Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “small files”

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 325 records · Page 18
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

Raster-Based Approach to Solar Pressure Modeling

An algorithm has been developed to take advantage of the graphics processing hardware in modern computers to efficiently compute high-fidelity solar pressure forces and torques on spacecraft, taking into account the possibility of self-shading due to the articulation of spacecraft components such as solar arrays. The process is easily extended to compute other results that depend on three-dimensional attitude analysis, such as solar array power generation or free molecular flow drag. The impact of photons upon a spacecraft introduces small forces and moments. The magnitude and direction of the forces depend on the material properties of the spacecraft components being illuminated. The parts of the components being lit depends on the orientation of the craft with respect to the Sun, as well as the gimbal angles for any significant moving external parts (solar arrays, typically). Some components may shield others from the Sun. The purpose of this innovation is to enable high-fidelity computation of solar pressure and power generation effects of illuminated portions of spacecraft, taking self-shading from spacecraft attitude and movable components into account. The key idea in this innovation is to compute results dependent upon complicated geometry by using an image to break the problem into thousands or millions of sub-problems with simple geometry, and then the results from the simpler problems are combined to give high-fidelity results for the full geometry. This process is performed by constructing a 3D model of a spacecraft using an appropriate computer language (OpenGL), and running that model on a modern computer's 3D accelerated video processor. This quickly and accurately generates a view of the model (as shown on a computer screen) that takes rotation and articulation of spacecraft components into account. When this view is interpreted as the spacecraft as seen by the Sun, then only the portions of the craft visible in the view are illuminated. The view as shown on the computer screen is composed of up to millions of pixels. Each of those pixels is associated with a small illuminated area of the spacecraft. For each pixel, it is possible to compute its position, angle (surface normal) from the view direction, and the spacecraft material (and therefore, optical coefficients) associated with that area. With this information, the area associated with each pixel can be modeled as a simple flat plate for calculating solar pressure. The vector sum of these individual flat plate models is a high-fidelity approximation of the solar pressure forces and torques on the whole vehicle. In addition to using optical coefficients associated with each spacecraft material to calculate solar pressure, a power generation coefficient is added for computing solar array power generation from the sum of the illuminated areas. Similarly, other area-based calculations, such as free molecular flow drag, are also enabled. Because the model rendering is separated from other calculations, it is relatively easy to add a new model to explore a new vehicle or mission configuration. Adding a new model is performed by adding OpenGL code, but a future version might read a mesh file exported from a computer-aided design (CAD) system to enable very rapid turnaround for new designs

Wright, Theodore W. II↗
NASA NTRS1999

Production and Characterization of Carbon Nanotubes and Nanotube-Based Composites

The Nobel Prize winning discovery of the Buckuball (C60) in 1985 at Rice University by a group including Dr. Richard Smalley led to the whole new class of carbon allotropes including fullerenes and nanotubes. Especially interesting from many viewpoints are single-walled carbon nanotubes, which structurally are like a single graphitic sheet wrapped around a cylinder and capped at the ends. This cylinders have diameter as small as 0.5 - 2 nm (1/100,000th the diameter of a human hair) and are as long as 0.1 - 1 mm. Nanotubes are really individual molecules and believed to be defect-free, leading to high tensile strength despite their low density. Additionally, these fibers exhibit electrical conductivity as high as copper, thermal conductivity as high as diamond, strength 100 times higher than steel at one-sixth the weight, and high strain to failure. Thus it is believed that developments in the field of nanotechnology will lead to stronger and lighter composite materials for next generation spacecraft. Lack of a bulk method of production is the primary reason nanotubes are not used widely today. Toward this goal JSC nanotube team is exploring three distinct production techniques: laser ablation, arc discharge and chemical vapor deposition (CVD, in collaboration with Rice University). In laser ablation technique high-power laser impinges on the piece of carbon containing small amount of catalyst, and nanotubes self-assemble from the resulting carbon vapor. In arc generator similar vapor is created in arc discharge between carbon electrodes with catalyst. In CVD method nanotubes grow at much lower temperature on small catalyst particles from carbon-containing feedstock gas (methane or carbon monoxide). As of now, laser ablation produces cleanest material, but mass yield is rather small. Arc discharge produces grams of material, but purity is low. CVD technique is still in baby steps, but preliminary results look promising, as well as perspective of scaling the process up. We are also working on necessary purification of nanotubes. Applications of nanotubes are in such various fields as lightweight composites, molecular electronics, energy storage (electrodes in Li ion batteries), flat panel displays, conductive polymers, etc. JSC nanotube team is focused on development of lightweight materials. We work on the injection thermoset epoxies reinforced with nanotubes. Early results show good wetting of nanotube surface with epoxy, which is very important. More research will be possible as more nanotubes become available.

Nikolaev, Pavel↗
NASA NTRS1997

Archiving of Wideband Plasma Wave Data

Beginning with the third year of funding, we began a more ambitious archiving production effort, minimizing work on new software and concentrating on building representative archives of the missions mentioned above, recognizing that only a small percentage of the data from any one mission can be archived with reasonable effort. We concentrated on data from Dynamics Explorer and ISEE 1, archiving orbits or significant fractions of orbits which attempt to capture the essence of the mission and provide data which will hopefully be sufficient for ongoing and new research as well as to provide a reference to upcoming and current ISTP missions which will not fly in the same regions of space as the older missions and which will not have continuous wideband data. We archived approximately 181 Gigabytes of data, accounting for some 1582 hours of data. Included in these data are all of the AMPTE chemical releases, all of the Spacelab 2/PDP data obtained during the free-flight portion of its mission, as well as significant portions of the S3, DE-1, Imp-6, Hawkeye, Injun 5, and ISEE 1 and 2 data sets. Table 1 summarizes these data. All of the data archived are summarized in gif-formatted images of frequency-time spectrograms which are directly accessible via the internet. Each of the gif files are identified by year, day, and time as described in the Web page. This provides a user with a specific date/time in mind a way of determining very quickly if there is data for the interval in question and, by clicking on the file name, browsing the data. Alternately, a user can browse the data for interesting features and events simply by viewing each of the gif files. When a user finds data of interest, he/she can notify us by email of the time period involved. Based on the user's needs, we can provide data on a convenient medium or by ftp, or we can mount the appropriate data and provide access to our analysis tools via the network. We can even produce products such as plots or spectrograms in hardcopy form based on the specific request of the user.

