SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “customer flexibility”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 415 records · Page 23

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2014

Cost Analysis in a Multi-Mission Operations Environment

Spacecraft control centers have evolved from dedicated, single-mission or single mission-type support to multi-mission, service-oriented support for operating a variety of mission types. At the same time, available money for projects is shrinking and competition for new missions is increasing. These factors drive the need for an accurate and flexible model to support estimating service costs for new or extended missions; the cost model in turn drives the need for an accurate and efficient approach to service cost analysis. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) provides operations services to a variety of customers around the world. HOSC customers range from launch vehicle test flights; to International Space Station (ISS) payloads; to small, short duration missions; and has included long duration flagship missions. The HOSC recently completed a detailed analysis of service costs as part of the development of a complete service cost model. The cost analysis process required the team to address a number of issues. One of the primary issues involves the difficulty of reverse engineering individual mission costs in a highly efficient multi-mission environment, along with a related issue of the value of detailed metrics or data to the cost model versus the cost of obtaining accurate data. Another concern is the difficulty of balancing costs between missions of different types and size and extrapolating costs to different mission types. The cost analysis also had to address issues relating to providing shared, cloud-like services in a government environment, and then assigning an uncertainty or risk factor to cost estimates that are based on current technology, but will be executed using future technology. Finally the cost analysis needed to consider how to validate the resulting cost models taking into account the non-homogeneous nature of the available cost data and the decreasing flight rate. This paper presents the issues encountered during the HOSC cost analysis process, and the associated lessons learned. These lessons can be used when planning for a new multi-mission operations center or in the transformation from a dedicated control center to multi-center operations, as an aid in defining processes that support future cost analysis and estimation. The lessons can also be used by mature service-oriented, multi-mission control centers to streamline or refine their cost analysis process.

Felton, Larry↗

NASA NTRS2014

Cost Analysis In A Multi-Mission Operations Environment

Spacecraft control centers have evolved from dedicated, single-mission or single missiontype support to multi-mission, service-oriented support for operating a variety of mission types. At the same time, available money for projects is shrinking and competition for new missions is increasing. These factors drive the need for an accurate and flexible model to support estimating service costs for new or extended missions; the cost model in turn drives the need for an accurate and efficient approach to service cost analysis. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) provides operations services to a variety of customers around the world. HOSC customers range from launch vehicle test flights; to International Space Station (ISS) payloads; to small, short duration missions; and has included long duration flagship missions. The HOSC recently completed a detailed analysis of service costs as part of the development of a complete service cost model. The cost analysis process required the team to address a number of issues. One of the primary issues involves the difficulty of reverse engineering individual mission costs in a highly efficient multimission environment, along with a related issue of the value of detailed metrics or data to the cost model versus the cost of obtaining accurate data. Another concern is the difficulty of balancing costs between missions of different types and size and extrapolating costs to different mission types. The cost analysis also had to address issues relating to providing shared, cloud-like services in a government environment, and then assigning an uncertainty or risk factor to cost estimates that are based on current technology, but will be executed using future technology. Finally the cost analysis needed to consider how to validate the resulting cost models taking into account the non-homogeneous nature of the available cost data and the decreasing flight rate. This paper presents the issues encountered during the HOSC cost analysis process, and the associated lessons learned. These lessons can be used when planning for a new multi-mission operations center or in the transformation from a dedicated control center to multi-center operations, as an aid in defining processes that support future cost analysis and estimation. The lessons can also be used by mature serviceoriented, multi-mission control centers to streamline or refine their cost analysis process.

Newhouse, M.↗

DOE OSTI2025

Flexible Operation of Microgrids Through Operator-Configurable Microgrid Controllers

Microgrids are becoming critical assets in power distribution systems. This is partly due to the resiliency and reliability challenges faced by power distribution systems in the last decade and partly due to the increased integration of distributed energy resource assets, such as solar photovoltaic. This increased need for microgrids has created a multitude of needs for microgrid controllers. Most microgrid controllers in the past decade have been uniquely programmed or custom programmed to meet the needs of a specific microgrid. Currently, IEEE standards aim to integrate the needs and capabilities of microgrid controllers under a unified umbrella. But the standards do not recommend necessary or appropriate software development practices for microgrid controllers. In addition, the programmable nature and maintenance of controllers are also key characteristics that fall outside the coverage of the standards. In this paper, we present the best software practices that utility engineers and microgrid operators should consider in the microgrid software platform. This paper can be used as an information document for developing documentation of controller requirements and assessing microgrid controller requirements.

