Observation of a new electronic state of CO perturbing $\bm {W\,{}^1\Pi (v=1)}$WΠ1(v=1)
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
A. N. Heays↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “V”
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Ares V: Game Changer for National Security Launch
NASA is designing the Ares V cargo launch vehicle to vastly expand exploration of the Moon begun in the Apollo program and enable the exploration of Mars and beyond. As the largest launcher in history, Ares V also represents a national asset offering unprecedented opportunities for new science, national security, and commercial missions of unmatched size and scope. The Ares V is the heavy-lift component of NASA's dual-launch architecture that will replace the current space shuttle fleet, complete the International Space Station, and establish a permanent human presence on the Moon as a stepping-stone to destinations beyond. During extensive independent and internal architecture and vehicle trade studies as part of the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS), NASA selected the Ares I crew launch vehicle and the Ares V to support future exploration. The smaller Ares I will launch the Orion crew exploration vehicle with four to six astronauts into orbit. The Ares V is designed to carry the Altair lunar lander into orbit, rendezvous with Orion, and send the mated spacecraft toward lunar orbit. The Ares V will be the largest and most powerful launch vehicle in history, providing unprecedented payload mass and volume to establish a permanent lunar outpost and explore significantly more of the lunar surface than was done during the Apollo missions. The Ares V consists of a Core Stage, two Reusable Solid Rocket Boosters (RSRBs), Earth Departure Stage (EDS), and a payload shroud. For lunar missions, the shroud would cover the Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM). The Ares V Core Stage is 33 feet in diameter and 212 feet in length, making it the largest rocket stage ever built. It is the same diameter as the Saturn V first stage, the S-IC. However, its length is about the same as the combined length of the Saturn V first and second stages. The Core Stage uses a cluster of five Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne RS-68B rocket engines, each supplying about 700,000 pounds of thrust. Its propellants are liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen. The two solid rocket boosters provide about 3.5 million pounds of thrust at liftoff. These 5.5-segment boosters are derived from the 4-segment boosters now used on the Space Shuttle, and are similar to those used in the Ares I first stage. The EDS is powered by one J-2X engine. The J-2X, which has roughly 294,000 pounds of thrust, also powers the Ares I Upper Stage. It is derived from the J-2 that powered the Saturn V second and third stages. The EDS performs two functions. Its initial suborbital burns will place the lunar lander into a stable Earth orbit. After the Orion crew vehicle, launched separately on an Ares I, docks with the lander/EDS stack, EDS will ignite a second time to put the combined 65-metric ton vehicle into a lunar transfer orbit. When it stands on the launch pad at Kennedy Space Center late in the next decade, the Ares V stack will be approximately 381 feet tall and have a gross liftoff mass of 8.1 million pounds. The current point-of-departure design exceeds Saturn V s mass capability by approximately 40 percent. Using the current payload shroud design, Ares V can carry 315,000 pounds to 29-degree low Earth orbit (LEO) or 77,000 pounds to a geosynchronous orbit. Another unique aspect of the Ares V is the 33-foot-diameter payload shroud, which encloses approximately 30,400 cubic feet of usable volume. A larger hypothetical shroud for encapsulating larger payloads has been studied. While Ares V makes possible larger payload masses and volumes, it may alternately make possible more cost-effective mission design if the relevant payload communities are willing to consider an alternative to the existing approach that has driven them to employ complexity to solve current launch vehicle mass and volume constraints. By using Ares V s mass and volume capabilities as margin, payload designers stand to reduce development risk and cost. Significant progress has been made on the Ares V to support a plaed fiscal 2011 authority-to-proceed (ATP) milestone. The Ares V team is actively reaching out to external organizations during this early concept phase to ensure that the Ares V vehicle can be leveraged for national security, science, and commercial development needs. This presentation will discuss Ares V vehicle configuration, the path to the current concept, accomplishments to date, and potential payload utilization opportunities.
