Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “post access report”

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.

118 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Electrochemistry in the Large Tunnels of Lithium Postspinel Compounds

Lithium spinels (Li MM 'O 4 ) are an important class of mixed-cation materials that have found uses in batteries, catalysis, and optics. Postspinels are a series of related framework structures with the AMM 'O 4 host composition that are formed with larger A -site cations, typically under high pressure. Postspinels have one-dimensional tunnel structures with pores that are larger than those in spinel and triangular in cross-section, but they are relatively unexplored as intercalation electrodes. While lithium postspinels have been previously found to be thermodynamically stable only at high pressures, we have identified a synthetic pathway that produces the lithium-containing materials at ambient pressure using an ion-exchange process from the corresponding sodium postspinels. Here, in this work, we report the synthesis and a survey of the electrochemical properties of 10 new lithium CaFe 2 O 4 -type postspinel compounds where M = Mn 3+ , V 3+ , Cr 3+ , Rh 3+ , Fe 2+ , Mg 2+ , Co 2+ and M ' = Ti 4+ and/or Sn 4+ . Although complete delithiation is not achieved during electrochemical cycling, many of the lithium postspinels have substantial charge storage capacity in Li battery cells owing to the ability of the large framework tunnels to accommodate more than one lithium ion per formula unit. Multiple redox couples are accessed for LiMnSnO 4 , Li 0.96 Mn 0.96 Sn 1.04-x Ti x O 4 , Li 0.96 V 0.96 Ti 1.04 O 4 , Li 0.96 Cr 0.96 Ti 1.04 O 4 , and LiFe 0.5 Ti 1.5 O 4 . Compositions with moderate or poor lithium cyclability are also discussed for comparison. Redox mechanisms and trends are identified by comparing this new redox-active framework to related spinels, ramsdellites, and 'Na 0.44 MnO 2 ' structures, and from density functional theory (DFT) electronic structures. Operando diffraction shows complex structural responses to lithium insertion and extraction in this postspinel framework. A DFT framework was proposed to identify promising lithium postspinel phases that could be accessed metastably under ambient pressure conditions and to assess their stability to lithium insertion and extraction. This work suggests that CaFe 2 O 4 -type hosts are a promising new class of lithium-ion energy storage materials.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
NASA NTRS1998

Proposed Mars Surveyor Landing Sites in Northern Meridiani Sinus, Southern Elysium Planitia, and Argyre Planitia

