Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “software competition”

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.

262 records · Page 15
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2011

Ground Processing Affordability for Space Vehicles

Launch vehicles and most of their payloads spend the majority of their time on the ground. The cost of ground operations is very high. So, why so often is so little attention given to ground processing during development? The current global space industry and economic environment are driving more need for efficiencies to save time and money. Affordability and sustainability are more important now than ever. We can not continue to treat space vehicles as mere science projects. More RLV's (Reusable Launch Vehicles) are being developed for the gains of reusability which are not available for ELV's (Expendable Launch Vehicles). More human-rated vehicles are being developed, with the retirement of the Space Shuttles, and for a new global space race, yet these cost more than the many unmanned vehicles of today. We can learn many lessons on affordability from RLV's. DFO (Design for Operations) considers ground operations during design, development, and manufacturing-before the first flight. This is often minimized for space vehicles, but is very important. Vehicles are designed for launch and mission operations. You will not be able to do it again if it is too slow or costly to get there. Many times, technology changes faster than space products such that what is launched includes outdated features, thus reducing competitiveness. Ground operations must be considered for the full product Lifecycle, from concept to retirement. Once manufactured, launch vehicles along with their payloads and launch systems require a long path of processing before launch. Initial assembly and testing always discover problems to address. A solid integration program is essential to minimize these impacts, as was seen in the Constellation Ares I-X test rocket. For RLV's, landing/recovery and post-flight turnaround activities are performed. Multi-use vehicles require reconfiguration. MRO (Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul) must be well-planned--- even for the unplanned problems. Defect limits and standard repairs need to be in-place as well as easily added. Many routine inspections and maintenance can be like an aircraft overhaul. Modifications and technology upgrades should be expected. Another factor affecting ground operations efficiency is trending. It is essential for RLV's, and also useful for ELV's which fly the same or similar models again. Good data analysis of technical and processing performance will determine fixes and improvements needed for safety, design, and future processing. Collecting such data on new or low-frequency vehicles is a challenge. Lessons can be learned from the Space Shuttle, or even the Concorde aircraft. For all of the above topics, efficient business systems must be established for comprehensive program management and good throughput. Drawings, specifications, and manuals for an entire launch vehicle are often in different formats from multiple vendors, plus they have proprietary constraints. Nonetheless, the integration team must ensure that all data needed is compatible and visible to each appropriate team member. Ground processing systems for scheduling, tracking, problem resolution, etc. must be well laid-out. The balance between COTS (commercial off the shelf) and custom software is difficult. Multiple customers, vendors, launch sites, and landing sites add to the complexity of efficient IT (Information Technology) tools.

Ingalls, John↗
DOE OSTI2014

SERIIUS-MAGEEP Visiting Scholars Program

Recent studies have assessed closed-loop supercritical carbon dioxide (s-CO 2 ) Brayton cycles to be a higher energy-density system in comparison to equivalent superheated steam Rankine systems. At turbine inlet conditions of 700°C and 20 MPa, a cycle thermal efficiency of ~50% can be achieved. Achieving these high efficiencies will help concentrating solar power (CSP) technologies to become a competitive alternative to current power generation methods. To incorporate an s-CO 2 Brayton power cycle in a solar power tower system, the development of a solar receiver capable of providing an outlet temperature of 700°C (at 20 MPa) is necessary. To satisfy the temperature requirements of an s-CO 2 Brayton cycle with recuperation and recompression, the s-CO 2 must undergo a temperature rise of ~200°C as it flows through the solar receiver. The main objective is to develop an optical-thermal-fluid and structural model to validate a tubular receiver that will receive a heat input ~0.33 MWth from the heliostat field at the National Solar Thermal Test Facility (NSTTF), Albuquerque, NM, USA. We also commenced the development of computational models and testing of air receivers being developed by the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) and the Indian Institute of Technology in Bombay (IIT-B). The helical tubular receiver is expected to counteract the effect of thermal expansion while using a cavity to reduce the radiative and convective losses. Initially, this receiver will be tested for a temperature range of 100-300°C under 1 MPa of pressurized air. The helical air receiver will be exposed to 10kWth to achieve a temperature rise of ~200°C. Preliminary tests to validate the modeling will be performed before the design and construction of a larger scale receiver. Lastly, I focused on the development of a new computational tool that would allow us to perform a nodal creep-fatigue analysis on the receivers and heat exchangers being developed. This tool was developed using MATLAB and is capable of processing the results obtained from ANSYS Fluent and Structural combined, which was limited when using commercial software. The main advantage of this code is that it can be modified to run in parallel making it more affordable and faster compared to commercial codes available. The code is in the process of validation and is currently being compared to nCode Design Life.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2024