Sumrall, Phil↗
Adaptive Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Reduces Risk of Software Impacting Safety in Artemis Missions
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is asking more of its human spaceflight programs than ever before through the collective Artemis Missions. The NASA Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Program contributes to NASA’s human spaceflight goals by providing IV&V services for NASA’s critical spacecraft and ground software. The IV&V Program is tasked with providing assurance from both individual and integrated mission software perspectives. The Artemis IV&V organization is actively supporting six distinct development efforts: Orion, the Space Launch System (SLS), Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Mission Control Center (MCC), the Lunar Gateway, and the Human Landing System (HLS), representing a wide diversity of developer organizations, management structures, and development approaches. With much of this extremely complex flight and ground software being essential to human safety both on the ground and in space, Artemis IV&V is likewise challenged to provide more value-added assurance to future Artemis missions within a constrained budget. To meet this challenge, Artemis IV&V employs a variety of novel and evolving “Adaptive IV&V” approaches for planning and executing IV&V analysis to increase both the efficiency and effectiveness of the IV&V Program’s assurance activities, and to address the difficulties imposed by assuring software for a large, highly integrated, multi-mission enterprise managed and executed by physically and organizationally distinct programs. Instilling agile principles like iterative planning cycles, self-organizing teams, and regular retrospectives, into IV&V planning and execution has led to a more rapid turnaround of a minimum viable assurance product and allowed for increased alignment of assurance activities with development progress. Adopting an assurance case methodology has led to greater consistency and clearer communication of assurance design and provided a foundation for long-term maintenance of assurance plans, products, and results across missions. The IV&V-developed Assurance / Safety Case Analytical Network (A-SCAN) framework and tool has enabled the quantification and tracking of system/software risk and confidence. These confidence measures provide a means to repeatedly express the impact of planned and completed assurance work and the remaining residual risk. Applied as part of a “Follow-the-Risk” organizational ethos, this allows consistent rightsizing of analysis rigor and intensity commensurate with the perceived risk of defects, as well as appropriate targeting of the highest risk areas of the software to find safety issues before they can manifest. Finally, the development of the IV&V Advanced Risk Reduction Integrated Software Test and Operations Tri-program Lightweight Environment (ARRISTOTLE), an integrated software-only simulation of Orion, SLS, and EGS systems, has made it possible to independently test integrated pad and flight scenarios and inject faults to observe how the Artemis multi-program, mission software behaves in degraded modes and in response to hazards. These adaptive IV&V investments have enabled Artemis IV&V to become more efficient and effective in IV&V planning and execution and respond more readily to changes in the risk landscape, increasing the breadth and depth of risk reduction possible within the available resources. Residual risk tracking allows IV&V to communicate more effectively with stakeholders, both internal and external at all levels, and inform key decision-making personnel. This evolving assurance design approach provides IV&V surety that work is performed in the highest risk, most value-added areas of the software, to keep our astronauts and ground crews safe and ensure mission success.
Gerek A Whitman↗
Adaptive Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Reduces Risk of Software Impacting Safety in Artemis Missions
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is asking more of its human spaceflight programs than ever before through the collective Artemis Missions. The NASA Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Program contributes to NASA’s human spaceflight goals by providing IV&V services for NASA’s critical spacecraft and ground software. The IV&V Program is tasked with providing assurance from both individual and integrated mission software perspectives. The Artemis IV&V organization is actively supporting six distinct development efforts: Orion, the Space Launch System (SLS), Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Mission Control Center (MCC), the Lunar Gateway, and the Human Landing System (HLS), representing a wide diversity of developer organizations, management structures, and development approaches. With much of this extremely complex flight and ground software being essential to human safety both on the ground and in space, Artemis IV&V is likewise challenged to provide more value-added assurance to future Artemis missions within a constrained budget. To meet this challenge, Artemis IV&V employs a variety of novel and evolving “Adaptive IV&V” approaches for planning and executing IV&V analysis to increase both the efficiency and effectiveness of the IV&V Program’s assurance activities, and to address the difficulties imposed by assuring software for a large, highly integrated, multi-mission enterprise managed and executed by physically and organizationally distinct programs. Instilling agile principles like iterative planning cycles, self-organizing teams, and regular retrospectives, into IV&V planning and execution has led to a more rapid turnaround of a minimum viable assurance product and allowed for increased alignment of assurance activities with development progress. Adopting an assurance case methodology has led to greater consistency and clearer communication of assurance design and provided a foundation for long-term maintenance of assurance plans, products, and results across missions. The IV&V-developed Assurance / Safety Case Analytical Network (A-SCAN) framework and tool has enabled the quantification and tracking of system/software risk and confidence. These confidence measures provide a means to repeatedly express the impact of planned and completed assurance work and the remaining residual risk. Applied as part of a “Follow-the-Risk” organizational ethos, this allows consistent rightsizing of analysis rigor and intensity commensurate with the perceived risk of defects, as well as appropriate targeting of the highest risk areas of the software to find safety issues before they can manifest. Finally, the development of the IV&V Advanced Risk Reduction Integrated Software Test and Operations Tri-program Lightweight Environment (ARRISTOTLE), an integrated software-only simulation of Orion, SLS, and EGS systems, has made it possible to independently test integrated pad and flight scenarios and inject faults to observe how the Artemis multi-program, mission software behaves in degraded modes and in response to hazards. These adaptive IV&V investments have enabled Artemis IV&V to become more efficient and effective in IV&V planning and execution and respond more readily to changes in the risk landscape, increasing the breadth and depth of risk reduction possible within the available resources. Residual risk tracking allows IV&V to communicate more effectively with stakeholders, both internal and external at all levels, and inform key decision-making personnel. This evolving assurance design approach provides IV&V surety that work is performed in the highest risk, most value-added areas of the software, to keep our astronauts and ground crews safe and ensure mission success.
