SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Clean room”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

313 records · Page 18

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2016

Origins of Line Defects in Self-Reacting Friction Stir Welds and Their Impact on Weld Quality

Friction stir welding (FSWing) is a solid state joining technique which reduces the occurrence of typical defects formed in fusion welds, especially of highly alloyed metals. Although the process is robust for aluminum alloys, occasional reductions in the strength of FSWs have been observed. Shortly after the NASA-MSFC implemented a variation of FSW called self-reacting (SR), low strength properties were observed. At that time, this reduction in strength was attributed to a line defect. At that time, the limited data suggested that the line defect was related to the accumulation of native oxides that form on the weld lands and faying surfaces. Through a series of improved cleaning methods, tool redesign, and process parameter modifications, the reduction in the strength of the SR-FSWs was eliminated. As more data has been collected, the occasional reduction in the strength of SR-FSW still occurs. These occasional reductions indicate a need to reexamine the underlying causes. This study builds off a series of self reacting (SR)-FSWs that were made in 3 different thickness panels of AA2219 (0.95, 1.27 and 1.56 cm) at 2 different weld pitches. A bead on plate SR-FSW was also made in the 1.56 cm thick panel to understand the contribution of the former faying surfaces. Copper tracer studies were used to understand the flow lines associated with the weld tool used. The quality of the SR-FSWs was evaluated from tensile testing at room temperature. Reductions in the tensile strength were observed in some weldments, primarily at higher weld pitch or tool rotations. This study explores possible correlations between line defects and the reduction of strength in SR-FSWs. Results from this study will assist in a better understand of the mechanisms responsible for reduced tensile strength and provide methodology for minimizing their occurrence.

Schneider, Judy↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Transforming any Facility for Meeting Strict Cleanliness Requirements

Over the life of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), Integration & Test (I&T) has taken place in areas that needed considerable work to make the facility itself and/or the protocols used while working in the rooms suitable to meet JWST percent area coverage (PAC) and molecular accumulation requirements. In addition to normal particulate matter, JWST had a uniquely significant challenge: fibers! Fibers not only cause much higher PAC levels, but they also risk damaging the angstrom sized Near Infrared Spectrometer (NIRSpec) microshutter array (MSA), which is critical to NIRSpec instrument performance. The primary emphasis of this paper is to address particulate and fiber contamination. The success of the JWST mission required effective cleanrooms, protocols, and mitigations in non-cleanroom areas that were pressed into service to house contamination-sensitive optics and scientific instruments. Some presented profound challenges. These included: NASA’s 60-year-old Johnson Space Center (JSC) Chamber A, which had never been used for anything contamination-sensitive, and the European tropical launch facilities, which were designed to meet International Standard Organization (ISO) Class 8 processing for communication satellites. The final challenge for JWST, as if to stare us in the face and say, “I dare you to try and make me clean enough,” was preparing the 4 areas in the Centre Spatial Guyanais (CSG) Final Assembly Building (BAF) located in French Guiana, a building in which one entire side opens for Ariane 5 rocket ingress and egress. This paper will describe our initial evaluation processes and the actual work undertaken to transform even the most challenging areas into first class cleanrooms that met JWST particulate and fiber requirements.

James Webb Space Telescope↗

NASA NTRS2005

In Situ Electrochemical Deposition of Microscopic Wires

A method of fabrication of wires having micron and submicron dimensions is built around electrochemical deposition of the wires in their final positions between electrodes in integrated circuits or other devices in which the wires are to be used. Heretofore, nanowires have been fabricated by a variety of techniques characterized by low degrees of controllability and low throughput rates, and it has been necessary to align and electrically connect the wires in their final positions by use of sophisticated equipment in expensive and tedious post-growth assembly processes. The present method is more economical, offers higher yields, enables control of wire widths, and eliminates the need for post-growth assembly. The wires fabricated by this method could be used as simple electrical conductors or as transducers in sensors. Depending upon electrodeposition conditions and the compositions of the electroplating solutions in specific applications, the wires could be made of metals, alloys, metal oxides, semiconductors, or electrically conductive polymers. In this method, one uses fabrication processes that are standard in the semiconductor industry. These include cleaning, dry etching, low-pressure chemical vapor deposition, lithography, dielectric deposition, electron-beam lithography, and metallization processes as well as the electrochemical deposition process used to form the wires. In a typical case of fabrication of a circuit that includes electrodes between which microscopic wires are to be formed on a silicon substrate, the fabrication processes follow a standard sequence until just before the fabrication of the microscopic wires. Then, by use of a thermal SiO-deposition technique, the electrodes and the substrate surface areas in the gaps between them are covered with SiO. Next, the SiO is electron-beam patterned, then reactive-ion etched to form channels having specified widths (typically about 1 m or less) that define the widths of the wires to be formed. Drops of an electroplating solution are placed on the substrate in the regions containing the channels thus formed, then the wires are electrodeposited from the solution onto the exposed portions of the electrodes and into the channels. The electrodeposition is a room-temperature, atmospheric-pressure process. The figure shows an example of palladium wires that were electrodeposited into 1-mm-wide channels between gold electrodes.

