Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Engineering Directorate”

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 433 records · Page 24
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2018

Computer Programming Resources 2018

The document is a compilation of Computer Programming resources. It is geared toward front-end and back-end web development. It specializes on an ongoing project to create a website for the Safety and Mission Assurance Directorate. The Quality Assurance System (QAS) is intended to improve the overall quality and efficiency of communication among NASA Quality Assurance Engineers and Contractors. The use of QAS software will be limited to NASA Kennedy Space Center and Contractors. It is accessible through the KSC network.

Confluence↗
NASA NTRS2020

A Review of In-Space Propellant Transfer Capabilities and Challenges for Missions Involving Propellant Resupply

This paper captures and transfers knowledge of in-space propellant transfer accomplishments and communicate the remaining challenges to a new generation of NASA engineers as multiple NASA programs and centers have worked related and applicable efforts. The Propulsion Technical Discipline Team (TDT) established a plan to draft this paper as an effort to help engineers and decision makers recognize and access the various islands of experience that have formed within the agency as different NASA directorates and projects have embraced the challenges associated with propellant transfer.

Propellant Transfer↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis III and IV Crew Health and Performance System Model Development

To maintain Crew Health and Performance (CHP) during an Artemis mission, the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) and Exploration Medical Capabilities (ExMC) element recognize the challenge that many different vehicles, habitats, and operational groups must come together to develop and implement cross program capabilities. To address this challenge, the ExMC team created the prototype 2023 Artemis CHP System Model to analyze how human system requirements are implemented throughout an Artemis mission and help understand the effects of changing an individual vehicle or habitat requirement on a full mission. Since presenting this work at the 2024 HRP Investigators’ Workshop, ExMC has continued this effort, now called the Artemis III and IV CHP System Model, to better support its operational end users within the NASA Human Health and Performance Directorate (HHPD) workforce. In this presentation, we will recapitulate how visualizing requirements and their relationships using a Model-Based Systems Engineering approach (MBSE) serves to improve understanding of an Artemis mission’s CHP capabilities along with discussion on updates made to the model to increase accessibility for users within HHPD so that it may be used in the development of cross program CHP capabilities at NASA.

Crew Health and Performance↗
NASA NTRS2008

Review of NASA's Exploration Technology Development Program: An Interim Report

NASA requested that a committee under the auspices of the National Research Council's Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board carry out an assessment of NASA's Exploration Technology Development Program (ETDP). Organizationally, this program functions under the direction of NASA's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate and is charged with developing new technologies that will enable NASA to conduct future human and robotic exploration missions, while reducing mission risk and cost. The Committee to Review NASA's Exploration Technology Development Program has been tasked to examine how well the program is aligned with the stated objectives of the President's Vision for Space Exploration (VSE), to identify gaps in the program, and to assess the quality of the research. The full statement of task is given in Appendix A. The committee consists of 25 members and includes a cross section of senior executives, engineers, researchers, and other aerospace professionals drawn from industry, universities, and government agencies with expertise in virtually all the technical fields represented within the program.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1999

NASA Ames Research Center R and D Services Directorate Biomedical Systems Development

The Ames Research Center R&D Services Directorate teams with NASA, other government agencies and/or industry investigators for the development, design, fabrication, manufacturing and qualification testing of space-flight and ground-based experiment hardware for biomedical and general aerospace applications. In recent years, biomedical research hardware and software has been developed to support space-flight and ground-based experiment needs including the E 132 Biotelemetry system for the Research Animal Holding Facility (RAHF), E 100 Neurolab neuro-vestibular investigation systems, the Autogenic Feedback Systems, and the Standard Interface Glove Box (SIGB) experiment workstation module. Centrifuges, motion simulators, habitat design, environmental control systems, and other unique experiment modules and fixtures have also been developed. A discussion of engineered systems and capabilities will be provided to promote understanding of possibilities for future system designs in biomedical applications. In addition, an overview of existing engineered products will be shown. Examples of hardware and literature that demonstrate the organization's capabilities will be displayed. The Ames Research Center R&D Services Directorate is available to support the development of new hardware and software systems or adaptation of existing systems to meet the needs of academic, commercial/industrial, and government research requirements. The Ames R&D Services Directorate can provide specialized support for: System concept definition and feasibility Mathematical modeling and simulation of system performance Prototype hardware development Hardware and software design Data acquisition systems Graphical user interface development Motion control design Hardware fabrication and high-fidelity machining Composite materials development and application design Electronic/electrical system design and fabrication System performance verification testing and qualification.

