Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “partner forum”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2022

Enabling Innovative Research on the International Space Station to Solve the Challenges of A Human Mission to Mars: Results of the ISS4Mars International Workshops 2020–2021

During the ISS4Mars workshops in 2020–2021, personnel from the International Space Station (ISS) partner agencies convened to reflect on scenarios for how the ISS could be used and its operations possibly modified to simulate aspects of a human mission to Mars. Scientific leaders, operations experts, crewmembers, managers, and flight surgeons discussed the five hazards of human spaceflight—gravity transitions, radiation, isolation and confinement, distance from Earth, and hostile closed environments—and considered how an ISS-based analog of Mars transit could benefit assessments and mitigations of these hazards. A focused writing team then discussed the advantages and disadvantages of each approach identified by the workshop participants before developing a set of eight use cases to consider the feasibility of implementing on the ISS. The writing team also identified the prerequisites needed, including ground analog studies simulating a mission to Mars required to verify measurements and procedures, before testing could begin on the ISS. Five of the use cases were considered feasible to assess in simulations using an ISS-based analog of Mars transit if some ground rules and assumptions were met. These five use cases were Earth-independent medical operations, Earth-independent integrated operations, life support and food for a one year duration, lower-body negative pressure as a countermeasure against the effects of exposure to microgravity, and fitness levels after landing. In addition, three more extensive interventions—extended Mars surface operations, a small-volume transit analog, and artificial gravity—were deemed unfeasible for testing on the ISS. Experience gained from the five use cases executed on the ISS may help answer some of the questions in the deferred scenarios, or it may be possible to complete them on another platform (e.g. commercial space station, lunar habitat). Simulating conditions during a Mars mission on the ISS will afford higher fidelity for assessing multiple integrated hazards of human spaceflight, however, ground analogs of Mars missions can be used to ensure effective measures and experimental design before testing begins on the ISS. The strategic concepts refined as part of these workshops were brought to a multilateral forum, Mulitlateral Human Research Planel for Exploration (MHRPE), where ISS partner agencies are now discussing implementation plans to provide new opportunities to use the ISS to prepare for deep space exploration over the coming decade. In this publication we present a summary of the international strategic plans for future research that will enable operations, software, and countermeasures to be developed that will reduce the risk to humans during future crewed missions to Mars.

Human space exploration↗
NASA NTRS2013

Future Challenges in Managing Human Health and Performance Risks for Space Flight

The global economy forces many nations to consider their national investments and make difficult decisions regarding their investment in future exploration. To enable safe, reliable, and productive human space exploration, we must pool global resources to understand and mitigate human health & performance risks prior to embarking on human exploration of deep space destinations. Consensus on the largest risks to humans during exploration is required to develop an integrated approach to mitigating risks. International collaboration in human space flight research will focus research on characterizing the effects of spaceflight on humans and the development of countermeasures or systems. Sharing existing data internationally will facilitate high quality research and sufficient power to make sound recommendations. Efficient utilization of ISS and unique ground-based analog facilities allows greater progress. Finally, a means to share results of human research in time to influence decisions for follow-on research, system design, new countermeasures and medical practices should be developed. Although formidable barriers to overcome, International working groups are working to define the risks, establish international research opportunities, share data among partners, share flight hardware and unique analog facilities, and establish forums for timely exchange of results. Representatives from the ISS partnership research and medical communities developed a list of the top ten human health & performance risks and their impact on exploration missions. They also drafted a multilateral data sharing plan to establish guidelines and principles for sharing human spaceflight data. Other working groups are also developing methods to promote international research solicitations. Collaborative use of analog facilities and shared development of space flight research and medical hardware continues. Establishing a forum for exchange of results between researchers, aerospace physicians and program managers takes careful consideration of researcher concerns and decision maker needs. Active participation by researchers in the development of this forum is essential, and the benefit can be tremendous. The ability to rapidly respond to research results without compromising publication rights and intellectual property will facilitate timely reduction in human health and performance risks in support of international exploration missions.