Yun, Minhee↗

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↗

NASA NTRS2006

Testing Fundamental Properties of Ionic Liquids for Colloid Microthruster Applications

NASA's New Millennium Program is scheduled to test a Disturbance Reduction System (DRS) on Space Technology 7 (ST7) as part of the European Space Agency's (ESA's) LISA Pathfinder Mission in late 2009. Colloid Micronewton Thrusters (CMNTs) will be used to counteract forces, mainly solar photon pressure, that could disturb gravitational reference sensors as part of the DRS. The micronewton thrusters use an ionic liquid, a room temperature molten salt, as propellant. The ionic liquid has a number of unusual properties that have a direct impact on thruster design. One of the most important issues is bubble formation before and during operation, especially during rapid pressure transitions from atmospheric to vacuum conditions. Bubbles have been observed in the feed system causing variations in propellant flow rate that can adversely affect thruster control. Bubbles in the feed system can also increase the likelihood that propellant will spray onto surfaces that can eventually lead to shorting high voltage electrodes. Two approaches, reducing the probability of bubble formation and removing bubbles with a new bubble eliminator device in the flow system, were investigated at Busek Co., Inc. and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) to determine the effectiveness of both approaches. Results show that bubble formation is mainly caused by operation at low pressure and volatile contaminants in the propellant coming out of solution. A specification for the maximum tolerable level of contamination has been developed, and procedures for providing system cleanliness have been tested and implemented. The bubble eliminator device has also been tested successfully and has been implemented in recent thruster designs at Busek. This paper focuses on the propellant testing work at JPL, including testing of a breadboard level bubble eliminator device.

bubble formation↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Optimization Approach to Support Science Decision Making for Lunar Surface Exploration

