SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “Directors”
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.
Bob Hwang is the new Transportation Energy Center director.
Abstract not provided.
Sandian Elected as a Director of the Microscopy Society of America.
Abstract not provided.
NSRC-Recap Director's Review
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Facilities and Operations Directorate (ALDFO)
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Nuclear Science & Technology Directorate: Creating a Secure & Resilient Energy Future
NS&T Overview presentation for the visit of NEA leadership
Small Business Innovation Research, Post-Phase II Opportunity Assessment
This report outlines current Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Post-Phase II opportunity contract award results for the SBIR technology program from 2007 to 2011 for NASA's Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD), Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD), Science Mission Directorate (SMD), and Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD). The report provides guidelines for incorporating SBIR technology into NASA programs and projects and provides a quantitative overview of the post-Phase II award patterns that correspond with each mission directorate at NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC). In recent years, one of NASA's goals has been to not only transfer SBIR technologies to commercial industries, but to ensure that NASA mission directorates incorporate SBIR technologies into their program and project activities. Before incorporating technologies into MD programs, it is important to understand each mission directorate structure because each directorate has different objectives and needs. The directorate program structures follow.
Dynamic states of swimming bacteria in a nematic liquid crystal cell with homeotropic alignment
Flagellated bacteria such as Escherichia coli and Bacillus subtilis exhibit effective mechanisms for swimming in fluids and exploring the surrounding environment. In isotropic fluids such as water, the bacteria change swimming direction through the run-and-tumble process. Lyotropic chromonic liquid crystals (LCLCs) have been introduced recently as an anisotropic environment in which the direction of preferred orientation, the director, guides the bacterial trajectories. In this work, we describe the behavior of bacteria B. subtilis in a homeotropic LCLC geometry, in which the director is perpendicular to the bounding plates of a shallow cell. We demonstrate that the bacteria are capable of overcoming the stabilizing elastic forces of the LCLC and swim perpendicularly to the imposed director (and parallel to the bounding plates). The effect is explained by a finite surface anchoring of the director at the bacterial body; the role of surface anchoring is analyzed by numerical simulations of a rod realigning in an otherwise uniform director field. Shear flows produced by a swimming bacterium cause director distortions around its body, as evidenced both by experiments and numerical simulations. These distortions contribute to a repulsive force that keeps the swimming bacterium at a distance of a few micrometers away from the bounding plates. The homeotropic alignment of the director imposes two different scenarios of bacterial tumbling: one with an 180° reversal of the horizontal velocity and the other with the realignment of the bacterium by two consecutive 90° turns. Finally, in the second case, the angle between the bacterial body and the imposed director changes from 90° to 0° and then back to 90°; the new direction of swimming does not correlate with the previous swimming direction.
NASA Strategy for Technology Development
At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), foresight is a coordinated, iterative, and continual process for making informed decisions. NASA faces diverse and relatively unique challenges and opportunities as the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration. To address these challenges and leverage opportunities, NASA uses foresight to strategically plan technology development across four mission directorates: Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, Space Technology Mission Directorate, Science Mission Directorate, and Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (recently separated into the new Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate and Space Operations Mission Directorate). The mission directorates leverage a broad community of experts and partners to incorporate technology foresight into mission and program planning. Through this process NASA realizes tangible benefits to the agency’s science, technology, and exploration programs. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) provides strategic advice, supported by independent assessments and rigorous analysis, to inform NASA senior leadership on key areas to align mission and agency-level activities. OTPS serves as a trusted authority to inform technology strategy at the agency to enable future missions. Specifically, OTPS coordinates and uses inputs from a broad community of experts, both internal and external to NASA, to inform decision making for technology plans, investments, and partnerships. OTPS develops and maintains the NASA Technology Taxonomy to standardize communication across the agency’s diverse technology portfolio and the related Strategic Technology Investment Plan that integrates priorities and informs technology investment. Through these efforts, OTPS has refined elements of foresight-informed strategic planning that may be applicable to other technology-driven industries where foresight is essential for resilience. This chapter describes the processes of foresight for technology development at NASA and provides insight into the value the agency derives from these processes. The chapter further describes the role of OTPS as an independent advisory office that supports NASA’s efforts to capitalize on foresight and strategic technology planning. We present these examples with consideration for how organizations in defense, security, and other technology-driven industries can operationalize foresight in their own strategic technology development.
