Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Samples”

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 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Genesis Non-flight Implant Sample Archive

Introduction: For the past 20 years the Genesis science community has been analyzing solar wind captured in sample collectors now curated at Johnson Space Center (JSC). Non-flown flight like collector materials (non-flight) considered reference material was always allocated by the JSC Genesis team for testing experimental procedures. However, to expedite Genesis science, distribution of non-flown reference materials were also provided by, D. S. Burnett (Genesis PI, Caltech) and A. J. G. Jurewicz (ASU) who were funded to aid all Genesis PIs by providing engineering test materials archived at Caltech pre-flight as well as ion implants into these materials [1]. Implanted materials (non-flight reference, flight-like semiconductor materials, and NIST SRM glass) received from the Caltech collection during a pilot project are being used to develop an accession procedure for the purpose of making these materials available to researchers in the future. These implant samples are important because they can be utilized as measurement standards [2]. This is a work in progress and this work reports progress in documentation and imaging. The pilot program received 63 implanted reference materials with known implanted ions. Genesis Non-Flight Database: The existing non-flight material database was modified to allow for the description of implant sessions and to allow correlation of the implant information to individual specimens. An implant session has three main components: a known ion, a known dose (ion/cm2), and a known energy (keV). Procedure: Laboratory Procedure. Upon receiving non-flight analytical standards (independently calibrated implants), or implant samples (nominally calibrated implants), they will be imaged in their current containers to capture any information written before being brought into the Genesis Sample Laboratory. Documentation is provided by the donor and used for correlating the data between the implant sessions and implant samples. This information is not verified by Genesis Curation. The microscope used to image samples in the laboratory has an automated stage with a stainless-steel plate to hold samples and a camera that utilizes the software Surveyor to take photomosaic images of the implant samples. The camera attached to the microscope is a QICAM High Performance IEEE 1394 FireWire Digital CCD Camera. This setup, shown in Fig. 1, allows for photomosaics of small-scale samples with a 10x objective or 25x objective. Examples of images taken with this microscope setup are shown in Fig.2 and Fig. 3. After imaging, samples get stored in a clean fluoroware container or polypropylene vial depending on sample size for long term storage. Database Procedure. The Genesis Non-Flight Database currently allows for the addition of implant sessions. The required fields for adding an implant session are the implant session ion, the implant session dose, and the implant session energy. There are also fields for the date and vendor of the sessions as well as a field for if the session was calibrated or not. Once an implant session has been inserted into the database, additional documentation from the session can be attached. The database will automatically assign an Implant Session Number. After inserting an implant session, the implanted samples can be inserted. The fields required for an implant sample are the material of the sample and the size of the sample. The Generic name for the implant sample with be automatically generated by the database once it has been inserted. Implant sample numbers begin with 3X to distinguish from flown Genesis sample numbers. There are also fields for processors to add the location (room, cabinet, tray) and container type (fluoroware, polypropylene vial). Once an implant session and an associated sample(s) have been inserted into the database the sample can be then tied to all associated implant sessions. An implant sample can be tied to multiple implant sessions. Future work: For curation, future work consists of creating an online catalogue for implant samples as well as updating the database with more samples as we receive them. For the scientific community these implant samples have many potential uses. For Genesis research, they are directly applicable for testing and, in some cases, as analytical standards. For non-Genesis research, implants (especially calibrated implants) could be used for calibrating other, unique planetary materials [1].

C D Calva↗
DOE OSTI2023

Data Summary Report for Soil and Slab Sampling at Former Building 175

Lawrence Livermore National Security (LLNS) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) are in the process of returning the area where Building 175 existed to beneficial use for future site development. The completed assessment will help LLNS and DOE to outline project scope and costs associated with the removal, characterization, and disposal of materials generated when the concrete slab for the former building and any associated remaining subsurface structures are demolished. Slab removal under the Transition & Disposition process requires full screening for potential site contamination to determine appropriate future land use. Borehole locations and depths were designed to correctly assess DOE’s future liability for characterizing residual vadose zone contamination. If a residual source area is identified at depth, DOE will need to evaluate the additional cost of future subsurface cleanup (with limited access) due to planned development. This is necessary to leave the location in a “ready-to-build” status. As a result, Phase II sampling requirements may in some cases extend beyond the construction zone required for slab removal to ensure the necessary due diligence. To avoid the potential spread of contamination and/or the creation of an environmental release by impacting the integrity of known contamination areas (e.g., pit within room 102 and the east to west boundary seam), these locations were not sampled for this project. During demolition of the slab, these locations and their underlying soils should be further evaluated. The assessment was conducted in accord with the May 2022 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Former Building 175 Assessment Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan / Quality Assurance Plan. Thirty-six, direct-push borings were advanced, along with collecting concrete (where present) and soil samples for laboratory analyses. Thirty-two of the borings were advanced to a depth of 25 feet below ground (bgs), and four borings were advanced to a depth of 55 feet bgs. The concrete slab for former Building 175 ranged from approximately 8 inches to over two feet in thickness. Soils encountered during the investigation consisted primarily of clayey silt, with interbeds of sandy gravel and silty sand to the total depth explored of 55 feet bgs. Field photoionization detector readings – checking for volatile organic compound (VOC) vapors in soils, ranged from zero (0) to a peak of 33 parts per million at 25 feet bgs in boring PC-B175- 028. The cause for the peak reading is unknown, however, no visually discolored or odorous soils were encountered during the assessment and all VOC results were below Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s (LLNL’s) Soil Screening and Management Plan (SSMP) soil screening levels (SSL). Groundwater was not encountered during the assessment and is expected to occur at roughly 65 feet bgs in the project area. No metals were detected at concentrations of concern in the concrete core samples collected and analyzed. Low gross alpha and beta activity concentrations were detected in the concrete core samples collected and analyzed. The detected activity concentrations would appear to be from naturally occurring radioactive isotopes, i.e., potassium 40, present in the raw materials used to make concrete and not artificially added. Tritium was not detected above the testing laboratory's Method Detection Limit (MDL) in any of the concrete core samples collected and analyzed. The radioactive isotopes - actinium 228, bismuth 214, lead 212, lead 214, potassium 40, radium 226, radium 228, and thallium 208, were detected at low activity concentrations in the concrete core samples analyzed. Based on the detected activity concentrations, the isotopes would appear to be naturally occurring in the raw materials used to make concrete and not artificially added. Acetone – a common laboratory contaminant, was detected in nine of the soil samples collected and analyzed. Concentrations of two other volatile organic compounds (benzene and tetrachloroethene) were detected in five of the soil samples analyzed. All concentrations were below SSLs. Total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel range organics were detected at 43.9 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) in the 20-foot bgs duplicate sample from boring PC-B175-007. Total petroleum hydrocarbons as motor oil were detected at 7.20 mg/kg in the 15-foot bgs routine sample from boring PC-B175-001, and at 20.7 mg/kg in the 20-foot bgs duplicate sample from boring PC-B175-007. The SSL for diesel-range TPHs is 260 mg/kg. LLNL does not have an SSL for motor oil range TPHs. No indications of a release, e.g., visibly stained, or odorous soil, were present at the boring locations. No samples collected contained polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in concentrations above the laboratory reporting limit. Arsenic was detected above its SSL of 8.51 mg/kg in the 25-foot bgs routine sample collected from boring PC-B175-023. Nickel was detected above its SSL of 86.0 mg/kg in the 10-foot bgs routine sample from boing PC-B175-005, the 20-foot bgs routine sample from boring PC-B175-025, and the 25-foot bgs routine sample from boring PC-B175-034. The detected concentrations, however, were well below ten times (10x) their respective STLCs. Gross alpha and/or gross beta were detected above their respective SSL activity concentrations in three routine soil samples. Retesting (two per sample) of the samples showed that the initial reported activity concentrations were anomalous. Tritium was not detected in any of the routine or duplicate soil samples collected and analyzed during the investigation. The radioactive isotopes - actinium 228, bismuth 212 and 214, lead 212 and 214, potassium 40, radium 224, 226 and 228, thallium 208, thorium 234 and uranium, were detected at low activity concentrations in the soil samples analyzed for radioactive constituents. The detected isotopes and their associated activity concentrations are typical of those naturally occurring in the marine-type sedimentary deposits underlying the Livermore Valley. No radiological controls are necessary for the soil evaluated.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Initial analysis of “stone” size Ryugu samples: current status

