SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Critical Experiments Team”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2013

STS-114: Engine Cut-Off Sensors Are a No-Go: Teaching Notes for NASA Case Study

This case study format is intended to simulate the experience of facing the same difficult challenges and making the same critical decisions as managers, engineers, and scientists in the Space Shuttle Program. It has been designed for use in the classroom setting to help students develop skills related to decision-making. Students will read about the engine cut-off sensor anomaly which created challenges during the STS-114 mission and have the opportunity to make decisions as lead NASA engineers and Mission Management Team members. Included within this document are three case study presentation options - class discussion, group activity, and open-ended research. Please read the full case prior to in-class presentation to allow ample time for students' analysis and reflection, as well as to prepare additional questions. activities or exercises, material selection, etc. Depending upon the setting of your presentation and the number of participants, please choose at least one presentation format beforehand and plan accordingly. You may expect the following learning objectives by using the proposed formats. Learning Objectives: To enable students to experience the responsibilities of NASA management, engineers, and analysis; to discover possible procedures for investigating system anomalies; to become familiar with the liquid hydrogen low level engine cut-off sensor, including its function, connecting components, and location within the Space Shuttle; and to encourage critical analysis and stimulating discussion of Space Shuttle mission challenges.

Ransom, Khadijah S.↗

DOE OSTI2025

Advancing Development of Emissions Detection (Final Report)

This document is the final report to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE for contract DE-FE0031873) awarded to Colorado State University (CSU). CSU and partners at Harrisburg University of Science and Technology, University of Texas Arlington, and University of Texas at Austin organized several testing rounds to provide knowledge focused on advancing the detection capabilities of emissions monitoring devices. With this funding opportunity the research group began by establishing the Advancing the Development of Emission Detection (ADED) program, with the goal focused on enhancing the accuracy, reliability, and field applicability of methane detection technologies. This effort aimed to address the critical challenges of identifying and quantifying methane emissions while enabling industry stakeholders to meet regulatory compliance and environmental sustainability goals. The program engaged with industry, government, and technology stakeholders to promote adoption and consensus on testing techniques for methane detection solutions. Methane, a potent greenhouse gas, contributes significantly to global warming, and the oil and natural gas (O&G) sector is a primary source of methane emissions. Regulatory measures such as leak detection and repair (LDAR) programs have been implemented to address emissions. However, traditional LDAR approaches, reliant on handheld and component-level measurements, are resource-intensive. To address these limitations and move with evolving regulations, advanced methane technologies are emerging. These solutions include ground-based sensors, mobile systems (e.g., drones, vehicles, and aircraft), and satellite-based platforms. They offer innovative capabilities for autonomous monitoring, larger spatial coverage, and emission quantification using methods such as tracer gas techniques and inverse modeling with Gaussian plume analysis. The ADED program began with creating protocols for methane controlled release (CR) testing these continuous monitoring (CM) and survey technologies that detect and monitor methane emissions at O&G facilities. The protocols were then implemented throughout testing of CM and survey devices at CSU’s Methane Emissions Technology Evaluation Center (METEC) facility from 2021 through 2024. As apart of the protocol, solutions that tested under the ADED program installed their solutions at METEC, documented their system under test, and provided detection reports to the METEC team for analysis. The METEC team would provide the solutions with analyzed reports of their emissions and ground truth data of the releases conducted during their testing session. Under the ADED program, CMs were also tested at O&G facilities for a six week test run of challenge release (ChR) releases. The findings from the ADED program underscore the critical role of collaborative research and innovation in tackling methane emissions, offering a pathway for the oil and gas sector to achieve significant environmental and economic benefits. Results from METEC testing saw improvement of performance and accuracy across all solutions over the extent of the ADED experiments. The results also showed a variance in CM solution performance between CRs and ChRs. That variance pushed the team to further analyze the differences between CR testing environments and field conditions. With the drive from regulations and that variance in field conditions, the ADED team began designing a new CR testing protocol and additions to the METEC testing facility. The METEC team is furthering the progress made through the ADED program with awarded funding from DE-FE0032276. This funding pushes the development of METEC’s addition with new equipment, allowing for an updated facility layout. METEC still facilitates for traditional facilities, with a legacy pad, while expanding an new design based on how O&G infrastructure has Final Report - Contract Number: DE-FE0031873 been changed over the last decade. Throughout the ADED program the team has also been working with international partners to ensure staying in the trend globally. International partners have been essential in moving the new protocol forward to implement into CR testing at the METEC facility in Spring 2025.

