SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Peer Review”

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 NTRS2018

NASA Guidelines for Promoting Scientific and Research Integrity

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) seeks to explore and expand human knowledge of the Earth, solar system, and universe and to enable the development of aeronautical and space exploration systems. NASA's ability to achieve these purposes depends on the integrity of the research and technology activities the agency conducts and supports. The NASA workforce - as well as all external entities who review proposals for or receive NASA funding - must maintain the highest standards of scientific integrity. These responsibilities include selecting the most meritorious research activities through open and fair competition, peer review and other appropriate merit review processes, and avoidance of actual and perceived conflicts of interest; avoiding fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results; openly sharing results and methods not subject to classification or privacy standards; disclosing assumptions and biases in sharing and applying scientific information and data; and acting honestly and transparently in using and serving on advisory committees and in engaging in professional development activities.

Guidelines↗

NASA NTRS2016

Surgical Capabilities for Exploration and Colonization Space Flight - An Exploration Symposium

Surgical capabilities in human space flight, whether on a space-based platform in low Earth orbit or on a long duration planetary exploration mission, will be challenging to conduct for a variety of reasons, some of which will be ameliorated by training, technology, and pre-flight planning. Nevertheless, inherent risks and challenges remain. Early space missions did not have any surgical capability. It was not until NASA's Skylab mission that serious consideration was given to this fundamental medical care capability. Over the past 30 years, subject matter experts have been brought together for discussion on the myriad of challenges and opportunities in this endeavor. The last such meeting was held in 2005 at the NASA Johnson Space Center. As we continue to move forward with human space flight activities for the International Space Station and beyond, the capabilities of information technology, robotics, sensors and imaging have rapidly changed since the last gathering of expertise. In December 2015, through sponsorship of the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI), a diverse group of individuals from government, academia, and industry representing three countries gathered at the NSBRI Space 4 Biomedicine facility in Houston, TX. This two day symposia included comprehensive sessions that addressed the challenges that we all face in developing, deploying, and utilizing surgical care capabilities in all human space missions, regardless of mission duration or profile. The symposium benefited from the knowledge and experience of three seasoned NASA physician astronauts, Drs. Jay Buckey, Thomas Marshburn, and Lee Morin. At the end of the first day, the assembled group heard from the crew members about their experiences and their ideas. It is clear that the discussion of surgical capabilities is part of the larger discussion of consideration of advanced healthcare, including critical care, on exploration space missions. This report represents the culmination of the symposium, capturing knowledge, experience, conceptual dialogue, and a narrative that can be used in supporting the development of future programs and potential policy. Each of the presentations that were provided by the guest speakers is included in the appendices. Those presentations that are not included were due to sensitivity of the material or at the request of the speaker. In addition, each speaker was offered an opportunity to provide comments in a 'lightning round' format. All of these comments and speaker abstracts also appear in the appendices. At the conclusion of the second day, a discussion was held that reviewed the priorities that perhaps add value to decision makers. These are also summarized. This report will serve as the final product of this symposium. Additional material may be produced for the peer-reviewed literature.

Doarn, Charles R.↗

NASA NTRS1998

Book Review: Regional Hydrological Response to Climate Change

The book being reviewed, Regional Hydrological Response to Climate Change, addresses the effects of global climate change, particularly global warming induced by greenhouse gas emissions, on hydrological budgets at the regional scale. As noted in its preface, the book consists of peer-reviewed papers delivered at scientific meetings held by the International Geographical Union Working Group on Regional Hydrological Response to Climate Change and Global Warming, supplemented with some additional chapters that round out coverage of the topic. The editors hope that this book will serve as "not only a record of current achievements, but also a stimulus to further hydrological research as the detail and spatial resolution of Global Climate Models improves". The reviewer found the background material on regional climatology to be valuable and the methodologies presented to be of interest. The value of the book is significantly diminished, however by the dated nature of some of the material and by large uncertainties in the predictions of regional precipitation change. The book would have been improved by a much more extensive documentation of the uncertainty associated with each step of the prediction process.