Pollitt, J.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Additive Manufacturing of Low Cost Upper Stage Propulsion Components

NASA is currently developing Additive Manufacturing (AM) technologies and design tools aimed at reducing the costs and manufacturing time of regeneratively cooled rocket engine components. These Low Cost Upper Stage Propulsion (LCUSP) tasks are funded through NASA's Game Changing Development Program in the Space Technology Mission Directorate. The LCUSP project will develop a copper alloy additive manufacturing design process and develop and optimize the Electron Beam Freeform Fabrication (EBF3) manufacturing process to direct deposit a nickel alloy structural jacket and manifolds onto an SLM manufactured GRCop chamber and Ni-alloy nozzle. In order to develop these processes, the project will characterize both the microstructural and mechanical properties of the SLMproduced GRCop-84, and will explore and document novel design techniques specific to AM combustion devices components. These manufacturing technologies will be used to build a 25K-class regenerative chamber and nozzle (to be used with tested DMLS injectors) that will be tested individually and as a system in hot fire tests to demonstrate the applicability of the technologies. These tasks are expected to bring costs and manufacturing time down as spacecraft propulsion systems typically comprise more than 70% of the total vehicle cost and account for a significant portion of the development schedule. Additionally, high pressure/high temperature combustion chambers and nozzles must be regeneratively cooled to survive their operating environment, causing their design to be time consuming and costly to build. LCUSP presents an opportunity to develop and demonstrate a process that can infuse these technologies into industry, build competition, and drive down costs of future engines.

Protz, Christopher↗
NASA NTRS2005

Auxiliary Propulsion Activities in Support of NASA's Exploration Initiative

The Space Launch Initiative (SLI) procurement mechanism NRA8-30 initiated the Auxiliary Propulsion System/Main Propulsion System (APS/MPS) Project in 2001 to address technology gaps and development risks for non-toxic and cryogenic propellants for auxiliary propulsion applications. These applications include reaction control and orbital maneuvering engines, and storage, pressure control, and transfer technologies associated with on-orbit maintenance of cryogens. The project has successfully evolved over several years in response to changing requirements for re-usable launch vehicle technologies, general launch technology improvements, and, most recently, exploration technologies. Lessons learned based on actual hardware performance have also played a part in the project evolution to focus now on those technologies deemed specifically relevant to the Exploration Initiative. Formal relevance reviews held in the spring of 2004 resulted in authority for continuation of the Auxiliary Propulsion Project through Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05), and provided for a direct reporting path to the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate. The tasks determined to be relevant under the project were: continuation of the development, fabrication, and delivery of three 870 lbf thrust prototype LOX/ethanol reaction control engines; the fabrication, assembly, engine integration and testing of the Auxiliary Propulsion Test Bed at White Sands Test Facility; and the completion of FY04 cryogenic fluid management component and subsystem development tasks (mass gauging, pressure control, and liquid acquisition elements). This paper presents an overview of those tasks, their scope, expectations, and results to-date as carried forward into the Exploration Initiative.