Banshee microgrid↗

DOE OSTI2022

Model-based interface design for smart field-device integration

Operational complexity is ever-increasing for electric utilities that face challenges including integration of DERs, customer expectation of energy choices, the proliferation of non-utility-owned resources, new business models with energy service providers, and new technology with IT/OT convergence. To maintain and improve the quality of operations, planning, and decision-making in general, utilities need to manage and navigate the complexity. Managing complexity requires a modular, scalable, and flexible solution. Connecting large amounts of DERs and introducing new services requires increased grid control and evolving applications. In this paper, we show an approach utilizing model-based standardized interfaces that simplifies integration and deployment of new algorithms and smart field devices for interoperability across legacy or new systems. A modular design is presented for a reference implementation of widely used DNP3 and IEEE 2030.5 interfaces within an open-source, standards-based data integration platform for integration of smart field devices with independently developed, best-of-breed applications.

Model-driven development, system integration, smar↗

DOE OSTI2022

California Load Flexibility Research and Development Hub (CalFlexhub) v0.1

This repository will host the software, data models and documentation developed as part of the California Energy Commission (CEC) funded California Load Flexibility Research and Development Hub (CalFlexHub) project. The main objectives of CalFlexHub are: - Identify, develop, evaluate, demonstrate and deploy cost-effective, scalable, building load-flexible (LF) technologies that are consistent with building energy efficiency, appliance, and load management standards. - Create a portfolio of LF RDD&D technology projects across various building types and sizes including single-family-residential, multi-family, commercial buildings and integrated campuses. - Deploy LF technologies to demonstrate the ability for 99% of the state's customers to receive the load management standards price and marginal GHG signals.

Prakash, Anand Krishnan↗

DOE OSTI2022

Enhancing Lifetime and Reducing Costs for Fish Diversion Netting Structures (Abstract)

This effort will focus on technology transfer and commercialization of antifouling coatings with an enthusiastic and engaged industrial team. Environmental requirements and operational demands call for a nontoxic coating/paint to prevent fouling on fish passage guidance netting at hydropower facilities. For example, one netting customer estimated the capital cost for compliance at $\$12$ million to $\$15$ million. This project will build partnerships between PNNL and private companies to optimize, demonstrate, mature, and commercialize a novel PNNL-developed technology that addresses this critical coating need of the hydropower industry. This effort will support modification of existing coatings for application to flexible netting structures. Industrial partners include commercial coating development specialist (Lorama), hydrophobic material manufacturer and paint developer (Dry Surface Technologies), aquatic applications specialists (Prometheus Innovations and River Connectivity Systems), and hydropower netting producer (Pacific Netting Products). Engagement with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), two hydropower operators, throughout the project will provide expertise and field test sites that will provide crucial proof of real-world performance data (additional details provided in Teaming section). Taylor Shellfish Farms will provide organisms and fouling expertise as well as a perspective of potential broader impacts for the blue economy. Sample netting will demonstrate performance in a range of environments for key hydropower applications. PNNL will work with industrial partners to overcome commercialization barriers as well as resolving any manufacturing or regulatory issues. This Phase 1 effort is focused on technology optimization for application to fish passage guidance netting and technology validation as verified by independent testing (through USACE, BOR, Taylor Shellfish and Prometheus Innovations). Through this effort, SLIC will be demonstrated for netting applications at technology readiness level (TRL) 5. The field test data will allow optimization of SLIC formulation and performance which is key to enabling technology transfer of a mature proven technology to industry and production of a viable commercial product specifically focused for hydropower needs.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2025

NEML2: An efficient and modular multiphysics constitutive modeling library for hybrid computing environments

This paper presents NEML2, an open-source, high-performance library developed for constitutive material modeling, designed to support the flexible and modular development of models for complex material behavior. Building on the foundational structure of its predecessor, NEML, the NEML2 library introduces significant improvements, including enhanced vectorization, automatic differentiation, and seamless integration with PyTorch, facilitating the application of machine learning techniques in material simulations. NEML2 provides a C++ backend with Python bindings, enabling users to create custom material models that can be executed efficiently on both CPU and GPU platforms. The library also supports coupling with Multiphysics simulation frameworks like MOOSE, making it suitable for realistic simulations involving coupled physical processes. Rigorous quality assurance through unit and regression testing ensures the reliability of results, while the extensible, user-friendly design encourages collaboration and reproducibility across the scientific community. This paper provides an overview of NEML2’s architecture, core features, and applications, highlighting its impact on accelerating material qualification and advancing computational methods in materials science.