As a part of the initial analysis of the Ryugu samples, we perform a variety of analyses of millimeter-sized "stones". Our goals are to elucidate the entire formation process of C-type asteroid Ryugu from the viewpoint of petrology and mineralogy ande obtain necessary information by sample analysis, and then simulate the formation of Ryugu based on the evidencef obtained rom sample analysis. Eighteen stones (8 from Room A and 10 from Room C) were received from the ISAS curation facility on June 1, 2021, and brought into a fully nitrogen-displaced glove box at Tohoku University. At the same time, we also received the powder samples from Room A and Room C. To completely block the atmosphere from leaking into the container, all samples were put in the sample transport containers prepared by ISAS, transferred from the main chamber to the glovebox at ISAS, and then all containers were completely sealed in plastic bags with moisture and oxygen absorbers. No moisture or oxygen was detected when the bags were opened in the glove box at Tohoku University, so it was confirmed that there was no exposure to the atmosphere during transport. To date, a number of analyses have been carried out successfully and almost on schedule. The analysis started with the measurement of reflectance spectra, which are sensitive to atmospheric oxidation, hydroxylation, and adsorbed water. The visible, near-infrared, and mid-infrared reflectance spectra were measured while the samples were kept airtight. The spectra of powder samples and stone samples (as aggregates and as single stone) were successfully obtained. A major feature of the stone team's analysis is the use of synchrotron radiation facilities around the world. Since this analysis is non-destructive, stone samples whose reflectance spectra were measured were sent to KEK, SPring-8, ESRF (France), SOLEIL (France), DESY (Germany), and APS (USA). Using these synchrotron radiation facilities, high spatial resolution and sensitivity XRD, STXM, XANES, CT [1], IR-CT, FT-IR [2, 3], XRF, and Mössbauer analyses were performed. Most of the analyses were carried out under air-tight conditions on the stone samples and the particulates separated from the stone samples. These analyses allowed us to determine the three-dimensional distribution of minerals and elements, redox state, density and porosity of the stone samples. Furthermore, as a characteristic analysis of the stone team, light elemental analysis using negative Muon was performed at the MLF facility of J-PARC with an exceptionally long allocation of machine time. This is the only non-destructive method to measure the concentration of light elements in the whole (not the surface) of stone samples. Because the characteristic X-rays produced by muon irradiation are much higher in energy than the fluorescent X-rays produced by X-ray irradiation, there is little effect of self-absorption by the sample, and therefore, the concentration of light elements such as carbon, oxygen, and Na in the entire "stone" sample can be determined. Some stone samples are currently being measured for heat and strength physical properties in order to understand the physical properties of asteroid Ryugu. The data obtained from these measurements are useful for interpreting the remote-sensing data data taken from the surface layer of the asteroid Ryugu [4-7]. It is also important for understanding the behavior of the Ryugu material during impact events. The surfaces of many stone samples were observed by electron microscopy and other techniques, especially on natural “flat” surfaces formed on 5 stomes. As a result, characteristric mineral aggregates formed by the reactions with water and characteiristic impact features were observed on some of the samples. Based on the observations of surfaces and the synchrotron measurements of the whole stones, important objects such as characteristic structures and specific crystal aggregates for understanding the formation history of the asteroid were identified, and these parts were separated from the stone samples using an Xe beam (pFIB) and analyzed by various methods including transmission electron microscopy and synchrotron radiation analysis. Many stone samples, from which important objects have been separated, are embedded in epoxy resin and cut to produce many polished sections. Electron microscopy and spectroscopic measurements of the polished surfaces are being carried out to reveal the detailed mineralogical properties and elemental distribution inside the stone samples. In the fall, machine time for synchrotron radiation will begin, and we plan to analyze single crystals and characteristic objects separated from the stone samples.

Tomoki Nakamura↗
DOE OSTI2024

Sampling Size Optimization for Bioburden Density Estimation in Planetary Protection