Kurth, William S.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Data and scripts associated with the manuscript "Using Mutual Information for Global Sensitivity Analysis on Watershed Modeling"

This package contains the data and scripts used in "Using Mutual Information for Global Sensitivity Analysis on Watershed Modeling" (Jiang et al., 2022). The ARW_SWAT.zip file contains the SWAT simulation and the sensitivity analysis result in the American River Watershed. The Portage_SWAT.zip file contains the SWAT simulation and the sensitivity analysis result in the Portage River Watershed. The src folder contains the source code of sensitivity analysis and plotting functions. The notebooks folder contains the Jupyter notebooks for performing sensitivity analysis and other post analyses.Global Sensitivity Analysis (GSA) often is applied to assess the sensitivity of model outputs to their inputs using ensemble simulations. However, increasing model complexity and the associated computational cost have limited the use of most GSA approaches for process-based watershed models. We propose to use Mutual Information (MI) as a computationally efficient GSA method for watershed modeling. Such MI computed from several hundred realizations usually can capture nonlinear relationships between inputs and outputs of interest. We perform MI-based watershed sensitivity analyses in studies of the Portage River Watershed in Ohio and the American River Watershed in Washington. In these studies, MI is used to evaluate the sensitivity of river discharges simulated by the Soil and Water Assessment Tool to no less than 20 parameters for each watershed. Our MI-based sensitivity analyses achieved convergence with about 300~500 realizations, a small fraction of the ensemble size (i.e., several thousand) required by the Sobol method. Nevertheless, MI yields similar sensitivity ranking compared to the Sobol method, especially for sensitive parameters. Our study thus sheds new light on the use of MI as an affordable GSA method for computationally intensive models such as the hyper-resolution, watershed hydrobiogeochemical models.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2012

Microgravity Passive Phase Separator

A new invention disclosure discusses a structure and process for separating gas from liquids in microgravity. The Microgravity Passive Phase Separator consists of two concentric, pleated, woven stainless- steel screens (25-micrometer nominal pore) with an axial inlet, and an annular outlet between both screens (see figure). Water enters at one end of the center screen at high velocity, eventually passing through the inner screen and out through the annular exit. As gas is introduced into the flow stream, the drag force exerted on the bubble pushes it downstream until flow stagnation or until it reaches an equilibrium point between the surface tension holding bubble to the screen and the drag force. Gas bubbles of a given size will form a front that is moved further down the length of the inner screen with increasing velocity. As more bubbles are added, the front location will remain fixed, but additional bubbles will move to the end of the unit, eventually coming to rest in the large cavity between the unit housing and the outer screen (storage area). Owing to the small size of the pores and the hydrophilic nature of the screen material, gas does not pass through the screen and is retained within the unit for emptying during ground processing. If debris is picked up on the screen, the area closest to the inlet will become clogged, so high-velocity flow will persist farther down the length of the center screen, pushing the bubble front further from the inlet of the inner screen. It is desired to keep the velocity high enough so that, for any bubble size, an area of clean screen exists between the bubbles and the debris. The primary benefits of this innovation are the lack of any need for additional power, strip gas, or location for venting the separated gas. As the unit contains no membrane, the transport fluid will not be lost due to evaporation in the process of gas separation. Separation is performed with relatively low pressure drop based on the large surface area of the separating screen. Additionally, there are no moving parts, and there are no failure modes that involve fluid loss. A patent application has been filed.