Gerek Whitman↗
Interpreting Methanol v(sub 2)-Band Emission in Comets Using Empirical Fluorescence g-Factors
For many years we have been developing the ability, through high-resolution spectroscopy targeting ro-vibrational emission in the approximately 3 - 5 micrometer region, to quantify a suite of (approximately 10) parent volatiles in comets using quantum mechanical fluorescence models. Our efforts are ongoing and our latest includes methanol (CH3OH). This is unique among traditionally targeted species in having lacked sufficiently robust models for its symmetric (v(sub 3) band) and asymmetric (v(sub 2) and v(sub 9) bands) C-H3 stretching modes, required to provide accurate predicted intensities for individual spectral lines and hence rotational temperatures and production rates. This has provided the driver for undertaking a detailed empirical study of line intensities, and has led to substantial progress regarding our ability to interpret CH3OH in comets. The present study concentrates on the spectral region from approximately 2970 - 3010 per centimeter (3.367 - 3.322 micrometer), which is dominated by emission in the (v(sub 7) band of C2H6 and the v(sub 2) band of CH3OH, with minor contributions from CH3OH (v(sub 9) band), CH4 (v(sub 3)), and OH prompt emissions (v(sub 1) and v(sub 2)- v(sub 1)). Based on laboratory jet-cooled spectra (at a rotational temperature near 20 K)[1], we incorporated approximately 100 lines of the CH3OH v(sub 2) band, having known frequencies and lower state rotational energies, into our model. Line intensities were determined through comparison with several comets we observed with NIRSPEC at Keck 2, after removal of continuum and additional molecular emissions and correcting for atmospheric extinction. In addition to the above spectral region, NIRSPEC allows simultaneous sampling of the CH3OH v(sub 3) band (centered at 2844 per centimeter, or 3.516 micrometers and several hot bands of H2O in the approximately 2.85 - 2.9 micrometer region, at a nominal spectral resolving power of approximately 25,000 [2]. Empirical g-factors for v(sub 2) lines were based on the production rate as determined from the v(sub 3) Q-branch intensity; application to comets spanning a range of rotational temperatures (approximately 50 - 90 K) will be reported. This work represents an extension of that presented for comet 21P/Giacobini-Zinner at the 2010 Division for Planetary Sciences meeting [3]. Our empirical study also allows for quantifying CH3OH in comets using IR spectrometers for which the v(sub 3) and v(sub 2) bands are not sampled simultaneously, for example CSHELL/NASA IRTF or CRIRES/VLT.