Planetary protection (PP) is a discipline that focuses on minimizing the biological contamination of spacecraft to ensure compliance with international policy. Precise estimation of bioburden - the total number of microbes in or on spacecraft hardware – and the bioburden density are of utmost importance for PP. Such estimation is the way concordance with requirements is demonstrated, and it is critical for quantifying the potential risk of inadvertently contaminating other planetary bodies. Although a suite of molecular techniques have been used to thoroughly characterize and profile the microbiome of various cleanroom environments and spacecraft, the gold standard remains the physical enumeration of microbes via culturing of samples directly taken from spacecraft and associated surfaces. However, due to technical, budgetary, and programmatic constraints, only a manageable portion (around 10%) of the entire spacecraft surface is directly sampled with cotton swabs or wipes. To generate the bioburden current best estimate (CBE) for components not directly verifiable, the accepted approach is to apply a NASA-defined bioburden estimate based on the components’ manufacturing or assembly environment. This approach utilizes a prespecified bioburden density estimation that applies a maximum value across the total surface area of the specified component. For hardware components that underwent similar assembly processes, an implied bioburden is adopted for all components, based on a direct verification of a representative component within the same lot. Once all components have a CBE, the bioburden estimates are generated. In previous publication [ 1], we have shown that statistical risks quantifying the accuracy of the estimates for sampled, prespecified, and implied components can be derived and ranked. For mean squared error (MSE) function, the risks are available analytically and hence a cost function can be obtained to optimize the risks with respect to the sampling area and sampling cost. Since the sampling area and sampling cost are two complimentary variables, their sum will have a well-defined minimum. This paper presents the multivariate optimization of the integrated risk of an empirical Bayes estimator to determine the optimal sampling schedule for a given number of components. It is assumed that given a number of components, N, the bioburden density for each component can either be sampled, implied, or prespecified. The multivariate optimization searches through different options to sample, imply or prespecify the bioburden density for a component, and account for the component’s surface area and cost of sampling. The idea of the optimization is based on the observation that the statistical risk of using an estimator is a monotonically decreasing function of the sampled area. The larger the sampled area, the lower the risk of using the estimator as the estimator becomes more and more accurate as the sampling area increases. On the other hand, the cost of sampling is monotonically increasing as the sampled surface grows. This makes the risk and total cost of sampling complimentary variables which can be counterbalanced to achieve an optimal overall value with respect to the sampled surface. In this paper, the integrated risk has been used to quantify the accuracy of the estimator. This risk has been selected because it depends on neither the true value of the parameter nor on the collected data. The cost of each sample was also available to obtain the total cost of sampling of N components. The paper will present the results based on computer-simulated data as well as the data collected during the InSight mission. The computer-simulated data have N components with randomly generated total areas and each component assigned to one of the three categories according to the method of estimating of bioburden density: sampled, implied, or prespecified. The cost of sampling is also available. The cost of sampling is estimated based on a cost model provided by the planetary protection group at JPL. For this paper, the overall cost was assumed to be a linear function of exposure. The optimization process finds the allocation of the components to the three categories that minimizes the tradeoff between integrated risk and total cost. For the InSight data, a set of components is selected representing all three categories, and optimization is performed to determine if the performed allocation was optimal or if a better allocation could have been obtained. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first attempt not only perform an accurate estimation of bioburden density but also do it in an optimal way.

97 - MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2002

Technology Development and Advanced Planning for Curation of Returned Mars Samples

NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) curates extraterrestrial samples, providing the international science community with lunar rock and soil returned by the Apollo astronauts, meteorites collected in Antarctica, cosmic dust collected in the stratosphere, and hardware exposed to the space environment. Curation comprises initial characterization of new samples, preparation and allocation of samples for research, and clean, secure long-term storage. The foundations of this effort are the specialized cleanrooms (class 10 to 10,000) for each of the four types of materials, the supporting facilities, and the people, many of whom have been doing detailed work in clean environments for decades. JSC is also preparing to curate the next generation of extraterrestrial samples. These include samples collected from the solar wind, a comet, and an asteroid. Early planning and R\&D are underway to support post-mission sample handling and curation of samples returned from Mars. One of the strong scientific reasons for returning samples from Mars is to search for evidence of current or past life in the samples. Because of the remote possibility that the samples may contain life forms that are hazardous to the terrestrial biosphere, the National Research Council has recommended that all samples returned from Mars be kept under strict biological containment until tests show that they can safely be released to other laboratories. It is possible that Mars samples may contain only scarce or subtle traces of life or prebiotic chemistry that could readily be overwhelmed by terrestrial contamination . Thus, the facilities used to contain, process, and analyze samples from Mars must have a combination of high-level biocontainment and organic / inorganic chemical cleanliness that is unprecedented. JSC has been conducting feasibility studies and developing designs for a sample receiving facility that would offer biocontainment at least the equivalent of current maximum containment BSL-4 (BioSafety Level 4) laboratories, while simultaneously maintaining cleanliness levels equaling those of state-of-the-art cleanrooms. Unique requirements for the processing of Mars samples have inspired a program to develop handling techniques that are much more precise and reliable than the approach (currently used for lunar samples) of employing gloved human hands in nitrogen-filled gloveboxes. Individual samples from Mars are expected to be much smaller than lunar samples, the total mass of samples returned by each mission being 0.5- 1 kg, compared with many tens of kg of lunar samples returned by each of the six Apollo missions. Smaller samples require much more of the processing to be done under microscopic observation. In addition, the requirements for cleanliness and high-level containment would be difficult to satisfy while using traditional gloveboxes. JSC has constructed a laboratory to test concepts and technologies important to future sample curation. The Advanced Curation Laboratory includes a new-generation glovebox equipped with a robotic arm to evaluate the usability of robotic and teleoperated systems to perform curatorial tasks. The laboratory also contains equipment for precision cleaning and the measurement of trace organic contamination.

Lindstrom, David J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Comet Astrobiology Exploration Sample Return (CAESAR) Mission

The Comet Astrobiology Exploration Sample Return (CAESAR) mission will acquire and return to Earth for laboratory analysis a minimum of 80 grams of surface material from the nucleus of comet 67P/Chur-yumov-Gerasimenko (67P). CAESAR will characterize the surface region sampled, preserve the collected sample in a pristine state, and return evolved volatiles by capturing them in a separate gas reservoir. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center provides project management, systems engineering, safety and mission assurance, contamination control, mission operations, and many other important functions. Northrop Grumman Space Systems will build the spacecraft, based on Dawn mission heritage, which like CAESAR, uses solar electric propulsion. CAESAR was selected by for Phase A study in the New Frontiers 4 Competition and will be proposed to New Frontiers 5.Collection of a sample from the surface of comet 67P is facilitated by a set of cameras that together provide images to support sample site selection, perform optical navigation, and document the sample before, during, and after col-lection. The sample is collected at the end of an arm during a 5-second touch-and-go (TAG) maneuver with the Sample Acquisition System (SAS)designed by Honeybee Robotics for the surface properties of comet 67P observed by the Rosetta mission. After sample collection, and while the sample is still cold (< -80°C), the TAG Arm inserts the sample container into the Sample Containment System (SCS) mounted inside the Sample Return Capsule (SRC). The SCS is sealed, preventing the sample from escaping into space. The sample is slowly warmed inside the SCS to enable sublimation of volatiles, which are collected in the Gas Containment System (GCS), a passively cooled gas reservoir. Separating the volatiles from the solid sample protects the solid sample from alteration. Once all sublimated H2O is transferred to the GCS, the GCS is sealed to capture the volatile sit contains, and the SCS is vented to space to maintain the solid sample under vacuum. The SCS vent is closed before Earth entry to prevent atmospheric contamination. Detailed laboratory analyses of the sample from 67P will trace the history of volatile reservoirs, delineate the chemical pathways that led from simple interstellar species to complex molecules, constrain the evolution of the comet, and evaluate the role of comets in delivering water and prebiotic organics to the early Earth. CAESAR will achieve these goals by carrying out coordinated sample analyses that will link macroscopic properties of the comet with microscale mineralogy, chemistry, and isotopic studies of volatiles and solids. Most of the sample (≥75%) will be set aside for analyses by generations of scientists using continually advancing tools and methods, yielding an enduring scientific treasure that only sample return can provide. This presentation will review development conducted during NF4 Phase A and discuss the NF5 mission concept.

