SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “competing risks”

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.

107 records · Page 6

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2009

Group Capability Model

The Group Capability Model (GCM) is a software tool that allows an organization, from first line management to senior executive, to monitor and track the health (capability) of various groups in performing their contractual obligations. GCM calculates a Group Capability Index (GCI) by comparing actual head counts, certifications, and/or skills within a group. The model can also be used to simulate the effects of employee usage, training, and attrition on the GCI. A universal tool and common method was required due to the high risk of losing skills necessary to complete the Space Shuttle Program and meet the needs of the Constellation Program. During this transition from one space vehicle to another, the uncertainty among the critical skilled workforce is high and attrition has the potential to be unmanageable. GCM allows managers to establish requirements for their group in the form of head counts, certification requirements, or skills requirements. GCM then calculates a Group Capability Index (GCI), where a score of 1 indicates that the group is at the appropriate level; anything less than 1 indicates a potential for improvement. This shows the health of a group, both currently and over time. GCM accepts as input head count, certification needs, critical needs, competency needs, and competency critical needs. In addition, team members are categorized by years of experience, percentage of contribution, ex-members and their skills, availability, function, and in-work requirements. Outputs are several reports, including actual vs. required head count, actual vs. required certificates, CGI change over time (by month), and more. The program stores historical data for summary and historical reporting, which is done via an Excel spreadsheet that is color-coded to show health statistics at a glance. GCM has provided the Shuttle Ground Processing team with a quantifiable, repeatable approach to assessing and managing the skills in their organization. They now have a common frame of reference across NASA/contractor lines to communicate and mitigate any critical skills concerns.

Olejarski, Michael↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Behavioral Health and Performance Operations and Research in Human Spaceflight

There are two distinct functions of the Behavioral Health and Performance (BHP) specialists at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC), with a shared goal of promoting optimal performance during all mission phases, beginning with selection to the NASA Astronaut Corps through training for and completing a spaceflight mission. The BHP Operations team is active in areas such as selection, training, routine behavioral healthcare services, and work-rest schedule. The BHP Laboratory is engaged in research in space and analog platforms to address the risks and other challenges associated with future deep space missions. Their research focuses on topics that align with the NASA Human Research Program’s Human Factors Behavioral Performance Element goals. This panel will provide details of recent work by BHP Operations and the BHP Laboratory at NASA JSC, and will demonstrate their shared goals, and contributions toward, optimizing performance and maintaining the behavioral health and well-being of astronauts during all mission phases.In 2020-2021, NASA engaged another astronaut applicant screening process to identify its 23rd group of astronaut candidates. The BHP Operations team completed a significant amount of work to evaluate applicants and provide valuable input to the Astronaut Selection Board and the Aerospace Medical Board. One presentation will provide an overview of the work completed by BHP; and one presentation will discuss a critical competency important for successful job performance of the astronauts – Team Orientation. The former will summarize aspects of BHP’s Select-in and Select-out process and provide lessons learned for future selection cycles; the latter will briefly discuss the competencies of BHP’s applicant screening work, with focus on the importance of Team Orientation and the challenges of its measure. A third presentation will provide an overview of BHP’s current fatigue management work with astronauts and mission-critical operators at JSC (e.g., flight directors, pilots), and provide a look at the direction these fatigue management services may take in future exploration missions. Two other presentations will focus on the research completed by the BHP Lab to measure in a standardized way the critical aspects of behavioral health and well-being. One of the presentations will provide an overview of the Exploration Measures being collected during all space and analog missions, and the importance these objective measures have for future research and operations. The final presentation will summarize analyses completed with these measures, as they have been harmonized across both ISS and Analog missions.