42 ENGINEERING↗

NASA NTRS1999

Aerospace Systems Design in NASA's Collaborative Engineering Environment

Past designs of complex aerospace systems involved an environment consisting of collocated design teams with project managers, technical discipline experts, and other experts (e.g. manufacturing and systems operations). These experts were generally qualified only on the basis of past design experience and typically had access to a limited set of integrated analysis tools. These environments provided less than desirable design fidelity, often lead to the inability of assessing critical programmatic and technical issues (e.g., cost risk, technical impacts), and generally derived a design that was not necessarily optimized across the entire system. The continually changing, modern aerospace industry demands systems design processes that involve the best talent available (no matter where it resides) and access to the best design and analysis tools. A solution to these demands involves a design environment referred to as collaborative engineering. The collaborative engineering environment evolving within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a capability that enables the Agency's engineering infrastructure to interact and use the best state-of-the-art tools and data across organizational boundaries. Using collaborative engineering, the collocated team is replaced with an interactive team structure where the team members are geographically distributed and the best engineering talent can be applied to the design effort regardless of physical location. In addition, a more efficient, higher quality design product is delivered by bringing together the best engineering talent with more up-to-date design and analysis tools. These tools are focused on interactive, multidisciplinary design and analysis with emphasis on the complete life cycle of the system, and they include nontraditional, integrated tools for life cycle cost estimation and risk assessment. NASA has made substantial progress during the last two years in developing a collaborative engineering environment. NASA is planning to use this collaborative engineering infrastructure to provide better aerospace systems life cycle design and analysis, which includes analytical assessment of the technical and programmatic aspects of a system from "cradle to grave." This paper describes the recent NASA developments in the area of collaborative engineering, the benefits (realized and anticipated) of using the developed capability, and the long-term plans for implementing this capability across the Agency.

Monell, Donald W.↗

NASA NTRS2000

Aerospace Systems Design in NASA's Collaborative Engineering Environment

Past designs of complex aerospace systems involved an environment consisting of collocated design teams with project managers, technical discipline experts, and other experts (e.g., manufacturing and systems operation). These experts were generally qualified only on the basis of past design experience and typically had access to a limited set of integrated analysis tools. These environments provided less than desirable design fidelity, often lead to the inability of assessing critical programmatic and technical issues (e.g., cost, risk, technical impacts), and generally derived a design that was not necessarily optimized across the entire system. The continually changing, modern aerospace industry demands systems design processes that involve the best talent available (no matter where it resides) and access to the the best design and analysis tools. A solution to these demands involves a design environment referred to as collaborative engineering. The collaborative engineering environment evolving within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a capability that enables the Agency's engineering infrastructure to interact and use the best state-of-the-art tools and data across organizational boundaries. Using collaborative engineering, the collocated team is replaced with an interactive team structure where the team members are geographical distributed and the best engineering talent can be applied to the design effort regardless of physical location. In addition, a more efficient, higher quality design product is delivered by bringing together the best engineering talent with more up-to-date design and analysis tools. These tools are focused on interactive, multidisciplinary design and analysis with emphasis on the complete life cycle of the system, and they include nontraditional, integrated tools for life cycle cost estimation and risk assessment. NASA has made substantial progress during the last two years in developing a collaborative engineering environment. NASA is planning to use this collaborative engineering engineering infrastructure to provide better aerospace systems life cycle design and analysis, which includes analytical assessment of the technical and programmatic aspects of a system from "cradle to grave." This paper describes the recent NASA developments in the area of collaborative engineering, the benefits (realized and anticipated) of using the developed capability, and the long-term plans for implementing this capability across Agency.