A G Hayes↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Microbial Monitoring of New Cleanrooms Used to Curate Astrobiologically Relevant Asteroid Samples from Bennu and Ryugu

Introduction: NASA has constructed two new cleanrooms to house materials from the OSRIS-REx and Hayabusa2 missions to the asteroids Ryugu (162173) and Bennu (101955), respectively. In accordance with standard astromaterials curation practices, these cleanrooms will be monitored for particulate contamination and maintained to ISO 5 equivalent standards1. Since the samples in these collections are expected to contain prebiotic organic compounds that may help explain the origin of life on Earth, these labs will also be monitored for organic and biological contamination2. Samples from Ryugu arrived on Earth in December, 2020. After basic characterization in Japan, NASA received a subset of these samples at the astromaterials curation facility in Houston in December of 2021. OSIRIS-REx is expected to return samples in September, 2023. Here we present preliminary microbial monitoring results from monthly monitoring of these new labs and the connected microtomy and staging areas that support them, as they are being commissioned. We also compare these results to baseline values for other astromaterials curation labs. We will also briefly describe additional cleaning efforts employed to reduce the bioburden in these new cleanrooms. Methods: Microbial samples were collected from surfaces using a dry macrofoam swab (Puritan Brand 2518051PFRNDFD). Swabs were also opened in the lab but not touched to any surfaces to function as negative controls. Samples and controls were processed inside a class II biosafety cabinet to avoid inadvertent cross contamination. The swabs were suspended in 15 ml of PBS (Phosphate Buffered Saline) and vortexed for 20 seconds to remove cells from the swab surface. The PBS was used to inoculate Petri dishes filled with TSA (Tryptic Soy Agar), Blood Agar, or Reasoners 2 agar to check for microbial growth. Each plate was inoculated with 0.1 ml of PBS. The TSA and blood agar plates were incubated at 35˚C and the Reasoners 2 agar plates were incubated at 25˚C for seven days. Petri dishes filled with Potato dextrose agar, Saboraud dextrose agar, or Saboraud dextrose agar with 0.1 mg/ml of chloramphenicol, an antibiotic, were used to check for fungal growth. These plates were inoculated with 0.3 ml of PBS and incubated at 30˚C. The remaining PBS was frozen at -80 ˚C for DNA sequencing. After incubation, isolates were counted and reisolated for identification. Isolates were identified using the VITEK23 system or by sequencing a portion of the 16S rRNA gene for bacteria or the ribosomal internal transcribed spacer (ITS) for fungi. Sequencing was performed with an ABI 3500 Sanger sequencer. Results: During our initial sampling, six of the seven sites sampled (86%) displayed bacterial or fungal growth. Samples collected from the staging areas and microtomy labs are not included in this calculation since those areas are maintained at a lower ISO 7 equivalent cleanliness standard. A month later, only three of the seven sites (43%) displayed bacterial growth. No fungal growth was detected in the second sampling. Since new equipment had been introduced to the Hayabusa2 lab since the first round of sampling, an additional three sampling sites were included in the second round of sampling. None of these sites displayed microbial growth. These sites will be included in all future sampling efforts. Bacterial isolates have been identified from the following genera at multiple time points: Micrococcus, Staphylococcus, and Bacillus. Isolates from the genera: Microbacterium, Nocardioides, Methylocystis, and Microvirga were identified in the initial sampling, but were not present at later time points. Identification of fungal isolates is in progress. Results are summarized in Table 1. Discussion: The recovery rate or percentage of positive samples4 was initially 86%, which is higher than the median recovery rate for comparable ISO 5 equivalent curation labs like Stardust (33%), Hayabusa (33%), and Cosmic Dust (50%). However, after a month of operation, the recovery rate for these same sites decreased to 43%, which is similar to what we observe in comparable curation cleanrooms with no microbial control requirements. Adding in the new sampling sites further decreases the recovery rate to 30%. With the reduction in recovery rate, we also observed a decrease in microbial diversity. At the first time point, we observed at least 10 different bacterial species and at least two different fungi. This is a higher diversity than the median values for comparable ISO 5 equivalent labs (2-4 isolates per sampling event). After the second sampling, we observed at least 4 bacterial species and no fungi, which is more consistent with comparable labs. We expect the recovery rate and diversity in both labs to continue to decrease as routine operation continues. We will use ultrapure hydrogen peroxide to disinfect equipment and work areas prior to opening any sample containers. Most of the bacterial and fungal isolates were detected on samples from the cleanroom floors. This is consistent with baseline results from other curation labs. Organisms from the genera Bacillus, Staphylococcus, and Micrococcus that were repeatedly detected are common in cleanrooms and on human skin5,6. These organisms are generally thought to be introduced when people enter the cleanroom. Microbacterium, Nocardioides, and Microvirga have also previously been identified in astromaterials cleanrooms, but not as frequently as Bacillus, Staphylococcus, and Micrococcus. Methylocystis is a novel genus in the astromaterials cleanrooms, but it was identified with low accuracy (93% match in the sequenced region of the 16S rRNA gene) and further work is needed to confirm this identification. Microbacterium is a diverse genus with isolates identified from terrestrial and aquatic sediments. Some species of Microbacterium are capable of degrading complex organic compounds found in crude oil. The presence of these bacteria in the OSIRIS REx and Hayabusa2 cleanrooms should be closely monitored. Methylocystis is a genus of methanotrophic bacteria capable of oxidizing methane. If this identification proves to be correct and it is detected again, it should be closely monitored as well. Under nominal operating conditions, samples should not ever encounter the cleanroom floor or other high traffic areas. If we observe an increase in the bioburden in sensitive work areas that appears to be influenced by organism transfer from high traffic areas like the floors, we can employ additional hydrogen peroxide treatments to disinfect high traffic areas. Routine microbial monitoring of these labs will ensure that NASA’s astromaterials collections remain pristine and useful for scientific study. Table 1. Sampling Locations and Colony Counts Bacterial CFUa Fungal CFU Bacterial CFU Fungal CFU Lab - Location 11/2/2021 11/2/2021 12/13/2021 12/13/2021 H2b-Floor 4 8 1 0 H2-staging pass through 3 0 0 0 H2-microtomy pass through TNTCc 0 0 0 H2 Microscope 1 NA NA 0 0 H2 Microscope 2 NA NA 0 0 H2-Table NA NA 0 0 OREXd- microtomy pass through 0 0 6 0 OREX – Anteroom pass through 0 0 0 0 OREX – Floor 1 2 0 0 OREX Witness Foil Table 3 0 1 0 Staging-Floor 16 0 15 0 Microtomy-Floor 3 0 2 0 a: CFU = Colony Forming Unit b: H2 = Hayabusa2 Lab c: TNTC = too numerous to count d: OREX = OSIRIS-REx Lab References: 1. ISO 14644-1:2015 - Cleanrooms and associated controlled environments -- Part 1: Classification of air cleanliness by particle concentration. 37 (2015). 2. McCubbin, F. M. et al. Space Sci Rev 215, (2019). 3. Pincus, D. H. Encyclopedia of Rapid Microbiological Methods (2005). 4. The United States Pharmacopeial Convention. USP General Chapter <1116> 17, 784–794 (2013). 5. Sheraba, N. S., Yassin, A. S. & Amin, M. BMC Research Notes 3, 278 (2010). 6. Utescher, C. L. de A., Franzolin, M. R., Trabulsi, L. R. & Gambale, V. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology 38, 710–716 (2007).

