for Aeropropulsion Use

Ultra-high-temperature ceramics (UHTC) are a group of materials consisting of zirconium diboride (ZrB2) or hafnium diboride (HfB2) plus silicon carbide (SiC), and in some instances, carbon (C). They offer a combination of properties that make them candidates for airframe leading edges on sharp-bodied reentry vehicles. These UHTCs perform well in the environment for such applications (i.e., air at low pressures). The purpose of this study at the NASA Glenn Research Center was to examine three of these materials under conditions more representative of a propulsion environment: that is, higher oxygen partial pressure and total pressure. Relatively long, multiple-exposure cycles were emphasized. We completed an in-house study of ZrB2 plus 20 vol% SiC (abbreviated as ZS), ZrB2 plus 14 vol% SiC and 30 vol% C (ZSC), and SCS-9a SiC fiber-reinforced ZrB2 plus 20 vol% SiC (ZSS). HfB2-based compositions were not included in the study because of their high cost. The capability of UHTC for propulsion applications must be compared with that of mature, available, and commercially used ceramics such as silicon nitride (e.g., AS-800) to put things in proper perspective. In terms of mechanical properties, UHTCs fall short in terms of strength and fracture toughness. At about 1300 C, the creep resistance of ZS appears to be superior to the creep resistance reported for AS-800. However, the stress rupture life for Si3N4 under stress and temperature conditions similar to those used in this study is measured in hundreds of hours. Because of oxidation, ZS could not achieve such lives. In terms of oxidation resistance, acceptable amounts of material recession in 1 hour to thousands of hours, depending on the specific propulsion application, are on the order of 100 to 300 mm. This converts to an acceptable range of parabolic recession rate constants kp" of approximately less than or equal to 10(exp -1) to 10(exp -2) square millimeters per hour for a 1-hr application. For a 100-hr application, an acceptable range of kp" would be less than or equal to those values divided by 100. For the more oxidation resistant ZS material, measured parabolic recession rate constants were 4.7 x 10(exp -3) millimeters per hour at 1327 C, 7.8 x 10(exp -2) square millimeters per hour at 1627 C, and 1.3 millimeters per hour at 1927 C. Thus, recession rate constants for ZS are acceptable at 1327 C for a 1-hr application, but here silicon nitride is a superior material. At 1627 C, ZS oxidation is marginal for a 1-hr application, but dimensional growth would be an issue. In a 100-hr application, ZS cannot be considered at any temperature. Our cursory examination of thermal shock, both from a theoretical and experimental viewpoint, indicated that the ZS and ZSC UHTCs are inferior to AS-800 silicon nitride. On the basis of this limited study, UHTCs are not ready to be considered as aeropropulsion materials for any applications longer than a few minutes. Current materials suffer from aggressive oxidation and moisture attack (Quynhgiao Nguyen, NASA Glenn, and Raymond C. Robinson, QSS Group, Inc., Cleveland, OH, 2002, private communication), and they are susceptible to thermal shock. For long-term propulsion applications, major improvements in environmental durability are needed. Work is in progress to improve the oxidation resistance of UHTC materials.

Stanley R Levine↗
NASA NTRS2025

Erosion Results of the MISSE 9-15 Polymers and Composites Experiment 1-4 (PCE 1-4)

Polymers and other oxidizable materials on the exterior of spacecraft in the low Earth orbit (LEO) space environment can be eroded from reaction with atomic oxygen (AO). Therefore, in order to design durable spacecraft it is important to know the extent of erosion that will occur during a mission. This can be determined by knowing the LEO AO erosion yield, E y (volume loss per incident oxygen atom), of materials susceptible to AO reaction. In addition, recent flight experiments have shown that the AO E y can vary with the AO fluence and/or solar exposure. Therefore, obtaining AO E y data for materials flown on various spaceflight missions is important. NASA Glenn Research Center has flown numerous experiments as part of the Materials International Space Station Experiment (MISSE) missions on the exterior of the International Space Station (ISS) to characterize the LEO E y of polymers, composites, protective coatings, and other spacecraft materials. Recently, four Glenn experiments with 365 flight (F) samples were flown on ISS’s MISSE-Flight Facility (MISSE-FF). These experiments are the Polymers and Composites Experiment-1 (PCE-1) flown as part of the MISSE-9 mission, the PCE-2 flown as part of the MISSE-10 mission, the PCE-3 flown as part of the MISSE-12 and MISSE-15 missions, and the PCE-4 flown as part of the MISSE-13 mission. Although each experiment had numerous sample objectives, the primary objective was to determine the LEO AO E y of various spacecraft materials as a function of solar irradiation and AO fluence. This paper provides a summary of the erosion data for the PCE 1-4 AO E y samples. The AO E y for 150 samples flown in either the LEO ram, wake, zenith or nadir directions are provided. The AO ram fluence varied from 2.97×10 20 atoms/cm 2 after 0.89 years of direct space exposure (with relatively high levels of Si contamination) on MISSE 12 to 3.93×10 20 atoms/cm 2 after 1.17 years of direct space exposure on MISSE-10. The ram AO E y values for uncoated polymers range from 3.81×10 –25 cm 3 /atom for polytetrafluoroethylene (M9R-C20 F) exposed to an AO fluence of 3.44×10 20 atoms/cm 2 on MISSE-9 to 4.43×10 –23 cm 3 /atom for AO etched low density polyimide aerogel (M12R-C21 F) exposed to an AO fluence of 2.97×10 21 atoms/cm 2 on MISSE-12. Because of the low AO fluence and relatively high Si contamination, a number of PCE-3 wake samples experienced mass gain. Thus, AO E y values are not provided for these samples. Although there are calculated AO E y values for the zenith, wake and nadir samples, the ram AO E y for a particular material is a more reliable value in terms of AO exposure because the zenith, wake and nadir directions were exposed to either no or very little AO fluence and thus other space environmental factors (i.e. vacuum, thermal extremes and thermal cycling, and/or various types of radiation) are responsible for the mass loss.

Erosion yield↗