SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “labs facilities”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2023

Hanford Waste Treatment Plant LAB Facility Stack Effluent Monitoring: Sampling Probe Location Qualification Evaluation

The Waste Treatment Plant laboratory (LAB) facility stack monitor locations were qualified using scale model stacks to mitigate the risk of identifying that sampling locations do not meet the qualification criteria on the full-scale stack. As required by the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-1999 standard, the scale model and its sampling location were geometrically similar to the actual stack, and the Reynolds numbers for both the actual and model stacks were >10,000. An additional criterion is that the product of the hydraulic diameter and mean velocity (DV) of the full-scale stack must be between 1/6 DV and 6 DV of the scale model stack tests. Verification tests of the LAB stacks were performed at normal operating conditions. The minimum 1/6 DV value, along with the maximum 6 DV value from the scale model testing, determines the range of conditions for which the full-scale stack may be operated and remain in compliance with the stack verification criterion. A practical range for the full-scale stack qualification uses the average DV through 6 DV from the scale model tests to compute the corresponding flow rates. Table S1 lists the operating flow rates along with the average and maximum qualified stack flow rates for each of the LAB facility stacks. For each stack, the operating flow is below the maximum qualified stack flow, which means that the scale model test results are acceptable for stack qualification. The remaining criteria for the stack verification to be considered valid involve the flow angle and velocity uniformity results. First, the flow angle at the full-scale stack must be ≤20°. Second, the velocity uniformity at the full-scale stack must be ≤20% coefficient of variance (COV). Finally, the velocity uniformity results for the actual and scale model stack tests must agree within 5% COV. These criteria were met through the full-scale stack tests at the LAB facility. Flow angle results were primarily less than 10°, except for the LB-C2 Fan A results, which were an average of 13.7°; all flow angle results were within the ≤20° criterion. The velocity uniformity results for each test condition averaged between 1.5 and 4.1% COV, which were all within the range of the target percent coefficient of variation values from the scale model tests. Based on these stack verification test results, the three LAB filtered exhaust stack sampling locations meet the qualification criteria provided in the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard for all fan operating configurations. This includes single-fan as well as dual-fan operations for LB-C2, each of the dual-fan operating conditions for LB-S1, and each single-fan operating condition for LB-S2. Further changes to the system configuration or operating conditions that are outside the bounds described in this report may require additional tests or analyses to determine compliance with the standard.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2022

Hanford Waste Treatment Plant LAB Facility Stack Effluent Monitoring: Sampling Probe Location Qualification Evaluation

The Waste Treatment Plant laboratory (LAB) facility stack monitor locations were qualified using scale model stacks to mitigate the risk of identifying that sampling locations do not meet the qualification criteria on the full-scale stack. As required by the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-1999 standard, the scale model and its sampling location were geometrically similar to the actual stack and the Reynolds numbers for both the actual and model stacks were >10,000. An additional criterion is that the product of the hydraulic diameter and mean velocity (DV) of the full-scale stack must be between 1/6 DV and 6 DV of the scale model stack tests. Verification tests of the LAB stacks were performed at normal operating conditions. The minimum 1/6 DV value, along with the maximum 6 DV value from the scale model testing determines the range of conditions for which the full-scale stack may be operated and remain in compliance with the stack verification criterion. Based on these DV values, the corresponding stack flow rates for each of the LAB stacks are 625 to 47,237 scfm for LB-C2, 1,704 to 103,131 scfm for LB-S1, and 467 to 18,088 scfm for LB-S2. The remaining criteria for the stack verification to be considered valid involve the flow angle and velocity uniformity results. First, the flow angle at the full-scale stack must be =20°. Second, the velocity uniformity at the full-scale stack must be =20% coefficient of variance (COV). Finally, the velocity uniformity results for the actual and scale model stack tests must agree within 5% COV. These criteria were met through the full-scale stack tests at the LAB facility. Flow angle results were primarily less than 10 degrees, except for the LB-C2 Fan A results, which were an average of 17.6 degrees; all flow angle results were within the =20° criterion. The velocity uniformity results for each test condition averaged between 1.5 and 3.5% COV, which were all within the range of the target %COV values from the scale model tests. Based on these stack verification test results, the three LAB filtered exhaust stack sampling locations meet the qualification criteria provided in the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard for all fan operating configurations. This includes single-fan as well as dual-fan operations for LB-C2, each of the dual-fan operating conditions for LB-S1, and each single-fan operating condition for LB-S2. Further changes to the system configuration or operating conditions that are outside the bounds described in this report may require additional tests or analyses to determine compliance with the standard.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2021