Koster, Randal↗

NASA NTRS2016

40 Years of Processing Pieces of Space

This year marks the 40th year anniversary for the Antarctic Search for Meteorite (ANSMET) program. In 1976, the ANSMET program led the first expedition to Antarctica. The ANSMET program is a US-led field-based science project that recovers meteorite samples from Antarctica. Once a year from late November to late January, a field team consisting of 8 to 12 people, spends 6-8 weeks camping on the ice and collecting meteorites. Since 1976, more than 22,000 meteorite samples have been recovered. These meteorites come from asteroids, planets and other bodies of the solar system. Once collected, the Antarctic meteorites are shipped to NASA/Johnson Space Center (JSC) Houston, TX. in a refrigerated truck and are kept frozen to minimize oxidation until they are ready for initial processing. In Antarctica each meteorite is given a field tag which consists of numbers, once in the lab, this is replaced by an official tag, consisting of the Antarctic field location and year collected. The types and numbers of meteorites that have been classified include 849 carbonaceous chondrites, 135 enstatites, 512 achondrites, 64 stony, 115 irons, 48 others (27 R chondrites, 7 ungrouped), 6,161 H chondrites, 7,668 L chondrites, and 4,589 LL chondrites. Although 80-85 percent of the collected meteorites fall in the ordinary chondrite group, the other approximately 15 percent represent rare types of achondrites and carbonaceous chondrites. These rare meteorites include 25 lunar meteorites, 15 Martian meteorites, scores of various types of carbonaceous chondrites, and unique achondrites. The Antarctic meteorites that have been collected are processed in the Meteorite Processing Lab at JSC in Houston, TX. Initial processing of the meteorites begins with thawing/drying the meteorites in a nitrogen glove box for 24 to 48 hours. The meteorites are then photographed, measured, weighed and a description of the interior and exterior of each meteorite is written. The meteorite is broken and a representative sample, either a 1-3 gram chip or thin section is sent to the Smithsonian Institution for classification. After Antarctic meteorites have been classified and approved by the Nomenclature Committee of the Meteoritical Society, they are announced in the Antarctic Meteorite Newsletter, which is published twice per year (fall and spring) so that scientists may review which meteorites are available to study. Requests for Antarctic Meteorite samples are welcomed from research scientists, regardless of their current state of funding for meteorite studies. Since its inception over 3,300 requests have been made for pieces of these meteorites and over 400 investigators worldwide are active in the study of meteorites.. Research on these samples has been published in more than1500 peer reviewed articles; a listing of papers for any meteorite sample can be generated by accessing http://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/antmet/referencesearch.cfm. Antarctic meteorite samples requested by scientists are prepared several different ways. Most samples are prepared as chips, either using a rock splitter or using a chisel and chipping bowl. In special situations, a researcher may request a meteorite slab in which case the samples are cut using a diamond-bladed bandsaw inside of a dry nitrogen glove box. The meteorites are always cut in a 100 percent liquid-free environment. Additionally, thin/thick sections of Antarctic meteorites are also prepared at JSC. The meteorite thin section lab at JSC can prepare standard 30-micron thin sections, thick sections of variable thickness (100 to 200 microns), or demountable sections using superglue, all section are prepared without using water. Although many of the techniques used back in the '70's are still used today, advances in computers, software, databases, available tools and instrumentation have helped to streamline and shorten the duration of the classification process. In conjunction with present day missions to asteroids and other planets, meteorite studies have not only led to a better understanding of the complex histories of these bodies but have also tied certain meteorite groups to particular asteroid bodies. New meteorite discoveries by the ANSMET program provide a cost effective method for obtaining samples of previously unsampled bodies, allowing scientists to learn more about the origin, composition, and evolution of the solar system. Preservation in our cleanrooms at NASA allows material to be archived for future generations and advances in instrumentation and analysis.