Development and Experimental Optimization of High-Temperature Modeling Tools and Methods for Concentrated Solar Power Particle - Systems

A novel, open-source radiative modeling toolset was developed to extend the functionality of particle-based modeling software (e.g. discrete element method (DEM)) to environmental conditions relevant to concentrated solar power applications. This toolset was optimized for deployment on desktop workstations instead of high-performance computing systems, to render such tools more accessible to the research community. Both particle-based modeling and radiative exchange modeling are computationally expensive and often require specialized programming expertise, making these methods cumbersome to use. Recent developments in DEM software by DCS Computing have greatly reduced these challenges, providing a graphical-user-interface based platform and modeling optimization for desktop workstations, HPCs, and cloud computing. The University of Dayton leveraged the experience of DCS Computing in developing a user-friendly, open-source radiative heat transfer expansion for DEM modeling. The University of Dayton DEM+ radiative modeling toolset was developed using a combination of fundamental experimental measurements, modeling, and simplified flow experiments over a range of temperatures and flow conditions. The toolset provides researchers with access to multiple radiative models including an accelerated Monte-Carlo Ray Tracing (application agnostic, highly computationally expensive), an expanded database of distance-based approximations (application limited, computationally light), and a weighted blending of the two methods capable of achieving over 90% reduction in computation time with equivalent accuracy compared to Monte-Carlo Ray Tracing. Through a graphical user interface, users can customize the radiative models to match their desired accuracy and available computational resources, improving access to particle based modeling for the research community. Ceramic sintered bauxite proppants were used in modeling and experimentally as a baseline. Both the radiative heat transfer and flow properties for particulate systems were investigated at elevated temperatures up to 800 °C. The major accomplishments for this work include a verified, open-source radiative modeling toolset to be distributed amongst the research community and the fabrication of three small-scale test facilities to investigate particle behavior and tune DEM flow properties for operation up to 800 °C. The findings have been shared with the research community via conference modeling workshops, deployment of the tools in DCS Computing Aspherix®, and open-source access to the developed radiative modeling tool. The development of next-generation CSP facilities and thermal energy storage systems based on ceramic particles requires providing access to computationally efficient and accurate modeling tools. Particles will experience a wide range of environments (20-800 °C) and handling conditions (dilute curtains or dense packing), requiring specially designed and optimized equipment. Optimizing solid particle physics models and establishing best-practices for particle modeling in CSP environments will assist researchers with designing optimized equipment, accelerating the deployment of more economically-competitive CSP facilities.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

The False Dilemma: Rethinking AF Science and Technology Officer Talent Management