Introduction: Scientific exploration is one of the three pillars of NASA’s Moon2Mars architecture, with crew surface extra vehicular activities (EVA) serving a critical enabling function. Development of surface EVA operational planning and execution, specifically integrating science and flight control teams (FCT), is currently being explored through analog scenarios. This integration, exercised, for example, through the Joint EVA and Hu-man Surface Mobility Test Team (JETT), allows for science input on EVA activities in near real-time through a Science Evaluation Room (SER), or Arte-mis science backroom, which integrates with the broader FCT through the Science Officer. The SER works within the FCT to support dynamic EVA planning in response to changes in operational constraints as well as science opportunities and re-prioritization, increasing the mission science return and accelerating the accomplishment of the Moon2Mars science objectives. The SER works within the FCT to provide recommendations to traverse execution in near real-time. One challenge is the requirement to deliver SER inputs to the FCT on operationally relevant timelines. Failure to do so may result in suboptimal execution of science exploration EVAs or even loss of key science objectives. To close this gap, we present a network optimization tool to allow the SER to provide rapid input to the FCT in response to changes in operational constraints or science opportunities. Inputs are predicated on approved science objectives, and clear rationale must be provided to the FCT for any requested change. Accordingly, this tool incorporates the Science Traceability Matrix (STM), SER prioritization scheme, and station characterization and action planning with operational constraints such as duration, traverse speed, and distance to maximize science objectives based on SER priorities, consistent with FCT operational requirements. Method: As a proof of concept, we used an existing linear programing software package used to simulate optimal routes through cellular metabolism. We built a Demonstrative Model with three STM objectives and four stations on a region of the Moon. The objectives were given an arbitrary prioritization and mapped to the stations through four possible crew actions. (Figs. 1 and 2). This station to STM mapping is consistent with the method used by the JETT5 Science Team to develop analog surface EVA science planning. We used a grid system with the landing site at the origin and the four stations placed across the positive x,y quadrant. Actions were assigned to each station and the accomplishment of those actions resulted in a numerical “reward” based on the ability of that action to achieve science objectives. The aggregate reward from each individual STM objective contributes to a global score (Science Yield), weighted by its priority. Operational constraints included a requirement to start and end at the landing site, 5 minutes each for initial station characterization and “clean up,” and variable total EVA time, traverse rate (fixed to 0.5 meters per second in our example), and time to perform each action (10, 5, 7, and 15 min for actions 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). Additional constraints and variables will be added in the future (e.g., sample mass, number of stations, traverse route constraints, illumination). Optimization. We converted the connections (arcs) between these stations (nodes) into a mixed integer linear programming optimization problem (arcs = constraints, nodes = variables) with the objective to maximize Science Yield. For any action, the Science Yield is equal to the relevance of that action to an STM objective [3, 2, and 1 point(s) for High, Med., and Low relevance, respectively], multiplied by the STM Objective Priority [3, 2, and 1 point(s) for High, Med., and Low priority, respectively]. This resulted in a model that computes the optimal station and action combination to maximize the Science Yield. These weightings can be adjusted by the SER as desired. Results: We explored three test cases for the Demonstrative Model. First, we set the maximum EVA duration to 120 minutes and computed the optimal route (Fig. 3A). The model suggested per-forming Actions 1 and 2 at Station P01, followed by Actions 1 and 2 at Station P02, and finally Actions 1 and 3 at Station P04 before returning to the Landing Site. Second, we adjusted the STM Objective Priori-ty order and computed the new optimal route (Fig. 3B). Under this situation, the model suggested per-forming all Actions at Station P02 followed by all Actions at Station P03. The previous test cases were relevant to SER planning activities. Next, we explored providing mid-EVA replanning input to the FCT. Scenario: While executing the Route in Fig. 3A the crew finishes at Station P01 and FCT decides that the EVA needs to finish in 45 minutes back at the Landing Site. FCT asks SER to recommend changes to the plan to accommodate this operation-al change. Using the model and incorporating these new constraints (start at Station P01, max. time of 45 min), the model suggested performing Actions 2 and 4 at Station P03 (Fig. 4), requiring 41 minutes to complete and return to the Landing Site. Interestingly, Station 3 was not part of the original route. Using the model, we determined the EVA would need 66 minutes, instead of 45, in order for the original Station P04 to yield a larger Science Yield than Station P03. The parametrization and simulation was per-formed in less than a minute, demonstrating the operational relevance of the approach. Future Efforts: The results from the Demonstrative Model suggest this tool can accelerate SER decision making on operationally relevant timelines. Use in analog activities, such as JETT5 or follow-ons, which have over a dozen stations for a crew to explore and over a dozen actions per station, will provide needed validation of the utility of this tool for planning EVAs, replanning mid-EVA, or planning follow-on EVAs based on previous results. Further integration with FCT execution monitoring tools may provide additional efficiency gains, al-lowing rapid and iterative exploration of operation-al and science decision space by the FCT and SER.

Science Operations↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A METHOD TO REDUCE BIOBURDEN IN ASTROMATERIALS CURATION FACILITIES WITHOUT INTRODUCING UNWANTED CONTAMINATION