A B Regberg↗
DOE OSTI2021

Sampling probe

A system for sampling a surface includes a sampling probe including a housing with a probe end having a sampling fluid opening, a sampling fluid supply conduit and a sampling fluid exhaust conduit. The sampling fluid supply conduit supplies sampling fluid to the sampling fluid opening. The sampling fluid exhaust conduit includes a wall, a sampling fluid exhaust conduit inlet opening for removing sampling fluid from the sampling fluid opening, and a sampling fluid exhaust conduit outlet opening for removing fluid from the sampling fluid exhaust conduit. A sampling fluid analytic conduit is also provided in the sampling probe and has a sampling fluid analytic conduit inlet opening spaced upstream from the sampling fluid exhaust conduit outlet opening, downstream from the sampling fluid exhaust conduit inlet opening, and from the wall of the sampling fluid exhaust conduit. A wash conduit can also be provided. Methods for sampling are also disclosed.

Van Berkel, Gary↗
NASA NTRS2013

Advanced Curation of Current and Future Extraterrestrial Samples

Curation of extraterrestrial samples is the critical interface between sample return missions and the international research community. Curation includes documentation, preservation, preparation, and distribution of samples. The current collections of extraterrestrial samples include: Lunar rocks / soils collected by the Apollo astronauts Meteorites, including samples of asteroids, the Moon, and Mars "Cosmic dust" (asteroid and comet particles) collected by high-altitude aircraft Solar wind atoms collected by the Genesis spacecraft Comet particles collected by the Stardust spacecraft Interstellar dust collected by the Stardust spacecraft Asteroid particles collected by the Hayabusa spacecraft These samples were formed in environments strikingly different from that on Earth. Terrestrial contamination can destroy much of the scientific significance of many extraterrestrial materials. In order to preserve the research value of these precious samples, contamination must be minimized, understood, and documented. In addition the samples must be preserved - as far as possible - from physical and chemical alteration. In 2011 NASA selected the OSIRIS-REx mission, designed to return samples from the primitive asteroid 1999 RQ36 (Bennu). JAXA will sample C-class asteroid 1999 JU3 with the Hayabusa-2 mission. ESA is considering the near-Earth asteroid sample return mission Marco Polo-R. The Decadal Survey listed the first lander in a Mars sample return campaign as its highest priority flagship-class mission, with sample return from the South Pole-Aitken basin and the surface of a comet among additional top priorities. The latest NASA budget proposal includes a mission to capture a 5-10 m asteroid and return it to the vicinity of the Moon as a target for future sampling. Samples, tools, containers, and contamination witness materials from any of these missions carry unique requirements for acquisition and curation. Some of these requirements represent significant advances over methods currently used. New analytical and screening techniques will increase the value of current sample collections. Improved web-based tools will make information on all samples more accessible to researchers and the public. Advanced curation of current and future extraterrestrial samples includes: Contamination Control - inorganic / organic Temperature of preservation - subfreezing / cryogenic Non-destructive preliminary examination - X-ray tomography / XRF mapping / Raman mapping Microscopic samples - handling / sectioning / transport Special samples - unopened lunar cores Informatics - online catalogs / community-based characterization.

Allen, Carlton C.↗
DOE OSTI2022

A comprehensive study of non-adaptive and residual-based adaptive sampling for physics-informed neural networks

Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) have shown to be effective tools for solving both forward and inverse problems of partial differential equations (PDEs). PINNs embed the PDEs into the loss of the neural network using automatic differentiation, and this PDE loss is evaluated at a set of scattered spatio-temporal points (called residual points). The location and distribution of these residual points are highly important to the performance of PINNs. However, in the existing studies on PINNs, only a few simple residual point sampling methods have mainly been used. Here, we present a comprehensive study of two categories of sampling for PINNs: non-adaptive uniform sampling and adaptive nonuniform sampling. We consider six uniform sampling methods, including (1) equispaced uniform grid, (2) uniformly random sampling, (3) Latin hypercube sampling, (4) Halton sequence, (5) Hammersley sequence, and (6) Sobol sequence. We also consider a resampling strategy for uniform sampling. To improve the sampling efficiency and the accuracy of PINNs, we propose two new residual-based adaptive sampling methods: residual-based adaptive distribution (RAD) and residual-based adaptive refinement with distribution (RAR-D), which dynamically improve the distribution of residual points based on the PDE residuals during training. Hence, we have considered a total of 10 different sampling methods, including six non-adaptive uniform sampling, uniform sampling with resampling, two proposed adaptive sampling, and an existing adaptive sampling. We extensively tested the performance of these sampling methods for four forward problems and two inverse problems in many setups. Our numerical results presented in this study are summarized from more than 6000 simulations of PINNs. Here, we show that the proposed adaptive sampling methods of RAD and RAR-D significantly improve the accuracy of PINNs with fewer residual points for both forward and inverse problems. Furthermore, the results obtained in this study can also be used as a practical guideline in choosing sampling methods.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of Tank 38H (HTF-38-20-62, -63) and Tank 43H (HTF-43-20-60, -61) Samples for Support of the Enrichment Control and Corrosion Control Programs