In 2019, Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) Heather Wilson launched the 2030 Science and Technology (S&T) Strategy by stating, “The advantage will go to those who create the best technologies and who integrate and field them in creative operational ways that provide military advantages.” In 2021, 15% of Air Force general officers responsible for creating and integrating this technological edge had a science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) graduate degree, and less than 1% of generals had a STEM doctorate. As one point of comparison, at least 32% and 13% of founding CEOs of Fortune 500 technology companies had a master’s and doctoral STEM degree, respectively. The gulf is larger when you consider that these CEOs used their technical degrees throughout their careers whereas most general officers do not. In large organizations, if the leader does not possess technical knowledge, it is difficult to drive innovation systems and connect ideas to reality. The evidence for this disconnect is abundant in acquisition challenges for high-tech systems, significant pushback to the “revolution in military affairs”, and failure of the “Third Offset” to take hold and deliver capabilities to offset Chinese and Russian capabilities. Indeed, when the former Air Force and Space Force Chief Software Officer, Nicolas M. Chaillan, offered his resignation, one of the main reasons for leaving was “the failure of OSD and the Joint Staff to deliver on their own alleged top ‘priority’, JADC2 – they couldn’t ‘walk the walk.’” Senior leaders have recognized this disconnect, and several inquiries and studies regarding STEM competency have been conducted. Many have posed a false dilemma: a large, STEM-cognizant or small, STEM-expert force. However, current and future STEM human capital needs are managed at the unit and functional area level. This leads to “silos” and the tactical “needs of the present” dominating the strategic “needs of the future”, highlighted by only two functional areas systematically tracking future STEM needs. Therefore, the decision on force structure appears to have been historically made by default through these and other perceived structural realities, and a vast majority of recommendations have focused on the small STEM community – an exercise in diminishing returns. In essence, the solution often boils down to finding unicorns – officers that have chartered the unforgiving pathway through the traditional “gates” to general officer while obtaining sufficient STEM proficiency along the way. Fortunately for the Air Force, these officers exist, albeit at a rate below what the evidence would suggest is necessary. However, this approach fundamentally limits the ability to develop a deep pool of officers with the ability to create and integrate technologies and ensures the Dunning-Kruger effect is prevalent. The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias where those with limited knowledge in an area lack the expertise necessary to recognize their lack of expertise and consequently are prone to overestimate their knowledge and performance. In short, we need less leaders overestimating their STEM knowledge and more with hard-earned STEM competency required to “walk the walk” to create and integrate technologies for military advantage. This will not be accomplished by restricting the emphasis to the traditional scientists and engineering (S&E) career fields – the pool, only 10% of line officers, and general officer progression is just too small. Fortunately, the recent SECAF’s Management Initiatives and Chief of Staff’s (CSAF) Action Orders, both containing emphasis on organic expertise to “accrue advantage in military-technological competition,” present an opportunity to truly develop a framework for the force of the future.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Results of the Photometric LSST Astronomical Time-series Classification Challenge (PLAsTiCC)

Abstract Next-generation surveys like the Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST) on the Vera C. Rubin Observatory (Rubin) will generate orders of magnitude more discoveries of transients and variable stars than previous surveys. To prepare for this data deluge, we developed the Photometric LSST Astronomical Time-series Classification Challenge (PLAsTiCC), a competition that aimed to catalyze the development of robust classifiers under LSST-like conditions of a nonrepresentative training set for a large photometric test set of imbalanced classes. Over 1000 teams participated in PLAsTiCC, which was hosted in the Kaggle data science competition platform between 2018 September 28 and 2018 December 17, ultimately identifying three winners in 2019 February. Participants produced classifiers employing a diverse set of machine-learning techniques including hybrid combinations and ensemble averages of a range of approaches, among them boosted decision trees, neural networks, and multilayer perceptrons. The strong performance of the top three classifiers on Type Ia supernovae and kilonovae represent a major improvement over the current state of the art within astronomy. This paper summarizes the most promising methods and evaluates their results in detail, highlighting future directions both for classifier development and simulation needs for a next-generation PLAsTiCC data set.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2018

Final Report to the National Energy Technology Laboratory on FY14- FY15 Cooperative Research with the Consortium for Electric Reliability Technology Solutions