DiSanti, Michael↗
Ares V: Enabling Unprecedented Payloads for Space in the 21st Century
Numerous technical and programmatic studies since the U.S. space program began in the 1960s has emphasized the need for a heavy lift capability for exploration beyond low Earth orbit (LEO). The Saturn V once embodied that capability until it was retired. Now the Ares V cargo launch vehicle (CaLV) promises to restore and improve on that capability, providing unprecedented opportunities for human and robotic exploration, science, national security and commercial uses. This paper provides an overview of the capabilities of Ares V, both as an opportunity for payloads of increased mass and/or volume, and as a means of reducing risk in the payload design process. The Ares V is part of NASA s Constellation Program, which also includes the Ares I crew launch vehicle (CLV), Orion crew exploration vehicle (CEV), and Altair lunar lander. This architecture is designed to carry out the national space policy goals of completing the International Space Station (ISS), retiring the Space Shuttle fleet, and expanding human exploration beyond LEO. The Ares V is designed to loft upper stages and/or cargo, such as the Altair lander, into LEO. The Ares I is designed to put Orion into LEO with a crew of up to four for rendezvous with the ISS or with the Ares V Earth departure stage for journeys to the Moon. While retaining the goals of heritage hardware and commonality, the Ares V configuration continues to be refined through a series of internal trades. The current reference configuration was recommended by the Ares Projects and approved by the Constellation Program during the Lunar Capabilities Concept Review (LCCR) June 2008. The reference configuration defines the Ares V as 381 feet (116m) tall with a gross lift-off mass (GLOM) of 8.1 million pounds (3,704.5 mT). Its first stage will generate 11 million pounds of sea-level liftoff thrust. It will be capable of launching 413,800 pounds (187.7 mT) to LEO, 138,500 pounds (63 mT) direct to the Moon or 156,700 pounds (71.1 mT) in its dual-launch architecture role with Ares I. It could also launch 123,100 pounds (55.8 mT) to Sun-Earth L2. Assessment of astronomy payload requirements since Spring 2008 has indicated that Ares V has the potential to support a range of payloads and missions. Some of these missions were impossible in the absence of Ares V s capabilities. Collaborative design/architecture inputs, exchanges, and analyses have already begun between scientists and payload developers. A 2008 study by a National Research Council (NRC) panel, as well as analyses presented by astronomers and planetary scientists at two weekend conferences in 2008, support the position that Ares V has benefit to a broad range of planetary and astronomy missions. This early dialogue with Ares V engineers is permitting the greatest opportunity for payload/transportation/mission synergy and with the least financial impact to Ares V development. In addition, independent analyses suggest that Ares V has the opportunity to enable more cost-effective mission design. 1
Creech, Steve↗
Development of Methodologies for IV and V of Neural Networks
Non-deterministic systems often rely upon neural network (NN) technology to "lean" to manage flight systems under controlled conditions using carefully chosen training sets. How can these adaptive systems be certified to ensure that they will become increasingly efficient and behave appropriately in real-time situations? The bulk of Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) research of non-deterministic software control systems such as Adaptive Flight Controllers (AFC's) addresses NNs in well-behaved and constrained environments such as simulations and strict process control. However, neither substantive research, nor effective IV&V techniques have been found to address AFC's learning in real-time and adapting to live flight conditions. Adaptive flight control systems offer good extensibility into commercial aviation as well as military aviation and transportation. Consequently, this area of IV&V represents an area of growing interest and urgency. ISR proposes to further the current body of knowledge to meet two objectives: Research the current IV&V methods and assess where these methods may be applied toward a methodology for the V&V of Neural Network; and identify effective methods for IV&V of NNs that learn in real-time, including developing a prototype test bed for IV&V of AFC's. Currently. no practical method exists. lSR will meet these objectives through the tasks identified and described below. First, ISR will conduct a literature review of current IV&V technology. TO do this, ISR will collect the existing body of research on IV&V of non-deterministic systems and neural network. ISR will also develop the framework for disseminating this information through specialized training. This effort will focus on developing NASA's capability to conduct IV&V of neural network systems and to provide training to meet the increasing need for IV&V expertise in such systems.
Taylor, Brian↗
Ares V: A National Launch Asset for the 21st Century
NASA is designing the Ares V as the cargo launch vehicle to carry NASA's exploration plans into the 21st century. The Ares V is the heavy-lift component of NASA's dual-launch architecture that will replace the current space shuttle fleet, complete the International Space Station, and establish a permanent human presence on the Moon as a stepping stone to destinations beyond. During extensive independent and internal architecture and vehicle trade studies as part of the Exploration Systems Architecture Study, NASA selected the Ares I crew launch vehicle and the Ares V to support future exploration. The smaller Ares I will launch the Orion crew exploration vehicle with four to six astronauts into orbit. The Ares V is designed to carry the Altair lunar lander into orbit, rendezvous with Orion, and send the mated spacecraft toward lunar orbit. The Ares V will be the largest and most powerful launch vehicle in history, providing unprecedented payload mass and volume to establish a permanent lunar outpost and explore significantly more of the lunar surface than was done during the Apollo missions. The Ares V also represents a national asset offering opportunities for new science, national security, and commercial missions of unmatched size and scope. Using the dual-launch Earth Orbit Rendezvous approach, the Ares I and Ares V together will be able to inject roughly 57percent more mass to the Moon than the Apollo-era Saturn V. Ares V alone will be able to send nearly 414,000 pounds into low Earth orbit (LEO) or more than 138,000 pounds directly to the Moon, compared with 262,000 pounds and 99,000 pounds, respectively for the Saturn V. Significant progress has been made on the Ares V to support a planned fiscal 2011 authority-to-proceed (ATP) milestone. This paper discusses recent progress on the Ares V and planned future activities.