Paragano, Matthew↗
DOE OSTI2021

Geodyn Material Library: Pseudocap models for dry porous tocks

This report describes the second edition of the Pseudocap Strength models for porous rocks implemented in GEODYN material library. The first model was developed in 2007 and calibrated for concrete. Then, the model parameters were calibrated based on triaxial tests reported for limestones and sandstones of various porosities. In these models some key parameters were chosen as functions of the reference porosity,Φ. Since then multiple modifications were implemented in the model, therefore, it has been recalibrated for some common porous materials such as limestones, sandstones, alluvium, tuffs and granite. Two types of models are described in this repot. The first type (called Pseudocap Model or PM) is for rocks from a specific location. Parameters were calibrated for several specific geologic materials. The second type (called Generic Pseudocap Model or GPM) is useful for the sites where only basic information (rock type, porosity) is available. Generic models include built-in correlations between porosities and other mechanical properties observed for certain rock types. The models of both types were validated by comparing not only to quasi-static triaxial tests for these materials but also to shock Hugoniot data and spherical explosion data for some materials. All models were derived in the frame of isotropic plasticity. They are designed to be used in explicit finite element/difference codes. Tangent stiffness tensor is not provided but can be calculated numerically for the model to be used in implicit finite element codes. For an isotropic material the stress can be decomposed into volumetric and deviatoric parts. The volumetric part is modeled using an Equation of state (EOS) which calculates the pressure and the bulk sound speed as functions of the internal specific energy and density. Here a simple, Mie-Gruneisen EOS is presented, but tabulated EOS (LEOS) provided by the library can be used as well. The stress is limited by the yield surface which depends on three invariants of the stress tensor and specific internal energy. In addition, to capture the strain-rate dependence a simple multiplier is used for the yield surface which depends on the equivalent plastic strain rate. The failure surface (the ultimate yield, Y f , defined later) is chosen in the Hoek-Brown form, commonly used in rock mechanics. It includes measurable parameters such as Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) as well as scale parameters characterizing the quality of the rock such as GSI (Geologic Strength Index). Thus, even though the model is calibrated for small samples it offers a way to extrapolate the strength to the field scale using geological characterization of the rock mass. The model captures effects of brittle-ductile transition in rocks by introducing a cap multiplier to the yield function. The rate of dilatancy (bulking) is proportional to the slope of the yield surface affected by the cap. Therefore, it takes place only at low confinements when the pressure is less than the brittle-ductile transition pressure, P BD . On the contrary, the porous compaction takes place at pressures higher than P BD . The cap moves as the porosity is compacted or new porosity is generated due to dilatancy. The porous compaction is modeled using an evolution equation which includes deviatoric stress so that the onset of compaction corresponds to the cap surface. The model captures effects of shear-enhanced compaction which is an important for porous rocks. Section 2 describes the modeling framework and Section 3 presents the model calibration procedure. Section 4 compares experimental data for various rocks versus model predictions. The model parameters used for this comparison are given in Appendix. The files with material constants are available with the latest GEODYN material library distribution.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Speaker-targeted Synthetic Speech Detection

Text-to-speech technologies are evolving quickly towards realistic-sounding human-like voices. As this technology improves, so does the opportunity for malpractice in speaker identification (SID) via spoofing, the process of impersonating a voice biometric via synthesis. More data typically equates to a more realistic voice model, which poses an issue for well-known subjects, such as politicians and celebrities, who have vast amounts of multimedia available online. Detection of synthetic speech has relied on signal processing techniques that focus on the generation of new acoustic features and train deep learning models to detect when an audio file has been manipulated through the characterization of unnatural changes or artifacts. However, these techniques do not use any information from the speaker they are evaluating. This paper proposes to incorporate information from the speaker-of-interest (SoI) into the models to avoid specific spoofing attacks for certain vulnerable people. The wealth of data for well-known people can also be used to train a speaker-specific spoofing detector with a higher level of accuracy than a speaker-independent model. The paper proposes a new xResNet-PLDA system and compares it to three different baseline systems: a state-of-the-art speaker identification system, an xResNet system trained to discriminate between bona fide and fake speech, and a speaker identification system in which the PLDA and calibration models were trained with bona fide and fake speech. We evaluated the systems in two different scenarios — a cross-validation scenario and a hold-out scenario — with three different databases. We show how the proposed system outperforms dramatically the baseline systems in each scenario and for each database. Finally, we show how using a small amount of the SoI’s speech to adapt global calibration parameters improves the performance of the system, especially in unseen conditions.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗
DOE OSTI2022

Fast Reactor Physics Model Verification Studies using ARC and PyARC Workflows

PyARC was recently developed at Argonne National Laboratory to automate many of the tasks required in the ARC (Argonne Reactor Computation) fast reactor simulation workflow, from input file generation, code execution, data transfer between ARC codes, and output postprocessing. PyARC will likely be the path forward to train new users of the ARC codes with the goal of wide adoption by the national laboratories, academia, and industry. In particular, for the ANL-JAEA collaboration under the Civil Nuclear Working Group (CNWG) project agreement NE-01, PyARC will be used to model the Joyo and EBR-II reactors for comparisons with measured data and calculated results from JAEA (Task 3: Fast Reactor Fuel and Core). As an additional avenue for verification and validation, this report investigates the use of PyARC towards a variety of existing ARC-based reactor models, in order to understand its efficacy in replicating the behavior of base ARC codes and better understand any limitations within modeling realistic fast reactor problems. To this end, PyARC was used to model the Joyo MKI, RBEC Benchmark-M, PRISM Mod-B, and EBR-II Run 138B cores, and its results were compared to those from existing ARC-based models. It was found that for hexagonal-based geometries PyARC was able to replicate the behavior of ARC codes to within 10 pcm for small reactor cores, and ~150pcm difference in eigenvalue for larger cores. These discrepancies are attributed primarily to differences in local mesh refinement options between ARC and PyARC, which currently cannot be resolved with PyARC’s latest version (1.6.0). In some of these cases, PyARC was used to model steady-state problems with initial core compositions originating from a prior REBUS depletion calculation. While PyARC was not designed to support such steady-state calculations, workarounds were applied to replicate the behavior of ARC-based calculations as closely as possible. Thus, these results demonstrate the wide extent to which they can be applied to fast reactor problems while still providing immense benefit to the user in terms of automating and standardizing common routines within the fast reactor analysis workflow. This study concluded that PyARC will be suitable for modeling the steady-state conditions of the EBR-II and Joyo fast reactors as part of the CNWG project agreement.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2026

HydraGNN_Predictive_GFM_2026 - Ensemble of predictive graph foundation models for atomistic materials modeling