Corbin, Barbara J.↗
NASA NTRS2000

1999 NASA Seal/Secondary Air System Workshop

NASA Glenn hosted the Seals/Secondary Air System Workshop on October 2829, 1999. Each year NASA and our industry and university partners share their respective seal technology development. We use these workshops as a technical forum to exchange recent advancements and "lessons-learned" in advancing seal technology and solving problems of common interest. As in the past we are publishing two volumes. Volume 1 will be publicly available and will be made available on-line through the web page address listed at the end of this chapter. Volume 2 will be restricted under International Traffic and Arms Regulations (I.T.A.R.) In this conference participants gained an appreciation of NASA's new Ultra Efficient Engine Technology (UEET) program and how this program will be partnering with ongoing DOE -industrial power production and DOD- military aircraft engine programs. In addition to gaining a deeper understanding into sealing advancements and challenges that lie ahead, participants gained new working and personal relationships with the attendees. When the seals and secondary fluid management program was initiated, the emphasis was on rocket engines with spinoffs to gas turbines. Today, the opposite is true and we are, again building our involvement in the rocket engine and space vehicle demonstration programs.

Steinetz, Bruce M.↗
NASA NTRS2000

1999 NASA Seal/secondary Air System Workshop

NASA Glenn hosted the Seals/Secondary Air System Workshop on October 28-29, 1999. Each year NASA and our industry and university partners share their respective seal technology development. We use these workshops as a technical forum to exchange recent advancements and "lessons-leamed" in advancing seal technology and solving problems of common interest. As in the past we are publishing two volumes. Volume 1 will be publicly available and volume 2 will be restricted under International Traffic and Arms Regulations (I.T.A.R.). The 1999 NASA Seal/Secondary Air System Workshop was divided into four areas; (i) overviews of the government-sponsored gas turbine programs (NASA Ultra Efficient Engine Technology program and DOE Advanced Turbine System program) and the general aviation program (GAP) with emphasis on program goals and seal needs; (ii) turbine engine seal issues from the perspective of an airline customer (i.e., United Airlines), (iii) sealing concepts, methods and results including experimental facilities and numerical predictions; and (iv) reviews of seal requirements for next generation aerospace vehicles (Trailblazer, Bantam and X-38).

Steinetz, Bruce M.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Overview of NASA Glenn Seal Development Program

NASA Glenn hosted the Seals/Secondary Air System Workshop on October 25-26, 2000. Each year NASA and our industry and university partners share their respective seal technology developments. We use these workshops as a technical forum to exchange recent advancements and 'lessons-learned' in advancing seal technology and solving problems of common interest. As in the past we are publishing two volumes. Volume I will be publicly available and individual papers will be made available online through the web page address listed at the end of this chapter.

Steinetz, Bruce M.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Overview of NASA Glenn Seal Program

NASA Glenn hosted the Seals/Secondary Air System Workshop on October 30-31, 2001. Each year NASA and our industry and university partners share their respective seal technology developments. We use these workshops as a technical forum to exchange recent advancements and "lessons-learned" in advancing seal technology and solving problems of common interest. As in the past we are publishing two volumes. Volume I will be publicly available and individual papers will be made available on-line through the web page address listed at the end of this chapter. Volume II will be restricted under International Traffic and Arms Regulations (I.T.A.R.) and/or Export Administration Regulations (E.A.R.).

Steinetz, Bruce M.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Overview of NASA Glenn Seal Project

NASA Glenn hosted the Seals/Secondary Air System Workshop on November 14-15, 2006. At this workshop NASA and our industry and university partners shared their respective seal technology developments. We use these workshops as a technical forum to exchange recent advancements and "lessons-learned" in advancing seal technology and solving problems of common interest. As in the past we are publishing the presentations from this workshop in two volumes. Volume I will be publicly available and individual papers will be made available on-line through the web page address listed at the end of this presentation. Volume II will be restricted as Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) under International Traffic and Arms Regulations (ITAR).