Gary Beven↗

NASA NTRS2013

Human Spaceflight Technology Needs - A Foundation for JSC's Technology Strategy

Human space exploration has always been heavily influenced by goals to achieve a specific mission on a specific schedule. This approach drove rapid technology development, the rapidity of which adds risks as well as provides a major driver for costs and cost uncertainty. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is now approaching the extension of human presence throughout the solar system by balancing a proactive yet less schedule-driven development of technology with opportunistic scheduling of missions as the needed technologies are realized. This approach should provide cost effective, low risk technology development that will enable efficient and effective manned spaceflight missions. As a first step, the NASA Human Spaceflight Architecture Team (HAT) has identified a suite of critical technologies needed to support future manned missions across a range of destinations, including in cis-lunar space, near earth asteroid visits, lunar exploration, Mars moons, and Mars exploration. The challenge now is to develop a strategy and plan for technology development that efficiently enables these missions over a reasonable time period, without increasing technology development costs unnecessarily due to schedule pressure, and subsequently mitigating development and mission risks. NASA's Johnson Space Center (JSC), as the nation s primary center for human exploration, is addressing this challenge through an innovative approach in allocating Internal Research and Development funding to projects. The HAT Technology Needs (TechNeeds) Database has been developed to correlate across critical technologies and the NASA Office of Chief Technologist Technology Area Breakdown Structure (TABS). The TechNeeds Database illuminates that many critical technologies may support a single technical capability gap, that many HAT technology needs may map to a single TABS technology discipline, and that a single HAT technology need may map to multiple TABS technology disciplines. The TechNeeds Database greatly clarifies understanding of the complex relationships of critical technologies to mission and architecture element needs. Extensions to the core TechNeeds Database allow JSC to factor in and appropriately weight JSC Center Core Technology Competencies, and considerations of Commercialization Potential and Partnership Potential. The inherent coupling among these, along with an appropriate importance weighting, has provided an initial prioritization for allocation of technology development research funding for JSC. The HAT Technology Needs Database, with a core of built-in reports, clarifies and communicates complex technology needs for cost effective human space exploration such that an organization seeking to assure that research prioritization supports human spaceflight of the future can be successful.

Stecklein, Jonette M.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Evaluation of Gas Chromatography/Mini-IMS to Detect VOCs

The Toxicology Laboratory at Johnson Space Center (JSC) has pioneered the use of gas chromatography-ion mobility spectrometry (GC/IMS) for measuring target volatile organic compounds (VOCs) aboard spacecraft. Graseby Dynamics, under contract to NASA/Wyle, has built several volatile organic analyzers (VOA) based on GC/IMS. Foremost among these have been the volatile organic analyzer-risk mitigation unit and the two flight VOA units for International Space Station (ISS). The development and evaluation of these instruments has been chronicled through presentations at the International Conference on Ion Mobility Spectrometry over the past three years. As the flight VOA from Graseby is prepared for operation on ISS at JSC, it is time to begin evaluations of technologies for the next generation VOA, Although the desired instrument characteristics for the next generation unit are the same as the current unit, the requirements are much more stringent. As NASA looks toward future missions beyond Earth environs, a premium will be placed upon small, light, reliable, autonomous hardware. It is with these visions in mind that the JSC Toxicology Laboratory began a search for the next generation VOA. One technology that is a candidate for the next generation VOA is GC/IMS. The recent miniaturization of IMS technology permits it to compete with other, inherently small, technologies such as chip-sized sensor arrays. This paper will discuss the lessons learned from the VOA experience and how that has shaped the design of a potential second generation VOA based upon GC/IMS technology. Data will be presented from preliminary evaluations of GC technology and the mini-IMS when exposed to VOCs likely to be detected aboard spacecraft. Results from the evaluation of an integrated GC/mini-IMS system will be shown if available.

Limero, Thomas↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Independent Technical Assessment of NASA and External Quantum Sensing Capability

