SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “open mobility”

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 433 records · Page 24

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2023

ARM FY2024 Aerosol Operations Plan

The Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility (ARM) deploys a suite of aerosol and trace gas (further mentions of aerosols will assume inclusion of trace gases) instrumentation at each of ARM's observatories. ARM currently deploys five Aerosol Observing Systems, one each at: Southern Great Plains (SGP); Eastern North Atlantic (ENA); ARM Mobile Fabilities (AMFI 1, 2, and 3). Aerosol measurements at ARM’s North Slope of Alaska (NSA) observatory have historically been made by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and provided to ARM through a collaboration. As ARM’s support for aerosol instrumentation increases, it is important for ARM to communicate plans and priorities for aerosol measurements to the community to maximize the benefit and planning around scientific activities and to advance confidence in ARM’s aerosol measurements. ARM will develop a yearly aerosol operations plan for the upcoming fiscal year (October 1-September 30) starting with FY24. This plan will be open and available through the ARM aerosol instrument webpages and will include: Review of the previous activities since the last plan (in this case, 2018); Planned activities and their priorities for the upcoming FY; Calibration timing and efforts; Planned activities for data products and value-added products (VAP).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2011

CO2 Washout Testing of the REI and EM-ACES Space Suits

Requirements for using a space suit during ground testing include providing adequate carbon dioxide (CO2) washout for the suited subject. Acute CO2 exposure can lead to symptoms including headache, dyspnea, lethargy and eventually unconsciousness or even death. Symptoms depend on several factors including partial pressure of CO2 (ppCO2), duration of exposure, metabolic rate of the subject and physiological differences between subjects. The objective of this test was to characterize inspired oronasal ppCO2 in the Rear Entry I-Suit (REI) and the Enhanced Mobility Advanced Crew Escape Suit (EM-ACES) across a range of workloads and flow rates for which ground testing is nominally performed. Three subjects were tested in each suit. In all but one case, each subject performed the test twice to allow for comparison between tests. Suit pressure was maintained at 4.3 psid. Subjects wore the suit while resting, performing arm ergometry, and walking on a treadmill to generate metabolic workloads of approximately 500 to 3000 BTU/hr. Supply airflow was varied at 6, 5 and 4 actual cubic feet per minute (ACFM) at each workload. Subjects wore an oronasal mask with an open port in front of the mouth and were allowed to breathe freely. Oronasal ppCO2 was monitored real-time via gas analyzers with sampling tubes connected to the oronasal mask. Metabolic rate was calculated from the total CO2 production measured by an additional gas analyzer at the air outlet from the suit. Real-time metabolic rate was used to adjust the arm ergometer or treadmill workload to meet target metabolic rates. In both suits, inspired CO2 was primarily affected by the metabolic rate of the subject, with increased metabolic rate resulting in increased inspired ppCO2. Suit flow rate also affected inspired ppCO2, with decreased flow causing small increases in inspired ppCO2. The effect of flow was more evident at metabolic rates greater than or equal to 2000 BTU/hr. Results were consistent between suits, with the EM-ACES demonstrating slightly better CO2 washout than the REI suit, but not statistically significant. Regression equations were developed for each suit to predict the mean inspired ppCO2 as a function of metabolic rate and suit flow rate. This paper provides detailed descriptions of the test hardware, methodology and results, as well as implications for future ground testing in the REI and EM-ACES.

Mitchell, Kate↗

NASA NTRS2010

Amorphous Rover

A proposed mobile robot, denoted the amorphous rover, would vary its own size and shape in order to traverse terrain by means of rolling and/or slithering action. The amorphous rover was conceived as a robust, lightweight alternative to the wheeled rover-class robotic vehicle heretofore used in exploration of Mars. Unlike a wheeled rover, the amorphous rover would not have a predefined front, back, top, bottom, or sides. Hence, maneuvering of the amorphous rover would be more robust: the amorphous rover would not be vulnerable to overturning, could move backward or sideways as well as forward, and could even narrow itself to squeeze through small openings.