Steinetz, Bruce M.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Towards a Standard for Provenance and Context for Preservation of Data for Earth System Science

Long-term data sets with data from many missions are needed to study trends and validate model results that are typical in Earth System Science research. Data and derived products originate from multiple missions (spaceborne, airborne and/or in situ) and from multiple organizations. During the missions as well as well past their termination, it is essential to preserve the data and products to support future studies. Key aspects of preservation are: preserving bits and ensuring data are uncorrupted, preserving understandability with appropriate documentation, and preserving reproducibility of science with appropriate documentation and other artifacts. Computer technology provides adequate standards to ensure that, with proper engineering, bits are preserved as hardware evolves. However, to ensure understandability and reproducibility, it is essential to plan ahead to preserve all the relevant data and information. There are currently no standards to identify the content that needs to be preserved, leading to non-uniformity in content and users not being sure of whether preserved content is comprehensive. Each project, program or agency can specify the items to be preserved as a part of its data management requirements. However, broader community consensus that cuts across organizational or national boundaries would be needed to ensure comprehensiveness, uniformity and long-term utility of archived data. The Federation of Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP), a diverse network of scientists, data stewards and technology developers, has a forum for ESIP members to collaborate on data preservation issues. During early 2011, members discussed the importance of developing a Provenance and Context Content Standard (PCCS) and developed an initial list of content items. This list is based on the outcome of a NASA and NOAA meeting held in 1998 under the auspices of the USGCRP, documentation requirements from NOAA and our experience with some of the NASA Earth science missions. The items are categorized into the following 8 high level categories: Preflight/Pre-Operations, Products (Data), Product Documentation, Mission Calibration, Product Software, Algorithm Input, Validation, Software Tools.

Ramaprian, Hampapuram K.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance Integration - the Future of Safe Deep Space Human Exploration

As a foundational element of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Artemis Campaign, the Gateway is an incrementally built cislunar spacecraft that will serve as a platform for deep space human exploration, science, and technology demonstration. The Gateway will be a unifying catalyst for international partners around the world to establish sustained deep space scientific investigations, lunar surface access, and missions to Mars. As human exploration moves farther away from Earth, spacecraft designs must prioritize and optimize mass and volume allocations, while minimizing human and spacecraft risk. To accomplish this objective, the Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance functions develop, implement, and ensure compliance with requirements, in concert with the accurate characterization and transparent communication of residual hazard risks, for integrated safety, reliability and maintainability and quality assurance. Safety and Mission Assurance was a key contributor during Gateway program pre-formulation and formulation activities where safety and reliability analysis was embedded in the Gateway Systems Engineering and Integration team. During these early program stages, a preliminary Gateway Integrated Hazard Analysis and Preliminary Gateway Probabilistic Risk Assessment assisted in Gateway architectural and operational definition as part of a risk-informed design process. As the deep space architecture has matured, the integrated Safety and Mission Assurance analyses have matured, new safety review processes have been developed, and requirements have been refined to ensure compliance with integrated safety and mission assurance objectives. The Gateway Program is currently concluding the preliminary design review informed milestone, where the primary objectives included: - Ensured completeness and consistency of the preliminary design, including the meeting of all requirements within appropriate margins and acceptable risk posture. - Identification of any major issues moving forward to the Critical Design phase. At this milestone, Safety and Mission Assurance provided numerous products, including Gateway Top Risks and Risk Mitigation Plans, updated integrated hazard analyses, updated probabilistic risk assessment, Crew Survival Analysis Report, and updated Safety and Mission Assurance Requirements and Plans. These products provide a many-faceted perspective on the inherent risk and available mitigations involved in flying the current proposed vehicle design and anticipated stack configurations. In addition, Safety and Mission Assurance identified top technical, process and workforce concerns to be addressed as the program progresses toward the critical design phase. This paper will detail the evolution of the Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance integration functions, provide its current status and lessons learned for future human spaceflight programs. Throughout this paper the key tenets of the Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance will be discussed: - Application of a risk-informed approach to identify and mitigate areas of highest risk. - Leverage of valuable processes and lessons learned from earlier spaceflight programs. - Development of Safety and Mission Assurance products to inform design risk trades. - Utilization of common Safety and Mission Assurance practices to identify safety risks for multiple perspectives: top-down, bottom-up, and across lines of integration. - Approval of safety hazards at the appropriate level of authority, keeping most deliberation closest to design expertise and elevating risks of greatest concern for program-level consideration. - Championing of Safety and Mission Assurance processes and forums to foster a pervasive safety culture that is transparent, inclusive, and collaborative between all partners. These tenets have allowed the Gateway Safety and Mission Assurance function to play a key role in optimized vehicle design evolution, and early identification and mitigation of Gateway program and Artemis mission risk.