Monell, Donald W.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Vehicle Integrated Performance Analysis, the VIPA Experience: Reconnecting with Technical Integration

Today's NASA is facing significant challenges and changes. The Exploration initiative indicates a large increase in projects with limited increase in budget. The Columbia report has criticized NASA for its lack of insight and technical integration impacting its ability to provide safety. The Aldridge report is advocating NASA find new ways of doing business. Very early in the Space Launch Initiative (SLI) program a small team of engineers at MSFC were asked to propose a process for performing a system level assessment of a launch vehicle. The request was aimed primarily at providing insight and making NASA a "smart buyer." Out of this effort the VIPA team was created. The difference between the VIPA effort and many integration attempts is that VIPA focuses on using experienced people from various disciplines and a process which focuses them on a technically integrated assessment. Most previous attempts have focused on developing an all encompassing software tool. In addition, VIPA anchored its process formulation in the experience of its members and in early developmental Space Shuttle experience. The primary reference for this is NASA-TP-2001-210092, "Launch Vehicle Design Process: Characterization, Technical Integration, and Lessons Learned," and discussions with its authors. The foundations of VIPA's process are described. The VIPA team also recognized the need to drive detailed analysis earlier in the design process. Analyses and techniques typically done in later design phases, are brought forward using improved computing technology. The intent is to allow the identification of significant sensitivities, trades, and design issues much earlier in the program. This process is driven by the T-model for Technical Integration described in the aforementioned reference. VIPA's approach to performing system level technical integration is discussed in detail. Proposed definitions are offered to clarify this discussion and the general systems integration dialog. VIPA's capabilities and process can now be used to significantly enhance the development and monitoring of realizable project requirements. This is done through the use of VIPA's V-model. Starting with a given concept, VIPA's assessment validates the concept's stated performance, identifies significant issues either with the concept or the requirements, and then re-integrates these issues to determine impacts. This process is discussed along with a description of how it may be integrated into a program's insight and review process. The VIPA process has been employed successfully on several projects including SLI, Orbital Space Plane (OSP), and several heavy lift concepts for Exploration. It has also been proposed for use on the Jupiter Icy Moon (JIMO) spacecraft. The VIPA process has gained favor with both engineering and project organizations for being responsive and insightful. Selected results from these assessments will be presented.

McGhee, David S.↗

DOE OSTI2020

Compare linear-system solver and preconditioner stacks with emphasis on GPU performance and propose phase-2 NGP solver development pathway

The goal of the ExaWind project is to enable predictive simulations of wind farms comprised of many megawatt-scale turbines situated in complex terrain. Predictive simulations will require computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations for which the mesh resolves the geometry of the turbines and captures the rotation and large deflections of blades. Whereas such simulations for a single turbine are arguably petascale class, multi-turbine wind farm simulations will require exascale-class resources. The primary physics codes in the ExaWind project are Nalu-Wind, which is an unstructured-grid solver for the acoustically incompressible Navier-Stokes equations, and OpenFAST, which is a whole-turbine simulation code. The Nalu-Wind model consists of the mass-continuity Poisson-type equation for pressure and a momentum equation for the velocity. For such modeling approaches, simulation times are dominated by linear-system setup and solution for the continuity and momentum systems. For the ExaWind challenge problem, the moving meshes greatly affect overall solver costs as reinitialization of matrices and recomputation of preconditioners is required at every time step. In this report we evaluated GPU-performance baselines for the linear solvers in the Trilinos and hypre solver stacks using two representative Nalu-Wind simulations: an atmospheric boundary layer precursor simulation on a structured mesh, and a fixed-wing simulation using unstructured overset meshes. Both strong-scaling and weak-scaling experiments were conducted on the OLCF supercomputer Summit and similar proxy clusters. We focused on the performance of multi-threaded Gauss-Seidel and two-stage Gauss-Seidel that are extensions of classical Gauss-Seidel; of one-reduce GMRES, a communication-reducing variant of the Krylov GMRES; and algebraic multigrid methods that incorporate the afore-mentioned methods. The team has established that AMG methods are capable of solving linear systems arising from the fixed-wing overset meshes on CPU, a critical intermediate result for ExaWind FY20 Q3 and Q4 milestones. For the fixed-wing strong-scaling study (model with 3M grid-points), the team identified that Nalu-Wind simulations with the new Trilinos and hypre solvers scale to modest GPU counts, maintaining above 70% efficiency up to 6 GPUs. However, there still remain significant bottlenecks to performance: matrix assembly (hypre), AMG setup (hypre and Trilinos) In the weak-scaling experiments (going from 0.4M to 211M gridpoints), it's shown that the solver apply phases are faster on GPUs, but that Nalu-Wind simulation times grow, primarily due to the multigrid-setup process. Finally, based on the report outcomes, we propose a linear solver path-forward for the remainder of the ExaWind project. Near term, the NREL team will continue their work on GPU-based linear-system assembly. They will also investigate how the use of alternatives to the NVIDIA UVM (unified virtual memory) paradigm affects performance. Longer term, the NREL team will evaluate algorithmic performance on other types of accelerators and merge their improvements back to the main hypre repository branch. Near term, the Trilinos team will address performance bottlenecks identified in this milestone, such as implementing a GPU-based segregated momentum solve and reusing matrix graphs across linear-system assembly phases. Longer term, the Trilinos team will do detailed analysis and optimization of multigrid setup.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