The recent FY 2020 federal Research and Development Budget Priorities memo addresses the leadership need in Quantum Information Science (QIS) directing agencies to “prioritize QIS research and development (R&D), which will build the technical and scientific base necessary to explore the next generation of QIS theory, devices, and applications.” Quantum Sensing (QS) is an integral part of QIS. NASA is a key part of the directive to forward American space exploration and commercialization by providing “capabilities that have broad potential applications in space and on Earth.” QS provides an arena for NASA to demonstrate leadership in both areas of the administrative directive. QS uses quantum properties to achieve unprecedented measurement sensitivity and performance, including quantum-enhanced methodologies that outperform their classical counterparts. Typical quantum sensors exploit techniques such as atomic systems, matter waves, quantum entanglement, quantum superposition of states, quantum illumination methods, and manipulation of photons and atoms, in general. Guided by advancements in our ability to generate, manipulate, and control quantum systems, the emerging quantum sensing technologies promise unrivalled sensitivity, resolution, and precision, potentially leading to game-changing applications. Significant gains include technologies important for a range of NASA missions such as remote sensing, in situ measurements, metrology, interferometry, quantum communication, ranging, imaging, radar and lidar receivers, and gravity measurements. NASA Engineering and Safety Center has convened an independent external panel, comprising of Quantum Sensing Experts from Government, DoD, academia, and Federally funded Research and Development Center to conduct an independent technical assessment of the agency's capabilities in Quantum Sensing to understand NASA's internal needs and competencies related to Quantum Sensing and compare agency capabilities with those available externally including industry, academia, and other government agencies. The outcomes of the assessment will help the agency in establishing appropriate strategies and investments to develop and maintain the state-of-the-art sensing competence and capabilities required to meet the agency’s future needs. The External Experts Panel (EEP) is collaborating with HQ, various NASA Center and the representatives in the NASA Quantum Sensing Community of Practice (QS CoP), a part of NASA Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Fellow Technical Discipline Team, in obtaining common, current understanding of agency mission needs where QS can be an important enabler for future needs, and any programs, projects, assets, and technologists working in QS. The EEP organized a Quantum Sensing Workshop of practitioners from industry, academia, other government agencies, external experts, and interested NASA personnel to gather the assessment information. EEP also conducted information gathering on the industry at large, educational institutions, and other government agency research efforts for capture in the assessment database. At the conclusion of this assessment, EEP team will develop findings and conclusions describing NASA’s capabilities for the mission needs, NASA's relative position on new, enabling technologies, and an analysis of the gaps that may present any risks to near-term or far-term mission needs. This presentation will give details of the NASA and External Quantum Sensing Assessment outcomes, findings, observations, and its recommendation to NASA as how it can advance Quantum Sensing technologies and techniques for its science and explorations related missions.

External Quantum Sensing Capability↗

NASA NTRS2005

Analysis of In-Space Assembly of Modular Systems

Early system-level life cycle assessments facilitate cost effective optimization of system architectures to enable implementation of both modularity and in-space assembly, two key Exploration Systems Research & Technology (ESR&T) Strategic Challenges. Experiences with the International Space Station (ISS) demonstrate that the absence of this rigorous analysis can result in increased cost and operational risk. An effort is underway, called Analysis of In-Space Assembly of Modular Systems, to produce an innovative analytical methodology, including an evolved analysis toolset and proven processes in a collaborative engineering environment, to support the design and evaluation of proposed concepts. The unique aspect of this work is that it will produce the toolset, techniques and initial products to analyze and compare the detailed, life cycle costs and performance of different implementations of modularity for in-space assembly. A multi-Center team consisting of experienced personnel from the Langley Research Center, Johnson Space Center, Kennedy Space Center, and the Goddard Space Flight Center has been formed to bring their resources and experience to this development. At the end of this 30-month effort, the toolset will be ready to support the Exploration Program with an integrated assessment strategy that embodies all life-cycle aspects of the mission from design and manufacturing through operations to enable early and timely selection of an optimum solution among many competing alternatives. Already there are many different designs for crewed missions to the Moon that present competing views of modularity requiring some in-space assembly. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the approach for scoring competing designs.

Moses, Robert W.↗

NASA NTRS2023

Progressively Enabling Earth Independent Medical Operations (EIMO)

This panel presents the findings from a series of Technical Interchange Meetings (TIMs) hosted by the Exploration Medical Capability Element (ExMC) in NASA’s Human Research Program. The topics for the TIMs were derived from a 2-day conference of senior leaders and subject matters experts that collectively outlined a multi-faceted strategy designed to optimize crew health and performance through an increasingly autonomous medical approach. The first abstract in this panel outlines the scope of issues related to data collection, usage, transmission and computing capacity to facilitate EIMO. The second presentation provides an overview of the challenges in developing curricula and advanced training tools to baseline knowledge, skills and abilities (KSA), verify clinical competency and assure retention during prolonged durations inherent in exploration-class missions. An overview of the complicated medical supply and resource chain necessary to facilitate EIMO is provided in the third presentation of this panel. The final presentation in this EIMO panel surveys the breadth and depth of demands on cognitive load expected to be experienced by crew on an exploration mission and proposes strategies to mitigate the prospect of cognitive overload through methods to shift task load from the crew to multi-modal artificial intelligence based medical support systems. Taken together, these presentations summarize the challenges to be expected and potential solution spaces to be explored and developed to progressively enable increasing autonomous medical operations to support crewed missions beyond low earth orbit. Through EIMO focused pre-mission planning, integrated data architecture design, innovative training development and AI-assisted task load management, the gradual transition of medical care and decision making from terrestrial to space-based assets enabling support of astronaut health and performance and reducing overall mission risk is achievable.

