Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “ACO”

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.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2012

Tailoring Systems Engineering Processes in a Conceptual Design Environment: A Case Study at NASA Marshall Spaceflight Center's ACO

This paper provides an overview of Systems Engineering as it is applied in a conceptual design space systems department at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Marshall Spaceflight Center (MSFC) Advanced Concepts Office (ACO). Engineering work performed in the NASA MFSC's ACO is targeted toward the Exploratory Research and Concepts Development life cycle stages, as defined in the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) System Engineering Handbook. This paper addresses three ACO Systems Engineering tools that correspond to three INCOSE Technical Processes: Stakeholder Requirements Definition, Requirements Analysis, and Integration, as well as one Project Process Risk Management. These processes are used to facilitate, streamline, and manage systems engineering processes tailored for the earliest two life cycle stages, which is the environment in which ACO engineers work. The role of systems engineers and systems engineering as performed in ACO is explored in this paper. The need for tailoring Systems Engineering processes, tools, and products in the ever-changing engineering services ACO provides to its customers is addressed.

Mulqueen, John↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Characterization of OCO-2 and ACOS-GOSAT biases and errors for flux estimates

We characterize the magnitude of seasonally and spatially varying biases in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2) Version 8 (v8) and the Atmospheric CO2 Observations from Space (ACOS) Greenhouse Gas Observing SATellite (GOSAT) version 7.3 (v7.3) satellite CO2 retrievals by comparisons to measurements collected by the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON), Atmospheric Tomography (ATom) experiment, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Earth System Research Laboratory (ESRL) and U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) aircraft, and surface stations. Although the ACOS-GOSAT estimates of the column averaged carbon dioxide (CO2) dry air mole fraction (XCO2) have larger random errors than the OCO-2 XCO2 estimates, and the space-based estimates over land have larger random errors than those over ocean, the systematic errors are similar across both satellites and surface types, 0.6 ± 0.1 ppm. We find similar estimates of systematic error whether dynamic versus geometric coincidences or ESRL/DOE aircraft versus TCCON are used for validation (over land), once validation and co-location errors are accounted for. We also find that areas with sparse throughput of good quality data (due to quality flags and preprocessor selection) over land have ~double the error of regions of high-throughput of good quality data. We characterize both raw and bias-corrected results, finding that bias correction improves systematic errors by a factor of 2 for land observations and improves errors by ~0.2 ppm for ocean. We validate the lowermost tropospheric (LMT) product for OCO-2 and ACOS-GOSAT by comparison to aircraft and surface sites, finding systematic errors of ~1.1 ppm, while having 2-3 times the variability of XCO2. We characterize the time and distance scales of correlations for OCO-2 XCO2 errors, and find error correlations on scales of 0.3 degrees, 5-10 degrees, and 60 days. We find comparable scale lengths for the bias correction term. Assimilation of the OCO-2 bias correction term is used to estimate flux errors resulting from OCO-2 seasonal biases, finding annual flux errors on the order of 0.3 and 0.4 PgC/yr for Transcom-3 ocean and land regions, respectively.

Susan S Kulawik↗
NASA NTRS1989

The distribution of clusters in the southern ACO catalog

The distribution of rich clusters of galaxies in the new southern catalog of Abell, Corwin, and Olowin (ACO, 1989) is examined. A comparison with the cluster distribution in the northern Abell catalog, published in 1958, is presented. The similarities as well as the differences between the catalogs are highlighted. The angular cluster correlation function of the ACO catalog is consistent with the Abell cluster correlation, showing strong superclustering to about 50/h Mpc. The correlation amplitude scales with depth, as expected for real spatial clustering. Plate-to-plate variation effects are investigated; no significant impact of the latter on the cluster correlation is observed.