NASA NTRS2018

International Space Station Medical Projects - Full Services to Mars

The International Space Station Medical Projects (ISSMP) Element provides planning, integration, and implementation services for HRP research studies for both spaceflight and flight analog research. Through the implementation of these two efforts, ISSMP offers an innovative way of guiding research decisions to meet the unique challenges of understanding the human risks to space exploration. Flight services provided by ISSMP include leading informed consent briefings, developing and validating in-flight crew procedures, providing ISS crew and ground-controller training, real-time experiment monitoring, on-orbit experiment and hardware operations and facilitating data transfer to investigators. For analog studies at the NASA Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA), the ISSMP team provides subject recruitment and screening, science requirements integration, data collection schedules, data sharing agreements, mission scenarios and facilities to support investigators. The ISSMP also serves as the HRP interface to external analog providers including the :envihab bed rest facility (Cologne, Germany), NEK isolation chamber (Moscow, Russia) and the Antarctica research stations. Investigators working in either spaceflight or analog environments requires a coordinated effort between NASA and the investigators. The interdisciplinary nature of both flight and analog research requires investigators to be aware of concurrent research studies and take into account potential confounding factors that may impact their research objectives. Investigators must define clear research requirements, participate in Investigator Working Group meetings, obtain human use approvals, and provide study-specific training, sample and data collection and procedures all while adhering to schedule deadlines. These science requirements define the technical, functional and performance operations to meet the research objectives. The ISSMP maintains an expert team of professionals with the knowledge and experience to guide investigators science through all aspects of mission planning, crew operations, and research integration. During this session, the ISSMP team will discuss best-practices approaches for successfully preparing and conducting studies in both the flight and analog environments. Critical tips and tricks will be shown to greatly improve your chances of successfully completing your research aboard the International Space Station and in Spaceflight Analogs.

Pietrzyk, R. A.↗

NASA NTRS2026

Raising TRL of Your Lunar Payload

Preparing payloads for the lunar surface requires rigorous testing that accurately captures the extreme environmental and operational conditions. This presentation provides an overview of the lunar relevant test capabilities at NASA JSC’s Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science (ARES) laboratories as well as the Energy System Test Area (ESTA) Lunar Development and Test Facility. These facilities allow teams to assess hardware performance in dusty vacuum environments, characterize interactions with high fidelity lunar regolith simulants, evaluate mechanical and thermal durability, and understand the effects of micrometeoroid and orbital debris impacts—critical factors for certifying payloads that will operate on the lunar surface or in orbit. While Lunar power challenges such as variable illumination, extreme temperatures, and dust driven degradation will be briefly summarized, the focus of this talk is on how JSC’s test infrastructure enables developers to validate designs, reduce mission risk, and ensure compatibility with CLPS and Artemis objectives. NASA JSC’s expertise and experience help industry, academic, and government teams prepare robust hardware ready for successful delivery and operation on the surface of the Moon.