Jay Lemery↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Progressively Enabling Earth Independent Medical Operations (EIMO)

John Lemery↗

NASA NTRS2025

Measuring Unique Contextual Factors: Group Living Skills

BACKGROUND The Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures (HFBP-EM) suite is a set of standardized measures used to assess behavioral health and performance risks related to future exploration-class space missions. During the HFBP-EM suite development, the importance of assessing unique contextual factors to understand the drivers of team dynamics was identified. Group living skills are a unique workplace skill which applies to those coworkers who live and work together. As mission lengths become longer, the line between work and non-work life may blur. Extreme living conditions such as spaceflight can result in increased stress over time, negatively impact mood and well-being, decrease team cohesion and increase conflict, deteriorate task performance, and potentially reduce mission success [1]. With no breaks in their isolated and confined environment possible, living with a messy, inconsiderate crewmember can add to the stress. Alternatively, crews with good group living skills may support one another, mitigating the negative effects of the extreme environment. There was no direct measure of group living skills. This work sought to fill this measurement gap and collect data related to group living in isolated, confined, extreme (ICE) environments. METHODS Group living skills as an astronaut competency area were developed with the input of experts familiar with ICE environments. Distinct aspects of this competency were reviewed and discussed by a NASA-invited group of spaceflight experts in 2015 to identify individual and team behavioral health and performance measures for operational environments. This work resulted in a 5-item measure focused on group living experiences with each crewmember (or the crew as a whole). A 6th item asks whether an individual would go on another mission with a particular crewmember or crew as a measure of future-oriented group living, or team viability. The measure was deployed in 24 teams living and working together in isolated and confined environments (e.g., International Space Station, space mission simulation analogs). RESULTS & DISCUSSION In this presentation, we will summarize results which indicate the Group Living Skills (GLS) Survey is a reliable, valid, and operationally feasible measure. Reliability was evaluated in several ways. Two-way multilevel mixed models revealed strong repeated measures reliability (ICC2 = .902, Omega between = .954). Reliability of change within teams was strong (Rc = .81). Factor analysis showed a consistent two-factor structure when individuals rated either the whole crew, all individuals, just peers, or a focal roommate. The latter used a sociometric approach to rating the GLS of the roommates. The two factors were tidiness and being considerate of others. We assessed the criterion-related validity of GLS, by examining GLS operationalized as the team-level aggregated GLS Survey scores as a predictor of team viability, team cohesion, and team performance. We used generalized mixed models to account for the repeated measures and longitudinal data. The marginal R2 change was used to determine the extent to which GLS were related to the team outcomes while controlling for mission day and campaign. Results suggested GLS was strongly related to team viability (marginal R2 change = .40), team cohesion (marginal R2 change = 0.28), social cohesion (marginal R2 change = 0.25), and moderately related to task cohesion (marginal R2 change = 0.18). GLS scores had a small relationship with team performance (marginal R2 change = .08). Results support GLS as a measure that can be used to capture group living skills of crews who live and work together in ICE. Because the items were written to be broadly applicable, less extreme environments with teams living and working together for some length of time also benefit from this measure (e.g., college roommates, camps). See Landon et al. (2024) for full results [2]. SUMMARY We report reliability and validity evidence for a new measure that assesses the Group Living Skills for teams that live and work in operational environments such as spaceflight.