Satterwhite, C. E.↗

NASA NTRS2015

2015 Occupant Protection Standing Review Panel

The 2015 Occupant Protection (OP) Risk Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) participated in a WebEx/teleconference with members of the Space Human Factors and Habitability (SHFH) Element, representatives from the Human Research Program (HRP), NASA Headquarters, and NASA Research and Education Support Services on November 3, 2015 (list of participants is in Section VII of this report). The SRP reviewed the updated research plans for the Risk of Injury from Dynamic Loads (OP Risk). The SRP agrees that the Gaps are relevant and appropriate to mitigate the injury risk. All the appropriate and relevant Tasks have been identified to fill the Gaps. Depending upon the findings, additional tasks may need to be identified or modified. Excellent progress has been made since the 2014 SRP meeting. Publications in peer-reviewed journals validate the scientific merit of the research findings. As detailed in this report, the SRP has specific comments, guidance, and information in the following areas: human finite element modeling, human vs. surrogate dynamic responses, chest injury risk curves, matched pair testing of Test device for Human Occupant Restraint (THOR) and Hybrid III, and disc herniation risk analysis.

Steinberg, Susan↗

NASA NTRS2014

Global Distribution and Trends of Tropospheric Ozone: An Observation-Based Review

Tropospheric ozone plays a major role in Earth's atmospheric chemistry processes and also acts as an air pollutant and greenhouse gas. Due to its short lifetime, and dependence on sunlight and precursor emissions from natural and anthropogenic sources, tropospheric ozone's abundance is highly variable in space and time on seasonal, interannual and decadal time-scales. Recent, and sometimes rapid, changes in observed ozone mixing ratios and ozone precursor emissions inspired us to produce this up-to-date overview of tropospheric ozone's global distribution and trends. Much of the text is a synthesis of in situ and remotely sensed ozone observations reported in the peer-reviewed literature, but we also include some new and extended analyses using well-known and referenced datasets to draw connections between ozone trends and distributions in different regions of the world. In addition, we provide a brief evaluation of the accuracy of rural or remote surface ozone trends calculated by three state-of-the-science chemistry-climate models, the tools used by scientists to fill the gaps in our knowledge of global tropospheric ozone distribution and trends.

Mixing ratios↗

NASA NTRS2012

A Review of NASA Human Research Program's Scientific Merit Processes: Letter Report

At the request of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Institute of Medicine (IOM) convened the Committee on the Review of NASA Human Research Program's (HRP's) Scientific Merit Assessment Processes in December 2011. The committee was asked to evaluate the scientific merit assessment processes that are applied to directed research tasks2 funded through the HRP and to determine best practices from similar assessment processes that are used in other federal agencies. This letter report and its recommendations are the product of a 10-member ad hoc committee, which included individuals who had previously conducted research under the HRP, were familiar with the HRP s research portfolio and operations, had specific knowledge of peer review processes, or were familiar with scientific merit assessment processes used in other organizations and federal agencies, such as the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR); National Institutes of Health (NIH); National Science Foundation (NSF); and U.S. Departments of Agriculture (USDA), Defense (DOD), and Transportation.

Pawelczyk, James A.↗

NASA NTRS2020

Natural Hazard Risk Assessments at the Global Scale

Since 1990, natural hazards have led to over 1.6 million fatalities globally, and economic losses are estimated at an average of around USD 260–310 billion per year. The scientific and policy communities recognise the need to reduce these risks. As a result, the last decade has seen a rapid development of global models for assessing risk from natural hazards at the global scale. In this paper, we review the scientific literature on natural hazard risk assessments at the global scale, and we specifically examine whether and how they have examined future projections of hazard, exposure, and/or vulnerability. In doing so, we examine similarities and differences between the approaches taken across the different hazards, and we identify potential ways in which different hazard communities can learn from each other. For example, there are a number of global risk studies focusing on hydrological, climatological, and meteorological hazards that have included future projections and disaster risk reduction measures (in the case of floods), whereas fewer exist in the peer-reviewed literature for global studies related to geological hazards. On the other hand, studies of earthquake and tsunami risk are now using stochastic modelling approaches to allow for a fully probabilistic assessment of risk, which could benefit the modelling of risk from other hazards. Finally, we discuss opportunities for learning from methods and approaches being developed and applied to assess natural hazard risks at more continental or regional scales. Through this paper, we hope to encourage further dialogue on knowledge sharing between disciplines and communities working on different hazards and risk and at different spatial scales.