SRNL analyzed samples from Tank 38H and Tank 43H to support ECP and CCP. The results indicate the concentrations of most species in the Tank 38H surface sample increased from the previous surface sample. The Tank 38H sub-surface sample shows only small changes in concentration for most major species in the solution from the previous sample. The large differences in the concentrations of major components between the Tank 38H surface and sub-surface samples indicate significant stratification of solution species within the tank. The Tank 38H surface and sub-surface samples both contained a small amount of sludge solids (<1 wt%). The Tank 43H surface and sub-surface samples are slightly more dilute than the previous samples. The Tank 43H sub-surface sample exhibits a composition more concentrated than the surface sample indicating some stratification within the tank. The Tank 38H surface and sub-surface sample both show large increases in the concentrations of uranium and plutonium likely due to the presence of sludge solids in both samples. (Note: the samples were digested and analyzed without filtration.) The total uranium concentrations of the two Tank 43H samples are similar to the previous sample results. The plutonium concentration in both Tank 43H samples appear to have decreased from the previous samples; however, the surface sample concentrations are close to the detection limit.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS2001

Mars Sample Handling Protocol Workshop Series: Workshop 2

Numerous NASA reports and studies have identified Planetary Protection (PP) as an important part of any Mars sample return mission. The mission architecture, hardware, on-board experiments, and related activities must be designed in ways that prevent both forward- and back-contamination and also ensure maximal return of scientific information. A key element of any PP effort for sample return missions is the development of guidelines for containment and analysis of returned sample(s). As part of that effort, NASA and the Space Studies Board (SSB) of the National Research Council (NRC) have each assembled experts from a wide range of scientific fields to identify and discuss issues pertinent to sample return. In 1997, the SSB released its report on recommendations for handling and testing of returned Mars samples. In particular, the NRC recommended that: a) samples returned from Mars by spacecraft should be contained and treated as potentially hazardous until proven otherwise, and b) rigorous physical, chemical, and biological analyses [should] confirm that there is no indication of the presence of any exogenous biological entity. Also in 1997, a Mars Sample Quarantine Protocol workshop was convened at NASA Ames Research Center to deal with three specific aspects of the initial handling of a returned Mars sample: 1) biocontainment, to prevent 'uncontrolled release' of sample material into the terrestrial environment; 2) life detection, to examine the sample for evidence of organisms; and 3) biohazard testing, to determine if the sample poses any threat to terrestrial life forms and the Earth's biosphere. In 1999, a study by NASA's Mars Sample Handling and Requirements Panel (MSHARP) addressed three other specific areas in anticipation of returning samples from Mars: 1) sample collection and transport back to Earth; 2) certification of the samples as non-hazardous; and 3) sample receiving, curation, and distribution. To further refine the requirements for sample hazard testing and the criteria for subsequent release of sample materials from quarantine, the NASA Planetary Protection Officer convened an additional series of workshops beginning in March 2000. The overall objective of these workshops was to develop comprehensive protocols to assess whether the returned materials contain any biological hazards, and to safeguard the purity of the samples from possible terrestrial contamination. This document is the report of the second Workshop in the Series. The information herein will ultimately be integrated into a final document reporting the proceedings of the entire Workshop Series along with additional information and recommendations.

Rummel, John D.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Preserving, Enhancing, and Continuing the Scientific Legacy of the Apollo Sample Suite

From 1969 to 1972, Apollo astronauts collected 382 kg of rocks, soils, and core samples from six geologically diverse locations on the Moon. In the nearly 50 years since the samples were collected, over 3000 different studies have been conducted using the nearly 2200 different Apollo samples. Despite the maturity of the sample collection, many new studies of lunar samples are undertaken each year, with an average of more than 55 requests and more than 600 distinct subsamples allocated annually over the past five years. The Apollo samples are a finite resource, however. Although new studies are encouraged, it is important that new studies do not duplicate previous studies, and where possible, leverage previous results to inform and enhance the current studies. This helps to preserve the samples and scientific funding, both of which are precious resources. We have initiated several new efforts to rescue some of the early analyses from these samples, including unpublished analytical data. We are actively scanning NASA documentation in paper form that is related to the Apollo missions and sample processing, and we are collaborating with IEDA to establish a geochemical data base called MoonDB. To populate this database, we are actively working with about a dozen prominent lunar PIs to organize and transcribe years of both published and unpublished data, making it available to all researchers. This effort will also take advantage of new online analytical tools like PetDB. There have already been tangible results from the MoonDB data rescue effort. A pilot project involving the rescue of geochemical data of John Delano on Apollo pyroclastic glasses has already been referenced in multiple Apollo sample requests, and in fact, the compiled data was used as part of one of the new studies. Similarly, scanned sample handling reports have been utilized to find previously analyzed samples that were appropriate to fulfill new sample requests. We have also begun to image the Apollo samples using (1) micro‐CT scanning to document the interior structure of samples, and (2) comprehensive high resolution photography of samples, enabling high resolution 3D reconstructions of the samples. Both efforts will provide comprehensive access to these samples and allow for more targeted requests, and thus better curation of the samples for decades to come.

Zeigler, Ryan↗
NASA NTRS2016

Spatial Sampling of Weather Data for Regional Crop Yield Simulations

Field-scale crop models are increasingly applied at spatio-temporal scales that range from regions to the globe and from decades up to 100 years. Sufficiently detailed data to capture the prevailing spatio-temporal heterogeneity in weather, soil, and management conditions as needed by crop models are rarely available. Effective sampling may overcome the problem of missing data but has rarely been investigated. In this study the effect of sampling weather data has been evaluated for simulating yields of winter wheat in a region in Germany over a 30-year period (1982-2011) using 12 process-based crop models. A stratified sampling was applied to compare the effect of different sizes of spatially sampled weather data (10, 30, 50, 100, 500, 1000 and full coverage of 34,078 sampling points) on simulated wheat yields. Stratified sampling was further compared with random sampling. Possible interactions between sample size and crop model were evaluated. The results showed differences in simulated yields among crop models but all models reproduced well the pattern of the stratification. Importantly, the regional mean of simulated yields based on full coverage could already be reproduced by a small sample of 10 points. This was also true for reproducing the temporal variability in simulated yields but more sampling points (about 100) were required to accurately reproduce spatial yield variability. The number of sampling points can be smaller when a stratified sampling is applied as compared to a random sampling. However, differences between crop models were observed including some interaction between the effect of sampling on simulated yields and the model used. We concluded that stratified sampling can considerably reduce the number of required simulations. But, differences between crop models must be considered as the choice for a specific model can have larger effects on simulated yields than the sampling strategy. Assessing the impact of sampling soil and crop management data for regional simulations of crop yields is still needed.