This release contains data and parameters of HydraGNN-based graph foundation models trained as a result of the work published in the pre-print "Exascale Multi-Task Graph Foundation Models for Imbalanced, Multi-Fidelity Atomistic Data" by M. Lupo Pasini et al. (https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.15380). We jointly train on 16 open first-principles datasets (544+ million structures covering 85+ elements) using a multi-task architecture with per-dataset heads and a scalable ADIOS2/DDStore data pipeline. On Frontier, we execute six large-scale DeepHyper hyperparameter optimization campaigns in FP64 and promote the top-performing message-passing models to sustained 2,048-node training, yielding a PaiNN-based lead model. The version of HydraGNN used to generate the outputs provided in this release is HydraGNN v5.0 (https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0) The list of datasets used for the training of the graph foundation model is the following: 1) Alexandria [1] 2) ANI1x [2] 3) MPTrj [3] 4) Open Catalyst 2020 (OC20) [4] 5) Open Catalyst 2022 (OC22) [5] 6) Open Catalyst 2025 (OC25) [6] 7) Open Direct ir Capture 2023 (ODAC23) [7] 8) Open Materials 2024 (OMat24) [8] 9) Open Molecules 2025 (OMol25) [9] 10) OMol25-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with zero total charge) 11) OMol25-non-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with non-zero total charge) 12) Open Polymers 2026 (OPoly2026) [10] 13) Nabla2DFT [11] 14) QCML [12] 15) QM7X [reference 13] 16) transition1x [14] Dataset references: [1] J. Schmidt et al., “A dataset of 175k stable and metastable materials calculated with the PBEsol and SCAN functionals,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 64, 2022. [2] J. S. Smith et al., “The ANI-1ccx and ANI-1x data sets, coupled-cluster and density functional theory properties for molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 7, p. 134, 2020. [Online]. Available: https: //www.nature.com/articles/s41597-020-0473-z [3] A. Jain et al., “Commentary: The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation,” APL Materials, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 011002, 07 2013. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4812323 [4] L. Chanussot et al., “Open catalyst 2020 (oc20) dataset and community challenges,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 6059–6072, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.0c04525 [5] K. Tran et al., “Open catalyst 2022 (oc22) dataset and challenges for oxidation electrocatalysts,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 3066–3084, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.2c05426 [6] S. J. Sahoo et al., “The open catalyst 2025 (oc25) dataset and models for solid-liquid interfaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.17862, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.17862 [7] A. Sriram et al., “The open DAC 2023 dataset and challenges for sorbent discovery in direct air capture,” ACS Central Science, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 923–941, 2024. [8] L. Barroso-Luque et al., “Open materials 2024 (omat24) inorganic materials dataset and models,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12771 [9] D. S. Levine et al., “The open molecules 2025 (OMol25) dataset, evaluations, and models,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.08762 [10] D. S. Levine et al., The open polymers 2026 (OPoly26) dataset and evaluations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.23117, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.23117 [11] K. Khrabrov et al., “Nabla2dft: A universal quantum chemistry dataset of drug-like molecules and a benchmark for neural network potentials,” in NeurIPS 2024 Datasets and Benchmarks Track, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=ElUrNM9U8c [12] S. Ganscha et al., “The QCML dataset, quantum chemistry reference data from 33.5M DFT and 14.7B semi-empirical calculations,” Scientific Data, vol. 12, p. 406, 2025. [13] J. Hoja et al., “QM7-X, a comprehensive dataset of quantum-mechanical properties spanning the chemical space of small organic molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 8, p. 43, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-021-00812-2 [14] M. Schreiner et al., “Transition1x - a dataset for building generalizable reactive machine learning potentials,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 779, 2022. The folder "datasets_ADIOS2_format" contains the set of pre-processed datasets in Adaptable I/O System (ADIOS) format (https://www.exascaleproject.org/research-project/adios/) that have been used for the development and training of GFMs in this work. The "datasets_ADIOS2_format" directory contains 2 sub-directories, one for the version "v1" of the datasets and one for the version "v2" of the datasets. The version "v1" of the datasets provides values of the total energy as they are extracted from the original data as it was released by the respective institutions. The version "v2" of the datasets provides values of the energy that have been realigned. The realignment was performed by training a linear regression model that predicts the total energy as a function of the chemical composition of the atomistic structure, and then subtract such prediction from the original value of the total energy. Both folders "v1" and "v2" contain 16 sub-directories, each corresponding to an ADIOS2-formatted dataset The folder "DeepHyper-results" contains the configurational files and model's parameters for all the 186 HPO trials that were successfully completed by the scalable hyperparameter optimization (HPO) runs on Frontier. The content of the folder "DeepHyper-results" I structured as follows: 1) task-list.txt: list of mpnn name, jobid, and deephyper task id 2) gfm_${MPNN}_${JOBID}_0.${TASKID}: run directory with checkpoint files 3) gfm_${MPNN}: deephyper summary directory (*.csv) for each specific MPNN type 4) deephyper-experiment-${JOBID}: output and error logs for each job The file "deephyper-sorted.csv" contains the details of each HydraGNN model built and tested by HPO, obtained by merging the (*.csv) filed from each HPO run executed. Out of all the HPO trials, we selected 10 to continue the training of the respective HydraGNN models. Due to limited computational budget available in the LRN070 allocation we could not complete the training till convergence for all these 10 selected models. The folder "models" contains multiple sub-folders, one per each HydraGNN model trained. Each model sub-folder contains the parameters of each HydraGNN model, with multiple checkpoint-restarts. The list of sub-folders are as follows: 1) multidataset_hpo-BEST1-fp64 2) multidataset_hpo-BEST2-fp64 3) multidataset_hpo-BEST3-fp64 4) multidataset_hpo-BEST4-fp64 5) multidataset_hpo-BEST5-fp64 6) multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64 7) multidataset_hpo-BEST7-fp64 8) multidataset_hpo-BEST8-fp64 9) multidataset_hpo-BEST9-fp64 10) multidataset_hpo-BEST10-fp64 Within each one of these folders, additional auxiliary log files are provided with descriptions about how the training proceeded. The lead PaiNN-model is contained inside "multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64". The file "mlp_branch_weights" contains the parameters of the multi-layer perceptron (MLP) used to reconcile the predictions of the 16 output decoding heads of the HydragNN architectures. The MLP takes in input the chemical composition of the atomistic structure and predicts averaging weights to linearly mix the predictions of each output decoding head toward consolidating them into a single one. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 1.1 billion atomistic structures randomly generated. Each structures is associated with energy and forces predicted with the lead-PaiNN model combined with the MLP model for reconciliation of the multi-branch predictions generated by the 16 output decoding heads. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 9,300 (*.tar.gz) subdirectories, one per Frontier compute node used to execute the inference at exascale. Once uncompressed, each (*.tar.gz) subdirectory contains an ADIOS2 (*.bp) file container, where each atomistic structure is stored as a PyTorch-Geometric Data object. The file "export_dataset_environment_variables.sh" contains the environment variables that need to be set before running the HydraGNN code to reproduce the results provided in this dataset release. The code that can be used to load the ADIOS2 files, load HydraGNN models, and run inference is available at: https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
NASA NTRS1983