Best, Philip J.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Industrial Assessment Center

Established in 1990, San Diego State University’s (SDSU) Industrial Assessment Center (IAC) is proud of its years of service. During this period, it has served over 620 small and medium-sized manufacturing plants in Southern California. SDSU/IAC’s efforts to transfer state-of-the-art technologies to industry have increased revenues, cultivated creativity, improved energy efficiencies, and benefited the environment. The Center has contributed to the region's economic growth and stability by assisting small and medium size companies to better compete in the global market. It has helped mitigate climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. IAC activities have fostered productive relationships between the University and local industry, assisted industrial sectors to improve their energy efficiency and enhance their manufacturing productivity, in turn impacting the material and working conditions of their employees. In addition to financial savings and environmental benefits, we have trained tens of students who became energy specialists in various companies. Thus, a substantial benefit of the IAC has been the ongoing training of engineering faculty and students. All IAC graduates were offered jobs before or within weeks of their graduation. The activities of the SDSU/IAC have expanded the institutional expertise of the College and improved the knowledge base of the faculties involved leading to several related publications, master’s theses, and senior student projects. Significant number of peer-reviewed publications of the IAC director at SDSU have greatly benefitted from the experience of the Center. As a result of this extensive exposure to manufacturing processes, the SDSU/IAC has grown to be an integral component of SDSU’s engineering research and training. We have successfully built upon these established achievements and academic excellence. IAC service to industry is particularly vital in Southern California, a region with one of the highest manufacturing concentrations in the country. SDSU/IAC has understood and implemented the overall objectives of DOE’s IAC program and guidelines except for the pandemic years when the country’s manufacturing sector was put in dire stress. In addition to student training and service to industry, IAC’s contribution to state and local governments as well as utility companies to assess energy policies and design rebate and incentive strategies cannot be undermined.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
NASA NTRS1999

Spaceliner Class Operability Gains Via Combined Airbreathing/ Rocket Propulsion: Summarizing an Operational Assessment of Highly Reusable Space Transports

In discussing a new NASA initiative in advanced space transportation systems and technologies, the Director of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Arthur G. Stephenson, noted that, "It would use new propulsion technology, air-breathing engine so you don't have to carry liquid oxygen, at least while your flying through the atmosphere. We are calling it Spaceliner 100 because it would be 100 times cheaper, costing $ 100 dollars a pound to orbit." While airbreathing propulsion is directly named, rocket propulsion is also implied by, "... while you are flying through the atmosphere." In-space final acceleration to orbital speed mandates rocket capabilities. Thus, in this informed view, Spaceliner 100 will be predicated on combined airbreathing/rocket propulsion, the technical subject of this paper. Interestingly, NASA's recently concluded Highly Reusable Space Transportation (HRST) study focused on the same affordability goal as that of the Spaceliner 100 initiative and reflected the decisive contribution of combined propulsion as a way of expanding operability and increasing the design robustness of future space transports, toward "aircraft like" capabilities. The HRST study built on the Access to Space Study and the Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) development activities to identify and characterize space transportation concepts, infrastructure and technologies that have the greatest potential for reducing delivery cost by another order of magnitude, from $1,000 to $100-$200 per pound for 20,000 lb. - 40.000 lb. payloads to low earth orbit (LEO). The HRST study investigated a number of near-term, far-term, and very far-term launch vehicle concepts including all-rocket single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) concepts, two-stage-to-orbit (TSTO) concepts, concepts with launch assist, rocket-based combined cycle (RBCC) concepts, advanced expendable vehicles, and more far term ground-based laser powered launchers. The HRST study consisted of preliminary concept studies, assessments and analysis tool development for advanced space transportation systems, followed by end-to-end system concept definitions and trade analyses, specific system concept definition and analysis, specific key technology and topic analysis, system, operational and economics model development, analysis, and integrated assessments. The HRST Integration Task Force (HITF) was formed to synthesize study results in several specific topic areas and support the development of conclusions from the study: Systems Concepts Definitions, Technology Assessment, Operations Assessment, and Cost Assessment. This paper summarizes the work of the Operations Assessment Team: the six approaches used, the analytical tools and methodologies developed and employed, the issues and concerns, and the results of the assessment. The approaches were deliberately varied in measures of merit and procedure to compensate for the uncertainty inherent in operations data in this early phase of concept exploration. In general, rocket based combined cycle (RBCC) concepts appear to have significantly greater potential than all-rocket concepts for reducing operations costs.

