Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “segmental refinement”

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.

147 records · Page 9

Constraints on neutrino oscillation parameters with the NOvA experiment

NOvA is a long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiment, which consists of two finely-segmented liquid-scintillator detectors operating 14 mrad off-axis from the NuMI muon neutrino beam. With an 810 km baseline, the combined measurements of muon neutrino disappearance and electron neutrino appearance allow the determination of neutrino oscillation unknowns, namely the mass hierarchy, the octant of the largest neutrino mixing angle, and the CP violating phase. In this dissertation I present the joint analysis of $\nu_\mu \to \nu_\mu$ and $\nu_\mu \to \nu_e$ oscillation data with an exposure of $8.85\times10^{20}$ protons on target on the 14 kton detector. It includes the estimation of neutrino energy distributions in the far detector using near detector data constraints, details of the implementation of the simultaneous fit of \numu and \nue samples, and the effect of systematic uncertainties on the measurement of oscillation parameters. I also discuss NOvA's projected sensiti vity to determine the mass hierarchy and discover CP violation in future analyses with increased exposure and the addition of antineutrino datasets. With 66 electron neutrino and 126 muon neutrino candidates, the best fit to the data corresponds to the normal mass hierarchy, $\Delta m^2_{32}=2.44\times 10^{-3} eV^2/c^4$, $\sin^2 \theta_{23}=0.56$, and $\delta_{CP} = 1.21\pi$, with the allowed regions $\Delta m^2_{32} \in [2.37,2.52]\times 10^{-3} eV^2/c^4$, $\sin^2 \theta_{23} \in [0.43,0.51] \cup [0.52,0.60]$ and $\delta_{CP} \in [0,0.12\pi] \cup [0.91\pi,2\pi]$ at the 68.3\% C.L. Our data disfavor maximal mixing by 0.8$\sigma$, $\delta_{CP} = \pi/2$ in the inverted hierarchy at higher than 3$\sigma$, and the entire inverted mass hierarchy at the 95\% confidence level. % By increasing the size of the samples and adding anti-neutrino data, \nova can potentially resolve the neutrino mass hierarchy at 4$\sigma$ C.L. or higher for some combinations of oscillation parameters. Im provements to the sensitivity to the determination of the ma! ss hierarchy and CP violation in the neutrino sector can be achieved through gains in the NuMI beam intensity, the inclusion of external data, and refinements in the analysis methodology.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗

The Suomi National Polar-Orbiting Partnership (SNPP): Continuing NASA Research and Applications

The Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (SNPP) satellite was successfully launched into a polar orbit on October 28, 2011 carrying 5 remote sensing instruments designed to provide data to improve weather forecasts and to increase understanding of long-term climate change. SNPP provides operational continuity of satellite-based observations for NOAA's Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellites (POES) and continues the long-term record of climate quality observations established by NASA's Earth Observing System (EOS) satellites. In the 2003 to 2011 pre-launch timeframe, NASA's SNPP Science Team assessed the adequacy of the operational Raw Data Records (RDRs), Sensor Data Records (SDRs), and Environmental Data Records (EDRs) from the SNPP instruments for use in NASA Earth Science research, examined the operational algorithms used to produce those data records, and proposed a path forward for the production of climate quality products from SNPP. In order to perform these tasks, a distributed data system, the NASA Science Data Segment (SDS), ingested RDRs, SDRs, and EDRs from the NOAA Archive and Distribution and Interface Data Processing Segments, ADS and IDPS, respectively. The SDS also obtained operational algorithms for evaluation purposes from the NOAA Government Resource for Algorithm Verification, Independent Testing and Evaluation (GRAVITE). Within the NASA SDS, five Product Evaluation and Test Elements (PEATEs) received, ingested, and stored data and performed NASA's data processing, evaluation, and analysis activities. The distributed nature of this data distribution system was established by physically housing each PEATE within one of five Climate Analysis Research Systems (CARS) located at either at a NASA or a university institution. The CARS were organized around 5 key EDRs directly in support of the following NASA Earth Science focus areas: atmospheric sounding, ocean, land, ozone, and atmospheric composition products. The PEATES provided the system level interface with members of the NASA SNPP Science Team and other science investigators within each CARS. A sixth Earth Radiation Budget CARS was established at NASA Langley Research Center (NASA LaRC) to support instrument performance, data evaluation, and analysis for the SNPP Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Budget Energy System (CERES) instrument. Following the 2011 launch of SNPP, spacecraft commissioning, and instrument activation, the NASA SNPP Science Team evaluated the operational RDRs, SDRs, and EDRs produced by the NOAA ADS and IDPS. A key part in that evaluation was the NASA Science Team's independent processing of operational RDRs and SDRs to EDRs using the latest NASA science algorithms. The NASA science evaluation was completed in the December 2012 to April 2014 timeframe with the release of a series of NASA Science Team Discipline Reports. In summary, these reports indicated that the RDRs produced by the SNPP instruments were of sufficiently high quality to be used to create data products suitable for NASA Earth System science and applications. However, the quality of the SDRs and EDRs were found to vary greatly when considering suitability for NASA science. The need for improvements in operational algorithms, adoption of different algorithmic approaches, greater monitoring of on-orbit instrument calibration, greater attention to data product validation, and data reprocessing were prominent findings in the reports. In response to these findings, NASA, in late 2013, directed the NASA SNPP Science Team to use SNPP instrument data to develop data products of sufficiently high quality to enable the continuation of EOS time series data records and to develop innovative, practical applications of SNPP data. This direction necessitated a transition of the SDS data system from its pre-launch assessment mode to one of full data processing and production. To do this, the PEATES, which served as NASA's data product testing environment during the prelaunch and early on-orbit periods, were transitioned to Science Investigator-led Processing Systems (SIPS). The distributed data architecture was maintained in this new system by locating the SIPS at the same institutions at which the CARS and PEATES were located. The SIPS acquire raw SNPP instrument Level 0 (i.e. RDR) data over the full SNPP mission from the NOAA ADS and IDPS through the NASA SDS Data Distribution and Depository Element (SD3E). The SIPS process those data into NASA Level 1, Level 2, and global, gridded Level 3 standard products using peer-reviewed algorithms provided by members of the NASA Science Team. The SIPS work with the NASA SNPP Science Team in obtaining enhanced, refined, or alternate real-time algorithms to support the capabilities of the Direct Readout Laboratory (DRL). All data products, algorithm source codes, coefficients, and auxiliary data used in product generation are archived in an assigned NASA Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC).

remote sensing↗

Acoustic Phased Array Quantification of Quiet Technology Demonstrator 3 Advanced Inlet Liner Noise Component