Curtis, Steven A.↗

DOE OSTI2024

Enriching OpenStreetMap network data for transportation applications: Insights into the impact of urban congestion on accessibility

OpenStreetMap (OSM) data is a valuable open-source resource for various transportation, traffic, and planning applications. However, OSM network data lack operating traffic speed information, which is critical for transport planning and operations. Addressing this shortcoming, this study leverages commercial vendor data (to serve as ground truth) with exogenous, open-source variables characterizing local transport infrastructure, land use, and demographic information to predict average congested traffic speeds on OSM networks. Three machine-learning models were tested and estimated for OSM links with and without speed limit information in the Denver metropolitan region. Among these, XGBoost performed best, with mean absolute errors of 3.27 and 3.62 mph for links with and without speed limits, respectively. The developed models accurately predicted traffic speeds for different hours and days of the week compared to ground truth data. Using these predicted speeds, drive accessibility scores were computed for the Denver region for different time periods using the Mobility Energy Productivity (MEP) metric to understand the impact of congestion on energy-efficient accessibility. Results show that congestion-adjusted drive accessibility can be significantly lower compared to accessibility calculated using free flow speeds. Specifically, weekday evening hours saw a 42 % drop in accessibility due to reduced speeds, particularly around downtown Denver. Across the Denver metro region, approximately half as many opportunities and jobs are accessible in under 20 min by car during the evening peak period relative to free flow conditions. These findings underscore the importance of using congestion-adjusted operating speeds rather than speed limits in accessibility calculations, as reliance on speed limits can substantially overestimate energy-efficient drive accessibility in large, car-centric cities susceptible to significant congestion. In conclusion, the methodology presented here could further enrich OSM network data, making them useful for an even broader range of transportation applications.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Enhanced hindrance from phenyl outer side chains on nonfullerene acceptor enables unprecedented simultaneous enhancement in organic solar cell performances with 16.7% efficiency

Inner side-chain engineering on Y6 has been a proven successful in improving short-circuit current density (JSC) through fine-tuning aggregated structures of acceptors. However, it fails in tuning the lowest unoccupied molecular orbital level (LUMO) and open-circuit voltage (V OC ). In this paper, we turn to focus on engineering the outer side chains on the flanking thienothiophene units with 4-hexylphenyl (PhC6) and 6-phenylhexyl (C6Ph) chains. Use of PhC6 enhances the steric effect between the attached phenyl and the ending group, which in combination with the additional conjugation effect provided by the linking phenyl leads to upshifted energy levels and increased V OC as a result. Again, substitution with the bulkier PhC6 unprecedentedly improves film-morphology with reduced paracrystalline disorder and long period and increased root-mean-square composition variations as well, leading to increased electron and hole mobilities and suppressed monomolecular recombination with J SC and fill-factor (FF) simultaneously enhanced. The PM6:BTP-PhC6-based devices yield a higher efficiency value of 16.7% than the PM6:BTP-C6Ph-based one (15.5%). Furthermore, this study shows a conceptual advance in materials design towards reducing the conflict between V OC and J SC in binary blended organic solar cells, which can be achieved by introducing bulkier chains to twist the backbone and simultaneously enhance the packing order.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2025

Vertical column dual-comb spectroscopy to a TBS

Open-path dual-frequency-comb spectroscopy (DCS) is a broadband, high spectral resolution, and high precision method for measuring gas concentrations over kilometer-scale paths. It has been used for detection and quantification of emissions of pollutants, hazardous gasses, and greenhouse gasses (GHGs). DCS has been shown to measure trace-gas mixing ratios with 0.14%-0.4% agreement between instruments. To achieve high signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) with DCS, comb light is targeted onto a retroreflector at the end of the measurement path, which returns the signal to a detector co-located with the launch signal. Installing the retroreflector on a mobile platform such as a balloon or unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) extends the capabilities of DCS by enabling variable path lengths, greater mobility, and access to higher altitudes. Mobile-target DCS has many uses in plume and leak detection, emissions modeling, and planetary boundary layer (PBL) studies. It is a promising method for observing vertical distributions of GHGs and mixing processes in the PBL, which are difficult to measure but important for pollution and climate monitoring as well as for understanding transport of gasses through the atmosphere. Tethered balloons are an intriguing platform because they enable longer flight durations and higher altitudes than easily obtainable with a UAV and thus allow for column measurements up to and above the PBL. New measurements completed in October/November 2024 reach the highest altitudes above ground level yet achieved by mobile-target DCS. For these measurements, the retroreflector was mounted on a 7 m diameter tethered helium balloon. An actively tracking gimbal on the ground holds the DCS launch telescope and keeps the 5 cm beam pointed onto the retroreflector while the balloon is lifted, lowered, and moved by wind and turbulence.

atmosphere↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Habitation Development Status: Current Concepts and ISRU Opportunities