Our objective is to propose two landing sites that the Mars Surveyor 2001 Lander and Athena Rover could go to on Mars that should meet the safety requirements of the spacecraft landing system and optimize surface operations (chiefly driven by power and communications requirements). An additional site within Argyre Planitia, initially proposed by Parker to the Mars Surveyor Landing Site program, is also proposed for potential consideration for post-2001 missions to Mars, as it is well outside the current latitude limits for the Athena Rover. All three sites are designed to be situated as close to a diversity of geologic units within a few kilometers of the landing site so that diversity can be placed in a geologic context. This objective is very different from the Mars Pathfinder requirement to land at a site with a maximum chance for containing a diversity of rocks within a few tens of meters of the lander. That requirement was driven by the Sojourner mobility limit of a few tens of meters. It can be argued that the Athena project, with its much larger mobility capability, might actually want to avoid such a site, because placing collected samples in geologic context would be difficult. While it has been argued, both before and after the Mars Pathfinder landing, that the provenance for local blocks may be determined by orbiter spectra, primarily from the MGS TES instrument, our ability to do so has yet to be demonstrated. Indeed, several months after conclusion of the Pathfinder mission, we have yet to reach a consensus on the composition of local materials. Our primary data set for selecting a landing site within the latitude and elevation constraints of the 2001 mission is the Viking Orbiter image archive. The site must be selected to place the landing ellipse so as to avoid obvious hazards, such as steep slopes, large or numerous craters, or abundant large knobs. For this purpose, we chose a resolution limit of better than 50 m/pixel. This necessarily excludes from the present study images from current and future orbiter spacecraft, until such data does become readily available. Within each proposed region, it may be possible to identify additional sites once these data become available. Second, the fine-component thermal inertia data, should be greater than about 5 or 6 cgs Units (10(exp -3) cal/sq cm s(exp -0.5)/K). Low thermal inertias imply dusty environments, which could pose a mobility hazard. Similarly, the albedo of the site should not be particularly high, which would also suggest dusty surfaces. Low albedos are preferred, as they often coincide with low Viking red:violet ratios and indicate less dusty surfaces. Next, the Modeled Block Abundance should also not be too high or too low. Based on the Viking Lander and Mars Pathfinder experiences, percentages of blocks should be on the order of 5-25%. Too many blocks could pose a hazard to the landing and mobility. Too few blocks could also indicate a dusty surface. Primary Landing Site: Northern Meridiani Sinus (Proposed by T. J. Parker and K., S. Edgett) Vital Statistics: (1) Latitude, Longitude: 0-3 N, 350-2 W. *Elevation (Viking): about0.5-1.5 Ian. (2) Viking Orbiter Image coverage: Excellent coverage by 15 - 25 m/pixel images (orbits 709A and 410B). Possible stereo coverage in region where two orbits overlap (probably small parallax angle, as these orbits are not listed in NASA Contractor Report 3501) (3) Albedo: about .18 -.26 (4) Block Abundance: 5-26% (5)Fine-Component Thermal Inertia: 5-9 cgs units This region consists of bright deposits similar to those described by Edgett et al, that also lie within a prominent dark albedo region. These deposits are flat-lying, to such a degree that they ramp against topography rather than draping over it. This led Edgett and Parker to suggest that they may be subaqueous sediments, possibly lacustrine or marine evaporites, laid down sometime from the late Noachian to middle Hesperian (age determination pending crater counts). A contact between this material and elevated, dissected highlands to the south was identified , and is described by Edgett et al. Our desire in proposing this landing site is to sample the edge of this deposit where it has been exposed through etching, presumably eolian deflation (the deposit, though in the highlands, is itself only lightly to moderately cratered). This should enable access to in situ stratigraphy. The actual landing site will be selected where slopes are not expected to be steep, such that the rover itself should be able to traverse them and sample layered materials on the way, either up or down the slope. Perhaps due to uncertainties at this time as to the friability or meter-scale roughness of the deposit, it might make sense to place the landing ellipse on the exhumed highland surface adjacent to the deflated margin of the deposit and plan on driving to the deposit rather than landing on it and driving downslope. This should also enable imaging the margin for evidence of layering should it prove too difficult to climb. A target ellipse on the highland surface should also allow Athena access to ancient Noachian highland materials, particularly if placed near crater ejecta or an inlier of knobby material. Secondary Landing Site: Southern Elysium Planitia (Proposed by T. J. Parker) Vital Statistics: (1) Latitude, Longitude: 1.5-3.5 S, 195-198 W. (2) Elevation (Viking): -1.0 km. (3) Viking Orbiter Image coverage: Excellent coverage by 15 - 25 m/pixel images (orbit 725). Possible stereo coverage between images from beginning and end of orbit that overlap (probably small parallax angle) (4) Albedo: about .27-.28 (5) Block Abundance: 4-7% (6) Fine-Component Thermal Inertia: about 3 cgs units This region consists of eroded knobby material, probably of Noachian age, though much of the crater population has been destroyed, that is onlapped at a sharp contact by an extensive plains unit in southern Elysium Planitia that is Amazonian in age. The plains materials have been attributed to unusually low-viscosity flood lavas from fissures south of the Elysium volcanic rise, or to lacustrine materials associated with a large, Amazonian lake at the source of Marte Vallis. Parker and Schenk presented evidence in support of the latter interpretation, though they attributed the putative shore morphology to an embayment of a northern plains ocean into the southern Elysium region. Detailed examination of the margin of the deposit, showing erosion, not simply burial, of small crater rims and fluidized ejecta blankets, also points to lacustrine or marine sedimentation rather than volcanic plains burial. The plains surface exhibits a "crusty" appearance that many researchers have attributed to pressure ridges in lava flows. In a lacustrine context, they also resemble pressure ridges in desiccated evaporite deposits and salt-rimmed pools (now dry) similar in scale and morphology to spectacular, hundred meter-scale pool rims in alkaline Lake Natron, East African Rift. The eroded highland margin surface adjacent to these plains appears to be fairly smooth, even at 15 m/pixel. Isolated knob inliers are scattered from a few kilometers to several tens of "kilometers apart. Heights of the knobs have not been measured yet but, based on experience with similar features in the Pathfinder landing ellipse, are probably typically on the order of several tens of meters high and smaller, though some of the largest knobs in the region are probably up to a few hundred meters high. Two craters larger than a kilometer in diameter, with fluidized deposits, lie nearby the proposed landing site. Very high-resolution images from MOC should help to determine whether a landing site navigable by the Athena rover could be placed in this region. The space between knobs and craters is large enough to enable placement of a target landing ellipse between them but still provide access to one or more of them and to the margin of the Elysium plains material. Post-2001 Mars Surveyor Landing Site: Argyre Planitia (Proposed by T. J. Parker) Vital Statistics: (1) Latitude, Longitude: 55-56 S, 41-43 W. (2) Elevation (Viking): 1.0 km. (3) Viking Orbiter Image coverage: Excellent coverage by 40 m/pixel images (orbits 567B, 568B, and 569B). Excellent stereo coverage with large parallax angles over the entire landing site region, and much of central and southern Argyre. (4) Albedo: about .23-.24 (5) Block Abundance: No data (6) Fine-Component Thermal Inertia: No data The floors of both the Argyre and Hellas basins contain etched layered materials that are probably thick accumulations of channel or lacustrine sediments. The deposits in Hellas are much more eroded than those in Argyre, and Hellas lacks a channel outlet. Argyre is unique in that Uzboi Vallis flowed out of the basin, requiring overflow of a standing body of water within Argyre. This makes it the largest impact basin on Mars with channels both draining into it and flowing out from it. Hellas' channels may be catastrophic flood channels, whereas Argyre was fed by modest-scale valley networks, though the outlet at Uzboi Vallis was a catastrophic flood Highland craters and basins of this kind should be high-priority landing targets for missions intended to focus on the search for either prebiotic organic materials or even simple fossil microorganisms. Basins with internally-draining valley networks should be preferred over flood channels, as they could have provided the long-term influx of water favorable to the origin of life. (Catastrophic floods are not conducive to fossil preservation, due to their very short durations and high transportation energies). They also afford an opportunity to study the evolution of the planet's climate and volatiles during the period of time between the late Noachian and early Hesperian, when a drastic change from a proposed early warm, wet climate to one more closely resembling the modern environment is thought to have occurred. Large basin