Philip J. Ward↗

NASA NTRS2007

A Review and Analysis of Remote Sensing Capability for Air Quality Measurements as a Potential Decision Support Tool Conducted by the NASA DEVELOP Program

This project focused on a comprehensive utilization of air quality model products as decision support tools (DST) needed for public health applications. A review of past and future air quality measurement methods and their uncertainty, along with the relationship of air quality to national and global public health, is vital. This project described current and future NASA satellite remote sensing and ground sensing capabilities and the potential for using these sensors to enhance the prediction, prevention, and control of public health effects that result from poor air quality. The qualitative uncertainty of current satellite remotely sensed air quality, the ground-based remotely sensed air quality, the air quality/public health model, and the decision making process is evaluated in this study. Current peer-reviewed literature suggests that remotely sensed air quality parameters correlate well with ground-based sensor data. A satellite remote-sensed and ground-sensed data complement is needed to enhance the models/tools used by policy makers for the protection of national and global public health communities

Ross, A.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Human Research Program Space Radiation Standing Review Panel (SRP)

The Space Radiation Standing Review Panel (SRP) met at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) on December 9-11, 2009 to discuss the areas of current and future research targeted by the Space Radiation Program Element (SRPE) of the Human Research Program (HRP). Using evidence-based knowledge as a background for identified risks to astronaut health and performance, NASA had identified gaps in knowledge to address those risks. Ongoing and proposed tasks were presented to address the gaps. The charge to the Space Radiation SRP was to review the gaps, evaluate whether the tasks addressed these gaps and to make recommendations to NASA s HRP Science Management Office regarding the SRP's review. The SRP was requested to evaluate the practicality of the proposed efforts in light of the demands placed on the HRP. Several presentations were made to the SRP during the site visit and the SRP spent sufficient time to address the SRP charge. The SRP made a final debriefing to the HRP Program Scientist, Dr. John B. Charles, on December 11, 2009. The SRP noted that current SRPE strategy is properly science-based and views this as the best assurance of the likelihood that answers to the questions posed as gaps in knowledge can be found, that the uncertainty in risk estimates can be reduced, and that a solid, cost-effective approach to risk reduction solutions is being developed. The current approach of the SRPE, based on the use of carefully focused research solicitations, requiring thorough peer-review and approaches demonstrated to be on the path to answering the NASA strategic questions, addressed to a broad extramural community of qualified scientists, optimally positioned to take advantage of serendipitous discoveries and to leverage scientific advances made elsewhere, is sound and appropriate. The SRP viewed with concern statements by HRP implying that the only science legitimately deserving support should be "applied" or, in some instances that the very term "research" might be frowned upon. We understand the desire of management to ensure that research stay focused on mission objectives, but the terms used are code words fraught with different meaning for scientists. Such expressions, taken at face value, convey a profoundly flawed view of science, can easily lead down counterproductive paths, and have the potential to irretrievably corrupt NASA requirements. The SRP understands and endorses the mandate to keep research efforts focused on the mission needs. However, thoughtful application of knowledge gained by understanding the mechanisms and pathways of biological effects cannot be replaced.