Nix, Michael B.↗
NASA NTRS2000

STS-99 Countdown Status Briefing

The primary objective of the STS-99 mission was to complete high resolution mapping of large sections of the Earth's surface using the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM), a specially modified radar system. This radar system produced unrivaled 3-D images of the Earth's Surface. The mission was launched at 12:31 on February 11, 2000 onboard the space shuttle Endeavour. This tape shows a pre-launch briefing. The panel members are George Diller, NASA Public Affairs; Scott Higginbotham, SRTM Payload Manager; Steve Altemus, NASA Test Director; and Ed Priselac, Meteorologist. The briefing opens with an announcement by Mr Diller that there were no further developments with the engine problems, and requests that questions about that issue be held for another press briefing. Steve Altemus summarized the situation and the steps to be taken. Scott Higginbotham reported that there were no problems with the mission hardware. Ed Priselac reported favorable weather for tanking and launch, and at emergency landing sites.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2016

Purpose, Principles, and Challenges of the NASA Engineering and Safety Center

NASA formed the NASA Engineering and Safety Center in 2003 following the Space Shuttle Columbia accident. It is an Agency level, program-independent engineering resource supporting NASA's missions, programs, and projects. It functions to identify, resolve, and communicate engineering issues, risks, and, particularly, alternative technical opinions, to NASA senior management. The goal is to help ensure fully informed, risk-based programmatic and operational decision-making processes. To date, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) has conducted or is actively working over 600 technical studies and projects, spread across all NASA Mission Directorates, and for various other U.S. Government and non-governmental agencies and organizations. Since inception, NESC human spaceflight related activities, in particular, have transitioned from Shuttle Return-to-Flight and completion of the International Space Station (ISS) to ISS operations and Orion Multi-purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), Space Launch System (SLS), and Commercial Crew Program (CCP) vehicle design, integration, test, and certification. This transition has changed the character of NESC studies. For these development programs, the NESC must operate in a broader, system-level design and certification context as compared to the reactive, time-critical, hardware specific nature of flight operations support.

Gilbert, Michael G.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Airborne Observations in Support of Wildfire Science and Applications

The NASA Science Mission Directorate Earth Science Division Airborne Science Program enables access to modified aircraft in support of NASA projects. The Program supports researchers and engineers by enabling testing of new instruments, calibration of on-orbit satellite instruments with airborne sensors, and to support process studies and model development. This talk will provide an overview of the Program capabilities, review past NASA flight projects that have focused on wildfires, and discuss how the Program is poised to support the FireSense project and interagency efforts to incorporate new technologies and observations into the wildfire management community. Past missions including the Western States Fire Mission and FIREX-AQ will be discussed, an overview of relevant NASA sensors will be provided, and an introduction to upcoming flight activity will be presented. Data telemetry, communications, and data standards will also be discussed towards improving timely distribution of data products to land managers.

Matthew M Fladeland↗
DOE OSTI2021

Weapons Production Directorate Overview

Detonator Production and Prototype Fabrication divisions serve a variety of organizations throughout the Laboratory and the nation by providing key non-nuclear components through excellence in on-site engineering, design, manufacturing, machining, and more.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗
DOE OSTI2016