Helen Vaccaro↗
NASA NTRS2022

National Campaign (NC)-1 Strategic Conflict Management Simulation (X4) Community Based Rules

Projected demand for transportation services in the urban environment has led to the development of several Concepts of Operation for Urban Air Mobility, or UAM. UAM is a concept for the transportation of people and goods in the metropolitan environment using small, efficient aircraft over short distances as part of an expanding multimodal transportation network. UAM will leverage emerging technologies including electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft, increasing levels of automation and a new operational paradigm in dense airspace where a set of agreed-upon rules govern the procedures and interactions defining a cooperative environment in which operators are entrusted with a range of functions typically conducted by Air Traffic Control (ATC). These rules, proposed in the FAA NextGen Office’s UAM Concept of Operations [1], were originally termed Community Based Rules or Community Business Rules (CBRs), and will in the future termed Cooperative Operating Practices (COPs); this document uses the original term, CBR. CBRs are a set of rules, developed by the UAM community and (where necessary) approved by the FAA that govern the interactions between UAM entities and limit the need for ATC services including, but not limited to, separation control by ATC, addressing a fundamental challenge to scaling UAM operations. UAM community development of CBRs is anticipated to accelerate the adoption of new practices while retaining the regulatory authority of the FAA within required domains (e.g., NAS safety, security and equal access). However, there currently exists no agreed industry forum or defined procedures for CBR development. Investigation of best practices for the development of UAM CBRs was identified by NASA and the FAA NextGen Office as a research need. In collaboration with seven industry partners, NASA participated in a series of simulations that investigated elements of the envisioned UAM operations, with a primary focus on Strategic Conflict Management (SCM). The development and conduct of cooperative UAM simulations with seven industry partners provided a unique opportunity to investigate CBR development practices. Development of CBRs for the UAM SCM simulations was conducted in parallel with simulation capability development and was closely related to requirements definition for the simulations. As such, the CBR development effort presented herein had two objectives: explore CBR development practices in collaboration with the industry partners and develop an initial set of UAM CBRs to support simulation requirements definition and development. Consensus was achieved among NASA and the industry partners on 24 CBRs that were developed to support the cooperative simulation operations across five topic areas: General (related to test requirements), Operational Intent, Conformance Monitoring, Demand Capacity Balancing, and Airspace Constraint Management. Additional topic areas and CBRs were discussed but were deemed outside the scope of the simulation; these are included in the appendices. A collaborative, iterative process was employed for developing the CBRs engaging both NASA and Industry; because CBR development is envisioned to be community-driven, opportunities were sought that provided industry partners leadership roles in developing CBRs. The following key observations and recommendations may aid the UAM industry in future CBR development efforts: - The lack of a defined process proved challenging initially. Stakeholder engagement in the early stages of CBR development was intermittent and may have been due to the lack of a clear definition of roles and responsibilities of those involved in the effort. - Industry leadership of CBR topic areas proved successful. Discussions in these topic areas were engaging, with alternate viewpoints freely discussed and detailed CBRs resulting. This points to the importance of identifying the best-suited leadership in technical areas for CBR development. - Discussions within a CBR topic area were typically dominated by only a few participants. Whereas all industry partners contributed to CBR development, within each topic area, technical leadership was evident even when not formally established. This observation may indicate that smaller, focused groups may be more effective in initial CBR development than an open forum or large standards development effort (although both maybe required prior to FAA review and approval for some CBRs). - Identifying suitable forums for initial UAM CBR development and identifying the most effective industry participants and leadership will be crucial for successful CBR development. Although the operational need for UAM CBRs may not be immediate, establishing the forums and leadership to define the processes for CBR development is a prudent early step to UAM realization.