Hanford Waste Treatment Plant LAB Facility Stack Effluent Monitoring: Sampling Probe Location Qualification Evaluation

The WTP LAB stack monitor locations were qualified using scale model stacks to mitigate the risk of identifying that sampling locations do not meet the qualification criteria on the full-scale stack. As required by the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard, the scale model and its sampling location were geometrically similar to the actual stack and the Reynolds numbers for both the actual and model stacks were >10,000. An additional criterion is that the DV of the full-scale stack must be between 1/6 DV and 6 DV of the scale model stack tests. Verification tests of the LAB stacks were performed at normal operating conditions. The maximum 6 DV value from the scale model testing determines the maximum conditions for which the full-scale stack may be operated and remain in compliance with the stack verification criterion. The remaining criteria for the stack verification to be considered valid involve the flow angle and velocity uniformity results. First, the flow angle at the full-scale stack must be = 20°. Second, the velocity uniformity at the full-scale stack must be = 20% COV. Finally, the velocity uniformity results for the actual and scale model stacks must agree within 5% COV. In general, these criteria were met through the full-scale stack tests at the LAB facility. Some specific items for each scale model and full-scale stack comparison should be noted in assessing the validity of the verification tests. The LB-C2 scale model stacks were performed with single fan operations at then-minimum flow conditions. These conditions resulted in DV values that were too low to meet the DV range criterion, and therefore are unable to be used in qualifying single fan operations on the full-scale stack. However, the single fan operations demonstrated COV values for velocity uniformity as well as flow angles that were comparable to the dual-fan operations at high flows. Overall, the test conditions and test results were within the range of acceptable values based on current design flow rates. Single fan operations are expected to only occur infrequently for maintenance needs and is therefore not a planned operating condition at this time. The LB-S1 scale model stacks were performed at three fan combinations, and in each combination, at least one test was performed at the then-minimum flow conditions as well as at then-maximum flow conditions. While the then-minimum flow conditions result in a DV range that is lower than the verification test DV value, and therefore does not meet the criterion, these tests are un-necessary for the verification test acceptance. The normal and maximum flow conditions from the scale model stack tests meet the DV range criterion, and the velocity uniformity test results compare favorably with the full-scale stack results. The LB-S2 scale model stacks were performed at nominally the same maximum flow condition; however, the 6 DV value for Fan A operation was slightly lower than the full-scale stack test DV. The COV values from the scale model stacks were comparable between the Fan A and Fan B results, and the overall test conditions are within the range of acceptable values. The stack verification is therefore considered acceptable for both Fan A and Fan B operations. The verification tests were performed at flows that were appreciably higher than the design conditions, and further elevated flow rates would be beyond the range of acceptable DV. Based on these stack verification test results, the three LAB filtered exhaust stacks meet the qualification criteria provided in the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard. Further changes to the system configuration or operating conditions that are outside the bounds described in this and the scale model test reports (Glissmeyer, Flaherty, and Piepel (2001), Glissmeyer and Geeting (2013)) may require additional tests and additional analyses to determine compliance with the standard.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2024

Smart Labs: Improving Lab Facilities to Meet Decarbonization Goals

Smart Labs enable safe and efficient world class science to occur in laboratories through high-performance methods. The Smart Labs Toolkit describes a systematic process to help laboratory owners and operators plan, assess, optimize, and manage laboratory facilities. This half-day workshop reviews the four phases of the Smart Labs Toolkit along with an interactive activity to complete a Laboratory Ventilation Risk Assessment. This session will also highlight the Lab Benchmarking Tool, which compares the energy use, emissions, and operational practices of lab buildings with similar facilities. Attendees will also discuss application as well as sharing tools and best practice guides.