Experimental philosophy leading to a small scale digital data base of the conterminous United States for designing experiments with remotely sensed data

Research using satellite remotely sensed data, even within any single scientific discipline, often lacked a unifying principle or strategy with which to plan or integrate studies conducted over an area so large that exhaustive examination is infeasible, e.g., the U.S.A. However, such a series of studies would seem to be at the heart of what makes satellite remote sensing unique, that is the ability to select for study from among remotely sensed data sets distributed widely over the U.S., over time, where the resources do not exist to examine all of them. Using this philosophical underpinning and the concept of a unifying principle, an operational procedure for developing a sampling strategy and formal testable hypotheses was constructed. The procedure is applicable across disciplines, when the investigator restates the research question in symbolic form, i.e., quantifies it. The procedure is set within the statistical framework of general linear models. The dependent variable is any arbitrary function of remotely sensed data and the independent variables are values or levels of factors which represent regional climatic conditions and/or properties of the Earth's surface. These factors are operationally defined as maps from the U.S. National Atlas (U.S.G.S., 1970). Eighty-five maps from the National Atlas, representing climatic and surface attributes, were automated by point counting at an effective resolution of one observation every 17.6 km (11 miles) yielding 22,505 observations per map. The maps were registered to one another in a two step procedure producing a coarse, then fine scale registration. After registration, the maps were iteratively checked for errors using manual and automated procedures. The error free maps were annotated with identification and legend information and then stored as card images, one map to a file. A sampling design will be accomplished through a regionalization analysis of the National Atlas data base (presently being conducted). From this analysis a map of homogeneous regions of the U.S.A. will be created and samples (LANDSAT scenes) assigned by region.

Labovitz, M. L.↗
NASA NTRS2013

SpaceCube Version 1.5

SpaceCube 1.5 is a high-performance and low-power system in a compact form factor. It is a hybrid processing system consisting of CPU (central processing unit), FPGA (field-programmable gate array), and DSP (digital signal processor) processing elements. The primary processing engine is the Virtex- 5 FX100T FPGA, which has two embedded processors. The SpaceCube 1.5 System was a bridge to the SpaceCube 2.0 and SpaceCube 2.0 Mini processing systems. The SpaceCube 1.5 system was the primary avionics in the successful SMART (Small Rocket/Spacecraft Technology) Sounding Rocket mission that was launched in the summer of 2011. For SMART and similar missions, an avionics processor is required that is reconfigurable, has high processing capability, has multi-gigabit interfaces, is low power, and comes in a rugged/compact form factor. The original SpaceCube 1.0 met a number of the criteria, but did not possess the multi-gigabit interfaces that were required and is a higher-cost system. The SpaceCube 1.5 was designed with those mission requirements in mind. The SpaceCube 1.5 features one Xilinx Virtex-5 FX100T FPGA and has excellent size, weight, and power characteristics [4×4×3 in. (approx. = 10×10×8 cm), 3 lb (approx. = 1.4 kg), and 5 to 15 W depending on the application]. The estimated computing power of the two PowerPC 440s in the Virtex-5 FPGA is 1100 DMIPS each. The SpaceCube 1.5 includes two Gigabit Ethernet (1 Gbps) interfaces as well as two SATA-I/II interfaces (1.5 to 3.0 Gbps) for recording to data drives. The SpaceCube 1.5 also features DDR2 SDRAM (double data rate synchronous dynamic random access memory); 4- Gbit Flash for storing application code for the CPU, FPGA, and DSP processing elements; and a Xilinx Platform Flash XL to store FPGA configuration files or application code. The system also incorporates a 12 bit analog to digital converter with the ability to read 32 discrete analog sensor inputs. The SpaceCube 1.5 design also has a built-in accelerometer. In addition, the system has 12 receive and transmit RS- 422 interfaces for legacy support. The SpaceCube 1.5 processor card represents the first NASA Goddard design in a compact form factor featuring the Xilinx Virtex- 5. The SpaceCube 1.5 incorporates backward compatibility with the Space- Cube 1.0 form factor and stackable architecture. It also makes use of low-cost commercial parts, but is designed for operation in harsh environments.