Batuski, David J.↗
NASA NTRS2016

A31N-03: Lower-Tropospheric CO2 from Near-Infrared ACOS-GOSAT Observations

We present two new products from near-infrared GOSAT observations: lower tropospheric (LMT, from 0-2.5 km) and upper tropospheric/stratospheric (U, above 2.5 km) carbon dioxide partial columns. We compare these new products to aircraft profiles and remote surface flask measurements and find that the seasonal and year-to-year variations in the new partial columns significantly improve over the ACOS-GOSAT initial guess/a priori, with distinct patterns in the LMT and U seasonal cycles which match validation data. For land monthly averages, we find errors of 1.9, 0.7, and 0.8 ppm for retrieved GOSAT LMT, U, and XCO2; for ocean monthly averages, we find errors of 0.7, 0.5, and 0.5 ppm for retrieved GOSAT LMT, U, and XCO2. In the southern hemisphere biomass burning season, the new partial columns show similar patterns to MODIS fire maps and MOPITT multispectral CO for both vertical levels, despite a flat ACOS-GOSAT prior, and CO/CO2 emission factor consistent with published values. The difference of LMT and U, useful for evaluation of model transport error, has also been validated with monthly average error of 0.8 (1.4) ppm for ocean (land). The new LMT partial column is more locally influenced than the U partial column, meaning that local fluxes can now be separated from CO2 transported from far away.

Kulawik, Susan S.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Consistent Evaluation of ACOS-GOSAT, BESD-SCIAMACHY, CarbonTracker, and MACC Through Comparisons to TCCON

Consistent validation of satellite CO2 estimates is a prerequisite for using multiple satellite CO2 measurements for joint flux inversion, and for establishing an accurate long-term atmospheric CO2 data record. Harmonizing satellite CO2 measurements is particularly important since the differences in instruments, observing geometries, sampling strategies, etc. imbue different measurement characteristics in the various satellite CO2 data products. We focus on validating model and satellite observation attributes that impact flux estimates and CO2 assimilation, including accurate error estimates, correlated and random errors, overall biases, biases by season and latitude, the impact of coincidence criteria, validation of seasonal cycle phase and amplitude, yearly growth, and daily variability. We evaluate dry-air mole fraction (X(sub CO2)) for Greenhouse gases Observing SATellite (GOSAT) (Atmospheric CO2 Observations from Space, ACOS b3.5) and SCanning Imaging Absorption spectroMeter for Atmospheric CHartographY (SCIAMACHY) (Bremen Optimal Estimation DOAS, BESD v2.00.08) as well as the CarbonTracker (CT2013b) simulated CO2 mole fraction fields and the Monitoring Atmospheric Composition and Climate (MACC) CO2 inversion system (v13.1) and compare these to Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON) observations (GGG2012/2014). We find standard deviations of 0.9, 0.9, 1.7, and 2.1 parts per million vs. TCCON for CT2013b, MACC, GOSAT, and SCIAMACHY, respectively, with the single observation errors 1.9 and 0.9 times the predicted errors for GOSAT and SCIAMACHY, respectively. We quantify how satellite error drops with data averaging by interpreting according to (error(sup 2) equals a(sup 2) plus b(sup 2) divided by n (with n being the number of observations averaged, a the systematic (correlated) errors, and b the random (uncorrelated) errors). a and b are estimated by satellites, coincidence criteria, and hemisphere. Biases at individual stations have year-to-year variability of 0.3 parts per million, with biases larger than the TCCON predicted bias uncertainty of 0.4 parts per million at many stations. We find that GOSAT and CT2013b under-predict the seasonal cycle amplitude in the Northern Hemisphere (NH) between 46 and 53 degrees North latitude, MACC over-predicts between 26 and 37 degrees North latitude, and CT2013b under-predicts the seasonal cycle amplitude in the Southern Hemisphere (SH). The seasonal cycle phase indicates whether a data set or model lags another data set in time. We find that the GOSAT measurements improve the seasonal cycle phase substantially over the prior while SCIAMACHY measurements improve the phase significantly for just two of seven sites. The models reproduce the measured seasonal cycle phase well except for at Lauder_125HR (CT2013b) and Darwin (MACC). We compare the variability within 1 day between TCCON and models in June-July-August; there is correlation between 0.2 and 0.8 in the NH, with models showing 10-50 percent the variability of TCCON at different stations and CT2013b showing more variability than MACC. This paper highlights findings that provide inputs to estimate flux errors in model assimilations, and places where models and satellites need further investigation, e.g., the SH for models and 45-67 degrees North latitude for GOSAT and CT2013b.