upscaling↗
NASA NTRS2022

Phase II and III Solid Waste Management Unit Assessment and Confirmatory Sampling Report for Per- and Polyfluorinated Alkyl Substances, Potential Release Location 237, Kennedy Space Center, Florida

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) Phase II and III Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) Assessment (SA) and Confirmatory Sampling (CS) were conducted at the John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Potential Release Location (PRL) 237, located in Merritt Island, Brevard County, Florida for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) under Contract 80KSC019D0010/80KSC019F0289. A Phase I SA and CS Report was previously submitted that identified 33 locations of concern (LOCs) at KSC associated with the storage, use, or release of materials containing PFAS. The objectives of the Phase II and III SA and CS were to: - Complete site and source characterization of identified LOCs; - Identify areas of potential concern (AOPCs) where past or present activities may have resulted in a release of PFAS to the environment; - Qualitatively characterize migration potential of released PFAS to environmental media (primarily soil, groundwater, surface water, and sediment); and - Identify potential receptors for exposure to PFAS-impacted environmental media. Surface water samples were collected from LOCs/AOPCs and locations on the KSC periphery during PFAS CS Phases I, II and III. Including duplicate samples, 143 environmental samples were analyzed for 14 PFAS compounds and 104 environmental samples were analyzed for 18 PFAS compounds. Ten of the analytes on the 14 compound list were detected at least once in surface water at KSC, with a wide range in magnitude of detections. The State of Florida has surface water screening levels (SWSLs) for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) in surface water, both for human and ecological receptors. The human health screening levels are lower than the ecological ones and are used in this report. PFOA was not detected in surface water at concentrations exceeding the SWSL at any LOC or Area of Potential Concern (AOPC). PFOS was detected in surface water at concentrations exceeding the SWSL at 28 LOCs/AOPCs, plus 42 locations on the KSC periphery. The data suggest a wide distribution of PFAS, particularly PFOS, in surface water but the sources of surface water contamination are not yet adequately understood. Sediment samples were collected during Phases II and III but not Phase I. Including duplicate samples, 104 environmental samples were analyzed for 14 PFAS compounds and 10 environmental samples were analyzed for 18 PFAS compounds. Twelve compounds were detected in sediment at KSC, with a wide range in magnitude of detections. There are currently no screening levels or cleanup target levels (CTLs) for sediment. The need to delineate and further characterize PFAS in sediment will be evaluated for those sites that move forward into Site Assessment. Groundwater samples were collected via DPT from LOCs/AOPCs and locations on the KSC periphery during PFAS CS Phases I, II and III. Including duplicate samples, 812 environmental DPT groundwater samples were analyzed for 14 PFAS compounds and 247 environmental samples were analyzed for 18 PFAS compounds. Twelve of the 14 compounds were detected in groundwater at KSC, with a wide range in magnitude of detections. The State of Florida has provisional groundwater cleanup target levels (GCTLs) for PFOA, PFOS and the additive concentration of PFOA+PFOS. PFOA was detected in groundwater at concentrations exceeding its provisional GCTL at 16 LOCs/AOPCs, with no exceedances on the KSC periphery. PFOS was detected in groundwater at concentrations exceeding its provisional GCTL at 30 LOCs/AOPCs, plus two locations on the KSC periphery. PFOA+PFOS was detected in groundwater at concentrations exceeding the provisional GCTL at 31 LOCs/AOPCs, plus two locations on the KSC periphery. Soil samples were collected during Phases II and III but not Phase I. Including duplicate samples, 292 environmental samples were analyzed for 14 PFAS compounds and 80 environmental samples were analyzed for 18 PFAS compounds. Fourteen compounds were detected in soil at KSC, with a wide range in magnitude of detections. The State of Florida has provisional soil cleanup target levels (SCTLs) for PFOA and PFOS. There were no PFOA results above its provisional SCTL. There was one LOC with a result above the provisional SCTL for residential settings. Recommendations are presented for each LOC and AOPC.

PFAS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ISS External Microorganisms: Collecting Planetary Protection Samples During Extravehicular Activity

We have developed, tested, and flown a caddy capable of collecting aseptic samples from external surfaces of the ISS (International Space Station). The sampling caddy is certified for use during US EVA (extra vehicular activity) and was launched to ISS in the summer of 2023. We are scheduled to collect samples from 6 locations outside ISS during an EVA in May of 2024. We will freeze these samples at -80°C on orbit and return them to Earth. We will then extract and sequence any DNA collected during the EVA using next generation sequencing technologies to characterize the community composition and function of each sample. Measuring the type and quantity of microbes present on the exterior of ISS will allow us to address knowledge gap 2B, “Acceptable levels of microbial/organic releases from humans and support systems” described in a 2019 COSPAR report. Collecting data about microbial release from current crewed vehicles will inform requirements for acceptable leak rates for future crewed missions to Mars. The sampling kit consists of eight commercially available, sterile, DNA free, macrofoam swabs ( 23 mm. diameter ) installed in custom aluminum end effectors. Each end effector is housed in and individual aluminum canister. Each canister contains a 0.2 μm Teflon filter to allow the interior volume to accommodate pressure changes without permitting microbial contaminants to enter the sterile interior volume. A handle repurposed from the space shuttle tile repair kit is used to remove the end effector from the sample canister, collect a sample by swabbing a surface and then replace the end effector in its canister. The canisters and end effectors were cleaned and assembled on Earth. Prior to installing the sterile swab the canisters and end effectors were sterilized in an autoclave at 134°C, 215 kPA, for 7 min.. The final assembly occurred in a sterilized class II biosafety cabinet. We will collect six samples from the 1) airlock vestibule, 2) airlock thermal cover, 3) a gap in the micrometeorite shielding near the airlock, 4) a handrail near the airlock, 5) the CDRA (Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly) vent, and 6) the VES (Vacuum Exhaust System) vent. The remaining two swabs will be reserved as controls. One swab will be exposed during the EVA without touching any surfaces to act as a blank. The final swab will remain sealed until the entire sampling kit is returned to earth. Based on previously published results from the Russian segment, we hypothesize that there will be detectable microbes at some or all of these locations. Ground-based testing of this sampling caddy confirms that the swabs remain sterile as the canisters transition in and out of vacuum. We were able to retrieve, viable bacterial and fungal cells as well as DNA from samples collected from US space suits during vacuum chamber tests lasting as long as seven hours. Based on these results and feedback from the test subjects the sampling caddy was modified to improve ergonomics and meet US EVA safety requirements. Bayonet probes were added to the sides of the sample kit as alternate mounting points. Additional locking features were added to the end effector and the filter stack to prevent inadvertent release during use. The opening mechanism was changed from one where the end effector was rocked laterally to defeat a ball detent to a twist-to-open threaded closure for similar reasons. Demonstrating, this sampling caddy’s effectiveness during a US EVA will allow us to address knowledge gaps identified in COSPAR reports and begin to define planetary protection requirements for life support systems on crewed missions to mars. This kit could also be used to collect contamination control samples during Artemis missions to verify requirements and could be easily modified for robotic sample collection.