J C W Miller↗

NASA NTRS2008

Distributed Aviation Concepts and Technologies

Aviation has experienced one hundred years of evolution, resulting in the current air transportation system dominated by commercial airliners in a hub and spoke infrastructure. While the first fifty years involved disruptive technologies that required frequent vehicle adaptation, the second fifty years produced a stable evolutionary optimization of decreasing costs with increasing safety. This optimization has resulted in traits favoring a centralized service model with high vehicle productivity and cost efficiency. However, it may also have resulted in a system that is not sufficiently robust to withstand significant system disturbances. Aviation is currently facing rapid change from issues such as environmental damage, terrorism threat, congestion and capacity limitations, and cost of energy. Currently, these issues are leading to a loss of service for weaker spoke markets. These catalysts and a lack of robustness could result in a loss of service for much larger portions of the aviation market. The impact of other competing transportation services may be equally important as casual factors of change. Highway system forecasts indicate a dramatic slow down as congestion reaches a point of non-linearly increasing delay. In the next twenty-five years, there is the potential for aviation to transform itself into a more robust, scalable, adaptive, secure, safe, affordable, convenient, efficient and environmentally friendly system. To achieve these characteristics, the new system will likely be based on a distributed model that enables more direct services. Short range travel is already demonstrating itself to be inefficient with a centralized model, providing opportunities for emergent distributed services through air-taxi models. Technologies from the on-demand revolution in computers and communications are now available as major drivers for aviation on-demand adaptation. Other technologies such as electric propulsion are currently transforming the automobile industry, and will also significantly alter the functionality of future distributed aviation concepts. Many hurdles exist, including technology, regulation, and perception. Aviation has an inherent governmental role not present in other recent on-demand transformations, which may pose a risk of curtailing aviation democratization .

Moore, Mark D.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Technology Development Roadmap: A Technology Development Roadmap for a Future Gravitational Wave Mission

Humankind will detect the first gravitational wave (GW) signals from the Universe in the current decade using ground-based detectors. But the richest trove of astrophysical information lies at lower frequencies in the spectrum only accessible from space. Signals are expected from merging massive black holes throughout cosmic history, from compact stellar remnants orbiting central galactic engines from thousands of close contact binary systems in the Milky Way, and possibly from exotic sources, some not yet imagined. These signals carry essential information not available from electromagnetic observations, and which can be extracted with extraordinary accuracy. For 20 years, NASA, the European Space Agency (ESA), and an international research community have put considerable effort into developing concepts and technologies for a GW mission. Both the 2000 and 2010 decadal surveys endorsed the science and mission concept of the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA). A partnership of the two agencies defined and analyzed the concept for a decade. The agencies partnered on LISA Pathfinder (LPF), and ESA-led technology demonstration mission, now preparing for a 2015 launch. Extensive technology development has been carried out on the ground. Currently, the evolved Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (eLISA) concept, a LISA-like concept with only two measurement arms, is competing for ESA's L2 opportunity. NASA's Astrophysics Division seeks to be a junior partner if eLISA is selected. If eLISA is not selected, then a LISA-like mission will be a strong contender in the 2020 decadal survey. This Technology Development Roadmap (TDR) builds on the LISA concept development, the LPF technology development, and the U.S. and European ground-based technology development. The eLISA architecture and the architecture of the Mid-sized Space-based Gravitational-wave Observatory (SGO Mid)-a competitive design with three measurement arms from the recent design study for a NASA-led mission after 2020-both use the same technologies. Further, NASA participation in an ESA-led mission would likely augment the eLISA architecture with a third arm to become the SGO Mid architecture. For these reasons, this TDR for a future GW mission applies to both designs and both programmatic paths forward. It is adaptable to the different timelines and roles for an ESA-led or a NASA-led mission, and it is adaptable to available resources. Based on a mature understanding of the interaction between technology and risk, the authors of this TDR have chosen a set of objectives that are more expansive than is usual. The objectives for this roadmap are: (1) reduce technical and development risks and costs; (2) understand and, where possible, relieve system requirements and consequences; (3) increase technical insight into critical technologies; and (4) validate the design at the subsystem level. The emphasis on these objectives, particularly the latter two, is driven by outstanding programmatic decisions, namely whether a future GW mission is ESA-led or NASA-led, and availability of resources. The relative emphasis is best understood in the context of prioritization.