GPU↗

DOE OSTI2023

EvoProtGrad (Directed Evolution for Proteins with Gradients) [SWR-23-48]

A Python package for directed evolution on a protein sequence with gradient-based discrete Markov chain monte carlo (MCMC). Users are able to compose custom models that map sequence to function with pretrained models, including protein language models (PLMs), to guide and constrain search. Our package natively integrates with the HuggingFace platform and supports PLMs from transformers. Our MCMC sampler identifies promising amino acids to mutate via model gradients taken with respect to the input (i.e., sensitivity analysis). We allow users to compose their own custom target function for MCMC by leveraging the Product of Experts MCMC paradigm. Each model is an "expert" that contributes its own knowledge about the protein's fitness landscape to the overall target function. The sampler is designed to be more efficient and effective than brute force and random search while maintaining most of the generality and flexibility. Additional information can be found in the related publication: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2632-2153/accacd

Emami, Patrick↗

NASA NTRS2007

Arrays of Miniature Microphones for Aeroacoustic Testing

A phased-array system comprised of custom-made and commercially available microelectromechanical system (MEMS) silicon microphones and custom ancillary hardware has been developed for use in aeroacoustic testing in hard-walled and acoustically treated wind tunnels. Recent advances in the areas of multi-channel signal processing and beam forming have driven the construction of phased arrays containing ever-greater numbers of microphones. Traditional obstacles to this trend have been posed by (1) the high costs of conventional condenser microphones, associated cabling, and support electronics and (2) the difficulty of mounting conventional microphones in the precise locations required for high-density arrays. The present development overcomes these obstacles. One of the hallmarks of the new system is a series of fabricated platforms on which multiple microphones can be mounted. These mounting platforms, consisting of flexible polyimide circuit-board material (see left side of figure), include all the necessary microphone power and signal interconnects. A single bus line connects all microphones to a common power supply, while the signal lines terminate in one or more data buses on the sides of the circuit board. To minimize cross talk between array channels, ground lines are interposed as shields between all the data bus signal lines. The MEMS microphones are electrically connected to the boards via solder pads that are built into the printed wiring. These flexible circuit boards share many characteristics with their traditional rigid counterparts, but can be manufactured much thinner, as small as 0.1 millimeter, and much lighter with boards weighing as much as 75 percent less than traditional rigid ones. For a typical hard-walled wind-tunnel installation, the flexible printed-circuit board is bonded to the tunnel wall and covered with a face sheet that contains precise cutouts for the microphones. Once the face sheet is mounted, a smooth surface is established over the entire array due to the flush mounting of all microphones (see right side of figure). The face sheet is made from a continuous glass-woven-fabric base impregnated with an epoxy resin binder. This material offers a combination of high mechanical strength and low dielectric loss, making it suitable for withstanding the harsh test section environment present in many wind tunnels, while at the same time protecting the underlying polyimide board. Customized signal-conditioning hardware consisting of line drivers and antialiasing filters are coupled with the array. The line drivers are constructed using low-supply-current, high-gain-bandwidth operational amplifiers designed to transmit the microphone signals several dozen feet from the array to external acquisition hardware. The anti-alias filters consist of individual Chebyshev low-pass filters (one for each microphone channel) housed on small printed-circuit boards mounted on one or more motherboards. The mother/daughter board design results in a modular system, which is easy to debug and service and which enables the filter characteristics to be changed by swapping daughter boards with ones containing different filter parameters. The filter outputs are passed to commercially- available acquisition hardware to digitize and store the conditioned microphone signals. Wind-tunnel testing of the new MEMS microphone polyimide mounting system shows that the array performance is comparable to that of traditional arrays, but with significantly less cost of construction.