Parker, T. J.↗
DOE OSTI2021

Coal-dependent Communities in Transition: Identifying Best Practices to Ensure Equitable Outcomes

The U.S. coal industry is experiencing a sharp increase in the numbers of retired and/or decommissioned coal-fired power plants across the U.S. In the years between 2010-2019, around 102 gigawatts (GW) of coal-fired generating capacity has been announced to be decommissioned, representing more than 546 coal-fired power plant units, and an additional 17 GW is planned to be decommissioned by 2025. This change in the energy production landscape presents an impact on the social, environmental, and economic prospects of coal-dependent communities. This report examined the role of communities in the coal power plant decommissioning process and provided community-identified best practices to ensure an equitable process. The experiences of four coal-dependent communities—Wise County, VA, Muskegon, MI, Anderson County, TN, and Becker, MN—are presented as case studies to understand the impacts of the decommissioning process, and associated best practices, from the communities’ perspective. The report results highlight the need to recognize that the decommissioning decision-making process must be community-based to be equitable. Each community’s input is key to the transition away from coal power because there is no one-size-fits-all development plan. In other words, each community’s trajectory through the decommissioning process—from the retirement decision-making stage to the final site redevelopment phase—is unique because each community has distinct needs and wants from the energy transition. What is best for one community may not be suited for another. Ultimately, the framework for site development and community revitalization post-decommissioning cannot be universal because each community’s profile—from a social, cultural, and economic perspective—is different. Community impacts of power plant decommissioning are not limited to job and revenue losses. Communities are likely to be impacted culturally, socially, environmentally, and have long-term health-based impacts that should be acknowledged and addressed in post-retirement plans. Commonly identified decommissioning best practices include: Early and continued engagement throughout, with a number of mediums for communication and feedback (e.g., in-person sessions, virtual meetings, written comment opportunities); Early planning of post-decommissioning projects to replace lost jobs, revenue, and economic activity; Recognition (and mitigation, if possible) of social impacts on the community due to plant closure; Transparency throughout the process, with trusted information being provided about the decommissioning process and timeline; potential impacts on the workforce, economy, and environment; and the feasibility of alternative site uses; Identification of funding sources, technical experts, and/or strategic partnerships to support decommissioning and the affected communities upfront; and, Acknowledgment of communities as stakeholders who have a role in the conversation and right to determine their futures. Three key areas for assisting coal-dependent communities affected by the energy transition: Technical assistance: assessment of site feasibility for alternative uses or to repower with new technologies; Cross-partnership engagement and collaboration: facilitate knowledge-sharing of “lessons learned” about the decommissioning process between communities and provide guidance for decision-making processes; and, Financial assistance: access to grant and/or loan programs to assist with redevelopment survey, bolster community economic security through job creation, and cover environmental clean-up costs. Technical assistance, cross-partnership engagement, and financial aid can be mobilized to help communities throughout various stages of the decommissioning process, including the retirement decision, the site reclamation phase, and eventual revitalization of the site and surrounding community.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
NASA NTRS2014