Woloschak, Gayle↗

NASA NTRS1977

Space Resources and Space Settlements

This publication contains the technical papers from the five task groups that took part in the 1977 Ames Summer Study on Space Settlements and Industrialization Using Nonterrestrial Materials. The study was sponsored by the following NASA Headquarters organizations: Office of Space Science, Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology, and Office of Space Transportation Systems. The NASA Ames Research Center hosted the study and provided administrative support through its Life Sciences Directorate. Expert assistance in the many aspects of the study came from NASA Headquarters, NASA centers, universities, industry, and from individual consultants. This summer study was the largest and most comprehensive investigation of space manufacturing and habitation to date; forty senior research workers and ten students participated. The six-week study was preceded by several months of planning and preparation, and was followed by extensive work on manuscript checking, review, and assembly. The study topics reflected the research areas requiring the most intensive attention as ofrnid-1977; they were: Group I: Regenerative life-support systems and controlled environment agriculture. Group II: Parametric studies of efficient habitats in space. Time and cost analysis of a space manufacturing program plan. Group III: Detection and analysis of special classes of asteroids suitable as material resources for space manufacturing; studies of retrieval missions. Group IV: Electromagnetic mass drivers for use as interorbital engines, as devices to launch lunar material into space, and as tugs for the retrieval of asteroidal material. Group V: Chemical processing of non terrestrial material in space; manufacture of metals and glass fibers, beneficiation, and design of processing plants. These five task groups each produced two or more technical papers, signed by the contributing members. The papers were subjected to independent peer review by scientists not connected with the study. During the course of the study, frequent formal and informal exchanges of information occurred between task groups, so that the entire effort evolved in a coherent fashion and was directed toward common goals. However, each group remained responsible for the choice of its topics and for its conclusions. A listing of all the participants is given on pages vii-x. It would be inappropriate for me to single out particular people or groups for special mention, since all involved applied their skills with dedication and enthusiasm. Instead, I thank everyone for their contributions to the success of the study, and also for making it a united and warmly cooperative personal experience.

John Billingham↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Exploration and In-Space Services (NExIS) Division OSAM-1 Propellant Transfer Subsystem Progress 2020

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)’s Exploration and In-Space Services (NExIS) Division of Goddard Space Flight Center has been developing technology for the On-orbit Servicing, Assembly and Manufacturing Mission 1 (OSAM-1) to robotically refuel heritage and new satellites on-orbit. OSAM-1, formerly known as Restore-L, successfully passed an important NASA milestone called Key Decision Point-C (KDP-C), receiving agency-level approval for its implementation. The decision point also establishes the mission’s official schedule and budget. The OSAM-1 spacecraft, Servicing Payload and the Space Infrastructure Dexterous Robot (SPIDER) payload will refuel a satellite in space, assemble a communications antenna and manufacture a beam. By demonstrating these capabilities, the mission is advancing never-before tested technologies for use in future missions (by NASA and other government organizations and private industry). The mission is funded by the Technology Demonstration Missions program within NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate. This paper covers a review of servicing extensibility and critical technologies that are being developed within NExIS with a focus on the fluid transfer refueling technology within the framework of the Propellant Transfer Subsystem (PTS). An overview of the planned initial technology demonstration servicing mission via the OSAM-1 Space Vehicle is provided as an extension of the technology development progress reported in 20181, and 20192. The general objectives, challenges, and key technologies are presented as an introduction to the context of the OSAM-1 mission, and a precursor to the OSAM-1 PTS specific development status. Development and progress of the Hose Management Assembly (HMA) and Propellant Transfer Assembly (PTA) are discussed. HMA risk reduction test results including those of thermal vacuum testing are presented. Important analytical results are discussed and progress of drawings and procedures developed for the fabrication and testing phase are shown. A summary of the PTS overall verification status and design activities prepared for the critical design peer review are presented. Procurement progress is shown with status on long, medium, and short term efforts to acquire the hardware required to support the mission objectives. Technology development, challenges, and testing status are discussed with particular regard to the OSAM-1 specific key assemblies including the PTA and HMA along with the overall integrated flight mockup of the spacecraft to client fluid transfer testing conducted in the servicing testbeds. The paper concludes with key milestones leading to the goal of on-orbit refueling to be demonstrated in 2024. The overall mission Launch Readiness Date (LRD) has been realigned to accommodate budget profiles and incorporation of additional on-orbit assembly and manufacturing demonstration efforts.