Community Based Rules↗
NASA NTRS2014

The Affording Mars Workshop: Background and Recommendations

A human mission to Mars is the stated "ultimate" goal for NASA and is widely believed by the public to be the most compelling destination for America's space program. However, widely cited enormous costs - perhaps as much as a trillion dollars for a many-decade campaign - seem to be an impossible hurdle, although political and budget instability over many years may be equally challenging. More recently, a handful of increasingly detailed architectures for initial Mars missions have been developed by commercial companies that have estimated costs much less than widely believed and roughly comparable with previous major human space flight programs: the Apollo Program, the International Space Station, and the space shuttle. Several of these studies are listed in the bibliography to the workshop report. As a consequence of these new scenarios, beginning in spring, 2013 a multiinstitutional planning team began developing the content and invitee list for a winter workshop that would critically assess concepts, initiatives, technology priorities, and programmatic options to reduce significantly the costs of human exploration of Mars. The output of the workshop - findings and recommendations - would be presented in a number of forums and discussed with national leaders in human space flight. It would also be made available to potential international partners. This workshop was planned from the start to be the first in a series. Subsequent meetings, conferences, and symposia will concentrate on topics not able to be covered in December. In addition, to make progress in short meeting, a handful of ground rules were adopted by the planning team and agreed to by the participants. Perhaps the two most notable such ground rules were (1) the Space Launch System (SLS) and Orion would be available during the time frame considered by the participants and (2) the International Space Station (ISS) would remain the early linchpin in preparing for Mars exploration over the coming decade. The workshop was organized around three topical breakout sessions: 1. The ISS and the path to Mars: The critical coming decade 2. Affordability and sustainability: what does it mean and what are its implications within guidelines established at the start of the workshop? 3. Notional sequence(s) of cost-achievable missions for the 2020s to 2030s, including capability objectives at each stage and opportunities for coordinated robotic partnerships.

background↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Validation of Cryogenic Propellant Tank Filling using Computational Fluid Dynamics Simulation

The Fluid Dynamics Branch at MSFC has positioned itself to support a wide range of customers in need of Cryogenic Fluid Management (CFM) analysis. A computational fluid dynamics (CFD) tool used for all manner of internal and external propulsion applications has been extended and refined to better model cryogenic propellant storage and tanking operations. Through the CFM Portfolio project, several validation activities were initiated. Validation of propellant tank self-pressurization, autogenous pressurization, slosh-induced ullage collapse, and jet-induced mixing all aid in defining model accuracy. The on-going validation effort has enabled confident application of the tool to in-line design and evaluation of CFM hardware and operations. Recent project support included defining the impact of in-space slosh dynamics on reaction control system mass for Space Launch System (SLS) upper stages. Propellant mixing strategies were defined to improve performance of a thermal vent system for a Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) partner. Design support of in-space maneuvers, tank hardware, and autogenous pressurization operations was also provided through Human Landing System (HLS) collaboration work. The branch has engaged the CFM community to share recent findings and capabilities through several forums including conferences, technical interchange meetings, and workshops. Development and demonstration of CFM modeling capabilities continues in this work on the no-vent fill of propellant tank in micro-gravity to meet the needs of NASA and its industry partners in the endeavor to sustainably reach the Moon and beyond.