Lunar Regolith Simulant↗

NASA NTRS2026

Raising TRL of Your Lunar Payload

Laboratories↗

NASA NTRS2010

The Right Stuff: A Look Back at Three Decades of Flight Controller Training for Space Shuttle Mission Operations

This paper will summarize the thirty-year history of Space Shuttle operations from the perspective of training in NASA Johnson Space Center's Mission Control Center. It will focus on training and development of flight controllers and instructors, and how training practices have evolved over the years as flight experience was gained, new technologies developed, and programmatic needs changed. Operations of human spaceflight systems is extremely complex, therefore the training and certification of operations personnel is a critical piece of ensuring mission success. Mission Control Center (MCC-H), at the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, in Houston, Texas manages mission operations for the Space Shuttle Program, including the training and certification of the astronauts and flight control teams. This paper will give an overview of a flight control team s makeup and responsibilities during a flight, and details on how those teams are trained and certified. The training methodology for developing flight controllers has evolved significantly over the last thirty years, while the core goals and competencies have remained the same. In addition, the facilities and tools used in the control center have evolved. These changes have been driven by many factors including lessons learned, technology, shuttle accidents, shifts in risk posture, and generational differences. Flight controllers will share their experiences in training and operating the Space Shuttle throughout the Program s history. A primary method used for training Space Shuttle flight control teams is by running mission simulations of the orbit, ascent, and entry phases, to truly "train like you fly." The audience will learn what it is like to perform a simulation as a shuttle flight controller. Finally, we will reflect on the lessons learned in training for the shuttle program, and how those could be applied to future human spaceflight endeavors.

Dittemore, Gary D.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Methods for Developing Successful Systems Engineers

Systems Engineering (SE) is a complex and challenging field that incorporates the knowledge of systems engineering processes, the ability to synthesize a wide-range of engineering disciplines, and the ability to lead a team of people to successfully accomplish the goals of a project. It requires hard technical skills and soft-skill leadership savvy. As a result, three main development needs are identified: 1) Knowledge of SE processes, the benefits of these processes to a project and their tailored application 2) Knowledge of a wide-range of engineering disciplines, how they interrelate in a system, and the development of sound technical judgement 3) Team leadership to direct and motivate a team of subsystem and discipline experts This paper describes the establishment of a comprehensive training and development program for Systems Engineers at NASA Ames Research Center that addresses in part each of these three areas from the perspective of the implementing manager. A variety of methods have been utilized including the establishment of a SE Community of Practice, a unique and innovative web tool, on-line videos, classroom training in NASA’s 17 Common Technical Processes, guidance on the tailored application of these processes, monthly technical talks, mentoring in both technical judgment and team leadership, and NASA’s Leadership Development Programs. While much of professional SE development must come through project experience, the approaches listed above can accelerate development. The diversity of skills required of Systems Engineering demands a multi-faceted approach to successfully train and develop this critical skill.

development↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Methods for Developing Successful Systems Engineers

Systems Engineering (SE) is a complex and challenging field that incorporates the knowledge of systems engineering processes, the ability to synthesize a wide-range of engineering disciplines, and the ability to lead a team of people to successfully accomplish the goals of a project. It requires hard technical skills and soft-skill leadership savvy. As a result, three main development needs are identified: 1. Knowledge of SE processes, the benefits of these processes to a project and their tailored application 2. Knowledge of a wide-range of engineering disciplines, how they interrelate in a system, and the development of sound technical judgement 3. Team leadership to direct and motivate a team of subsystem and discipline experts This paper describes the establishment of a comprehensive training and development program for Systems Engineers at NASA Ames Research Center that addresses in part each of these three areas from the perspective of the implementing manager. A variety of methods have been utilized including the establishment of a SE Community of Practice, a unique and innovative web tool, on-line videos, classroom training in NASA’s 17 Common Technical Processes, guidance on the tailored application of these processes, monthly technical talks, mentoring in both technical judgment and team leadership, and NASA’s Leadership Development Programs. While much of professional SE development must come through project experience, the approaches listed above can accelerate development. The diversity of skills required of Systems Engineering demands a multi-faceted approach to successfully train and develop this critical skill.

development↗

DOE OSTI2026

A Field Guide to Corralling the Chaos: A Conceptual Framework for Using Models to Guide Opportunistic Field Studies of Natural Disturbances