An experimental evaluation of head-up display formats
Three types of head-up display format are investigated. Type 1 is an unreferenced (conventional) flight director, type 2 is a ground referenced flight path display, and type 3 is a ground referenced director. Formats are generated by computer and presented by reflecting collimation against a simulated forward view in flight. Pilots, holding commercial licenses, fly approaches in the instrument flight mode and in a combined instrument and visual flight mode. The approaches are in wind shear with varied conditions of visibility, offset, and turbulence. The displays are equivalent in pure tracking but there is a slight advantage for the unreferenced director in poor conditions. Flight path displays are better for tracking in the combined flight mode, possibly because of poor director control laws and the division of attention between superimposed fields. Workloads is better for the type 2 displays. The flight path and referenced director displays are criticized for effects of symbol motion and field limiting. In the subjective judgment of pilots familiar with the director displays, they are rated clearly better than path displays, with a preference for the unreferenced director. There is a fair division of attention between superimposed fields.
Scientific and Technical Publishing at Goddard Space Flight Center in Fiscal Year 1994
This publication is a compilation of scientific and technical material that was researched, written, prepared, and disseminated by the Center's scientists and engineers during FY94. It is presented in numerical order of the GSFC author's sponsoring technical directorate; i.e., Code 300 is the Office of Flight Assurance, Code 400 is the Flight Projects Directorate, Code 500 is the Mission Operations and Data Systems Directorate, Code 600 is the Space Sciences Directorate, Code 700 is the Engineering Directorate, Code 800 is the Suborbital Projects and Operations Directorate, and Code 900 is the Earth Sciences Directorate. The publication database contains publication or presentation title, author(s), document type, sponsor, and organizational code. This is the second annual compilation for the Center.
Structural Transformations in Nematic Liquid Crystals with a Hybrid Orientation
The structural transformations in a nematic liquid crystal (NLC) layer with a hybrid orientation (planar director orientation is created on one substrate and homeotropic director orientation is created on the other) are studied. In the case of a dc voltage applied to the NLC layer, the primary instability is flexoelectric. It causes the appearance of flexoelectric domains oriented along the director on the substrate with a planar orientation. When the voltage increases further, an electroconvective instability in the form of rolls moving almost normal to flexoelectric domains develops along with these domains. Thus, the following spatially periodic structures of different natures coexist in one system: equilibrium static flexoelectric deformation of a director and dissipative moving oblique electroconvection rolls. The primary instability in the case of an ac voltage is represented by electroconvection, which leads to moving oblique or normal rolls depending on the electric field frequency. Above the electroconvection threshold, a transition to moving “abnormal” rolls is detected. The wavevector of the rolls coincides with the initial director orientation on the substrate with a planar orientation, and the projection of the director at the midplane of the NLC layer on the layer plane makes a certain angle with the wavevector. The results of numerical calculations of the threshold characteristics of the primary instabilities agree well with the obtained experimental data.
Manual and automatic flight control during severe turbulence penetration
An analytical and experimental investigation of possible contributing factors in jet aircraft turbulence upsets was conducted. Major contributing factors identified included autopilot and display deficiencies, the large aircraft inertia and associated long response time, and excessive pilot workload. An integrated flight and thrust energy management director system was synthesized. The system was incorporated in a moving-base simulation and evaluated using highly experienced airline pilots. The evaluation included comparison of pilot workload and flight performance during severe turbulence penetration utilizing four control/display concepts: manual control with conventional full panel display, conventional autopilot (A/P-A) with conventional full panel display, improved autopilot (A/P-B) with conventional full panel display plus thrust director display, and longitudinal flight director with conventional full panel display plus thrust director display. Simulation results show improved performance, reduced pilot workload, and a pilot preference for the autopilot system controlling to the flight director command and manual control of thrust following the trim thrust director.