Shams, Qamar A.↗

NASA NTRS2002

Second Generation RLV Space Vehicle Concept

NASA has a long history of conducting development programs and projects in a consistent fashion. Systems Engineering within those programs and projects has also followed a given method outlined by such documents as the NASA Systems Engineering Handbook. The relatively new NASA Space Launch Initiative (SLI) is taking a new approach to developing a space vehicle, with innovative management methods as well as new Systems Engineering processes. With the program less than a year into its life cycle, the efficacy of these new processes has yet to be proven or disproven. At $776M for phase 1, SLI represents a major portion of the NASA focus; however, the new processes being incorporated are not reflected in the training provided by NASA to its engineers. The NASA Academy of Program and Project Leadership (APPL) offers core classes in program and project management and systems engineering to NASA employees with the purpose of creating a "knowledge community where ideas, skills, and experiences are exchanged to increase each other's capacity for strong leadership". The SLI program is, in one sense, a combination of a conceptual design program and a technology program. The program as a whole doesn't map into the generic systems engineering project cycle as currently, and for some time, taught. For example, the NASA APPL Systems Engineering training course teaches that the "first step in developing an architecture is to define the external boundaries of the system", which will require definition of the interfaces with other systems and the next step will be to "define all the components that make up the next lower level of the system hierarchy" where fundamental requirements are allocated to each component. Whereas, the SLI technology risk reduction approach develops architecture subsystem technologies prior to developing architectures. The higher level architecture requirements are not allowed to fully develop and undergo decomposition and allocation down to the subsystems before the subsystems must develop allocated requirements based on the highest level of requirements. In the vernacular of the project cycles prior to the mid 1990's, the architecture definition portion of the program appears to be at a generic Phase A stage, while the subsystems are operating at Phase B. Even the management structure of the SLI program is innovative in its approach to Systems Engineering and is not reflected in the APPL training modules. The SLI program has established a Systems Engineering office as an office separate from the architecture development or the subsystem technology development, while that office does have representatives within these other offices. The distributed resources of the Systems Engineering Office are co-located with the respective Project Offices. This template is intended to provide systems engineering as an integrated function at the Program Level. the program management of SLI and the MAT agree that "program/project managers and the systems engineering team must work closely together towards the single objective of delivering quality products that meet the customer needs". This paper will explore the differences between the methods being taught by NASA, which represent decades of ideas, and those currently in practice in SLI. Time will tell if the innovation employed by SLI will prove to be the model of the future. For now, it is suggested that the training of the present exercise the flexibility of recognizing the new processes employed by a major new NASA program.

Bailey, Michelle↗

NASA NTRS2012

Fast Paced, Low Cost Projects at MSFC

What does an orbiting microsatellite, a robotic lander and a ruggedized camera and telescope have in common? They are all fast paced, low cost projects managed by Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) teamed with successful industry partners. MSFC has long been synonymous with human space flight large propulsion programs, engineering acumen and risk intolerance. However, there is a growing portfolio/product line within MSFC that focuses on these smaller, fast paced projects. While launching anything into space is expensive, using a managed risk posture, holding to schedule and keeping costs low by stopping at egood enough f were key elements to their success. Risk is defined as the possibility of loss or failure per Merriam Webster. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) defines risk using procedural requirement 8705.4 and establishes eclasses f to discern the acceptable risk per a project. It states a Class D risk has a medium to significant risk of not achieving mission success. MSFC, along with industry partners, has created a niche in Class D efforts. How did the big, cautious MSFC succeed on these projects that embodied the antithesis of its heritage in human space flight? A key factor toward these successful projects was innovative industry partners such as Dynetics Corporation, University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAHuntsville), Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory (JHU APL), Teledyne Brown Engineering (TBE), Von Braun Center for Science and Innovation (VCSI), SAIC, and Jacobs. Fast Affordable Satellite Technology (FastSat HSV01) is a low earth orbit microsatellite that houses six instruments with the primary scientific objective of earth observation and technology demonstration. The team was comprised of Dynetics, UAHuntsvile, SAIC, Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and VCSI with the United States Air Force Space Test Program as the customer. The team completed design, development, manufacturing, environmental test and integration in one year. FastSat HSV01 also deployed a Poly Picosatellite Orbital Deployer (PPOD) for a separate nano ]satellite class spacecraft (Cubesat: Nano Sail Demonstration) in partnership with Ames Research Center. The Robotic lunar lander is a MSFC JHU APL partnership that led to the development of a flexible architecture for landers to support robotic missions to a wide range of lunar and asteroid destinations. The team started with the goal of meeting NASA agency directives that led to the creation of a test bed focusing on GN&C and software to demonstrate the descent and landing on any airless body for the final 30 to 60 meters. The team created a complex technology demonstration as well as Guidance Control and Navigation (GN&C) algorithms providing autonomous control of the lander. The team uses a green propellant of 90% hydrogen peroxide and has completed 18 successful test flights. The International Space Station (ISS) SERVIR Environmental Research and Visualization System (ISERV) is a technology demonstration payload to assist the SERVIR project with environmental monitoring for disaster relief and humanitarian efforts. The ISERV project was a partnership with TBE. The ISERV payload consists of a commercial off the shelf camera, telescope, and MSFC developed power distribution box and interfaces on ISS with the Window Observational Research Facility in the US Lab. MSFC has identified three key areas that enabled the low cost mission success to include culture, partnering, and cost/schedule control. This paper will briefly discuss these three Class D efforts, FastSat HSV-01, the Robotic Lunar Lander and the ISERV camera system, the lessons learned, their successes and challenges.