Poster - 28: Shielding of X-ray Rooms in Ontario in the Absence of Best Practice

This poster will be strictly based on the Healing Arts Radiation Protection (HARP) Act, Regulation 543 under this Act (X-ray Safety Code), and personal communication the presenting author has had. In Ontario, the process of approval of an X-ray machine installation by the Director of the X-ray Inspection Service (XRIS) follows a certain protocol. Initially, the applicant submits a series of forms, including recommended shielding amounts, in order to satisfy the law. This documentation is then transferred to a third-party vendor (i.e. a professional engineer – P.Eng.) outsourced by the Ministry of Health and Long-term Care (MOHLTC). The P.Eng. then evaluates the submitted documentation for appropriate fulfillment of the HARP Act and Reg. 543 requirements. If the P.Eng.’s evaluation of the documentation is to their satisfaction, the XRIS is then notified. Finally, the Director will then issue a letter of approval to install the equipment at the facility. The methodology required to be used by the P.Eng. in order to determine the required amounts of protective barriers, and recommended to be used by the applicant, is contained within Safety Code 20A. However, Safety Code 35 has replaced the obsolete Safety Code 20A document and employs best practices in shielding design. This talk will focus further on specific intentions and limitations of Safety Code 20A. Furthermore, this talk will discuss the definition of the “practice of professional engineering” in Ontario. COMP members who are involved in shielding design are strongly encouraged to attend.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

Formulation and numerical analysis of a fully-coupled dynamically deforming electromagnetic wire

Here, an electromagnetic beam model is developed for the simulation of actuated electronic textiles. The beam is solved using a nonlinear director-based kinematic description with additional temperature and electric potential fields along its length. The three fields are fully coupled by mutual dependences on the deformation, Lorenz force, back electromotive force, temperature dependent constitutive responses, and the Seebeck effect. Instead of solving Maxwell's equations in full detail, a quasistatic approximation is used to solve the electric potential in the presence of a moving material medium. The current-carrying beam approximation is used to further simplify the solution space for the potential. While this formulation alleviates the spatial and temporal discretization restrictions, the coupled problem is an index-1 semi-explicit Differential Algebraic Equation requiring special treatment. The time dependent problem is solved using different Runge-Kutta methods. Diagonally implicit Runge-Kutta methods and explicit Runge-Kutta methods using implicit solution of the electric potential problem are explored. The finite element model is implemented using the open source package FEniCS, which is able to automatically generate the linearizations of the multiphysics equations required for the implicit solutions. A model problem is constructed with which to test and analyze the physical formulation and numerical solution techniques. The time stepping methods are verified using the convergence orders of the higher-order Runge-Kutta methods. Runtime comparisons show that the explicit methods are generally more computationally efficient than the implicit schemes used for this problem. For the implicit schemes, a staggered solution is significantly faster than a monolithic solution at most time step sizes. However, at very large time steps, such as those that would be used for dynamic relaxation, the monolithic solution can be more efficient than the staggered solution.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2023

Did you know the Lab and its first director share a birthday month? A look back at Oppenheimer’s wartime legacy through historical items in our collections

Many birthdays ago, at only 38 years old and with no previous administrative experience, J. Robert Oppenheimer accepted responsibility for a national security mission of unprecedented scale. His charge, handed down by Manhattan Project director General Leslie R. Groves, was to lead a team of the world’s foremost scientific minds in developing the first atomic bomb. Under Oppenheimer’s leadership, a community of over 6,000 scientists, engineers, and other personnel living and working at the top-secret lab in Los Alamos completed their task in only 27 months, delivering the world’s first two atomic weapons to the U.S. military. In honor of what would have been Oppenheimer’s 119th birthday (on April 22), the National Security Research Center remembers his contributions as an administrator and scientist and the scope of his legacy as the first director of the Lab through items in our unclassified collections.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2015