International Space Station Data Collection for Disaster Response

Natural disasters - including such events as tropical storms, earthquakes, floods, volcanic eruptions, and wildfires -effect hundreds of millions of people worldwide, and also cause billions of dollars (USD) in damage to the global economy. Remotely sensed data acquired by orbital sensor systems has emerged as a vital tool to identify the extent of damage resulting from a natural disaster, as well as providing near-real time mapping support to response efforts on the ground and humanitarian aid efforts. The International Space Station (ISS) is a unique terrestrial remote sensing platform for acquiring disaster response imagery. Unlike automated remote-sensing platforms it has a human crew; is equipped with both internal and externally-mounted remote sensing instruments; and has an inclined, low-Earth orbit that provides variable views and lighting (day and night) over 95 percent of the inhabited surface of the Earth. As such, it provides a useful complement to free-flyer based, sun-synchronous sensor systems in higher altitude polar orbits. While several nations have well-developed terrestrial remote sensing programs and assets for data collection, many developing nations do not have ready access to such resources. The International Charter, Space and Major Disasters (also known as the "International Disaster Charter", or IDC; http://www.disasterscharter.org/home) addresses this disparity. It is an agreement between agencies of several countries to provide - on a best-effort basis - remotely sensed data of natural disasters to requesting countries in support of disaster response. The lead US agency for interaction with the IDC is the United States Geological Survey (USGS); when an IDC request or "activation" is received, the USGS notifies the science teams for NASA instruments with targeting information for data collection. In the case of the ISS, the Earth Sciences and Remote Sensing (ESRS) Unit, part of the Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science Directorate and supporting the ISS Program Science Office at NASA's Johnson Space Center, receives notification from the USGS and coordinates targeting and data collection with the NASA ISS sensor teams. If data is collected, it is passed back to the USGS for posting on their Hazards Data Distribution System and made available for download. The ISS International Partners (CSA, ESA, JAXA, Roscosmos/Energia) have their own procedures for independently supporting IDC activations using their assets on ISS, and there is currently no joint coordination with NASA ISS sensor teams. Following completion of ISS assembly, NASA remote sensing assets began collecting IDC response data in May 2012. The initial NASA ISS sensor systems available to respond to IDC activations included the ISS Agricultural Camera (ISSAC), an internal multispectral visible-near infrared wavelength system mounted in the Window Observational Research Facility, or WORF; the Crew Earth Observations (CEO) Facility, where the crew collects imagery through Station windows using off-the-shelf handheld digital visible-wavelength cameras; and the Hyperspectral Imager for the Coastal Oceans (HICO), a visible to near-infrared system mounted externally on the Japan Experiment Module Exposed Facility. The ISSAC completed its primary mission and was removed from the WORF in January 2013. It was replaced by the very high resolution ISS SERVIR Environmental Research and Visualization System (ISERV) Pathfinder, a visible-wavelength digital camera, telescope, and pointing system. Since the start of IDC response by NASA sensors on the ISS in May 2012 and as of this report, there have been eighty IDC activations; NASA sensor systems have collected data for twenty-three of these events. Of the twenty-three successful data collections, five involved 2 or more ISS sensor systems responding to the same event. Data has also been collected by International Partners in response to natural disasters, most notably JAXA and Roscosmos/Energia through the Urugan program. Data collected in response to IDC activations is delivered by the ISS sensor teams to the ESRS for quality review and transfer to the USGS, where it is ingested into the Hazards Data Distribution System, or HDDS (https://hdds.usgs.gov/hdds2/; figure 1). This system allows the local agencies that issued the IDC activation request to review and download data. The data is then used to develop secondary products useful for humanitarian response such as flood maps. As of this report, approximately 1000 images collected by NASA ISS sensor systems have been downloaded from the HDDS, indicating that the ISS has assumed a valuable role in disaster response efforts. The ISS is also a unique platform in that it will have multiple users over its lifetime, and that no single remote sensing system has a permanent internal or external berth. This scheduled turnover provides for development of new remote sensing capabilities relevant to disaster response -as well as both research and applied science-and represents a significant contribution to continuance and enhancement of the NASA mission to investigate changes on our home planet.