The Power System Engineering Research Center (PSERC) engages in technological, market, and policy research for an efficient, secure, resilient, adaptable, and economic U.S. electric power system. PSERC, as a founding partner of the Consortium for Electric Reliability Technology Solutions (CERTS), conducted a multi-year program of research for U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE) to develop new methods, tools, and technologies to protect and enhance the reliability and efficiency of the U.S. electric power system as competitive electricity market structures evolve, and as the grid moves toward wide-scale use of decentralized generation (such as renewable energy sources) and demand-response programs. Phase I of OE’s funding for PSERC, under cooperative agreement DE-FC26-09NT43321, started in fiscal year (FY) 2009 and ended in FY2013. It was administered by DOE’s National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) through a cooperative agreement with Arizona State University (ASU). ASU provided sub-awards to the participating PSERC universities. This document is PSERC’s final report to NETL on the activities for OE, conducted through CERTS, from September 2015 through September 2017 utilizing FY 2014 to FY 2015 funding under cooperative agreement DE-OE0000670. PSERC is a thirteen-university consortium with over 30 industry members. Since 1996, PSERC has been engaged in research and education efforts with the mission of “empowering minds to engineer the future electric energy system.” Its work is focused on achieving: • An efficient, secure, resilient, adaptable, and economic electric power infrastructure serving society • A new generation of educated technical professionals in electric power • Knowledgeable decision-makers on critical energy policy issues • Sustained, quality university programs in electric power engineering. PSERC core research is funded by industry, with a budget supporting approximately 30 principal investigators and some 70 graduate students and other researchers. Its researchers are multi-disciplinary, conducting research in three principal areas: power systems, power markets and policy, and transmission and distribution technologies. The research is collaborative; each project involves researchers typically at two universities working with industry advisors who have expressed interest in the project. Examples of topics for recent PSERC research projects include grid integration of renewables and energy storage, new tools for taking advantage of increased penetration of real-time system measurements, advanced system protection methods to maintain grid reliability, and risk and reliability assessment of increasingly complex cyber-enabled power systems. A PSERC’s objective is to proactively address the technical and policy challenges of U.S. electric power systems. To achieve this objective, PSERC works with CERTS to conduct technical research on advanced applications and investigate the design of fair and transparent electricity markets; these research topics align with CERTS research areas 1 and 2: Real-time Grid Reliability Management (Area 1), and Reliability and Markets (Area 2). The CERTS research areas overlap with the PSERC research stems: Power Systems, Power Markets, and Transmission and Distribution Technologies, as described on the PSERC website (see http://www.pserc.org/research/research_program.aspx). The performers were with Arizona State University (ASU), Cornell University (CU), University of California at Berkeley (UCB), and University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). PSERC research activities in the area of reliability and markets focused on electric market and power policy analyses. The resulting studies suggest ways to frame best practices using organized markets for managing U.S. grid assets reliably and to identify highest priority areas for improvement. PSERC research activities in the area of advanced applications focused on mid- to long-term software research and development, with anticipated outcomes that move innovative ideas toward real-world application. Under the CERTS research area of Real-time Grid Reliability Management, PSERC has been focused on Advanced Applications Research and Development (AARD), a subgroup of activities that works to develop advanced applications and tools to more effectively operate the electricity delivery system, by enabling advanced analysis, visualization, monitoring and alarming, and decision support capabilities for grid operators.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Recent Advancements in the PATO Material Response Code