Watersheds regulate biogeochemical processes and provide ecosystem services to human societies, but disturbances can fundamentally alter these processes across space and time. Determining when and where to sample to capture disturbance impacts in watersheds remains a central challenge. Manipulation studies and long-term monitoring are often constrained by scope, and opportunistic studies often lack pre-disturbance data needed to statistically determine disturbance impacts. We identify a persistent knowledge gap: the absence of a clear, transferable framework to guide opportunistic disturbance research where pre-disturbance data collection is not a feasible option. To address this gap, we present a conceptual framework that intentionally integrates modeling and empirical observation in an iterative, stepwise model–experiment workflow. We demonstrate its application through two contrasting case studies: wildfire impacts on headwater streams using a pre-disturbance preparedness approach, and saltwater flooding impacts on coastal forests using an ‘ex-post-facto’ approach. From these applications, we assess strengths, limitations, and the critical role of team science for transferability across disturbance types and study designs. Broadly, this framework offers a scalable path towards more rigorous, timely, and actionable disturbance science that can inform watershed management, hazard risk reduction, and ecosystem resilience.

Coastal Biogeochemistry↗

DOE OSTI2024

Chlorine Isotope Separations using Thermal Diffusion

As of the close of 2023 a thermal diffusion isotope separations (TDIS) apparatus was constructed, successful shakedown testing was achieved and enrichments of isotopic concentrations relative to natural abundance 35/37 Cl were collected. Further, the model for these enrichment experiments drove the timing for sampling and other critical, extrapolated functions that are discussed herein. Our decision to move forward in 2024 with the installation of a larger set of separation tubes and associated equipment was based on the successful development of the predictive model. The Chlorine Isotopes Project Team at PNNL is prepared to claim that the installation and hence its separative power is restricted only by the spatial limitations of the laboratory, and this at present appears to be the limiting feature to first pass high enriched 37 Cl.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

Participation in and Assessment of the Second DNCSH Public Workshop

The DOE/NRC Criticality Safety for Commercial-Scale HALEU Fuel Cycle and Transportation (DNCSH) project was established through the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (H.R. 5376) to support the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and industry in addressing critical experiment validation gaps that impede the licensing basis and regulatory approval of high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) operations. An initial public workshop was held in February 2024 to address HALEU transportation validation gaps. The resulting call for proposals was released in April and resulted in funding for the execution and/or evaluation of 16 critical experiments. A second public workshop was held in August 2025 to address facility and operational validation gaps, precluding a second call for proposals. A list of attendees is provided in APPENDIX A, Table A-1. A total of 319 participants joined the meeting, which was hosted online via Microsoft Teams as well as in person. The slides from the meeting were uploaded online to the NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The meeting agenda is provided in Table 1-1. In preparation for the meeting, a study was performed to examine expected fissile forms for the fuel cycles of various fuel types at different stages of production and the apparent validation gaps. The resulting report, titled “Benchmark Gap Assessment for the Manufacturing of High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium Fuels,” provided the foundation for the discussions that took place during the workshop. The discussions and the validation gaps in the report were used to develop the second call for proposals. The present report presents the feedback received before, during, and after the second workshop. All the data presented are based on voluntarily self-reported identification, opinions from workshop participants, and survey responses and are assumed to be as accurate as practically reasonable. The discussions during the workshop and the subsequent survey responses were intended to direct attention to industry-specific areas of interest and to collect feedback on the work performed to date by the DNCSH project.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2022

A Multi-Scale Computational Platform for Predictive Modeling of Corrosion in Al-Steel Joints (Final Report)