Stefanov, William L.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Differential Processing of Low and High LET Radiation Induced DNA Damage: Investigation of Switch from ATM to ATR Signaling

The members of the phosphatidylinositol kinase-like kinase family of proteins namely ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) and ATM- and Rad3-related (ATR) are directly responsible for the maintenance of genomic integrity by mounting DDR through signaling and facilitating the recruitment of repair factors at the sites of DNA damage along with coordinating the deployment of cell cycle checkpoints to permit repair by phosphorylating Checkpoint kinase Chk1, Chk2 and p53. High LET radiation from GCR (Galactic Cosmic Rays) consisting mainly of protons and high energy and charged (HZE) particles from SPE (Solar Particle Event) pose a major health risk for astronauts on their space flight missions. The determination of these risks and the design of potential safeguards require sound knowledge of the biological consequences of lesion induction and the capability of the cells to counter them. We here strive to determine the coordination of ATM and ATR kinases at the break sites directly affecting checkpoint signaling and DNA repair and whether differential processing of breaks induced by low and high LET radiation leads to possible augmentation of swap of these damage sensors at the sites of DNA damage. Exposure of cells to IR triggers rapid autophosphorylation of serine-1981 that causes dimer dissociation and initiates monomer formation of ATM. ATM kinase activity depends on the disruption of the dimer, which allows access and phosphorylation of downstream ATM substrates like Chk2. Evidence suggests that ATM is activated by the alterations in higher-order chromatin structure although direct binding of ATM to DSB ends may be a crucial step in its activation. On the other hand, in case of ATR, RPA (replication protein A)-coated ssDNA (single-stranded DNA) generated as a result of stalled DNA replication or during processing of chromosomal lesions is crucial for the localization of ATR to sites of DNA damage in association with ATR-interacting protein (ATRIP). Although the majority of RPA-coated ssDNA is generally present only during DNA replication, ATR activation in G1 and G2-phase might still require formation of RPA-coated ssDNA, probably initiated by the MRN-CtIP complex and then extended by the Exo1- or BLM-dependent mechanisms at the sites of DSBs. Evidence accumulates that activation of ATM and ATR are oppositely regulated by the length of single stranded overhangs generated at the break sites by processes mentioned above and these stretches of single stranded overhangs hold the clue for ATM to ATR switch at broken DNA ends. We irradiated 82-6hTERT human fibroblast cells with low LET gamma-rays and high LET Fe and Si particles. Preliminary results with cells exposed to 1Gy gamma-rays show that the kinetics of pChk2-pT68 foci formation is comparable to that of gamma-H2AX although they appear to recede quicker. The number and intensity of observed foci reaches a maximum at 30 min and 60 min post IR for Chk2-pT68 and gamma-H2AX foci respectively and all Chk2-pT68 foci colocalize with gamma-H2AX foci. The kinetics of Chk1-pS345 and ATRIP are being determined. Results of Chk2-pT68 foci kinetics was also corroborated by western blot experiments, although phosphorylation was detected as early as 10 min and started receding 30 min post IR with 2Gy of gamma-rays. On the other hand, level of ATR-pS428 reached its maximum between 60 and 120 min and was maintained until the last measured time point of 4 hours post IR as determined by western blotting. Experiments performed with high LET Fe and Si particles will be reported.