CFD↗
NASA NTRS2022

National Campaign (NC)-1 Strategic Conflict Management Simulation (X4) Final Report

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) enables highly automated, cooperative, passenger or cargo-carrying air transportation services in and around urban areas. UAM is a subset of the Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) concept under development by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and industry. The Strategic Conflict Management (SCM) Simulation, dubbed “X4”, was conducted between July 2021 and June 2022 by NASA with the FAA and industry to evolve the Provider of Services for UAM (PSU) that will be needed to ensure initial UAM operations can scale in the National Airspace System (NAS). The FAA UAM Concept of Operations (ConOps) v1 [1] served as an initial guiding document for the X4 airspace management system design to ensure the architecture supports testing of services provided by third-party service providers. To that end, the X4 architecture leveraged concepts and technologies developed for Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) while also developing and testing new capabilities and services needed for UAM. The architecture included an initial prototype of the FAA-Industry Exchange Protocol (FIDXP), third-party services such as the PSUs, and Discovery and Synchronization Service (DSS), and other new services such as Demand-Capacity Balancing (DCB) to facilitate UAM strategic conflict management. During X4, NASA led discussions and collaborated with seven industry airspace partners to develop initial airspace management concepts for UAM that drove what would be tested and evaluated during the simulations. The initial capabilities defined for PSU leveraged UTM UAS Service Supplier (USS) as a starting point and evolved to meet UAM requirements. These discussions were also an opportunity for NASA to collaborate with industry to develop a set of initial Community-Based Rules (CBRs). These CBRs enabled how UAM traffic would be cooperatively managed among UAM operators. The collaborative, iterative process of developing CBRs with industry during X4 provided insight into the challenges involved and identified the need for a suitable and effective forum for future CBR development. In parallel with these discussions, NASA conducted a series of seven software sprints and two collaborative simulations with the airspace partners that built up in complexity. Over the course of the year, all seven partners successfully completed all the sprints by demonstrating the required capabilities. They also participated in the two collaborative simulations to demonstrate how multiple PSUs could work together in a collaborative, more complex environment with higher traffic density. The X4 simulation accomplished NASA's objectives and helped advance the development of the seven participating PSUs. The lessons learned provided insight into key elements of the UAM Notional Architecture from the FAA ConOps v1 [1] and UTM technologies when applied to UAM: - Having a Concept of Use (ConUse) defined prior to the activity would accelerate the time and effort from concept development to testing. - While the UAM Notional Architecture provided a starting point for a federated architecture that support services provided by third-party providers, the USS and PSU differed in their capability definitions for operational intent submission and sharing, conformance monitoring, airspace authorization, strategic conflict management, airspace constraints and dynamic replanning. - While existing DSS developed for UTM provided a way for PSU and other UAM services (such as DCB) to discover relevant operations from each other, additional complexity and challenges were found during X4 testing and illuminated the need for a more suitable solution for UAM. Industry can leverage the results of this demonstration to accelerate UAM requirements, CBRs, and standards development. The FAA and other government municipalities and agencies will be able to leverage results to inform future policies and identify additional gaps that require further analysis, moving toward operationalization of UAM.

Urban Air Mobility↗
NASA NTRS2016

International Research Results and Accomplishments From the International Space Station

In 2016, the International Space Station (ISS) partnership published the first-ever compilation of international ISS research publications resulting from research performed on the ISS through 2011. The International Space Station Research Accomplishments: An Analysis of Results From 2000-2011 is a collection of summaries of over 1,200 journal publications that describe ISS research in the areas of biology and biotechnology; Earth and space science; educational activities and outreach; human research; physical sciences; technology development and demonstration; and, results from ISS operations. This paper will summarize the ISS results publications obtained through 2011 on behalf of the ISS Program Science Forum that is made up of senior science representatives across the international partnership. NASA's ISS Program Science office maintains an online experiment database (www.nasa.gov/issscience) that tracks and communicates ISS research activities across the entire ISS partnership, and it is continuously updated. It captures ISS experiment summaries and results and includes citations to the journals, conference proceedings, and patents as they become available. The International Space Station Research Accomplishments: An Analysis of Results From 2000-2011 is a testament to the research that was underway even as the ISS laboratory was being built. It reflects the scientific knowledge gained from ISS research, and how it impact the fields of science in both space and traditional science disciplines on Earth. Now, during a time when utilization is at its busiest, and with extension of the ISS through at least 2024, the ISS partners work together to track the accomplishments and the new knowledge gained in a way that will impact humanity like no laboratory on Earth. The ISS Program Science Forum will continue to capture and report on these results in the form of journal publications, conference proceedings, and patents. We anticipate that successful ISS research will continue to contribute to the science literature in a way that helps to formulate new hypotheses and conclusions that will enable science advancements across a wide range of scientific disciplines both in space and on Earth.