Propellant transfer, satellite servicing↗

NASA NTRS2013

Benefits, Consequences, and Uncertainties of Conventional (Exercise) Countermeasure Approaches

This presentation will review the pros, cons, and uncertainties of using exercise countermeasures in hypothetical long duration exploration missions. The use of artificial gravity and exercise will be briefly discussed. One benefit to continued use of exercise is related to our extensive experience with spaceflight exercise hardware and programming. Exercise has been a part of each space mission dating back to the 1960's when simple isometric and bungee exercises were performed in the Gemini capsule. Over the next 50 years, exercise hardware improved cumulating in today's ISS suite of exercise equipment: Cycle Ergometer with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization System (CEVIS), Treadmill (T2) and Advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED). Today's exercise equipment is the most robust ever to be flown in space and allows the variety and intensity of exercise that might reasonably be expected to maintain muscle mass and function, bone density and cardiovascular fitness. A second benefit is related to the large body of research literature on exercise training. There is a considerable body of supporting research literature including >40,000 peer reviewed research articles on exercise training in humans. A third benefit of exercise is its effectiveness. With the addition of T2 and ARED to our ISS exercise suite, crew member outcomes on standard medical tests have improved. Additionally exercise has other positive side effects such as stress relief, possible improvement of immune function, improved sleep, etc. Exercise is not without its consequences. The major cons to performance of in‐flight exercise are the time and equipment required. Currently crew are scheduled 2.5 hrs/day for exercise and there is considerable cost to develop, fly and maintain exercise hardware. While no major injuries have been reported on ISS, there is always some risk of injury with any form of exercise There are several uncertainties going forward; these relate mostly to the development of small compact robust effective exercise devices for the next generation of space vehicles. It is becoming increasingly apparent that high intensity exercise is required for maintenance of fitness and functional capability and so future hardware will need to be developed, tested and implemented that allow for a wide variety of exercise, at high intensity while likely involving low mass, volume and power. There are many unanswered issues related to the minimum number and type of exercise devices required for exploration, optimizing exercise prescriptions for these devices, whether a treadmill is absolutely required, and even whether any single countermeasure can adequately protect muscle, bone, cardiovascular and sensorimotor function.

Ploutz-Snyder, Lori↗

NASA NTRS1997

Activation and proliferation of lymphocytes and other mammalian cells in microgravity

The experimental findings reviewed in this chapter support the following conclusions: Proliferation. Human T-lymphocytes, associated with monocytes as accessory cells, show dramatic changes in the centrifuge, in the clinostat and in space. In free-floating cells the mitogenic response is depressed by 90% in microgravity, whereas in cells attached to a substratum activation is enhanced by 100% compared to 1-G ground and inflight controls. The duration of phase G1 of the mitotic cycle of HeLa cells is reduced in hypergravity, resulting in an increased proliferation rate. Other systems like Friend cells and WI38 human embryonic lung cells do not show significant changes. Genetic expression and signal transduction. T-lymphocytes and monocytes show important changes in the expression of cytokines like interleukin-1, interleukin-2, interferon-gamma and tumor necrosis factor. The data from space experiments in Spacelab, Space Shuttle mid-deck, and Biokosmos have helped to clarify certain aspects of the mechanism of T-cell activation. Epidermoid A431 cells show changes in the genetic expression of the proto-oncogenes c-fos and c-jun in the clinostat and in sounding rockets. Membrane function, in particular the binding of ligates as first messengers of a signal, is not changed in most of the cell systems in microgravity. Morphology and Mortility. Free cells, lymphocytes in particular, are able to move and form aggregates in microgravity, indicating that cell-cell contacts and cell communications do take place in microgravity. Dramatic morphological and ultrastructural changes are not detected in cells cultured in microgravity. Important experiments with single mammalian cells, including immune cells, were carried out recently in three Spacelab flights, (SL-J, D-2, and IML-2 in 1992, 1993, and 1994, respectively). The results of the D-2 mission have been published in ref. 75; those of the IML-2 mission in ref. 76. Finally, many cell biology experiments in space have suffered in the past from a lack of adequate controls (like 1-G centrifuges) and of proper experimental conditions (like well-controlled temperature). In this respect the availability of Biorack, outfitted with proper incubators with 1-G control centrifuge as well as a glovebox with a microscope, is a great advantage. It is also desirable that cell biology experiments in space are accompanied or even preceded by a program of ground-based investigations in the fast rotating clinostat and in the centrifuge, and that preparatory experiments be done in parabolic flights and sounding rockets, whenever possible. Proper publication of the results of space experiments is another important need. A great number of data have been published in proceedings and reports that are not available to the broad scientific community. To guarantee the credibility and the international recognition of space biology it is important that the results be published in international, peer reviewed journals.