assessment↗

NASA NTRS2003

Research Combustion Lab Facility Capabilities and Throughput Enhanced by New Test Stands

The original test stand location has a small copper rocket engine mounted on the stand. The new stand, located about 4 feet to the left, has a long pulse detonation combustion engine mounted on it. To the rear of the two stands can be seen a bulkhead with feed line outlets that can be switched at common valves behind the bulkhead to supply either stand. A gauge panel is visible through a doorway in the bulkhead at which various purge pressures are set. A connection panel for instrumentation wiring can be seen above the stands.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2014

SPHERES National Lab Facility

SPHERES is a facility of the ISS National Laboratory with three IVA nano-satellites designed and delivered by MIT to research estimation, control, and autonomy algorithms. Since Fall 2010, The SPHERES system is now operationally supported and managed by NASA Ames Research Center (ARC). A SPHERES Program Office was established and is located at NASA Ames Research Center. The SPHERES Program Office coordinates all SPHERES related research and STEM activities on-board the International Space Station (ISS), as well as, current and future payload development. By working aboard ISS under crew supervision, it provides a risk tolerant Test-bed Environment for Distributed Satellite Free-flying Control Algorithms. If anything goes wrong, reset and try again! NASA has made the capability available to other U.S. government agencies, schools, commercial companies and students to expand the pool of ideas for how to test and use these bowling ball-sized droids. For many of the researchers, SPHERES offers the only opportunity to do affordable on-orbit characterization of their technology in the microgravity environment. Future utilization of SPHERES as a facility will grow its capabilities as a platform for science, technology development, and education.

Free Flyer↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Code TSM STAR Labs Facility, Capabilities, and Equipment

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Matt R Switzer↗

NASA NTRS2018

SPHERES: Synchronized, Position, Hold, Engage, Reorient, Experimental Satellites

SPHERES/Astrobee Working Group (SAWG) Quarterly meeting. Membership includes MIT, FIT, AFS, DARPA, CASIS, SJSU, and NASA (HQ, KSC, JSC, MSFC, and ARC) Face-to-Face, twice a year. The purpose is information sharing across the SPHERES community. Program office shares National Lab facility availability. Status of resources (batteries, CO2 tanks, etc.), overall calendar (scheduled Test Sessions, upmass return), and updates on new PD, investigations, and ISS infrastructure. Provide the SPHERES community (PD, investigators, etc.) with up-to-date information to determine opportunities to use the National Lab facility. Discuss proposed changes and updates to SPHERES National Lab which may be required to support a specific activity or research. Discuss specific support requests made to the ISS Office.

SPHERES satellites↗

DOE OSTI2021

Isotope Production at the Jefferson Lab LERF Facility (Final Report)

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Isotope Production at the Jefferson Lab LERF Facility

The project initially proceeded well, meeting all of the Milestones. However, the need to create a new irradiation area in the LERF (the initial proposal was to use the CEBAF Injector) used up a larger fraction of the budget than foreseen. A further problem arose when the hot-cell became unavailable at VCU, followed by VCU dropping out of the collaboration. This meant that we were unable to separate the 67 Cu from the gallium. We replaced this by carrying out detailed gamma spectroscopy to determine the quantity of 67 Cu produced. This work was published as presentations in November of 2021 by the two doctoral students (Geno Santistevan and Robert Bentley) and proceedings articles for American Nuclear Society’s topical meeting AccApp21 (https://www.ans.org/pubs/proceedings/issue-3206/), as well as in invited, expanded versions in the peer-reviewed journal “Nuclear Science and Engineering”. Geno and Robert have subsequently successfully leveraged this research to achieve “doctoral candidacy” status and are expected to defend their dissertations in the Fall of 2023.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