Bridging the PSI Knowledge Gap: A Multi-Scale Approach

Plasma-surface interactions (PSI) pose an immense scientific hurdle in magnetic confinement fusion and our present understanding of PSI in confinement environments is highly inadequate; indeed, a recent Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee report found that 4 out of the 5 top five fusion knowledge gaps were related to PSI. The time is appropriate to develop a concentrated and synergistic science effort that would expand, exploit and integrate the wealth of laboratory ion-beam and plasma research, as well as exciting new computational tools, towards the goal of bridging the PSI knowledge gap. This effort would broadly advance plasma and material sciences, while providing critical knowledge towards progress in fusion PSI. This project involves the development of a Science Center focused on a new approach to PSI science; an approach that both exploits access to state-of-the-art PSI experiments and modeling, as well as confinement devices. The organizing principle is to develop synergistic experimental and modeling tools that treat the truly coupled multi-scale aspect of the PSI issues in confinement devices. This is motivated by the simple observation that while typical lab experiments and models allow independent manipulation of controlling variables, the confinement PSI environment is essentially self-determined with few outside controls. This means that processes that may be treated independently in laboratory experiments, because they involve vastly different physical and time scales, will now affect one another in the confinement environment. Also, lab experiments cannot simultaneously match all exposure conditions found in confinement devices typically forcing a linear extrapolation of lab results. At the same time programmatic limitations prevent confinement experiments alone from answering many key PSI questions. The resolution to this problem is to usefully exploit access to PSI science in lab devices, while retooling our thinking from a linear and de-coupled extrapolation to a multi-scale, coupled approach. The PSI Plasma Center consisted of three equal co-centers; one located at the MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center, one at UC San Diego Center for Energy Research and one at the UC Berkeley Department of Nuclear Engineering, which moved to the University of Tennessee, Knoxville (UTK) with Professor Brian Wirth in July 2010. The Center had three co-directors: Prof. Dennis Whyte led the MIT co-center, the UCSD co-center was led by Dr. Russell Doerner, and Prof. Brian Wirth led the UCB/UTK center. The directors have extensive experience in PSI and material research, and have been internationally recognized in the magnetic fusion, materials and plasma research fields. The co-centers feature keystone PSI experimental and modeling facilities dedicated to PSI science: the DIONISOS/CLASS facility at MIT, the PISCES facility at UCSD, and the state-of-the-art numerical modeling capabilities at UCB/UTK. A collaborative partner in the center is Sandia National Laboratory at Livermore (SNL/CA), which has extensive capabilities with low energy ion beams and surface diagnostics, as well as supporting plasma facilities, including the Tritium Plasma Experiment, all of which significantly augment the Center. Interpretive, continuum material models are available through SNL/CA, UCSD and MIT. The participating institutions of MIT, UCSD, UCB/UTK, SNL/CA and LLNL brought a formidable array of experimental tools and personnel abilities into the PSI Plasma Center. Our work has focused on modeling activities associated with plasma surface interactions that are involved in effects of He and H plasma bombardment on tungsten surfaces. This involved performing computational material modeling of the surface evolution during plasma bombardment using molecular dynamics modeling. The principal outcomes of the research efforts within the combined experimental – modeling PSI center are to provide a knowledgebase of the mechanisms of surface degradation, and the influence of the surface on plasma conditions.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
NASA NTRS1993

Test, Control and Monitor System maintenance plan

The maintenance requirements for Test, Control, and Monitor System (TCMS) and the method for satisfying these requirements prior to First Need Date (FND) of the last TCMS set are described. The method for satisfying maintenance requirements following FND of the last TCMS set will be addressed by a revision to this plan. This maintenance plan serves as the basic planning document for maintenance of this equipment by the NASA Payloads Directorate (CM) and the Payload Ground Operations Contractor (PGOC) at KSC. The terms TCMS Operations and Maintenance (O&M), Payloads Logistics, TCMS Sustaining Engineering, Payload Communications, and Integrated Network Services refer to the appropriate NASA and PGOC organization. For the duration of their contract, the Core Electronic Contractor (CEC) will provide a Set Support Team (SST). One of the primary purposes of this team is to help NASA and PGOC operate and maintain TCMS. It is assumed that SST is an integral part of TCMS O&M. The purpose of this plan is to describe the maintenance concept for TCMS hardware and system software in order to facilitate activation, transition planning, and continuing operation. When software maintenance is mentioned in this plan, it refers to maintenance of TCMS system software.

Buehler, David P.↗