Laser Interferometry Space Antenna↗

NASA NTRS2016

Systems Engineering and Management Applications of ISO 9001:2015 for Government

The manufacturing segment of the business world is busy assessing the impact of ISO 9001:2015, and updating their management systems to meet the required compliance date. What does the new revision mean for government agencies that deliver large engineering projects rather than mass production? In fact, the standard, especially the new revision, can be used quite readily for government agencies, or applied to specific projects, once it is understood in terms of the similarities with systems engineering and project management. From there it can be extrapolated to "mission realization" systems, and a Quality Management System (QMS) is a logical result that can bring order to processes and systems that likely already exist in some fashion. ISO 9001:2015 is less product-oriented than previous versions. It can be more broadly applied to public organizations as well as private; and to services (missions) as well as products. The emphasis on risk management in the revised standard provides the needed balance for weighing decisions with respect to cost, schedule, technical, safety, and regulatory compliance; so if this is not part of agency governance already, this is a good place to start, especially for large engineering projects. The Systems Engineering standard used for this analysis is from NASA's NPR 7123.1 NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements; however, those who are more familiar with ISO/IEC 26702 Systems Engineering-application and management of the systems engineering process, or SAE/EIA 632 Processes for Engineering a System will also recognize the similarities. In reality, the QMS outlined by ISO 9001 reinforces the systems engineering processes, and serves to ensure that they are adequately implemented, although most of the ISO 9001 literature emphasizes the production and process aspects of the standard. Rather than beginning with ISO 9001and getting lost in the vocabulary, it is useful to begin with the systems engineering lifecycle. Identification of stakeholder expectations, identifying solutions, creating specific product or service designs, production of the product or service, delivery to the public, and the associated management, planning, and control processes, are a familiar place to begin thinking of the overall system of identifying, designing, and competing a project or mission. Lining up this lifecycle with the ISO requirements (see Figure 1) illustrates how a quality management system is concerned with the same processes, and provides a governance and assurance function. If implemented properly, there are cost savings resulting from less rework, repair, reprocessing, failures, misplaced documents, and similar types of deficiencies1. Starting with an organization's systems engineering processes allows the organization to use their own terminology for a QMS plan, and tailor the plan to their own project or organization, so that it is more easily developed, understood, and implemented.

Shepherd, Christena C.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Application of Emulsified Zero-Valent Iron to Marine Environments

Contamination of marine waters and sediments with heavy metals and dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs) including chlorinated solvents, pesticides and PCBs pose ecological and human health risks through the contaminant's potential bioaccumulation in fish, shellfish and avian populations. The contaminants enter marine environments through improper disposal techniques and storm water run-off. Current remediation technologies for application to marine environments include costly dredging and off-site treatment of the contaminated media. Emulsified zero-valent iron (EZVI) has been proven to effectively degrade dissolved-phase and DNAPL-phase contaminants in freshwater environments on both the laboratory and field-scale level. However, the application to marine environments is only just being explored. This paper discusses the potential use of EZVI in brackish and saltwater environments, with supporting laboratory data detailed. Laboratory studies were performed in 2005 to establish the effectiveness of EZVI to degrade trichloroethylene (TCE) in saltwater. Headspace vials were setup to determine the kinetic rate of TCE degradation using EZVI in seawater. The reaction vials were analyzed by Gas Chromatographic/Flame Ionization Detection (GC/FID) for ethene production after a 48 day period using a GC/FID Purge and Trap system. Analytical results showed that EZVI was very effective at degrading TCE. The reaction by-products (ethene, acetylene and ethane) were produced at 71% of the rate in seawater as in the fresh water controls. Additionally, iron within the EZVI particles was protected from oxidation of the corrosive seawater, allowing EZVI to perform in an environment where zero-valent iron alone could not compete. Laboratory studies were also performed to establish the effectiveness of emulsified zero-valent metal (EZVM) to remove dissolved-phase cadmium and lead found in seawater. EZVM is comprised of a combination of magnesium and iron metal surrounded by the same oil/surfactant membrane used in EZVI. The removal of cadmium and lead from a seawater matrix is a unique challenge. It requires a system that is resistant to the corrosive nature of seawater while removing specific ions that are in a relatively low concentration compared to naturally occurring seawater salts. Laboratory studies conducted show greater than 99% removal of lead and 96% removal of cadmium from a seawater solution spiked at 5 mg/L that was treated with an Emulsified Zero-Valent Metal (EZVM). The cadmium and lead are removed from the solution as they transport across the emulsion membrane and plate out onto the zero-valent metal surface.