NASA NTRS2017

SPHERES: Synchronized, Position, Hold, Engage, Reorient, Experimental Satellites: SPHERES/Astrobee Working Group (SAWG)

SPHERES/Astrobee Working Group (SAWG) Quarterly meeting. Membership includes MIT, FIT, AFS, DARPA, CASIS, SJSU, and NASA (HQ, KSC, JSC, MSFC, and ARC)Face-to-Face, twice a year Purpose: Information sharing across the SPHERES community Program office shares National Lab Facility availability Status of resources (batteries, CO2 tanks, etc.), Overall Calendar (scheduled Test Sessions, up mass return), and Updates on new PD, Investigations, and ISS infrastructure. Provide the SPHERES community (PD, investigators, etc.) with up-to-date information to determine opportunities to use the NL Facility Discuss proposed changes updates to SPHERES Nat Lab which may be required to support a specific activity or research. Discuss specific support requests made to the ISS Office.

Benavides, Jose↗

NASA NTRS2019

SPHERES/Astrobee Working Group (SAWG) Quarterly Meeting

SPHERES Astrobee Working Group (SAWG) Quarterly meeting. Membership includes MIT, FIT, AFS, DARPA, CASIS, SJSU, and NASA (HQ, KSC, JSC, MSFC, and ARC). Face-to-Face, twice a year Purpose: Information sharing across the SPHERES community. Program office shares National Lab Facility availability. Status of resources (batteries, CO2 tanks, etc.), Overall Calendar (scheduled Test Sessions, upmassreturn), and Updates on new PD, Investigations, and ISS infrastructure. Provide the SPHERES community (PD, investigators, etc.) with up-to-date information to determine opportunities to use the NL Facility. Discuss proposed changes updates to SPHERES Nat Lab which may be required to support a specific activity or research. Discuss specific support requests made to the ISS Office

Benavides, Jose V.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

SPHERES Synchronized, Position, Hold, Engage, Reorient, Experimental Satellites: SPHERES Working Group (SWG) Quarterly Meeting

SPHERES Working Group (SWG) Quarterly meeting. Membership includes MIT, FIT, AFS, DARPA, CASIS, SJSU, and NASA (HQ, KSC, JSC, MSFC, and ARC). Face-to-Face, twice a year. Next Face-to-Face will be scheduled in Feb. 2017 at NASA Ames. Purpose: Information sharing across the SPHERES community. Program office shares National Lab Facility availability. Status of resources (batteries, CO2 tanks, etc.), Overall Calendar (scheduled Test Sessions, upmassreturn), and Updates on new PD, Investigations, and ISS infrastructure.Provide the SPHERES community (PD, investigators, etc.) with up-to-date information to determine opportunities to use the NL Facility. Discuss proposed changes updates to SPHERES Nat Lab which may be required to support a specific activity or research. Discuss specific support requests made to the ISS Office.

Jose V Benavides↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Design of a Manufacturing Demonstration Unit for a Composite Lunar Landing Gear Strut

The goal of the current work was to develop an analytical framework for design of composite struts using various levels of model fidelity. Rapid optimization trade studies were performed using low fidelity two-dimensional (2D) axisymmetric models with smeared composite properties. The optimum 2D model was compared with three-dimensional (3D) models with higher levels of fidelity in material property representation. Good agreement was found with all models. The buckling performance of the highest fidelity 3D model was found to be satisfactory for the intended loading conditions. An additional goal of this work was to perform an initial assessment of using automated fiber placement (AFP) and other advanced manufacturing methods to explore their feasibility for the fabrication of struts for lunar landers, strut-braced wings, and other aerospace components. The designs produced during this study are intended to be used to develop manufacturing demonstration units (MDU) that can be fabricated at the Integrated Structural Assembly of Advanced Composites (ISAAC) facility at Langley Research Center (LaRC) and tested in lab facilities at LaRC.

carbon-epoxy↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Design of a Manufacturing Demonstration Unit for a Composite Lunar Landing Gear Strut

carbon-epoxy↗

DOE OSTI2022

Design and commissioning of an e-beam irradiation beamline at the Upgraded Injector Test Facility at Jefferson Lab