ACOS-GOSAT↗
NASA NTRS2017

An 8-Year, High-Resolution Reanalysis of Atmospheric CO2 Mixing Ratios Based on OCO-2 and GOSAT-ACOS Retrievals

The NASA GMAO (Global Modeling and Assimilation Office) reanalysis blends OCO-2 (Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2) and GOSAT-ACOS (Greenhouse Gases Observing Satellite-Atmospheric Carbon Observations from Space) retrievals (top) with GEOS (Goddard Earth Observing System) model predictions (bottom) to estimate the full 3D (three-dimensional) state of CO2 every 3 hours (middle). This poster describes monthly atmospheric growth rates derived from the reanalysis and an application to aircraft data with the potential to aid bias correction.

GEOS-Carb↗
NASA NTRS2013

NASA GES DISC support of CO2 Data from OCO-2, ACOS, and AIRS

NASA Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Centers (GES DISC) is the data center assigned to archive and distribute current AIRS, ACOS data and data from the upcoming OCO-2 mission. The GES DISC archives and supports data containing information on CO2 as well as other atmospheric composition, atmospheric dynamics, modeling and precipitation. Along with the data stewardship, an important mission of GES DISC is to facilitate access to and enhance the usability of data as well as to broaden the user base. GES DISC strives to promote the awareness of science content and novelty of the data by working with Science Team members and releasing news articles as appropriate. Analysis of events that are of interest to the general public, and that help in understanding the goals of NASA Earth Observing missions, have been among most popular practices.Users have unrestricted access to a user-friendly search interface, Mirador, that allows temporal, spatial, keyword and event searches, as well as an ontology-driven drill down. Variable subsetting, format conversion, quality screening, and quick browse, are among the services available in Mirador. The majority of the GES DISC data are also accessible through OPeNDAP (Open-source Project for a Network Data Access Protocol) and WMS (Web Map Service). These services add more options for specialized subsetting, format conversion, image viewing and contributing to data interoperability.

Wei, Jennifer C↗
NASA NTRS2017

Validation of OCO-2 and ACOS-GOSAT using HIPPO and TCCON

Consistent validation of satellite CO2 estimates is a prerequisite for using multiple satellite CO2measurements for joint flux inversion and establishing a long-term atmospheric CO2 data record. Wevalidate recent satellite observation of OCO-2 v7 and ACOS-GOSAT v7.3 using similar analysis as previouswork (Kulawik et al. (2016) and Frankenberg et al. (2106)) through comparisons to the HIAPER Pole-to-Pole Observations (HIPPO) and the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON) to estimate biasesand errors affecting the understanding of carbon cycle science. CarbonTracker RT is also compared tothe validation data, and additionally used to evaluate the mismatch between the HIPPO observationtimeframe and the OCO-2 record, which are offset by 3-7 years. Some key metrics that are validatedinclude the seasonal cycle phase and amplitude, latitudinal gradient by season, regional biases, anderrors with respect to averaging.

Kulawik, Susan S.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lunar Lander Fuel Cell (LLFC) ACO

This is the one-page status report for the STMD Announcement for Collaborative Opportunity (ACO) Lunar Lander Fuel Cell (LLFC) task to be presented at the fiscal year 2020 (FY20) Game Changing Development (GCD) Annual Review.

Fuel Cell↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ACO Dust Mitigation for Flexible Solar Arrays (DMFlex)

• Announcement of Collaborative Opportunity (ACO) with SSLMaxar • Purpose: • Evaluate blanket solar arrays with mechanical actuation for dust removal • Evaluate vibratory shaking and electrostatic methods for efficacy in simulated lunar environment • Goal is to develop dust mitigation for solar arrays • To maintain solar array operational capability over time • Avoid replacement costs • Extend mission durations

solar arrays↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

DIP Announcement of Collaborative Opportunity (ACO) for Service Providers

The Digital Information Sub-project will hold a virtual information session regarding the Announcement for Collaborative Opportunity being released to solicit feedback and potential partnership opportunities. The objectives of this information session are to inform the service provider (SP) community of the DIP sub-project and provide insight into sub-project formulation and information about the sub-project they would not get without personal engagement.

Digital Information Platform↗