Acoustic phased array flyover noise measurements were acquired as part of the Boeing 737 MAX-7 NASA Advanced Inlet Liner segment of the Quiet Technology Demonstrator 3 (QTD3) flight test program. This paper reports on the processes used for separating and quantifying the engine inlet, exhaust and airframe noise source components and provides sample phased array-based comparisons of the component noise source levels associated with the inlet liner treatment configurations. Full scale flyover noise testing of NASA advanced inlet liners was conducted as part of the Quiet Technology Demonstrator 3 flight test program in July and August of 2018. Details on the inlet designs and testing are provided in the companion paper of Reference 1. The present paper provides supplemental details relating to the acoustic phased array portion of the analyses provided in Ref. 1. In brief, the test article was a Boeing 737MAX-7 aircraft with a modified right hand (starboard side) engine inlet, which consisted of either a production inlet liner, a NASA designed inlet liner or a simulated hard wall configuration (accomplished by applying speed tape over the inlet acoustic treatment areas). In all three configurations, the engine forward fan case acoustic panel was replaced with a unperforated (hardwall) panel. No other modifications to any other acoustic treatment areas were made. The left hand (port side) engine was a production engine and was flown at idle thrust for all measurements in order to isolate the effects of the inlet liners to the right hand engine. As described in Ref. 1, the NASA inlet treatment consists of laterally cut slots (cut perpendicular to the flow direction) which are designed to reduce excrescence drag while maintaining or exceeding the liner acoustic noise reduction capabilities. The NASA inlet liner consists of a Multi-Degree of Freedom (MDOF) design with two breathable septum layers inserted into each honeycomb cell [1]. The aircraft noise measurements were acquired for both takeoff (flaps 1 setting, gear up) and approach (flaps 30 gear up and gear down) configurations. The inlet and flight test configurations are summarized in Table 1. Table 1: Inlet Treatment and Flight Configurations Inlet Forward Fan Case Aircraft Production Hardwall Flaps 1, gear up; flaps 30 gear up; flaps 30 gear down NASA Hardwall Flaps 1, gear up; flaps 30 gear up; flaps 30 gear down Hardwall Hardwall Flaps 1, gear up; flaps 30 gear up; flaps 30 gear down III.Test Description and Hardware The flight testing was conducted at the Grant County airport in Moses Lake, WA, between 27 July and 6 August 2018. The noise measurement instrumentation included 8 flush dish microphones arranged in a noise certification configuration as well as an 840 microphone phased array. The flush dish microphones were used to quantify the levels and differences in levels between the various inlet treatments. The phased array was used to separate and quantify the narrowband (tonal) and broadband noise component levels from the engine inlet/exhaust and from the airframe. Phased array extraction of the broadband component was critical to this study because it allowed for the separation of the inlet component from the total airplane level noise even when it was significantly below the total level. Figure 1 provides an overview of the phased array microphone layout as well as a detailed image of an individual phased array microphone mounted in a plate holder (the microphone sensor is the dot in the center of the plate). The ground plane ensemble array microphones (referred to as “ensemble array” in this paper) were mounted in plates with “flower petal” edges designed to minimize edge scattering effects. Fig. 1 Flyover test microphone layout. The phased array configuration was the result of a progressive development of concepts originally implemented in Ref. 2 and refined over the following years, consisting namely of multiple multi-arm logarithmic spiral subarrays designed to cover overlapping frequency ranges and optimized for various aircraft emission angles. For the present case, the signals from all 840 microphones were acquired on a single system. The 840 microphones were parsed into 11 primary subarray sets spanning from smallest to largest aperture size and labeled accordingly as “a, b, …, k”, where “a” corresponds to the smallest fielded subarray and “k” corresponds to the largest aperture subarray. The apertures ranged from approximately 10 ft to 427 ft in size (in the flight direction) with the subarrays consisting of between 215 and 312 microphones. Figure 2 shows three such subarrays, k, h and a. As done in Ref. 2, microphones were shared between subarrays in order to reduce total channel count. Fig. 2 Sample subarray sizes (20° from overhead – refer to Figure 3a discussion). In addition to the above, each of the 11 primary subarray sets consisted of four subarrays optimized to provide near equivalent array spatial resolution in both the flight and lateral directions within 30 degrees of overhead (i.e., airplane directly above the center of the array), namely, at angles  of 0, ±10, ±20 and ±30 degrees relative to overhead where angle  is defined as shown in Figure 3a. This allowed for optimized aircraft noise measurements from 60 to 120 degree emission angle.6 An example of this pletharray design is shown in Figure 3b for the k subarray. When the aircraft is at overhead, the microphones indicated by the blue markers are used for beamforming. When the aircraft is at angles ±10 degrees from overhead, both the blue and red colored microphones are used, and so on for the ±20 and ±30 degree aircraft locations. See Ref. 3 for extensive details on pletharray design for aeroacoustic phased array testing. 6 In the discussions that follow, emission angle values are used. These are the angles at the time sound is emitted relative to the engine axis and are calculated based on flight path angle, body aircraft body angle with respect to the relative wind direction, and engine axis angle relative to aircraft body angle.

Brusniak, Leon↗