Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “TEST STANDS - ENGINES, JET”

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.

The MATHUSLA test stand

The rate of muons from LHC pp collisions reaching the surface above the ATLAS interaction point is measured as a function of the ATLAS luminosity and compared with expected rates from decays of W and Z bosons and b- and c- quark jets. In addition, data collected during periods without beams circulating in the LHC provide a measurement of the background from cosmic ray inelastic backscattering that is compared to simulation predictions. Data were recorded during 2018 in a 2.5 × 2.5 × 6.5 m 3 active volume MATHUSLA test stand detector unit consisting of two scintillator planes, one at the top and one at the bottom, which defined the trigger, and six layers of RPCs between them, grouped into three ( x, y )-measuring layers separated by 1.74 m from each other. Triggers selecting both upward-going tracks and downward-going tracks were used.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

Robust Solar Receivers Using MAX Phase Materials

This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy under the Solar Energy Technologies Office Award Number 35928. The objective of the proposed effort was to develop and optimize additive manufacturing technologies for low-cost fabrication of high-temperature receivers using MAX phase-based materials (Ti 3 SiC 2 and Ti 3 AlC 2 ). MAX phase materials are a group of ternary metal carbides and nitrides where M stands for an early transition metal element, A is a group 13–16 element, and X is C and/or N. In Phase 1, the binder jetting additive manufacturing process was used to synthesize and characterize the Ti 3 SiC 2 MAX phase material. The typical process involved first producing a TiC preform using binder jetting followed by infiltration of the preform with silicon melt to form Ti 3 SiC 2 in situ. The reaction-infiltrated samples showed formation of MAX phase in the sample core; however, the surface showed cracking. Various process conditions—cooling rates, hold times, Si proportion, etc.—were varied to minimize the surface cracking. The fabricated MAX phase core was characterized by microstructure analysis and evaluations of mechanical properties such as hardness and thermal shock. In Phase 2, the focus included fabrication of Ti 3 SiC 2 MAX phase materials by spark plasma sintering (SPS) and synthesis of Ti 3 AlC 2 MAX phase materials by the Al melt infiltration process. It is expected that Al infiltration will not cause sample cracking, since Al does not expand during solidification. In addition, other processing approaches were investigated to fabricate the MAX phase materials, such as SPS with a graphite bedding approach for producing short-length Ti 3 AlC 2 MAX phase tubes for demonstration of prototypical Concentrating Solar Power receiver tubes. Fabricated samples underwent thermo-mechanical testing to validate the materials for the solar receiver application at temperatures >1000°C. In Phase 3, the effort focused on the development and optimization of the Ti-Al-C MAX phase composite material using the Al melt infiltration approach. We started with optimization of precursor powders and making preform structures by either pressing them in a die or using the binder jetting additive manufacturing process followed by Al melt infiltration. In addition, we investigated the formation of preform structures by cold isostatic pressing followed by Al melt infiltration for making Ti-Al-C MAX phase composite. Thermo-mechanical characterizations, such as creep, strength, and thermal shock, were conducted to establish the structures’ performance.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DEEPEN 3D PFA Favorability Models and 2D Favorability Maps at Newberry Volcano

DEEPEN stands for DE-risking Exploration of geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments. Part of the DEEPEN project involved developing and testing a methodology for a 3D play fairway analysis (PFA) for multiple play types (conventional hydrothermal, superhot EGS, and supercritical). This was tested using new and existing geoscientific exploration datasets at Newberry Volcano. This GDR submission includes images, data, and models related to the 3D favorability and uncertainty models and the 2D favorability and uncertainty maps. The DEEPEN PFA Methodology is based on the method proposed by Poux et al. (2020), which uses the Leapfrog Geothermal software with the Edge extension to conduct PFA in 3D. This method uses all available data to build a 3D geodata model which can be broken down into smaller blocks and analyzed with advanced geostatistical methods. Each data set is imported into a 3D model in Leapfrog and divided into smaller blocks. Conditional queries can then be used to assign each block an index value which conditionally ranks each block's favorability, from 0-5 with 5 being most favorable, for each model (e.g., lithologic, seismic, magnetic, structural). The values between 0-5 assigned to each block are referred to as index values. The final step of the process is to combine all the index models to create a favorability index. This involves multiplying each index model by a given weight and then summing the resulting values. The DEEPEN PFA Methodology follows this approach, but split up by the specific geologic components of each play type. These components are defined as follows for each magmatic play type: 1. Conventional hydrothermal plays in magmatic environments: Heat, fluid, and permeability 2. Superhot EGS plays: Heat, thermal insulation, and producibility (the ability to create and sustain fractures suitable for and EGS reservoir) 3. Supercritical plays: Heat, supercritical fluid, pressure seal, and producibility (the proper permeability and pressure conditions to allow production of supercritical fluid) More information on these components and their development can be found in Kolker et al., 2022. For the purposes of subsurface imaging, it is easier to detect a permeable fluid-filled reservoir than it is to detect separate fluid and permeability components. Therefore, in this analysis, we combine fluid and permeability for conventional hydrothermal plays, and supercritical fluid and producibility for supercritical plays. More information on this process is described in the following sections. We also project the 3D favorability volumes onto 2D surfaces for simplified joint interpretation, and we incorporate an uncertainty component. Uncertainty was modeled using the best approach for the dataset in question, for the datasets where we had enough information to do so. Identifying which subsurface parameters are the least resolved can help qualify current PFA results and focus future efforts in data collection. Where possible, the resulting uncertainty models/indices were weighted using the same weights applied to the respective datasets, and summed, following the PFA methodology above, but for uncertainty. There are two different versions of the Leapfrog model and associated favorability models: - v1.0: The first release in June 2023 - v2.1: The second release, with improvements made to the earthquake catalog (included additional identified events, removed duplicate events), to the temperature model (fixed a deep BHT), and to the index models (updated the seismicity-heat source index models for supercritical and EGS, and the resistivity-insulation index models for all three play types). Also uses the jet color map rather than the magma color map for improved interpretability. - v2.1.1: Updated to include v2.0 uncertainty results (see below for uncertainty model versions) There are two different versions of the associated uncertainty models: - v1.0: The first release in June 2023 - v2.0: The se...

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