Saha, Janapriya↗
DOE OSTI2022

Activating Opportunity Zones for Rapid Solar+Storage Deployment in Low Income Communities (Final Report)

Millions of Texans choose their own power provider, giving them the option to have low-cost and even renewable energy delivered through their retail electric plan. However, Texans with less disposable income often pay more for electricity and have limited access to green energy and emergency backup power even though the costs of solar and wind power are at record lows and continue to decline. The Powered for Good initiative aimed to help deliver clean, affordable, 100% renewable electricity to low-income households in Texas’s Competitive Retail Areas, where households can choose their electricity provider. Objectives: The primary goal of this project was to develop and validate one or more affordable solar+storage products (i.e., priced less than of $0.14/kWh) that Retail Electricity Providers (REP) can offer to LI households. The team achieved three objectives: 1. Investigate how to best reduce electricity costs and increase availability of emergency power for LI customers; 2. Build momentum for, and facilitate an approach to, a Texas-based pilot deployment of such solar+storage products, with a goal of greatly expanding this approach to a large segment of the LI population in Texas; 3. Provide the structural framework, finance model, and roadmap to potentially increase investment of solar+storage projects in LI communities across U.S. states when modified to meet their state-specific laws and regulations. The team evaluated the market of viable solutions for low-income Texans through interviews and focus groups with professionals and residents with lived experience. The team then piloted a low-cost retail electric product. Following the pilot, the team developed educational materials, including fact sheets, a Go Green Save Green interactive guide, and an Electricity Bill Analysis Tool. The team is now working to increase power resilience and reduce energy insecurity with micro solar and storage in partnership with local entities in the Harris County area. Key Findings: Informed by Powered for Good research, including the experiences on Texas residents and electricity system experts, the Powered for Good team developed a pilot that was implemented by Energy Well Texas, a new company formed in late 2020. The pilot featured a combination of a 100% clean residential energy offering delivered through the electrical grid plus a selection of batteries, lights and a solar panel that provided participants with varying levels of backup power. For the 8 customers who submitted previous bills, the Energy Well Texas pilot reduced energy bills by about 30%. In Houston, residents earning less than 30% of Area median Income (AMI) spend an average 13% of their income on energy or about $1,555 per year. Repeating the pilot results for these residents could yield $466 in savings per customer or about 4% of their income. While this will not end energy poverty, it is a big step toward that goal. The Powered for Good and Energy Well Texas teams are currently planning their post-pilot phase of service offerings.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Quarterly Research Performance Progress Report (Q8)

As part of Task 1, we have started by testing our modeling capabilities by reproducing isothermal DFIT simulations presented in the literature. Once satisfied with the results we have started by targeting the modeling of the DFITs at conducted at well 58-32. We have a identified a specific test (cycle 4 in zone 2) as the most interesting to be model with GEOS hydraulic fracturing module. Thus, we have first produced results with an isothermal model and adjusted model parameters to get a satisfying match with field pressure data. The, we have added thermal effects and compared the modeling results with and without thermal effects to estimate how thermal effects may influence test interpretation. Models seem to suggest that, for small volumes of fluid, thermal effects are moderate. In Task 2, we have adapted GEOS phase-field formulation to be able to simulate near-wellbore hydraulic fracture nucleation and propagation. We have devised a novel formulation that, compared to other existing ones, incorporates rock strengths. We have submitted a journal publication about our work. We are currently employing this phase-field formulation to model the experiments taking place at U Pitt and help us understand the effect of various parameters. In Task 3, we have built a model of the region surround well 16A and have started modeling stage 3 stimulation because of its simpler planar geometry. After calibrating simulation parameters using known analytical solutions, we have simulated the stage 3 stimulation using our isothermal hydraulic fracturing module, varying the permeability field, the stress conditions including different physics to get a better understanding of the numerical challenges and of the effects of varying these parameters on the simulation results. In Task 4 laboratory experimentation, a set of specialized drilling and injection tools has been customized and constructed to accommodate an inclined well with an orientation of up to 30 degrees relative to material anisotropy or principal stress axes. These inclined samples have also undergone thermal stress and hydraulic fracturing at a temperature of 190 degrees Celsius. Furthermore, both vertical and deviated sampling testing setups enable an extended analysis of post-peak pressure behaviors, facilitating post-test pressure analyses such as the G-function, step rate, and fracture reopening measurements. Thus, the key components of in-situ stress estimation can be extracted and validated through our experiment, providing a solid foundation for validating existing in-situ stress estimation theories or proposing new ones. Simultaneously, we are integrating computer vision techniques with traditional experimental fracture observation methods such as multi-overcore/slicing and water-penetration fracture observation. This combination will prove beneficial in populating the hydraulic fracture patterns database, generated under challenging EGS conditions. This approach aims to deepen our understanding of the complexities in EGS reservoirs and pave the way for future data-driven investigations. Additionally, PITT has also equipped the ELE International compression machine, which is now prepared for conducting indirect tensile and fracture toughness tests. These tests will aid in characterizing how rock fabrics influence the resulting fracture patterns. Additionally, we have completed the required personnel training and gained access to Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy (EDS) for conducting more detailed characterization and analysis of rock fabrics, as well as the examination of thermal and hydraulically induced fracture patterns. Thus, the PITT team has effectively demonstrated the capabilities of our experimental apparatuses in exploring the thermal effects, well deviation angles, material anisotropy, and operational choices (such as circulation rate, injection fluid viscosity, and injection rate) and their impact on pressure responses and fracture trajectories under the Utah FORGE conditions.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Informing New Concepts for UAS and Autonomous System Safety Management using Disaster Management and First Responder Scenarios