Planetary Protection↗
NASA NTRS1988

Sampling Mars: Analytical requirements and work to do in advance

Sending a mission to Mars to collect samples and return them to the Earth for analysis is without doubt one of the most exciting and important tasks for planetary science in the near future. Many scientifically important questions are associated with the knowledge of the composition and structure of Martian samples. Amongst the most exciting questions is the clarification of the SNC problem- to prove or disprove a possible Martian origin of these meteorites. Since SNC meteorites have been used to infer the chemistry of the planet Mars, and its evolution (including the accretion history), it would be important to know if the whole story is true. But before addressing possible scientific results, we have to deal with the analytical requirements, and with possible pre-return work. It is unlikely to expect that a possible Mars sample return mission will bring back anything close to the amount returned by the Apollo missions. It will be more like the amount returned by the Luna missions, or at least in that order of magnitude. This requires very careful sample selection, and very precise analytical techniques. These techniques should be able to use minimal sample sizes and on the other hand optimize the scientific output. The possibility to work with extremely small samples should not obstruct another problem: possible sampling errors. As we know from terrestrial geochemical studies, sampling procedures are quite complicated and elaborate to ensure avoiding sampling errors. The significance of analyzing a milligram or submilligram sized sample and putting that in relationship with the genesis of whole planetary crusts has to be viewed with care. This leaves a dilemma on one hand, to minimize the sample size as far as possible in order to have the possibility of returning as many different samples as possible, and on the other hand to take a sample large enough to be representative. Whole rock samples are very useful, but should not exceed the 20 to 50 g range, except in cases of extreme inhomogeneity, because for larger samples the information tends to become redundant. Soil samples should be in the 2 to 10 g range, permitting the splitting of the returned samples for studies in different laboratories with variety of techniques.

Koeberl, Christian↗
NASA NTRS1999

Aerosols and Particulates Workshop Sampling Procedures and Venues Working Group Summary

The Sampling Procedures and Venues Workgroup discussed the potential venues available and issues associated with obtaining measurements. Some of the issues included Incoming Air Quality, Sampling Locations, Probes and Sample Systems. The following is a summary of the discussion of the issues and venues. The influence of inlet air to the measurement of exhaust species, especially trace chemical species, must be considered. Analysis procedures for current engine exhaust emissions regulatory measurements require adjustments for air inlet humidity. As a matter of course in scientific investigations, it is recommended that "background" measurements for any species, particulate or chemical, be performed during inlet air flow before initiation of combustion, if possible, and during the engine test period as feasible and practical. For current regulatory measurements, this would be equivalent to setting the "zero" level for conventional gas analyzers. As a minimum, it is recommended that measurements of the humidity and particulates in the incoming air be taken at the start and end of each test run. Additional measurement points taken during the run are desirable if they can be practically obtained. It was felt that the presence of trace gases in the incoming air is not a significant problem. However, investigators should consider the ambient levels and influences of local air pollution for species of interest. Desired measurement locations depend upon the investigation requirements. A complete investigation of phenomenology of particulate formation and growth requires measurements at a number of locations both within the engine and in the exhaust field downstream of the nozzle exit plane. Desirable locations for both extractive and in situ measurements include: (1) Combustion Zone (Multiple axial locations); (2) Combustor Exit (Multiple radial locations for annular combustors); (3) Turbine Stage (Inlet and exit of the stage); (4) Exit Nozzle (Multiple axial locations downstream of the nozzle). Actual locations with potential for extractive or non-intrusive measurements depend upon the test article and test configuration. Committee members expressed the importance of making investigators aware of various ports that could allow access to various stages of the existing engines. Port locations are engine si)ecific and might allow extractive sampling or innovative hybrid optical-probe access. The turbine stage region was one the most desirable locations for obtaining samples and might be accessed through boroscope ports available in some engine designs. Discussions of probes and sampling systems quickly identified issues dependent on particular measurement quantities. With general consensus, the group recommends SAE procedures for measurements and data analyses of currently regulated exhaust species (CO2, CO, THC, NO(x),) using conventional gas sampling techniques. Special procedures following sound scientific practices must be developed as required for species and/or measurement conditions not covered by SAE standards. Several issues arose concerning short lived radicals and highly reactive species. For conventional sampling, there are concerns of perturbing the sample during extraction, line losses, line-wall reactions, and chemical reactions during the sample transport to the analyzers. Sample lines coated with quartz.or other materials should be investigated for minimization of such effects. The group advocates the development of innovative probe techniques and non-intrusive optical techniques for measurement of short lived radicals and highly reactive species that cannot be sampled accurately otherwise. Two innovative probe concepts were discussed. One concept uses specially designed probes to transfer optical beams to and from a region of flow inaccessible by traditional ports or windows. The probe can perturb the flow field but must have a negligible impact on the region to be optically sampled. Such probes are referred to as hybrid probes and are under development at AEDC for measurement in the high pressure, high temperature of a combustor under development for power generation. The other concept consists of coupling an instrument directly to the probe. The probe would isolate a representative sample stream, freeze chemical reactions and direct the sample into the analyzer portion of the probe. Thus, the measurement would be performed in situ without sample line losses due either to reactions or binding at the wall surfaces. This concept was used to develop a fast, in situ, time-of-flight mass spectrometer measurement system for temporal quantification of NO in the IMPULSE facility at AEDC. Additional work is required in this area to determine the best probe and sampling technique for each species measurement requirement identified by the Trace Chemistry Working Group. A partial list of Venues was used as a baseline for discussion. Additional venues were added to the list and the list was broken out into the following categories: (1)Engines (a) Sea Level Test Stands (b) Altitude Chambers; (2) Annular Combustor Test Stands, (3) Sector Flametube Test Stands, (4) Fundamentals Rigs/Experiments.

Pachlhofer, Peter↗