Sumrall, Phil↗
Geological Map of the Fredegonade (V-57) Quadrangle, Venus: Status Report
The Fredegonde quadrangle (V-57; 50-75degS, 60-120degE, Fig. 1) corresponds to the northeastern edge of Lada Terra and covers a broad area of the topographic province of midlands (0-2 km above MPR [1,2]). This province is most abundant on Venus and displays a wide variety of units and structures [3-11]. The sequence of events that formed the characteristic features of the midlands is crucially important in understanding of the timing and modes of evolution of this topographic province. Topographically, the Fredegonde quadrangle is within a transition zone between the elevated portion of Lada Terra to the west (Quetzalpetlatl-Boala Coronae rise, approx.3.5 km) and the lowland of Aino Planitia to the north and northeast (approx.-0.5 km). This transition is one of the key features of the V-57 quadrangle. In this respect the quadrangle resembles the region of V-4 quadrangle [12] that shows transition between the midlands and the lowlands of Atalanta Planitia. One of the main goals of our mapping within the V-57 quadrangle is comparison of this region with the other transitional topographic zones such as quadrangles V-4 and V-3 [13]. The most prominent features in the V-57 quadrangle are linear deformational zones of grooves and large coronae. The zones characterize the central and NW portions of the map area and represent broad (up to 100s of km wide) ridges that are 100s of m high. Morphologically and topographically, these zones are almost identical to the groove belt/corona complexes at the western edge of Atalanta Planitia [12]. Within the Fredegonde area, however, the zones are oriented at high angles to the general trend of elongated Aino Planitia, whereas within the V-4 quadrangle they are parallel to the edge of Atalanta Planitia. Relatively small (100s of km across, 100s of m deep) equidimensional basins occur between the corona-groove-chains in the area of V-57 quadrangle. These basins are similar to those that populate the area of the V-3 quadrangle [13]. Broad regional plains cover the surface of the basins in both regions. In contrast to Fredegonde, the area of the V-3 quadrangle displays a greater diversity of units and features [13]. Here we describe units that make up the surface within the V-57 quadrangle and present a summary of our geological map that shows the areal distribution of the major groups of units.
Ivanov, M. A.↗
Effect of vanadium on phase composition and hard magnetic properties of as-solidified and heat-treated Sm–Fe–(Ti,V) alloys
Although the intrinsic magnetic properties of Ti-stabilized Sm(Fe,Co,Ti) 12 compounds exhibit potential of excellent rare-earth-lean permanent magnets, it has been much easier to realize large coercivities with the isostructural compounds stabilized by either V or by certain combinations of Ti and V. To elucidate the influence of V on the microstructure and magnetic properties, a series of Sm 8.1 Fe 78.4 (Ti 1-x V x ) 13.5 alloys was studied after arc-melting and annealing at 850–1000 °C. The alloys were found to fall into three groups. For x ≤ 0.2, solidification generates mostly the Sm(Fe,Ti,V) 12 phase, but annealing converts at least part of it into the non-magnetic Sm(Fe,Ti,V) 11 and the magnetically soft Sm 2 (Fe,Ti,V) 17 phases. For 0.2 < x < 0.6, the alloys solidify into a near-equilibrium mixture of the Sm(Fe,Ti,V) 12 , TiFe 2 and Sm-rich phases. For x ≥ 0.6, solidification generates large fractions of α-Fe solid solution and Sm-rich phases; an annealing step is necessary to complete the formation of Sm(Fe,Ti,V) 12 phase. Also, for x ≥ 0.6 the temperature below which the Sm(Fe,Ti,V) 12 phase is stable decreases with x, as does the fraction of this phase formed during solidification. Here, the differences between these three groups of alloys suggest different strategies for developing hard magnetic properties, with the likelihood of a success increasing with increasing x. For x ≥ 0.6, heat treatment alone is demonstrated to generate a microstructure of micron and submicron Sm(Fe,Ti 1-x V x ) 12 crystallites separated by a Sm-rich phase and exhibiting a coercivity with values up to 3.5 and 5.7 kOe for x = 0.8 and 1.0, respectively.