Introduction: NASA curates its Astromaterials collections in cleanrooms that are carefully monitored for particulate, inorganic and trace metal contamination. Current sample collections are not particularly susceptible to organic contamination or biological alteration. However, new collections like those from the OSIRIS-REx and Hayabusa2 missions will have organic contamination requirements and are susceptible to biodegradation. It will be necessary sterilize or at least disinfect curation labs, as well as tools and equipment in a manner that does not introduce additional contamination and does not affect the samples 1. Current curation cleaning procedures utilize isopropyl alcohol which offers some bioburden reduction, but is not effective against spore-forming bacteria or fungal spores 2. We present a modified disinfection method that uses ultrapure hydrogen peroxide to reduce bioburden inside curation labs and glove boxes without introducing contamination or damaging curation equipment. We tested this method in the meteorite processing lab as well as on a glovebox being cleaned for use in processing ANGSA (Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis) samples and present the results of those tests. We discuss the limitations of this method and describe potential situations in which it will not be applicable. The CDC guidelines for disinfection andsterilization in healthcare facilities discusses over 15different methods for reducing bioburden in hospitalsettings 3. The most common method, steamsterilization, is well suited to sterilizing curationprocessing tools but cannot easily be used to sterilizecleanroom surfaces or large equipment likegloveboxes. Chemical sterilization with bleach(NaOCl) is also a common strategy in healthcare andpharmaceutical settings that presents materialcompatibility issues as well as serious inorganiccontamination concerns for curation facilities.Introducing a new source of Na and Cl into curationlabs is not acceptable. Other chemical methods likeethylene oxide, formaldehyde, iodophors andquaternary ammonium compounds could introduceorganic and inorganic contamination. We chose tofocus on hydrogen peroxide because it is generallycompatible with commonly used curation materialslike stainless steel, aluminum and Teflon and becauseit decomposes to oxygen and water. The CDCguidelines for hydrogen peroxide specify using a 7.5wt% solution at 25 ̊C with a contact time of 30 minutesfor high level disinfection and 6 hours for sterilization.High level disinfection is defined as a technique thatwill kill all microorganisms except large numbers ofbacterial spores 3. Methods: We prepared a solution of 7.5 wt%hydrogen peroxide from a stock solution of ultrapure30 wt% peroxide (JT Baker) and curation gradeultrapure water. This ultrapure water is already used incuration cleaning procedures and thus is not consideredand additional source of contamination. We conducteda materials compatibility test by exposing unanodizedand anodized 6061 T6 Al alloy to the peroxide solutionfor up to six hours and periodically inspecting thesurfaces for visible defects. We used this peroxide todisinfect the floor of the meteorite processing lab andthe interior of a curation glovebox by exposing thesesurfaces to the peroxide solution for 30 min. Thesurfaces were swabbed with a dry macrofoam swabbefore (Puritan Brand 2518051PFRNDFD) and afterperoxide treatment to collect microbes present on thesurfaces. Microbes were extracted by sonication fromthe swab into 15 ml of PBS (phosphate buffered saline)and inoculated onto the following media: TSA (trypticsoy agar) BA (blood agar), R2A (Reasoners 2 agar),Potato Dextrose Agar, Saboraud Dextrose Agar andSaboraud Dextrose Agar with 0.1 mg/ mlchloramphenicol. Four TSA plates and two BA plateswere inoculated with 0.1 ml of PBS each andincubated at 35 and 37 for 48 hours. Two R2A°C°Cplates (0.1 ml of PBS each) were incubated at 25 .°CThe remaining plates were inoculated with 0.2ml ofPBS and incubated at 30 ̊C for seven days. Afterincubation bacterial and fungal isolates were countedand transferred to new plates for identification usingthe VITEK24 automated system or by sequencing aportion of the barcode gene (16S rRNA for bacteria,small subunit gene for fungi) on an ABI 3500 Sangersequencer. Negative controls consisted of swabs thatwere opened in the sampling environment andanalyzed alongside the experimental samples.Results: A 6 hour exposure to hydrogen peroxideresulted in visible pitting on un-anodized 6061 Al, butnot on anodized surfaces. No visible pitting occurredafter a 30 minute exposure. Therefore, we decided tolimit our experimental tests to 30 min. exposures. 17bacterial CFU (colony forming units) representing 4distinct organisms were isolated from the meteorite processing lab floor prior to hydrogen peroxidetreatment. We were unable culture any organisms afterperoxide treatment. In the glovebox we were able toculture three bacterial CFU representing three distinctspecies, including a spore forming bacterium prior todisinfection with peroxide. After the peroxidetreatment we were unable to culture any organisms.Routine monitoring of the meteorite processing lab andthe glovebox did not indicate any increase in unwantedinorganic contamination after these peroxidetreatments. Discussion: A 30 minute treatment with 7.5 wt%peroxide appears to be an effective method forreducing bioburden on typical cleanroom surfaces. Themethod does not introduce unwanted organic orinorganic contamination and is compatible withcommonly used curation materials like stainless steel,Teflon and anodized aluminum alloys. Special careshould be taken with un-anodized aluminum.Prolonged exposure to hydrogen peroxide can causepitting on this material. We recommend using thismethod to disinfect curation labs and equipment whenbiological alteration is a concern. This method iseffective at room temperature and cannot be used todisinfect labs and equipment where the ambienttemperature is < 0 ̊C. Astromaterials samples shouldbe removed from the area where disinfection is tooccur. Hydrogen peroxide is a powerful oxidizingagent and will react with any organic carbon present inthe sample. References: [1.] Mccubbin, F. M. et al.Sp. Sci Rev(2019) doi:10.1007/s11214-019-0615-9. [2.] Mogul, R.et al.Astrobiology 18, ast.2017.1814 (2018). [3.]Rutala, W. A. & Weber, D. J. Guideline for Disinfection and Sterilization in Healthcare Facilities, 2008. [4.] Pincus, D. H. in Encyclopedia of Rapid Microbiological Methods (2005).

A. B. Regberg↗