Investigation of piloting aids for manual control of hypersonic maneuvers
An investigation of piloting aids designed to provide precise maneuver control for an air-breathing hypersonic vehicle is described. Stringent constraints and nonintuitive high-speed flight effects associated with maneuvering in the hypersonic regime raise the question of whether manual control of such a vehicle should even be considered. The objectives of this research were to determine the extent of manual control that is desirable for a vehicle maneuvering in this regime and to identify the form of aids that must be supplied to the pilot to make such control feasible. A piloted real-time motion-based simulation of a hypersonic vehicle concept was used for this study, and the investigation focused on a single representative cruise turn maneuver. Piloting aids, which consisted of an auto throttle, throttle director, autopilot, flight director, and two head-up display configurations, were developed and evaluated. Two longitudinal control response types consisting of a rate-command/attitude-hold system and a load factor-rate/load-factor-hold system were also compared. The complete set of piloting aids, which consisted of the autothrottle, throttle director, and flight director, improved the average Cooper-Harper flying qualities ratings from 8 to 2.6, even though identical inner-loop stability and control augmentation was provided in all cases. The flight director was determined to be the most critical of these aids, and the cruise turn maneuver was unachievable to adequate performance specifications in the absence of this flight director.
NASA Human Health and Performance Strategy
In May 2007, what was then the Space Life Sciences Directorate, issued the 2007 Space Life Sciences Strategy for Human Space Exploration. In January 2012, leadership and key directorate personnel were once again brought together to assess the current and expected future environment against its 2007 Strategy and the Agency and Johnson Space Center goals and strategies. The result was a refined vision and mission, and revised goals, objectives, and strategies. One of the first changes implemented was to rename the directorate from Space Life Sciences to Human Health and Performance to better reflect our vision and mission. The most significant change in the directorate from 2007 to the present is the integration of the Human Research Program and Crew Health and Safety activities. Subsequently, the Human Health and Performance Directorate underwent a reorganization to achieve enhanced integration of research and development with operations to better support human spaceflight and International Space Station utilization. These changes also enable a more effective and efficient approach to human system risk mitigation. Since 2007, we have also made significant advances in external collaboration and implementation of new business models within the directorate and the Agency, and through two newly established virtual centers, the NASA Human Health and Performance Center and the Center of Excellence for Collaborative Innovation. Our 2012 Strategy builds upon these successes to address the Agency s increased emphasis on societal relevance and being a leader in research and development and innovative business and communications practices. The 2012 Human Health and Performance Vision is to lead the world in human health and performance innovations for life in space and on Earth. Our mission is to enable optimization of human health and performance throughout all phases of spaceflight. All HHPD functions are ultimately aimed at achieving this mission. Our activities enable mission success, optimizing human health and productivity in space before, during, and after the actual spaceflight experience of our crews, and include support for ground-based functions. Many of our spaceflight innovations also provide solutions for terrestrial challenges, thereby enhancing life on Earth. Our strategic goals are aimed at leading human exploration and ISS utilization, leading human health and performance internationally, excelling in management and advancement of innovations in health and human system integration, and expanding relevance to life on Earth and creating enduring support and enthusiasm for space exploration.
NASA Activity Update for the 2013 Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (UVSI) Yearbook
This year s report offers a high level perspective on some of the UAS related activities in which NASA is involved, both internal and external to the agency. Internally, NASA issued UAS operational policy on certification of NASA UAS and aircrew. A team of NASA UAS experts and operators analyzed all current procedures and best practices to design the policy. An update to the agencies Aircraft Operations Management Manual incorporated a new chapter to address UAS planning, preflight operations, flight operations, flight crew requirements, airworthiness and flight safety reviews. NASA UAS are classified into three categories based on weight and airspeed. Aircrews, including observers, are classified by how they interface with the UAS, and the policy defines qualifications, training, and currency. The NASA flight readiness approval process identifies risks and mitigations in order to reduce the likelihood and/or consequence of the risk to an acceptable level. The UAS operations process incorporates all aspects of airworthiness, flight standards and range safety exactly the same processes used for NASA manned aircraft operations. NASA has two internal organizations that routinely operate UAS. The Science Mission Directorate utilizes UAS as part of its Airborne Science Program and is the most frequent operator of NASA UAS in both national and international airspace. The Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate conducts UAS flight operations in addition to conducting research important to the UAS community. This past year the Science Mission Directorate supported the Hurricane and Severe Storm Sentimental (HS3) Mission with two NASA Global Hawk platforms. HS3 is a five-year mission specifically targeted to investigate the processes that underlie hurricane formation. During the 2012 portion of this mission the Global Hawk overflew hurricanes Leslie and Nadine in the Atlantic Ocean completing 6 flights and accumulating more than 148 flight hours. Another multi-year mission was initiated last year when the Sensor Integrated Environmental Remote Research Aircraft (SIERRA) UAS began surveying faults in California s Surprise Valley. A team of scientists and engineers from the United States Geological Survey (USGS), NASA Ames Research Center, Central Washington University, and Carnegie Mellon University will measure magnetic fields using ground surveys and the SIERRA to map the geophysics below the surface of Surprise Valley. The data collected will be used to generate 3D maps of the geophysical data of the area. The Aeronautics Mission Directorate continues its collaboration with Boeing to conduct UAS flight operations of the X-48C, a modified version of the X-48B originally built by Cranfield Aerospace, United Kingdom. The Aeronautics Mission Directorate utilizes vehicles of this size for a wide variety of research studies. Most of these operations are conducted within restricted airspace. The Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate also sponsors the UAS in the National Airspace System (NAS) Project, which is working in close cooperation with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to address critical challenges associated with routine UAS operations in civil airspace. The project is focused on separation assurance and collision avoidance systems and algorithms, command and control for non-military operations including spectrum allocation requirements, human system interaction issues, and safety and certification topics.