36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
Experimental Constraints on the Partitioning and Valence of V and Cr in Garnet and Coexisting Glass
A series of experiments with garnet and coexisting melt have been carried out across a range of oxygen fugacities (near hematite-magnetite (HM) to below the iron-wustite (IW) buffers) at 1.7 GPa to study the partitioning and valence of Cr and V in both phases. Experiments were carried out in a non end loaded piston cylinder apparatus, and the run products were analyzed with electron microprobe and xray absorption near edge structure (XANES) analysis at beamline 13-ID at the Advanced Photon Source of Argonne National Lab. The valence of vanadium and chromium were determined using the position and intensity of the Ka pre-edge peaks, calibrated on a series of Cr and Vbearing standard glasses. This technique has been applied to V and Cr in glasses and V in spinels previously, and in these isotropic phases there are no orientational effects on the XANES spectra (Righter et al., 2006, Amer. Mineral. 91, 1643-1656). We also now demonstrate this to be true for V and Cr in garnet. Also, previous work has shown that V has a higher valence in the glass (or melt) than in the coexisting spinel. This is also true for V in garnet-glass pairs in this study. Vanadium valence in garnets varies from 2.7 below the IW buffer to 3.7 near HM, and for coexisting glass it varies from 3.2 to 4.3. Vanadium valence measured in some natural garnets from mantle localities indicates V in the more reduced range at 2.5. Comparisons will be made between fO2 estimated from V valence and other methods for garnet-bearing mantle samples. In contrast, Cr valence measured in garnet and coexisting glass for all experimental and natural samples is 2.9- 3.0, suggesting that the valence of Cr does not vary within either phase across a large fO2 range. These results demonstrate that while V varies from 2+ to 3+ to 4+ in garnet-melt systems, Cr does not, and this will ultimately affect the partitioning behavior of these two elements in natural systems. Garnet/melt D(Cr) are between 12 and 17 across this range of fO2, whereas D(V) has the highest partition coefficient approx.3, near the IW buffer where the valence of V is almost entirely 3+.
Righter, K.↗
Ares V: Shifting the Payload Design Paradigm
NASA's Ares V heavy-lift cargo launch vehicle is being designed send more crew and cargo to more places on the lunar surface than the 1960s-era Apollo program and provide ongoing support to a permanent lunar outpost. In addition to that role, however, its unmatched mass and volume capability represent a global asset for exploration, science, and commerce. The Ares V also is an enabler of a large class of space missions not thought possible by scientists and engineers since the Saturn V program ended over 30 years ago. Compared to current systems, it will offer approximately 5 times the mass and volume to most orbits and locations. This should allow prospective mission planners to build robust payloads with margins that are 3 to 5 times the industry norm. The space inside the planned payload shroud has enough usable volume to launch the volumetric equivalent of approximately 10 Apollo Lunar Excursion Modules or approximately 5 equivalent Hubble Space Telescopes. This mass and volume capability to Low Earth Orbit enables a host of new scientific and observation platforms, such as telescopes, satellites, planetary and solar missions, as well as being able to provide the lift for future large in-space infrastructure missions, such as space based power and mining, Earth asteroid defense, propellant depots, etc. The Ares V team is engaging the potential payload community now, 2-3 years before System Requirements Review, in order to better understand the potential limitations and or additional requirements that could be added to the Ares V from the mission planning community. If a viable mission is determined and added to the Ares V as a design case, tradeoffs will be conducted to determine if other mission design requirements can be included in the system. Multiple shroud options for the Ares V have been analyzed to identify their impact on performance. Ares V is in a conceptual design stage prior to a formal design phase. The initial concept for the cargo launch vehicle (CaLV) that would later be dubbed "Ares V" was produced by the Exploration Systems Architecture Study in 2005. Since then, it has evolved through hundreds of concepts. The current point-of-departure (POD) concept was approved during the Lunar Capabilities Concept Review/Ares V Mission Concept Review in June 2008. This reference concept serves as a starting point for a renewed set of design trades and detailed analysis into its interaction with the other components of the Constellation architecture and existing launch infrastructure. This paper will discuss the Ares V design evolution, the most recent point-of-departure concept, and its capabilities to support future science missions.