Brooks, Kathleen B.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Hypervelocity Impact Performance of Open Cell Foam Core Sandwich Panel Structures

Metallic foams are a relatively new class of materials with low density and novel physical, mechanical, thermal, electrical and acoustic properties. Although incompletely characterized, they offer comparable mechanical performance to traditional spacecraft structural materials (i.e. honeycomb sandwich panels) without detrimental through-thickness channeling cells. There are two competing types of metallic foams: open cell and closed cell. Open cell foams are considered the more promising technology due to their lower weight and higher degree of homogeneity. Leading micrometeoroid and orbital debris shields (MMOD) incorporate thin plates separated by a void space (i.e. Whipple shield). Inclusion of intermediate fabric layers, or multiple bumper plates have led to significant performance enhancements, yet these shields require additional non-ballistic mass for installation (fasteners, supports, etc.) that can consume up to 35% of the total shield weight [1]. Structural panels, such as open cell foam core sandwich panels, that are also capable of providing sufficient MMOD protection, represent a significant potential for increased efficiency in hypervelocity impact shielding from a systems perspective through a reduction in required non-ballistic mass. In this paper, the results of an extensive impact test program on aluminum foam core sandwich panels are reported. The effect of pore density, and core thickness on shielding performance have been evaluated over impact velocities ranging from 2.2 - 9.3 km/s at various angles. A number of additional tests on alternate sandwich panel configurations of comparable-weight have also been performed, including aluminum honeycomb sandwich panels (see Figure 1), Nomex honeycomb core sandwich panels, and 3D aluminum honeycomb sandwich panels. A total of 70 hypervelocity impact tests are reported, from which an empirical ballistic limit equation (BLE) has been derived. The BLE is in the standard form suitable for implementation in risk analysis software, and includes the effect of panel thickness, core density, and facesheet material properties. A comparison between the shielding performance of foam core sandwich panel structures and common MMOD shielding configurations is made for both conservative (additional 35% non-ballistic mass) and optimistic (additional mass equal to 30% of bumper mass) considerations. Suggestions to improve the shielding performance of foam core sandwich panels are made, including the use of outer mesh layers, intermediate fabric/composite layers, and varying pore density.

Ryan, Shannon↗

NASA NTRS2000

The New Millenium Program: Serving Earth and Space Sciences

NASA has exciting plans for space science and Earth observations during the next decade. A broad range of advanced spacecraft and measurement technologies will be needed to support these plans within the existing budget and schedule constraints. Many of these technology needs are common to both NASA's Office of Earth Science (OES) and Office of Space Sciences (OSS). Even though some breakthrough technologies have been identified to address these needs, project managers have traditionally been reluctant to incorporate them into flight programs because their inherent development risk. To accelerate the infusion of new technologies into its OES and OSS missions, NASA established the New Millennium Program (NMP). This program analyzes the capability needs of these enterprises, identifies candidate technologies to address these needs, incorporates advanced technology suites into validation flights, validates them in the relevant space environment, and then proactively infuses the validated technologies into future missions to enhance their capabilities while reducing their life cycle cost. The NMP employs a cross-enterprise Science Working Group, the NASA Enterprise science and technology roadmaps to define the capabilities needed by future Earth and Space science missions. Additional input from the science community is gathered through open workshops and peer-reviewed NASA Research Announcement (NRAs) for advanced measurement concepts. Technology development inputs from the technology organizations within NASA, other government agencies, federally funded research and development centers (FFRDC's), U.S. industry, and academia are sought to identify breakthrough technologies that might address these needs. This approach significantly extends NASA's technology infrastructure. To complement other flight test programs that develop or validate of individual components, the NMP places its highest priority on system-level validations of technology suites in the relevant space environment. This approach is not needed for all technologies, but it is usually essential to validate advanced system architectures or new measurement concepts. The NMP has recently revised its processes for defining candidate validation flights, and selecting technologies for these flights. The NMP now employs integrated project formulation teams, 'Which include scientists, technologists, and mission planners, to incorporate technology suites into candidate validation flights. These teams develop competing concepts, which can be rigorously evaluated prior to selection for flight. The technology providers for each concept are selected through an open, competitive, process during the project formulation phase. If their concept is selected for flight, they are incorporated into the Project Implementation Team, which develops, integrates, tests, launches, and operates the technology validation flight. Throughout the project implementation phase, the Implementation Team will document and disseminate their validation results to facilitate the infusion of their validated technologies into future OSS and OES science missions. The NMP has successfully launched its first two Deep Space flights for the OSS, and is currently implementing its first two Earth Orbiting flights for the OES. The next OSS and OES flights are currently being defined. Even though these flights are focused on specific Space Science and Earth Science themes, they are designed to validate a range of technologies that could benefit both enterprises, including advanced propulsion, communications, autonomous operations and navigation, multifunctional structures, microelectronics, and advanced instruments. Specific examples of these technologies will be provided in our presentation. The processes developed by the NMP also provide benefits across the Space and Earth Science enterprises. In particular, the extensive, nation-wide technology infrastructure developed by the NMP enhances the access to breakthrough technologies for both enterprises.