The research team proposed to develop innovative multi-scale models to predict corrosion and the resulting mechanical performances in aluminum-steel joints. The methods of joining considered are resistance spot welding, self-piercing riveting, and rivet-welding, all suitable for mass production applications. The multi-scale models integrate high throughput first-principle calculations based on density functional theory (DFT), high throughput calculation of phase diagrams (CALPHAD) modeling, and finite element method (FEM) simulations. These models are to be validated through laboratory experiments. Furthermore, the models are available as open source so as to enable scientists and engineers in the community to adapt and contribute to the development and application. The approaches rely on the research team’s extensive experience on the prediction of properties of individual phases at finite temperatures and variable compositions through DFT calculations, and our broad expertise on dissimilar material joining and their corrosion. The proposed computational framework enables high throughput computations for improved predictions of corrosion and the associated mechanical performance in dissimilar material joints, resulting in significant reduction in computational time needed by the current state-of-the-art methods. With the participation of researchers from three universities, an auto manufacturer, two manufacturing technology/equipment suppliers, and a software developer/vendor, the interdisciplinary research team applies the technical development on both phase-based modeling and laboratory experiments into the automobile body joining processes for validation and technology demonstration. The global cost of corrosion was estimated at about 3.4% of the global GDP in 2013. By using available corrosion control practices, it is estimated a saving between 15-35% of the cost of corrosion. In the U.S., more than $276 billion is spent repairing corrosion damage. Prediction of the corrosion and its impact on performance of the dissimilar material joints is critical for reducing the massive number of the current corrosion-based recalls for automobiles. Thus, the project goal is to develop models to enable predictive maintenance and end-of-life planning of multi-metal joints with risk of corrosion under different conditions such as exposure to high temperatures in summer and salt solutions in winter, quantified through its pH. An academia-industry consortium led by the University of Michigan and including Pennsylvania State University, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, University of Georgia, General Motors Company, Livermore Software Technology Corporation, and Optimal Process Technologies, LLC. created multi-scale models for prediction of corrosion in aluminum-steel joint structures such of them used in vehicle subassemblies – chassis and transmission systems. Starting from the first principle calculations, the team developed mathematical and data-driven models to predict the metallic components, which are formed during joining of two metals, for example aluminum and steel - a lightweight multilateral system which is currently used in more than 60% car bodies. These models were used for simulating chemical reactions that are happening when the joining metallic components are exposed to high temperatures and different pH values. The team was able to predict how the corrosion installs on the metallic components and how they lead to a sudden failure of components in cars. Newly developed machine learning algorithms combining Science, Technology, Engineering and Math disciplines, advanced finite element simulation and experimental validations have been integrated in a platform for prediction of the corrosion evolution and prediction the failure of joints under mechanical loadings and fatigue. Moreover, based on machine learning and inverse analysis, the team proposed solutions for designing new metallic alloys less susceptible to corrosion when joining multi-material assembles. An average of 4% error compared with experiments was achieved for the most common joints that are used in vehicle subassemblies.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2024

Fast neutron leakage spectra of the EUCLID experiment

Special nuclear material in sub-critical and critical configurations measured in integral experiments are important for validation and adjustment of nuclear data. Many different evaluations of nuclear data exist, and these different evaluations can provide different values for individual cross sections that vary due to the uncertainties in differential experiments or lack of such data. For integral experiments, differences in these individual cross sections can have compensating errors, which lead to the same answer. One example of this is the Jezebel critical assembly, where k eff of the system is correctly computed by both ENDF/B-VIII.0 and JEFF-3.3, despite having substantially different underlying evaluated values for specific reactions (such as elastic and inelastic cross sections). To reduce compensating errors in nuclear data, the Experiments Underpinned by Computational Learning for Improvements in Nuclear Data (EUCLID) project has utilized machine learning to design a set of sub-critical and critical experiments. These experiments include slab- and cube-like configurations of 239 Pu in the form of the ZPPR plates. Six different responses were measured on a total of thirteen different configurations. One of these responses, the neutron leakage spectrum, was measured using an EJ301D detector. Finally, the results of the neutron leakage spectra show good agreement (within 1–2 σ ) with the expected spectrum from simulations and will be used in the subsequent nuclear data adjustment done by the EUCLID team.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

NASA NTRS1991

Innovative nuclear thermal propulsion technology evaluation - Results of the NASA/DOE task team study

In response to findings from two NASA/DOE nuclear propulsion workshops, six task teams were created to continue evaluation of various propulsion concepts, from which evolved an innovative concepts subpanel to evaluate thermal propulsion concepts which did not utilize solid fuel. This subpanel endeavored to evaluate each concept on a level technology basis, and to identify critical issues, technologies, and early proof-of-concept experiments. Results of the concept studies including the liquid core fission, the gas core fission, the fission foil reactors, explosively driven systems, fusion, and antimatter are presented.

Howe, Steven D.↗