Summrall, Phil↗
IV&V Assurance Case Design for Artemis II
As human-rated missions like those in NASA’s Artemis program continue to grow in both size and complexity, and the role of software in achieving mission objectives expands dramatically, NASA’s Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Teams face evolving challenges in assuring the safety and performance of the safety- and mission-critical embedded software that is essential to landing astronauts on the surface of the Moon by 2024. Key among these challenges is IV&V’s desire to present a cohesive, integrated assurance statement to its stakeholders that encapsulates and summarizes our assurance positions across the integrated Artemis systems and their combined role in support of a safe and successful flight. In order to meet this challenge, the IV&V Teams have begun a transition to using formal assurance case concepts and documentation in the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) to build an argument in support of software assurance. IV&V recognizes significant benefits to the logical argumentation structure provided by assurance cases and GSN over our current practices for documenting and managing assurance claims. In order to reap these benefits, IV&V is integrating the use of assurance case concepts with our paradigm of follow-the-risk capability based assurance. Because of this, assurance cases created and used by IV&V are distinct from the sort of assurance case created by a development project or embedded software assurance organization. IV&V’s assurance cases depend much less upon standards and regulations, and more on evidence captured by IV&V regarding the environment, requirements, design, and implementation. IV&V constructs an independent network of claims based on an independent decomposition of arguments. Based upon the risk posture of these claims and their associated software and software artifacts, IV&V then develops and executes engineering analyses and testing, which provide evidence to either support or refute the claim. This emerging risk-informed assurance case methodology is being put into practice as IV&V plans for support of the Artemis II mission, the first flight of the Orion capsule and Space Launch System with astronauts on board.
Gerek Whitman↗
IV&V Assurance Case Design for Artemis II
As human-rated missions like those in NASA's Artemis program continue to grow in both size and complexity, and the role of software in achieving mission objectives expands dramatically, NASA's Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Teams face evolving challenges in assuring the safety and performance of the safety- and mission-critical embedded software that is essential to landing astronauts on the surface of the Moon by 2024. Key among these challenges is IV&V's desire to present a cohesive, integrated assurance statement to its stakeholders that encapsulates and summarizes our assurance positions across the integrated Artemis systems and their combined role in support of a safe and successful flight. In order to meet this challenge, the IV&V Teams have begun a transition to using formal assurance case concepts and documentation in the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) to build an argument in support of software assurance. IV&V recognizes significant benefits to the logical argumentation structure provided by assurance cases and GSN over our current practices for documenting and managing assurance claims. In order to reap these benefits, IV&V is integrating the use of assurance case concepts with our paradigm of follow-the-risk capability based assurance. Because of this, assurance cases created and used by IV&V are distinct from the sort of assurance case created by a development project or embedded software assurance organization. IV&V's assurance cases depend much less upon standards and regulations, and more on evidence captured by IV&V regarding the environment, requirements, design, and implementation. IV&V constructs an independent network of claims based on an independent decomposition of arguments. Based upon the risk posture of these claims and their associated software and software artifacts, IV&V then develops and executes engineering analyses and testing, which provide evidence to either support or refute the claim. This emerging risk-informed assurance case methodology is being put into practice as IV&V plans for support of the Artemis II mission, the first flight of the Orion capsule and Space Launch System with astronauts on board.
Whitman, Gerek↗
Phosphate-modulated transformation of Sb(V)-bearing ferrihydrite under microbial iron- and sulfate-reducing conditions
Antimony (Sb) is a toxic metalloid that poses environmental risks in terrestrial and aquatic systems. The fate of the Sb(V) oxyanion, Sb(OH) 6 − , is governed by complex biogeochemical processes, including immobilization by ferric (Fe(III)) oxides, reduction by sulfide, and the less-explored competitive adsorption with other anions such as phosphate (PO 4 3− ). Here, this study investigates the interplay between such mechanisms in controlling the behavior of Sb(V) associated with ferrihydrite (Fh) under Fe(III)- and sulfate-reducing conditions, with a particular emphasis on the role of phosphate in influencing Sb(V) mobility and transformation. Anoxic reactors that contained Sb(V)-coprecipitated Fh, varying PO 4 3− concentrations (0, 0.2, and 2 mM), and sulfate, were inoculated with a microbial community sourced from Sb-contaminated soil. Additionally, abiotic reactors with either Sb(V)-adsorbed or Sb(V)-coprecipitated Fh and different PO 4 3− loadings (0–100 mM) were created to investigate the competitive adsorption mechanisms in the absence of microbial activity. Results from the abiotic reactors suggest that Sb(V) is likely incorporated into the Fh structure, with only minor amounts remaining surface-bound and extractable by PO 4 3− . In the biotic reactors, microbial Fe(III) and sulfate reduction were more extensive in the presence of PO 4 3− . At 0.2 mM PO 4 3− , microbial activity transformed Fh into siderite and led to the complete reduction of Sb(V) to Sb(III) as stibnite (Sb 2 S 3 ). At 2 mM PO 4 3− , the greater coverage by PO 4 3− stabilized Fh and decreased the extent of both Fe(III) and Sb(V) reduction, and shifted the reduced products to mackinawite and Sb(III) adsorbed onto Fh, in addition to stibnite formation. This study demonstrates that while PO 4 3− may not directly compete with Sb(V) for sorption sites, it can influence Sb mobility in Fe(III)- and sulfate-reducing environments by enhancing microbial activity and altering the mineralization pathways.