Ruttley, Tara M.↗
DOE OSTI2022

“Snowmass’21 Discussions on Future HEP Facilities in the US

The US particle physics community planning exercise (a.k.a. “Snowmass”) is organized every 7 to 9 years to provide a forum for discussions among the entire particle physics community to develop a scientific vision for the future of particle physics in the U.S. and its international partners. The Snowmass'21 Accelerator Frontier activities include discussions on high-energy hadron and lepton colliders, high-intensity beams for neutrino research and for “Physics Beyond Colliders”, accelerator technologies, science, education and outreach as well as the progress of core accelerator technologies, including RF, magnets, targets and sources. Here we summarize the Snowmass'21 discussions on future HEP accelerator facilities.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
NASA NTRS2015

International Space Station Earth Observations Working Group

The multilateral Earth Observations Working Group (EOWG) was chartered in May 2012 in order to improve coordination and collaboration of Earth observing payloads, research, and applications on the International Space Station (ISS). The EOWG derives its authority from the ISS Program Science Forum, and a NASA representative serves as a permanent co-chair. A rotating co-chair position can be occupied by any of the international partners, following concurrence by the other partners; a JAXA representative is the current co-chair. Primary functions of the EOWG include, 1) the exchange of information on plans for payloads, from science and application objectives to instrument development, data collection, distribution and research; 2) recognition and facilitation of opportunities for international collaboration in order to optimize benefits from different instruments; and 3) provide a formal ISS Program interface for collection and application of remotely sensed data collected in response to natural disasters through the International Charter, Space and Major Disasters. Recent examples of EOWG activities include coordination of bilateral data sharing protocols between NASA and TsNIIMash for use of crew time and instruments in support of ATV5 reentry imaging activities; discussion of continued use and support of the Nightpod camera mount system by NASA and ESA; and review and revision of international partner contributions on Earth observations to the ISS Program Benefits to Humanity publication.

Stefanov, William L.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Snowmass 21 Discussions on Future Accelerator HEP Facilities

The US particle physics community planning exercise (a.k.a. Snowmass) is organized every 7 to 9 years to provide a forum for discussions among the entire particle physics community to develop a scientific vision for the future of particle physics in the U.S. and its international partners. The Snowmass 21 Accelerator Frontier activities include discussions on high-energy hadron and lepton colliders, high-intensity beams for neutrino research and for Physics Beyond Colliders, accelerator technologies, science, education and outreach as well as the progress of core accelerator technologies, including RF, magnets, targets and sources. Here we summarize the Snowmass 21 discussions on future HEP accelerator facilities.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Digital Information Platform (DIP) Overview

On March 24, 2021, NASA’s Digital Information Platform (DIP) released a Request for Information (RFI) to the aviation community. The RFI was intended to request two things: 1) DIP concept input such as current challenges and needs for data and services and 2) Interest in participating in collaborative demonstrations. On July 29, 2021, DIP team will meet with Airlines for America (A4A) to share a summary of information received from the RFI responses. The objective of the meeting is to follow up with respondents with takeaways the DIP team identified that will inform the concept and demonstration plans. The forum will give participants an opportunity to add on and provide feedback to the summary. The meeting will also describe the roadmap for the Collaborative Demonstrations and next steps for partner engagement.

Digital Information Platform (DIP) RFI summary↗