Watson-Morgan, Lisa↗

DOE OSTI2023

Predicting Deposition Rate and Closing the Loop on Aerosol Jet Printing with In‐Line Light Scattering Measurements

Aerosol jet printing is a compelling noncontact, digital manufacturing technology for flexible, hybrid, and conformal electronics, but batch‐to‐batch variability and process drift inhibit systematic study and translation to production environments. Emerging measurement techniques for the aerosol volume fraction, a key parameter governing deposition rate, have shown promise for real‐time response, including a recent demonstration of human‐in‐the‐loop control. By integrating improved light scattering measurements with custom software, a robust environment for real‐time monitoring is established and fully automated closed‐loop control over the deposition rate during printing is enabled. The physical basis for scattering measurements as a feedback source is examined and the quantitative insight this provides for ink development and fundamental process studies is highlighted. Three candidate process variables for closed‐loop control, namely the atomizer voltage, carrier gas flow rate, and print speed, are then evaluated. The atomizer voltage demonstrates the best extended duration validity because it addresses atomization variability directly, but carrier gas flow rate and print speed provide faster and more deterministic responses. This methodology is then demonstrated for electrical properties using a silver nanoparticle ink, maintaining 98% of printed patterns within 10% of the mean resistance value over 3 h of printing.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2021

WaterTAP3 (The Water Technoeconomic Assessment Pipe-Parity Platform)

The Water Technoeconomic Assessment Pipe-Parity Platform (WaterTAP3) was developed under the National Alliance for Water Innovation (NAWI) to facilitate consistent technoeconomic assessments of desalination treatment trains. The WaterTAP3 is an analytically robust modeling tool that can be used to evaluate water technology cost, energy, environmental, and resiliency tradeoffs across different water sources, sectors, and scales. The model simulates steady-state water treatment train performance and costs including flow and constituent mass balance across unit processes, based on source water conditions, configurations of treatment technologies, and system-level techno-economic assumptions. Users can build a new treatment train by connecting any number of unit processes, specific for their context and system, or selecting a train from the treatment train library. The model contains various technical and cost parameter options for a range of treatment processes and a library of influent water quality characteristics for a variety of source waters and case studies. Users can customize water quality parameters to evaluate the technology performance in their context. The model can be set up for different assessment needs including simulation, optimization, and uncertainty and sensitivity analyses. The results from WaterTAP3 can help identify trade-offs among the different system performance metrics, with insight on how particular technologies or systems promote pipe-parity. The flexibility and comprehensive scope of the tool makes it a promising solution to industry-wide water technoeconomic evaluations, leading to more informed water investment decisions and technologies. As a user-friendly, open-source platform, WaterTAP3 can be used by industry, academia, policymakers, planners, and those with or without extensive analytical experience.

Miara, Ariel↗

DOE OSTI2021

Water Technoeconomic Assessment Pipe-Parity Platform (WaterTAP3)

Miara, Ariel↗

DOE OSTI2025

Post-2026 Environmental Impact Statement Rate Analysis for the Colorado River Storage Project

The Glen Canyon Dam (GCD) is a principal power-generating asset within the Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP), accounting for approximately 70–80% of CRSP power production over the past two decades. In June 2023, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) issued a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) outlining operational guidelines and strategies for Colorado River Basin reservoirs after 2026 (Reclamation, 2023). Power generation is among CRSP’s statutory purposes under the Colorado River Storage Project Act of 1956 (U.S. Congress, 1956). Assessing how alternative policy frameworks affect CRSP power production and the resulting electricity rates for U.S. customers is therefore essential to inform decision-making. This report evaluates projected electricity rates and the market value of electricity from the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) CRSP GCD under multiple post-2026 policy scenarios to support Reclamation’s EIS development. Results from advanced econometric and machine learning models indicate that the Enhanced Coordination alternative (EnhanCoor), Maximum Operational Flexibility alternative (CCA), and Supply Driven - 55 alternative (SD55) alternatives yield more favorable hydropower generation and capacity outcomes, which are objectives outlined in Reclamation’s documentations (Reclamation, 2007; Reclamation, 2016). Specifically, these scenarios are associated with higher electricity production, lower projected rate trajectories, and greater economic value to the U.S. power system from CRSP generation. The remaining five scenarios generally produce lower generation, higher rate trajectories, and reduced long-term market values.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