Microbial Fe(III) and sulfate reduction↗
Ares V: New Opportunities for Scientific Payloads
What if scientists and payload planners had access to three to five times the volume and five to nine times the mass provided by today's launch vehicles? This simple question can lead to numerous exciting possibilities, all involving NASA's new Ares V cargo launch vehicle now on the drawing board. Multiple scientific fields and payload designers have that opportunity with the Ares V cargo launch vehicle, being developed at NASA as the heavy-lift component of the U.S. Space Exploration Policy. When the Ares V begins flying late next decade, its capabilities will significantly exceed the 1960s-era Saturn V or the current Space Shuttle, while it benefits from their engineering, manufacturing, and infrastructure heritage. It will send more crew and cargo to more places on the lunar surface than Apollo and provide ongoing support to a permanent lunar outpost. Moreover, it will restore a strategic heavy-lift U.S. asset, which can support human and robotic exploration and scientific ventures for decades to come. Assessment of astronomy payload requirements since Spring 2008 has indicated that Ares V has the potential to support a range of payloads and missions. Some of these missions were impossible in the absence of Ares V's capabilities. Collaborative design/architecture inputs, exchanges, and analyses have already begun between scientists and payload developers. A 2008 study by a National Research Council (NRC) panel, as well as analyses presented by astronomers and planetary scientists at two weekend conferences in 2008, support the position that Ares V has benefit to a broad range of planetary and astronomy missions. This early dialogue with Ares V engineers is permitting the greatest opportunity for payload/transportation/mission synergy and the least financial impact to Ares V development. In addition, independent analyses suggest that Ares V has the opportunity to enable more cost-effective mission design.
Creech, Steve↗
Tight Fits for Americas Next Moon Rocket, Ares V
America has begun the development of a new heavy lift rocket which will enable humans to return to the moon and reach even farther destinations. Five decades ago, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration designed a system (called Saturn/Apollo) to carry men to the moon and back; the rocket which boosted them to the moon was the Saturn V. Saturn V was huge relative to contemporary rockets and is still the largest rocket ever launched. The new moon rocket is called Ares V. It will insert 40% more payload into low earth orbit than Saturn V; and after docking with the crew spacecraft, it will insert 50% more payload onto the translunar trajectory than Saturn V. The current design of Ares V calls for two liquid-fueled stages and 2 "strap-on" solid rockets. The solid rockets are extended-length versions of the solid rockets used on the Shuttle. The diameter of the liquid stages is at least as large as the first stage of the Saturn V; the height of the lower liquid stage (called the core stage) is longer than the external tank of the Shuttle. Huge rockets require huge infrastructure and, during the Saturn/Apollo era, America invested significantly in manufacturing, assembly and launch facilities which are still in use today. Since the Saturn/Apollo era, America has invested in additional infrastructure for the Shuttle program. Ares V must utilize this existing infrastructure, with reasonable modifications. Building a rocket with 50% more capability in the same buildings, testing it in the same test stands, shipping on the same canals under the same bridges, assembling it in the same building, rolling it to the pad on the same crawler, and launching it from the same launch pad is an engineering and logistics challenge which goes hand-in-hand with designing the structure, tanks, turbines, engines, software, etc. necessary to carry such a large payload to earth orbit and to the moon. This paper quantitatively discusses the significant "tight fits" that are constraining Ares V. The engineers designing and building the infrastructure for the Saturn/Apollo program usually added margins and growth capability; sometimes the size of existing facilities (such as the width of a draw bridge) was not a constraint. Ares V may utilize the "extra" space in the existing facilities and expand other tight fits. Some of the tight fits cannot be overcome without great expense; raising the roof on the Vertical Assembly Building for example. Other tight fits are easily overcome; the transporter at the manufacturing facility for the core stage can pass under low ceilings and later over a dike (without dragging the middle) by retracting or extending the struts which support the stage. Tight fits discussed in this paper include manufacturing (jigs, widths, heights, and local transportation), testing (test stand sizes and crane capability), transportation to the test stands and the launch site (barge, waterway, and rail), assembly (VAB internal dimensions and door size), roll-out limits, and launch pad size.
Jaap, John↗