Li, Fuk K.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Variation in Predicted Orbital Lifetime Due to Launch Year

We present trends in predicted orbital lifetimes of CubeSats based not only on orbital parameters, but also launch year and the Area-to-Mass (AtM) ratio of the CubeSat. Determining the orbital lifetime variation of CubeSats in low-Earth orbit (LEO) is an important aspect of mission planning because of two competing factors: (1) the maximum orbital lifetime for orbital debris mitigation requirements, and (2) the minimum orbit duration necessary to accomplish the spacecraft mission requirements. The orbital lifetime is a function of orbital parameters, the AtM ratio of the CubeSat, and date of orbit insertion. Solar flux varies with time, peaking and declining across the 11-year solar cycle and affecting the amount of atmospheric drag on the CubeSat. This results in large variations in orbital lifetime dependent on the mission's launch date. We calculated the variation of orbital lifetime for multiple commonly used 1U to 6U CubeSat mission types across the two upcoming solar cycles. For any given AtM ratio and altitude combination in this analysis, the predicted orbital lifetime varies up to a factor of five due to orbit insertion occurring in a different year. Some examples of orbital lifetime spreads are 5 months to 2 years, and 1.5 to 7.5 years. While orbital lifetimes correlate to the solar cycle, the phasing of the maximum values varies based on a given AtM ratio and altitude combination. Different combinations of these two factors will result in the maximum predicted orbital lifetime occurring at different launch years throughout the solar cycle. Therefore, there is not a specific year within a solar cycle which can be used to calculate the maximum predicted orbital lifetime for all CubeSats. Since CubeSats are typically flown as a rideshare payload on a launch vehicle, mission planners must account for launch date variation in their orbital lifetime predictions. We recommend calculating orbital lifetime for a range of dates to allow for risk planning due to launch date slips, and other mission planning best practices.

CubeSat↗

NASA NTRS1995

SPARTNIK: Engineering catalyst for government and industry

Industrial demands for highly motivated and competent technical personnel to carry forward with the technological goals of the US has posed a significant challenge to graduating engineers. While curricula has improved and diversified over time to meet these industry demands, relevant industry experience is not always available to undergraduates. The microsatellite development program at San Jose State University (SJSU) has allowed an entire undergraduate senior class to utilize a broad range of training and education to refine their engineering skills, bringing them closer to becoming engineering professionals. Close interaction with industry mentors and manufacturers on a real world project provides a significant advantage to educators and students alike. With support from companies and government agencies, the students have designed and manufactured a microsatellite, designed to be launched into a low Earth orbit. This satellite will gather telemetry for characterizing the state of the spacecraft. This will enable the students to have a physical check on their predicted value of spacecraft subsystem performance. Additional experiments will also be undertaken during the two year lifetime, including micro-meteorite impact sensing and capturing digital color images of the Earth. This paper will detail the process whereby students designed, prototype and manufactured a small satellite in a large team environment, along with the experiments that will be performed on board. With the project's limited funds, it needed the support of many industry companies to help with technical issues and hardware acquisition. Among the many supporting companies, NASA's space shuttle small payloads program could be used for an affordable launch vehicle for the student project. The paper address these collaborations between the student project and industry support, as well as explaining the benefits to both. The paper draws conclusion on how these types of student projects can be used by industry as a feasible resource for developing small platforms for space based experiments, as well as increasing the practical experience and engineering knowledge of graduating students. These benefits to industry and universities, can lead to a close working relationship between the two. These types of projects can facilitate the development of low-cost space rated parts to be used by the industry and university projects. It can also help with the understanding and use of acceptable risk non-space rated parts reducing the cost of the spacecraft. This will lead to the development of low cost platforms for space based experiments, providing research companies an inexpensive, long duration platform to conduct their in-space experiments, while better preparing engineering undergraduates for their transition into the work force.

Prass, James D.↗