NASA NTRS1994

Agile manufacturing: The factory of the future

The factory of the future will require an operating methodology which effectively utilizes all of the elements of product design, manufacturing and delivery. The process must respond rapidly to changes in product demand, product mix, design changes or changes in the raw materials. To achieve agility in a manufacturing operation, the design and development of the manufacturing processes must focus on customer satisfaction. Achieving greatest results requires that the manufacturing process be considered from product concept through sales. This provides the best opportunity to build a quality product for the customer at a reasonable rate. The primary elements of a manufacturing system include people, equipment, materials, methods and the environment. The most significant and most agile element in any process is the human resource. Only with a highly trained, knowledgeable work force can the proper methods be applied to efficiently process materials with machinery which is predictable, reliable and flexible. This paper discusses the affect of each element on the development of agile manufacturing systems.

Loibl, Joseph M.↗

DOE OSTI2026

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program: FY 2025 Completed Projects

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) largest multiprogram science, technology, and energy laboratory. It possesses distinctive capabilities in a variety of fields, such as neutron science, computing, advanced materials, and nuclear science and technology. Using these capabilities, ORNL conducts basic and applied research and development (R&D) to support DOE’s overarching mission “to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.” As a national resource, ORNL also applies its capabilities and skills to the specific needs of other federal agencies and customers through the DOE Strategic Partnership Projects (SPP) Program. Information about the laboratory and its programs is available on the ORNL website. The Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program at ORNL operates under the authority of DOE Order 413.2C, Laboratory Directed Research and Development, which establishes DOE’s requirements for the program while providing the laboratory director broad flexibility for program implementation. The LDRD Program funds are obtained through a charge to all laboratory programs. Although it represents a relatively small portion of the overall research budget, the LDRD Program plays an essential role in maintaining the laboratory’s ability to respond to national needs. The program allows ORNL to improve its distinctive capabilities and enhance its ability to conduct cutting-edge R&D. In accordance with the DOE order, R&D projects funded through the LDRD Program at ORNL support the goals of • maintaining the scientific and technical vitality of the laboratory, • enhancing the laboratory’s ability to address future DOE missions, • fostering creativity and stimulating exploration of forefront areas of science and technology, • serving as a proving ground for new concepts in R&D, and • supporting high-risk, potentially high-value R&D. This report provides an overview of the LDRD Program at ORNL in FY 2025 and contains summaries of all the LDRD research projects that concluded between October 1, 2024, and September 30, 2025.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

NASA NTRS2016

Detector Control and Data Acquisition for the Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope (WFIRST) with a Custom ASIC

The Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope (WFIRST) will have the largest near-IR focal plane ever flown by NASA, a total of 18 4K x 4K devices. The project has adopted a system-level approach to detector control and data acquisition where 1) control and processing intelligence is pushed into components closer to the detector to maximize signal integrity, 2) functions are performed at the highest allowable temperatures, and 3) the electronics are designed to ensure that the intrinsic detector noise is the limiting factor for system performance. For WFIRST, the detector arrays operate at 90 to 100 K, the detector control and data acquisition functions are performed by a custom ASIC at 150 to 180 K, and the main data processing electronics are at the ambient temperature of the spacecraft, notionally approx.300 K. The new ASIC is the main interface between the cryogenic detectors and the warm instrument electronics. Its single-chip design provides basic clocking for most types of hybrid detectors with CMOS ROICs. It includes a flexible but simple-to-program sequencer, with the option of microprocessor control for more elaborate readout schemes that may be data-dependent. All analog biases, digital clocks, and analog-to-digital conversion functions are incorporated and are connected to the nearby detectors with a short cable that can provide thermal isolation. The interface to the warm electronics is simple and robust through multiple LVDS channels. It also includes features that support parallel operation of multiple ASICs to control detectors that may have more capability or requirements than can be supported by a single chip.

data acquisition↗