manned↗

NASA NTRS1978

Preliminary environmental assessment for the Satellite Power System (SPS). Volume 2: Detailed assessment

Volume 2 provides a preliminary assessment of the impact of the Satellite Power System (SPS) on the environment in a technically detailed format more suitable for peer review than the executive summary of Vol. 1. It serves to integrate and assimilate information that has appeared in documents referenced herein and to focus on issues that are purely environmental. It discloses the state-of-knowledge as perceived from recently completed DOE-sponsored studies and defines prospective research and study programs that can advance the state-of-knowledge and provide an expanded data base for use in an assessment planned for 1980. Alternatives for research that may be implemented in order to achieve this advancement are also discussed.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1983

Condensation of solids in space. Isotope fractionation in the model system C-O

The reported chemical fractionation of a single isotope O-16 under simulated space conditions provides the first experimental proof for the hypothesis that the oxygen isotopic anomaly (and other similar anomalies) seen in meteorites is a product of chemical fractionation in interstellar or circumstellar space. Work proposed on this subject was discontinued because a peer review determined that such effects could not possibly exist and that continued support of this project would be a wasted effort. A bibliography is included of articles generated during research in this area.

Arrhenius, G.↗

NASA NTRS1985

Space Missions for Automation and Robotics Technologies (SMART) Program

NASA is currently considering the establishment of a Space Mission for Automation and Robotics Technologies (SMART) Program to define, develop, integrate, test, and operate a spaceborne national research facility for the validation of advanced automation and robotics technologies. Initially, the concept is envisioned to be implemented through a series of shuttle based flight experiments which will utilize telepresence technologies and real time operation concepts. However, eventually the facility will be capable of a more autonomous role and will be supported by either the shuttle or the space station. To ensure incorporation of leading edge technology in the facility, performance capability will periodically and systematically be upgraded by the solicitation of recommendations from a user advisory group. The facility will be managed by NASA, but will be available to all potential investigators. Experiments for each flight will be selected by a peer review group. Detailed definition and design is proposed to take place during FY 86, with the first SMART flight projected for FY 89.

Cliffone, D. L.↗

NASA NTRS1986

Present state of knowledge of the upper atmosphere: An assessment report; processes that control ozone and other climatically important trace gases

The state of knowledge of the upper atmosphere was assessed as of January 1986. The physical, chemical, and radiative processes which control the spatial and temporal distribution of ozone in the atmosphere; the predicted magnitude of ozone perturbations and climate changes for a variety of trace gas scenarios; and the ozone and temperature data used to detect the presence or absence of a long term trend were discussed. This assessment report was written by a small group of NASA scientists, was peer reviewed, and is based primarily on the comprehensive international assessment document entitled Atmospheric Ozone 1985: Assessment of Our Understanding of the Processes Controlling Its Present Distribution and Change, to be published as the World Meteorological Organization Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project Report No. 16.

Watson, R. T.↗