Introduction: Predicting the complicated multiphysics phenomena during atmospheric entry requires high-fidelity modeling tools to refine estimates of mission risks during entry. To this end, new capabilities are being added to the Porous-material Analysis Toolbox based on OpenFOAM (PATO). PATO is an open-source software for Computational Material Response (CMR) of reactive porous materials submitted to high-temperature environments. The objective of this work is to highlight current efforts to add to and improve upon the modeling capabilities of PATO. These include efforts to loosely couple PATO with other discipline specialized codes including hypersonic Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), to assess the interaction effects between pyrolysis gas blowing and the boundary layer, and Computational Solid Mechanics (CSM), to address modeling of mechanical erosion. Other refinements include surface phenomena modeling capabilities to address the effects of silicone-based coatings applied to the TPS during flight preparation, and a unified multiphase solver for a mixed porous-material and plain-fluid domain. Coupling CMR with CFD (CMR/CFD): A loose coupling between PATO and the Data Parallel Line Relaxation (DPLR) CFD code has been achieved by making use of a blowing boundary condition at the heatshield surface available in DPLR. Starting with heat flux estimates with no pyrolysis gas blowing at the surface, blowing gases are computed by the CMR and passed to the CFD such that aerothermal properties of the environment can be recomputed for a new CMR computation. This leads to an iterative process which is supplemented with an estimate of the radiative heat flux using the Nonequilibrium air radiation (NEQAIR) program. The entire iterative process is illustrated in Figure 1. This coupling strategy has been utilized in computing the MSL material response. The goal is to compare the coupled CMR/CFD results with material response results obtained using traditional blowing corrections. Coupling CMS with CMR: A mechanical erosion model is currently being implemented in PATO to account for the additional mass removal induced by high shear conditions. The modeling process at each timestep consists of updating the mechanical properties as a function of temperature and computing the stress tensor and displacement fields of the material. Then, a failure criteria model determines the regions in which the stress exceeds the ultimate strength values resulting in mesh movement to account for mass removal. This model allows the material response simulation to compute the recession due to both oxidation and shear-induced erosion. The model is demonstrated by computing material response of sphere-cone arc jet samples. Surface Modeling Capabilities: NuSil, a silicone-based coating, was sprayed onto the MSL and Mars 2020 heatshields to mitigate shedding of phenolic dust. To better understand the effects of the NuSil coating on the material response, a novel model has been implemented in PATO. In this model, the equilibrium of the charred NuSil surface is modeled as pure silica, and a constant offset, inspired by the classical spallation model, is added to the the char blowing rate and wall enthalpy to reproduce HyMETS experimental results. The model has also been used to estimate the 3D material response of the MSL heatshield. Unified Solver: In addition to the iterative loose coupling approach mentioned above, a multiphase unified solver is being developed to couple the environment (plain-fluid phase) and the porous-material phase. The solver is based on the volume averaged conservation of mass, momentum, and energy for the macroscale with closure models which include microscale effects through effective physicochemical properties. The unified solver has been used to compute flow through a porous plug and solve the Beavers and Joseph problem. Since the strong coupling between phases is inherent to this solver, modeling assumptions present in other coupling methods of material response are mitigated. This strategy also makes it feasible to capture the competition between surface and volume ablation in the same computational domain, which is usually not possible with other coupling approaches.

Material Response↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Recent Advancements in the PATO Material Response Code