As emerging flight operations become more prevalent and increasingly automated and distributed, the capabilities for managing safety of vehicles and operations will also need to evolve. To address this challenge, the National Academies has envisioned an In-Time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) capability for a wide range of aviation operations including current commercial operations as well as new entrants envisioned with advanced air mobility (AAM). The suite of IASMS services, functions, and capabilities (SFCs) would be implemented in a federated approach and would address trends as well as individual operations. Through predictive modeling and data analysis, IASMS is envisioned to identify arising risks so that they can be mitigated, in-time, before a safety incident occurs. IASMS and its requisite set of SFCs must leverage a wide range of information to perform. To better understand these new needs, FSF worked with the aviation and humanitarian communities to develop and validate scenarios that include traditional aviation operations and UAS operations intermingled as they are deployed for disaster management and first responder (DMFR) situations. The three scenarios developed include: • Post Natural disaster response, such as a hurricane, involving multiple parties utilizing traditional aviation and UAS to support rescue operations, surveil damage, and locate survivors needing assistance. • Wildfire fighting in remote locations with traditional aircraft for transport and fire-retardant delivery combined with UAS for surveillance of fire locations as well as to track individual firefighter locations. • Medical Operations and AAM in Urban Environments including passenger-carrying helicopters and AAM vehicles, medical missions (such as transport of radio-pharmaceuticals), and other UAS delivery operations (such as the delivery of defibrillators). Each scenario was developed and validated by representatives with expertise in humanitarian operations, urban and rural emergency response, air traffic management, UAS operations, and traditional flight operations. The scenario definitions address roles and responsibilities of individual actors, the appropriate utilization of UAS, and the actions taken by those actors to appropriately manage risks associated with the mission and environment. The risks to aviation traffic and to people on the ground explored included potential risks arising from incompatibilities in calculating reference altitudes (eg, differing uses of AGL, MSL, barometric, or GPS-derived values), loss of command and control (C2) communications, rapid changes in weather and winds, and physical interference. For each risk, IASMS SFCs were postulated in the context of monitoring services, risk assessment capabilities, and identifying appropriate mitigation strategies. The identified SFC capabilities were envisioned from known services postulated for IASMS and for UTM. For these unique environments, IASMS SFCs are needed to address conditions such as hazardous payloads, micro-climates and urban canyons, and the need to keep uninvolved air traffic out of the area where DMFR operations are being conducted. The second phase of analysis focused on inferring the specific information needs and the SFCs for IASMS, utilizing a structure of 16 information classes to organize requirements. For each of the risks identified in the workshops, it was postulated what data sources would be necessary to monitor critical aspects of the risk (eg, surrounding air traffic, ground population, terrain, etc). to be directly measured as well as data that would be derived, which implies additional SFCs for different actors to understand what information would likely be exchanged between parties. For an IASMS to be effective, additional research is needed to develop the advanced algorithms that can address the increasingly autonomous and complex operations in differing environments and to develop means of identifying unknown risks. Looking at these scenarios highlighted a number of research issues. These include the ability to quickly "cordon off" airspace thru temporary flight restrictions (TFRs) or other means, developing clear definitions to enable automation-based algorithms for prioritizing operations, defining airspace density metrics, standardization of altitude reporting, and establishing a basis for safety data metrics definition and collection. This paper seeks to outline the development of an IASMS in the context of the DMFR scenarios and resulting demonstrations. Utilizing this contextual approach, NASA will generate recommendations for an assured safety framework for AAM operations that enables AAM operations to safely access the NAS.

In Time Aviation Safety Management System↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