Geist, Alessandro↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA Tech Briefs, March 2011

Topics covered include: Optimal Tuner Selection for Kalman-Filter-Based Aircraft Engine Performance Estimation; Airborne Radar Interferometric Repeat-Pass Processing; Plug-and-Play Environmental Monitoring Spacecraft Subsystem; Power-Combined GaN Amplifier with 2.28-W Output Power at 87 GHz; Wallops Ship Surveillance System; Source Lines Counter (SLiC) Version 4.0; Guidance, Navigation, and Control Program; Single-Frame Terrain Mapping Software for Robotic Vehicles; Auto Draw from Excel Input Files; Observation Scheduling System; CFDP for Interplanetary Overlay Network; X-Windows Widget for Image Display; Binary-Signal Recovery; Volumetric 3D Display System with Static Screen; MMIC Replacement for Gunn Diode Oscillators; Feature Acquisition with Imbalanced Training Data; Mount Protects Thin-Walled Glass or Ceramic Tubes from Large Thermal and Vibration Loads; Carbon Nanotube-Based Structural Health Monitoring Sensors; Wireless Inductive Power Device Suppresses Blade Vibrations; Safe, Advanced, Adaptable Isolation System Eliminates the Need for Critical Lifts; Anti-Rotation Device Releasable by Insertion of a Tool; A Magnetically Coupled Cryogenic Pump; Single Piezo-Actuator Rotary-Hammering Drill; Fire-Retardant Polymeric Additives; Catalytic Generation of Lift Gases for Balloons; Ionic Liquids to Replace Hydrazine; Variable Emittance Electrochromics Using Ionic Electrolytes and Low Solar Absorptance Coatings; Spacecraft Radiator Freeze Protection Using a Regenerative Heat Exchanger; Multi-Mission Power Analysis Tool; Correction for Self-Heating When Using Thermometers as Heaters in Precision Control Applications; Gravitational Wave Detection with Single-Laser Atom Interferometers; Titanium Alloy Strong Back for IXO Mirror Segments; Improved Ambient Pressure Pyroelectric Ion Source; Multi-Modal Image Registration and Matching for Localization of a Balloon on Titan; Entanglement in Quantum-Classical Hybrid; Algorithm for Autonomous Landing; Quantum-Classical Hybrid for Information Processing; Small-Scale Dissipation in Binary-Species Transitional Mixing Layers; Superpixel-Augmented Endmember Detection for Hyperspectral Images; Coding for Parallel Links to Maximize the Expected Value of Decodable Messages; and Microwave Tissue Soldering for Immediate Wound Closure.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2019

TESS Science Processing Operations Center Pipeline and Data Products

TESS launched 18 April 2018 to conduct a two-year, near all-sky survey for at least 50 small, nearby exoplanets for which masses can be ascertained and whose atmospheres can be characterized by ground- and space-based follow-on observations. TESS just completed its survey of the southern hemisphere, identifying >600 candidate exoplanets and unveiling a plethora of exciting non-exoplanet astrophysics results, such as asteroseismology, asteroids, and supernova. The TESS Science Processing Operations Center (SPOC) processes the data downlinked every two weeks to generate a range of data products hosted at the Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes (MAST). For each sector (~1 month) of observations, the SPOC calibrates the image data for both 30-min Full Frame Images (FFIs) and up to 20,000 pre-selected 2-min target star postage stamps. Data products for the 2-min targets include simple aperture photometry and systematic error-corrected flux time series. The SPOC also conducts searches for transiting exoplanets in the 2-min data for each sector and generates Data Validation time series and associated reports for each transit-like feature identified in the search. Multi-sector searches for exoplanets are conducted periodically to discover longer period planets, including those in the James Webb Continuous Viewing Zone (CVZ), which are observed for up to one year. Data products also include co-trending basis vectors (CBVs) and calibration files, such as the Pixel Response Functions across the field of view of each of TESS's four cameras. To maximize the usability, the TESS science data products are modeled after those for Kepler, including Target Pixel Files and Light Curve files.In this talk, I describe the SPOC pipeline and the chief differences between the TESS and the Kepler pipelines, and the major updates to the SPOC pipeline (4.0) available now to the community at MAST. I also discuss the documentation available to the community to help them in properly interpreting and analyzing the TESS data products.The TESS Mission is funded by NASA's Science Mission Directorate as an Astrophysics Explorer Mission.

Jenkins, Jon M.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Tool for Forecasting Cool-Season Peak Winds Across Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station