Introduction: Predicting the complicated multiphysics phenomena during atmospheric entry requires high-fidelity modeling tools to refine estimates of mission risks during entry. To this end, new capabilities are being added to the Porous-material Analysis Toolbox based on OpenFOAM (PATO) [1,2,3]. PATO is an open-source software for Computational Material Response (CMR) of reactive porous materials submitted to high-temperature environments. The objective of this work is to highlight current efforts to add to and improve upon the modeling capabilities of PATO. These include efforts to loosely couple PATO with other discipline specialized codes including hypersonic Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), to assess the interaction effects between pyrolysis gas blowing and the boundary layer, and Computational Solid Mechanics (CSM), to address modeling of mechanical erosion. Other refinements include surface phenomena modeling capabilities to address the effects of silicone-based coatings applied to the TPS during flight preparation, and a unified multiphase solver for a mixed porous-material and plain-fluid domain. Coupling CMR with CFD (CMR/CFD): A loose coupling between PATO and the Data Parallel Line Relaxation (DPLR) [4] CFD code has been achieved by making use of a blowing boundary condition at the heatshield surface available in DPLR. Starting with heat flux estimates with no pyrolysis gas blowing at the surface, blowing gases are computed by the CMR and passed to the CFD such that aerothermal properties of the environment can be recomputed for a new CMR computation. This leads to an iterative process which is supplemented with an estimate of the radiative heat flux using the Nonequilibrium air radiation (NEQAIR) [5] program. The entire iterative process is illustrated in Figure 1. This coupling strategy has been utilized in computing the MSL material response. The goal is to compare the coupled CMR/CFD results with material response results obtained using traditional blowing corrections. Coupling CMS with CMR: A mechanical erosion model is currently being implemented in PATO to account for the additional mass removal induced by high shear conditions. The modeling process at each timestep consists of updating the mechanical properties as a function of temperature and computing the stress tensor and displacement fields of the material. Then, a failure criteria model determines the regions in which the stress exceeds the ultimate strength values resulting in mesh movement to account for mass removal. This model allows the material response simulation to compute the recession due to both oxidation and shear-induced erosion. The model is demonstrated by computing material response of sphere-cone arc jet samples. Surface Modeling Capabilities: NuSil, a silicone-based coating, was sprayed onto the MSL and Mars 2020 heatshields to mitigate shedding of phenolic dust. To better understand the effects of the NuSil coating on the material response, a novel model has been implemented in PATO. In this model, the equilibrium of the charred NuSil surface is modeled as pure silica, and a constant offset, inspired by the classical spallation model, is added to the the char blowing rate and wall enthalpy to reproduce HyMETS experimental results. The model has also been used to estimate the 3D material response of the MSL heatshield [6]. Unified Solver: In addition to the iterative loose coupling approach mentioned above, a multiphase unified solver is being developed to couple the environment (plain-fluid phase) and the porous-material phase. The solver is based on the volume averaged conservation of mass, momentum, and energy for the macroscale with closure models which include microscale effects through effective physicochemical properties. The unified solver has been used to compute flow through a porous plug and solve the Beavers and Joseph problem [7]. Since the strong coupling between phases is inherent to this solver, modeling assumptions present in other coupling methods of material response are mitigated. This strategy also makes it feasible to capture the competition between surface and volume ablation in the same computational domain, which is usually not possible with other coupling approaches.

Thermal Protection Systems↗
NASA NTRS2011

Standards and Specifications for Ground Processing of Space Vehicles: From an Aviation-Based Shuttle Project to Global Application