We report the Upgraded Injector Test Facility (UITF) at Jefferson Lab is a continuous-wave superconducting linear accelerator capable of providing an electron beam with energy up to 10 MeV. A beamline for electron-beam irradiation has been designed, installed and successfully commissioned at this facility, aimed at the degradation study of 1,4-dioxane and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in wastewater treatment. A solenoid with a peak axial magnetic field of up to 0.28 T and a set of raster coils were used to obtain a Gaussian beam profile with a transverse standard deviation of ~ 15.0 mm at the target location. Monte-Carlo simulations using FLUKA were carried out to calculate the total absorbed dose and the dose distribution in the sample volume inside the target cell. The simulations were benchmarked experimentally by dosimetry mapping using optichromic dosimeters. The results of the irradiation experiments showed a ~ 95% reduction of 1,4-dioxane in ultra-pure water for a dose of 1 kGy, demonstrating the potential of electron-beam irradiation towards addressing growing challenges in environmental remediation.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

NASA NTRS2015

SPHERES: From Ground Development to Operations on ISS

SPHERES (Synchronized Position Hold Engage and Reorient Experimental Satellites) is an internal International Space Station (ISS) Facility that supports multiple investigations for the development of multi-spacecraft and robotic control algorithms. The SPHERES Facility on ISS is managed and operated by the SPHERES National Lab Facility at NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) at Moffett Field California. The SPHERES Facility on ISS consists of three self-contained eight-inch diameter free-floating satellites which perform the various flight algorithms and serve as a platform to support the integration of experimental hardware. To help make science a reality on the ISS, the SPHERES ARC team supports a Guest Scientist Program (GSP). This program allows anyone with new science the possibility to interface with the SPHERES team and hardware. In addition to highlighting the available SPHERES hardware on ISS and on the ground, this presentation will also highlight ground support, facilities, and resources available to guest researchers. Investigations on the ISS evolve through four main phases: Strategic, Tactical, Operations, and Post Operations. The Strategic Phase encompasses early planning beginning with initial contact by the Principle Investigator (PI) and the SPHERES program who may work with the PI to assess what assistance the PI may need. Once the basic parameters are understood, the investigation moves to the Tactical Phase which involves more detailed planning, development, and testing. Depending on the nature of the investigation, the tactical phase may be split into the Lab Tactical Phase or the ISS Tactical Phase due to the difference in requirements for the two destinations. The Operations Phase is when the actual science is performed; this can be either in the lab, or on the ISS. The Post Operations Phase encompasses data analysis and distribution, and generation of summary status and reports. The SPHERES Operations and Engineering teams at ARC is composed of experts who can guide the Payload Developer (PD) and Principle Investigator (PI) in reaching critical milestones to make their science a reality using the SPHERES platform. From performing integrated safety and verification assessments, to assisting in developing crew procedures and operations products, to organizing, planning, and executing all test sessions, to helping manage data products, the SPHERES team at ARC is available to support microgravity research with the SPEHRES Guest Scientist Program.

ISS Research↗

NASA NTRS1986

Commerce Lab - An enabling facility and test bed for commercial flight opportunities

Commerce Lab is conceived as an adjunct to the National Space Transportation System (NSTS) by providing a focal point for commercial missions which could utilize existing NSTS carrier and resource capabilities for on-orbit experimentation in the microgravity sciences. In this context, the Commerce Lab provides an enabling facility and test bed for commercial flight opportunities. Commerce Lab program activities to date have focused on mission planning for private sector involvement in the space program to facilitate the commercial exploitation of the microgravity environment for materials processing research and development. It is expected that Commerce Lab will provide a logical transition between currently planned NSTS missions and future microgravity science and commercial R&D missions centered around the Space Station. The present study identifies candidate Commerce Lab flight experiments and their development status and projects a mission traffic model that can be used in commercial mission planning.

Robertson, Jack↗