The expected peak wind speed for the day is an important element in the daily morning forecast for ground and space launch operations at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS). The 45th Weather Squadron (45 WS) must issue forecast advisories for KSC/CCAFS when they expect peak gusts for >= 25, >= 35, and >= 50 kt thresholds at any level from the surface to 300 ft. In Phase I of this task, the 45 WS tasked the Applied Meteorology Unit (AMU) to develop a cool-season (October - April) tool to help forecast the non-convective peak wind from the surface to 300 ft at KSC/CCAFS. During the warm season, these wind speeds are rarely exceeded except during convective winds or under the influence of tropical cyclones, for which other techniques are already in use. The tool used single and multiple linear regression equations to predict the peak wind from the morning sounding. The forecaster manually entered several observed sounding parameters into a Microsoft Excel graphical user interface (GUI), and then the tool displayed the forecast peak wind speed, average wind speed at the time of the peak wind, the timing of the peak wind and the probability the peak wind will meet or exceed 35, 50 and 60 kt. The 45 WS customers later dropped the requirement for >= 60 kt wind warnings. During Phase II of this task, the AMU expanded the period of record (POR) by six years to increase the number of observations used to create the forecast equations. A large number of possible predictors were evaluated from archived soundings, including inversion depth and strength, low-level wind shear, mixing height, temperature lapse rate and winds from the surface to 3000 ft. Each day in the POR was stratified in a number of ways, such as by low-level wind direction, synoptic weather pattern, precipitation and Bulk Richardson number. The most accurate Phase II equations were then selected for an independent verification. The Phase I and II forecast methods were compared using an independent verification data set. The two methods were compared to climatology, wind warnings and advisories issued by the 45 WS, and North American Mesoscale (NAM) model (MesoNAM) forecast winds. The performance of the Phase I and II methods were similar with respect to mean absolute error. Since the Phase I data were not stratified by precipitation, this method's peak wind forecasts had a large negative bias on days with precipitation and a small positive bias on days with no precipitation. Overall, the climatology methods performed the worst while the MesoNAM performed the best. Since the MesoNAM winds were the most accurate in the comparison, the final version of the tool was based on the MesoNAM winds. The probability the peak wind will meet or exceed the warning thresholds were based on the one standard deviation error bars from the linear regression. For example, the linear regression might forecast the most likely peak speed to be 35 kt and the error bars used to calculate that the probability of >= 25 kt = 76%, the probability of >= 35 kt = 50%, and the probability of >= 50 kt = 19%. The authors have not seen this application of linear regression error bars in any other meteorological applications. Although probability forecast tools should usually be developed with logistic regression, this technique could be easily generalized to any linear regression forecast tool to estimate the probability of exceeding any desired threshold . This could be useful for previously developed linear regression forecast tools or new forecast applications where statistical analysis software to perform logistic regression is not available. The tool was delivered in two formats - a Microsoft Excel GUI and a Tool Command Language/Tool Kit (Tcl/Tk) GUI in the Meteorological Interactive Data Display System (MIDDS). The Microsoft Excel GUI reads a MesoNAM text file containing hourly forecasts from 0 to 84 hours, from one model run (00 or 12 UTC). The GUI then displays e peak wind speed, average wind speed, and the probability the peak wind will meet or exceed the 25-, 35- and 50-kt thresholds. The user can display the Day-1 through Day-3 peak wind forecasts, and separate forecasts are made for precipitation and non-precipitation days. The MIDDS GUI uses data from the NAM and Global Forecast System (GFS), instead of the MesoNAM. It can display Day-1 and Day-2 forecasts using NAM data, and Day-1 through Day-5 forecasts using GFS data. The timing of the peak wind is not displayed, since the independent verification showed that none of the forecast methods performed significantly better than climatology. The forecaster should use the climatological timing of the peak wind (2248 UTC) as a first guess and then adjust it based on the movement of weather features.

Barrett, Joe H., III↗
NASA NTRS2019

Aerojet Engineering Corporation: Stimulation and Creation, 1935-1942

There are multiple published accounts of the stimulation and creation of the Aerojet Engineering Corporation that are inconsistent, incomplete, or erroneous in significant details, describing principals involved, timing, and funding of the creation process. This paper corrects the record and offers a well-documented and reliable history of the creation of the Aerojet Engineering Corporation. A small group of academic researchers and technicians, joined by an attorney, working at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), accomplished the formation and creation of the corporation. The group of six men incorporated and served as initial officers of the Aerojet Engineering Corporation—Dr. Theodore von Karman; Dr. Frank Malina; Dr. Martin Summerfield; John Parsons; Edward Forman; and a Washington, DC, attorney, Andrew Haley. A government-funded program definition study at Caltech generated a proposal to produce a means of providing superior aircraft performance capabilities using rocketry, often referred to as jet propulsion, due to engineering disrepute of “rocketry" prior to WWII. Caltech successfully conducted flight demonstrations at March Field (Riverside, California) in the summer of 1941, leading Drs. von Karman and Malina to discuss and explore the best method to provide for production of jet-assisted takeoff (JATO) rockets with established industrial leaders, as well as industrial organizational alternatives. Von Karman, Malina, Summerfield, Parsons, and Forman continued these discussions until von Karman decided, in early 1942, to solicit the legal advice of Andrew Haley on how to proceed. After meetings at von Karman's home in Pasadena, on Haley's recommendation and using his volunteered initial corporate funding, it was agreed to incorporate the group. Articles of incorporation were drawn up by Haley and on 19 March 1942 were formally filed with the Delaware Secretary of State, establishing the Aerojet Engineering Corporation. Many accounts previously published have distorted or misreported many of the details of the process followed by the group that created the company. It is intended that this paper will be regarded as a fully researched historical account of the creation of the Aerojet Engineering Corporation. Included are the historical environment, the industrial motivations, descriptions of key players, the role of government, and the ultimate confluence of these factors with the motivation of a champion and the availability of the required resources.

Doyle, Stephen E.↗
DOE OSTI2021

3-D Geologic Controls of Hydrothermal Fluid Flow at Brady Geothermal Field, Nevada using PCA

In many hydrothermal systems, fracture permeability along faults provides pathways for groundwater to transport heat from depth. Faulting generates a range of deformation styles that cross-cut heterogeneous geology, resulting in complex patterns of permeability, porosity, and hydraulic conductivity. Vertical connectivity (a through going network of permeable areas that allows advection of heat from depth to the shallow subsurface) is rare and is confined to relatively small volumes that have highly variable spatial distribution. This local compartmentalization of connectivity represents a significant challenge to understanding hydrothermal circulation and for exploring, developing, and managing hydrothermal resources. Here, we present an evaluation of the geologic characteristics that control this compartmentalization in hydrothermal systems through 3-D analysis of the Brady geothermal field in western Nevada. A published 3-D geologic map of the Brady area is used as a basis to develop structural and geological variables that are hypothesized to control or effect permeability or connectivity. The 3-D distribution of these variables is compared to the distribution of productive and non-productive fluid flow intervals along production wells and non-productive wells via principal component analysis (PCA). This comparison elucidates which geologic and structural variables are most closely associated with productive fluid flow intervals. Results indicate that production intervals at Brady are located: (1) within or near to known and stress-loaded macro-scale faults, and (2) in areas of high fault and fracture density. This submission includes the published journal article detailing this work, the published 3-D geologic map of the Brady Geothermal Area used as a basis to develop structural and geological variables that are hypothesized to control or effect permeability or connectivity, 3-D well data, along which geologic data were sampled for PCA analyses, and associated metadata file. This work was done using existing R programs.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
NASA NTRS2016