Proprietary or unique designs and operations are expected early in any industry's development, and often provide a competitive early market advantage. However, there comes a time when a product or industry requires standardization for the whole industry to advance...or survive. For the space industry, that time has come. Here, we will focus on standardization of ground processing for space vehicles and their ground systems. With the retirement of the Space Shuttle, and emergence of a new global space race, affordability and sustainability are more important now than ever. The growing commercialization of the space industry and current global economic environment are driving greater need for efficiencies to save time and money. More RLV's (Reusable Launch Vehicles) are being developed for the gains of reusability not achievable with traditional ELV's (Expendable Launch Vehicles). More crew/passenger vehicles are also being developed. All of this calls for more attention needed for ground processing-repeatedly before launch and after landing/recovery. RLV's should provide more efficiencies than ELV's, as long as MRO (Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul) is well-planned-even for the unplanned problems. NASA's Space Shuttle is a primary example of an RLV which was supposed to thrive on reusability savings with efficient ground operations, but lessons learned show that costs were (and still are) much greater than expected. International standards and specifications can provide the commonality needed to simplify design and manufacturing as well as to improve safety, quality, maintenance, and operability. There are standards organizations engaged in the space industry, but ground processing is one of the areas least addressed. Challenges are encountered due to various factors often not considered during development. Multiple vehicle elements, sites, customers, and contractors pose various functional and integration difficulties. Resulting technical publication structures and methods are incongruent. Some processing products are still done on paper, some electronic, and many being converted in between. Business systems then are not fully compatible, and paper as well as electronic conversions are time-consuming and costly. NASA and its Shuttle contractors setup rules and systems to handle what has produced over 130 RLV launches, but they have had many challenges. Attempts have been made to apply aviation industry specifications to make the Shuttle more efficient with its ground processing. One efficiency project example was to make a Shuttle Maintenance Manual (SMM) based on the commercial ATA (Air Transport Association of America) Spec 100 for technical publications. This industry standard, along with others, has been a foundation for efficient global MRO of commercial airlines for years. A modified version was also made for some military aircraft. The SMM project found many similarities in Spec 100 which apply to the Shuttle, and room for expansion for space systems/structures not in aircraft. The SMM project team met with the ATA and representatives from NASA's X-33 and X-34 programs to discuss collaboration on a national space standard based on Spec 100. A pilot project was enabled for a subset of Shuttle systems. Full implementation was not yet achieved, X-33 and X-34 were cancelled, and the Shuttles were then designated for retirement. Nonetheless, we can learn from this project how to expand this concept to all space vehicle products. Since then, ATA has joined with ASD (AeroSpace and Defence Industries Association of Europe) and AIA (Aerospace Industries Association) to form a much-enhanced and expanded international specification: Sl000D, International Specification for Technical Publications. It includes air, land, and sea vehicles, missiles, support equipment, ordnance, and communications. It is used by a growing number of countries for commercial and government products. Its modular design is supported by a Common Source Dabase (CSDB), and COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) software is available for production of IETP's (Interactive Electronic Technical Publications). A few space industry products in Europe have begun to apply Sl000D already. Also, there are other related standards/specifications which have global implications. We have an opportunity to adapt Sl000D and possibly other standards for use with space vehicles and ground systems. Sl000D has plenty of flexibility to apply to any product needed. To successfully grow the viability of the space industry, all members, commercial and government, will need to engage cooperatively in developing and applying standards to move toward interoperability. If we leverage and combine the best existing space standards and specifications, develop new ones to address known gaps, and adapt the best applicable features from other industries, we can establish an infrastructure to not only accelerate current development, but also build longevity for a more cohesive international space community.