NASA Human Health and Performance Strategy
In May 2007, what was then the Space Life Sciences Directorate, issued the 2007 Space Life Sciences Strategy for Human Space Exploration. In January 2012, leadership and key directorate personnel were once again brought together to assess the current and expected future environment against its 2007 Strategy and the Agency and Johnson Space Center goals and strategies. The result was a refined vision and mission, and revised goals, objectives, and strategies. One of the first changes implemented was to rename the directorate from Space Life Sciences to Human Health and Performance to better reflect our vision and mission. The most significant change in the directorate from 2007 to the present is the integration of the Human Research Program and Crew Health and Safety activities. Subsequently, the Human Health and Performance Directorate underwent a reorganization to achieve enhanced integration of research and development with operations to better support human spaceflight and International Space Station utilization. These changes also enable a more effective and efficient approach to human system risk mitigation. Since 2007, we have also made significant advances in external collaboration and implementation of new business models within the directorate and the Agency, and through two newly established virtual centers, the NASA Human Health and Performance Center and the Center of Excellence for Collaborative Innovation. Our 2012 Strategy builds upon these successes to address the Agency's increased emphasis on societal relevance and being a leader in research and development and innovative business and communications practices. The 2012 Human Health and Performance Vision is to lead the world in human health and performance innovations for life in space and on Earth. Our mission is to enable optimization of human health and performance throughout all phases of spaceflight. All HH&P functions are ultimately aimed at achieving this mission. Our activities enable mission success, optimizing human health and productivity in space before, during, and after the actual spaceflight experience of our crews, and include support for ground-‐ based functions. Many of our spaceflight innovations also provide solutions for terrestrial challenges, thereby enhancing life on Earth. Our strategic goals are aimed at leading human exploration and ISS utilization, leading human health and performance internationally, excelling in management and advancement of innovations in health and human system integration, and expanding relevance to life on Earth and creating enduring support and enthusiasm for space exploration.
NASA Strategy for Technology Development
At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), foresight is a coordinated, iterative, and continual process for making informed decisions. NASA faces diverse and relatively unique challenges and opportunities as the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration. To address these challenges and leverage opportunities, NASA uses foresight to strategically plan technology development across four mission directorates: Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, Space Technology Mission Directorate, Science Mission Directorate, and Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate. The mission directorates leverage a broad community of experts and partners to incorporate technology foresight into mission and program planning. Through this process NASA realizes tangible benefits to the agency’s science, technology, and exploration programs. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT) serves as a trusted authority to inform technology strategy and advocacy at the agency, enabling future missions and advancing U.S. economic competitiveness. Specifically, OCT coordinates and uses inputs from abroad community of experts, both internal and external to NASA, to inform decision making for technology plans, investments, and partnerships. OCT develops the NASA Technology Taxonomy to standardize communication across the agency’s diverse technology portfolio and the related Strategic Technology Investment Plan that integrates priorities and informs technology investment. Through these efforts, OCT has refined elements of foresight-informed strategic planning that may be applicable to other technology-driven industries where foresight is essential for resilience. This chapter describes the processes of foresight for technology development at NASA and provides insight into the value the agency derives from these processes. The chapter further describes the role of OCT as an independent advisory office that supports NASA’s efforts to capitalize on foresight and strategic technology planning. We present these examples with consideration for how organizations in defense, security, and other technology-driven industries can operationalize foresight in their own strategic technology development.