3D Printing in Zero G Technology Demonstration Mission: Summary of On-Orbit Operations, Material Testing, and Future Work

Human space exploration to date has been limited to low Earth orbit and the moon. The International Space Station (ISS), an orbiting laboratory 200 miles above the earth, provides a unique and incredible opportunity for researchers to prove out the technologies that will enable humans to safely live and work in space for longer periods of time and venture farther into the solar system. The ability to manufacture parts in-space rather than launch them from earth represents a fundamental shift in the current risk and logistics paradigm for human spaceflight. In particularly, additive manufacturing (or 3D printing) techniques can potentially be deployed in the space environment to enhance crew safety (by providing an on-demand part replacement capability) and decrease launch mass by reducing the number of spare components that must be launched for missions where cargo resupply is not a near-term option. In September 2014, NASA launched the 3D Printing in Zero G technology demonstration mission to the ISS to explore the potential of additive manufacturing for in-space applications and demonstrate the capability to manufacture parts and tools on-orbit. The printer for this mission was designed and operated by the company Made In Space under a NASA SBIR (Small Business Innovation Research) phase III contract. The overarching objectives of the 3D print mission were to use ISS as a testbed to further maturation of enhancing technologies needed for long duration human exploration missions, introduce new materials and methods to fabricate structure in space, enable cost-effective manufacturing for structures and mechanisms made in low-unit production, and enable physical components to be manufactured in space on long duration missions if necessary. The 3D print unit for fused deposition modeling (FDM) of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) was integrated into the ISS Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG) in November 2014 and phase I printing operations took place from November through December of that year. Phase I flight operations yielded 14 unique parts (21 total specimens) that could be directly compared against ground-based prints of identical geometry manufactured using the printer prior to its launch to ISS. The 3DP unit functioned safely and produced specimens necessary to advance the understanding of the critical design and operational parameters for the FDM process as affected by the microgravity environment. From the standpoint of operations, 3DP demonstrated the ability to remove parts from the build-tray on-orbit, teleoperate the printer from the ground, perform critical maintenance functions within defined human factors limits, produce a functional tool that could be evaluated for form/fit/function, and uplink a new part file from the ground and produce it on the printer. The flight parts arrived at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama in April 2015, where they underwent months of testing in the materials and processes laboratory. Ground and flight prints completed the following phases of testing: photographic/visual inspection, mass and density evaluation, structured light scanning, XRay and CT, mechanical testing, optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and chemical analysis. This presentation will discuss the results of this testing as well as phase II operations for the printer, which took place in June and July of 2016. Lessons learned from the tech demo and their impacts on the design and development of the second generation 3D printer for ISS, the Additive Manufacturing Facility (AMF) by Made In Space will also be presented. In addition, progress in other elements of NASA's In Space Manufacturing (ISM) initiative such as the on-demand ISM utilization catalog, in-space Recycler ISS Technology Demonstration development, launch packaging recycling, in-space printable electronics, development of higher strength polymeric materials for 3D printing and Additive Construction by Mobile Emplacement (ACME) will also be addressed.

Prater, Tracie↗
NASA NTRS2024

Smallsat 2024 - Starling Cubesat Swarm Technology Demonstration Flight Results

The Starling swarm of four 6U CubeSats launched in July 2023 to test four key technologies to enable future swarm missions: 1) Mobile Ad-Hoc Networking (MANET) over a crosslink radio network 2) Autonomous onboard decision-making for operations 3) Optical-based absolute and relative navigation 4) Autonomous maneuver planning and execution The Starling team implemented the Better Approach to Mobile Ad-hoc Networking (B.A.T.M.A.N.) protocol to automatically manage the crosslink network of four satellites. The B.A.T.M.A.N. protocol uses a decentralized approach to managing a multi-hop mesh network of devices, in this case, a satellite swarm. The four satellites were able to successfully establish a network at multiple data rates and demonstrate file transfer and command issuance between spacecraft over the network. Starling incorporated Distributed Spacecraft Autonomy's (DSA) software to demonstrate onboard decision-making. The DSA software takes L1/L2 band GPS measurements and uses them to estimate the relative Total Electron Count (TEC) in the ionosphere. The onboard software then determines if there are any features of interest and provides that information to the other satellites over the crosslink network. The swarm of satellites then reaches a consensus on the optimal TEC observation strategy and adjusts its measurement collection tactics autonomously. The Starling Formation-Flying Optical Experiment (StarFOX), produced by Stanford's Space Rendezvous Laboratory, uses the onboard star trackers to collect images of the other swarm spacecraft and produce angles-only navigation estimates. This system is envisioned to be valuable in applications in which Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) are not available, such as in cis-lunar or deep space. StarFOX successfully applied its algorithms to multiple simultaneous spacecraft targets using the star tracker imagery. Finally, Starling used Emergent Space's Cluster Flight Application (CFA) software suite for the Reconfiguration and Orbit Maintenance Experiments Onboard (ROMEO) demonstration of autonomously planning and executing propulsive maneuvers. Large swarms will need to be able to maintain formation requirements with minimal operator involvement, especially as the size of the swarm scales up. Results from the ROMEO experiment are presented. Starling is funded by the Small Spacecraft Technology (SST) program out of NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD).

distributed systems↗