Ingalls, John↗
DOE OSTI2023

University Coalition for Fossil Fuel Energy Research

Following a nationwide open competition, the University Coalition for Fossil Energy Research (UCFER) was established in October 2015 through a cooperative agreement between Penn State and the Department of Energy (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). Penn State lead UCFER with the objective of advancing basic and applied research for clean and low-carbon energy based on fossil fuels in support of the DOE’s mission. UCFER focused on research that improves the efficiency of production and use of fossil energy resources, while minimizing the environmental impacts and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Penn State lead a team of nine universities (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, The Pennsylvania State University, Princeton University, Texas A&M University, University of Kentucky, University of Southern California, The University of Tulsa, University of Wyoming, and Virginia Polytechnic and State University) during the competition stage, adding seven more universities in 2017 (Carnegie Mellon University, Louisiana State University, The Ohio State University, University of North Dakota, University of Pittsburgh, University of Utah, and West Virginia University). This Coalition exhibited a wide geographical distribution across the U.S. bringing a wide variety of fossil energy expertise. This national university alliance was a major collaborative effort with NETL to address specific topics of R&D in NETL’s mission area, which involved one or more of NETL’s five core competencies (Geologic and Environmental Systems, Materials Engineering and Manufacturing, Energy Conversion Engineering, Systems Engineering and Analysis, and Computational Science and Engineering). The first five to six months of the project was the definitization stage. During this period, Penn State worked closely with NETL to finalize the Coalition organizational structure and By- Laws, prepare a statement of substantial involvement and a statement of project objectives, and develop operations and membership plans. A major component of this stage included preparing an execution plan to solicit research, evaluate proposals, recommend selected projects to NETL, and award projects. In addition, a plan was prepared to monitor projects, review projects, disseminate knowledge from research projects and develop an online system for Coalition research portfolio management. This included developing a website and several databases. The first of six rounds of solicitations started in mid-2016. Projects from the sixth solicitation started February 1, 2021, and ended January 31, 2023. Projects that were selected represented twelve technology lines. Approximately $16.6 million in funding was available for the six solicitations. Most of the funding was provided by DOE, Office of Fossil Energy (DOEFE) with the DOE Fuel Cells Technologies Office (DOE-FCTO) providing funding for a few projects. Coalition universities submitted 259 proposals in response to the solicitations, requesting approximately $67.0 million in funding, and forty-three projects were selected. However, one project withdrew after the principal investigator left the university. The management of the Coalition projects was a major activity by Penn State. Managing the Coalition projects consisted of monitoring the projects, reviewing the projects through annual technical review meetings, disseminating knowledge from the research projects, and developing an online system for Coalition research portfolio management. Penn State’s OMT monitored projects to ensure that all milestones (technical, schedule, budget) were met, expenditures were allowable, cost share (when applicable) were reported, and all technical reports were submitted. The OMT also posted the technical reports electronically on a secure members-only website for access and review by the Coalition members. Disseminating knowledge from the research projects was done through a website, newsletters, various meetings, conferences, journal articles, publicity/press releases, and project summaries that were prepared after each project was completed. Penn State kept NETL apprised of UCFER progress through quarterly reports (thirtyone were submitted by Penn State), verbal and written communications, yearly updates at the annual technical review meetings, and cost accrual reports. The UCFER project had a significant impacty. The UCFER program established the first national university alliance in fossil energy research with a major collaboration effort with DOE NETL that addressed specific topics in NETL’s research and development mission areas. It generated inter-university collaborations, which was another program interest. Twenty-two out of 259 proposals contained collaborations (≈8.5%) and three of forty-two funded projects involved inter-university collaborations (≈7.0%). The forty-two funded projects provided support at fourteen universities involving 269 personnel. Research was conducted by 106 faculty, 115 graduate and undergraduate students, forty-six research staff and post-doctoral scholars, and two visiting scholars. Students and post-doctoral scholars were also on-site at NETL through CRADAs. In addition, non-Coalition participants included six universities and sixteen companies and national laboratories. The non-Coalition participants were involved as subcontractors, providers of cost share, performed unpaid consultation and sample analysis, served as advisory board members, or were providers of samples and materials for testing. UCFER also produced visibility in that fifty-six refereed journal articles were published, fifty-seven conference papers and twenty-three posters were prepared, 190 presentations were given, eight patent applications were filed, two books/book chapters were written, and ten software codes were developed. Collaboration between NETL and the individual projects was a major requirement for all funded projects. This included NETL staff time to support collaboration, consultation, technical guidance, sample preparation and analysis, internships at NETL, on-site testing and equipment usage by Coalition participants at NETL, co-mentoring students, and coauthoring journal articles and conference papers. Collaboration was impacted by COVID-19 in that not all on-site activities could be performed. NETL personnel were coauthors on eight of the conference papers (fourteen percent of the conference papers that were prepared) and seventeen of the journal articles (thirty percent of the journal articles that were prepared). A website was developed for an online proposal solicitation and review process and to provide exposure to UCFER. A website analysis highlighted the large amount of member and general public interest in UCFER by interpreting access statistics from March 2016 through June 2023. Visitors to the site originated from many different organizations, businesses, and countries. The website provided a means to disseminate information to both the general public and the UCFER members and was successfully used for outreach activities. In addition, NETL required that RFP release, proposal submission, and proposal reviews all be performed online. Penn State successfully developed these capabilities in a secure section of the website, which were used throughout the UCFER project. It is recognized that each project had its technical successes. In addition, highlighted successes were compiled and summarized from the research projects. Information was requested from the PIs of completed projects. In addition, Penn State’s Operations Management Team reviewed subcontract reports to identify project successes. Examples of information requested from PIs included (not all-inclusive): new projects that have been funded as a result of UCFER funding; new commercial products; establishment of a new center; new patent; new software; best paper awards; highly-cited work; and graduate student successes. A total of forty-eight highlighted successes were reported.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