Introduction: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a bold journey to return humankind to the Moon and onward to Mars with innovative commercial, international, and academic partnerships [1]. Under the Artemis series of missions, NASA seeks to establish sustained human exploration of deep space through an objectives-based approach [2]. This approach drives the identification of needed system functionality and the current and future capabilities which will eventually allow humanity to sustainably live beyond Earth. Providing evolvable and scalable habitation is a cornerstone function that calls for the collection and integration of current, developmental, and future technologies that can meet near-term exploration needs while growing into long-term sustained presence. NASA is advancing in-space habitation through its Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) model while designing lunar, Mars transit, and Mars surface habitat government reference concepts for Artemis missions. These efforts have unveiled possible near-term opportunities for the in-space resource utilization community if human habitation is considered a future customer of space resources. NextSTEP Habitation Development: NASA is closely working with commercial partners under its NextSTEP Appendix A model to advance habitation systems in the arena of inflatable and composite habitation structures. Such efforts promise efficiencies in volumetric packaging and overall spacecraft mass respectively. Recent testing by commercial partners have helped to quantify possible failure mechanisms for inflatable structures while advancing their technology towards eventual flight certification. The advancement of such Class II habitation structures, in which the habitat is only fully deployed once in-space or on a planetary surface [3], is critical to providing increased habitable volume for long-duration missions with no additional mass penalties. The progression of such technology is infused into NASA’s government reference concepts for notional deep space habitation concepts. Current Government Reference Concepts: To best inform the formulation of future collaborative solicitations, NASA employs the practice of internally developing reference concepts for future exploration elements. These concepts aid in identifying the functions and capabilities needed to complete NASA missions as well as feasible solutions within the timeframe needed. Government reference concepts for a lunar Surface Habitat, Mars Transit Habitat, and Mars Sur-face Habitat are continuously being developed and updated to better guide the Agency’s overall exploration architecture. Lunar Surface Habitat. As NASA returns to the Moon, it is evaluating possible lunar surface habitation concepts. The Surface Habitat (SH) reference concept entails a hybrid metallic-inflatable structure capable of initially housing two crew for surface stays of up to 30 days in duration [4]. While initial missions may span ~7 days in duration, consideration is being given to expanding SH’s capability to support a crew of four for up to 60 days over its 15-year design life [5]. Functionally, the SH serves as a ‘hub’ for all Artemis crewed surface operations, providing internal volume for maintenance, medical, logistics, science utilization, and extravehicular activity (EVA) support in addition to core habitation functionality such as environmental control and life support (ECLS) and power generation and distribution among many others. Additionally, NASA has entered a study agreement with the Italian Space Agency (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana – ASI) to investigation a possible Multi-Purpose Habitat (MPH) as an additional or augmenting habit-able element for the lunar surface [6]. Mars Transit Habitat. NASA’s current architectural concept for initial human missions to Mars entails the utilization of a transit habitat (TH) to transport a four-person crew to and from Mars orbit, departing from and returning to a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO), over the course of a ~1,200-day mission [5]. While holding a similar 15-year design lifetime, TH will also support a series of analog mission activities in NRHO to gradually test the systems and interaction with lunar surface elements, some of which may be adapted for Mars surface exploration. Holding similar functional capabilities as SH, TH is sized to support much longer durations in space and greater logistical independence. Mars Surface Habitat. NASA is still exploring the concept of operations for initial crewed missions to Mars. As such, the Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept is still in its infancy as options for mobile, pressurized habitation and stationary habitats are being explored. It is expected MSH will leverage heavily from the lunar SH and possible lunar pressurized rover, however the very different Martian environment will likely necessitate modifications. ISRU Opportunities: Despite the advancements under NASA’s NextSTEP habitation work and continually optimized reference concepts, NASA is facing near-term mass and power challenges that may create opportunities to the ISRU community by providing yet another possible customer for space resources. While NASA desires to use regenerative ECLS systems (ECLSS) for all habitation concepts, their operation comes with initial mass penalties and maintenance overheads when compared to simpler open-loop architectures. Because of this, NASA is currently pro-posing an open-loop, consumables-based architecture for its surface habitats to achieve initial launch and delivery lander mass targets while scarring for the in-corporation of regenerative ECLSS to meet longer mission durations and sustained presence. With such an architecture, oxygen and potable water are needed consumables, which initial ISRU systems may be able to provide in a pilot capacity. Although the TH is expecting to utilize regenerative ECLSS, advancements in lunar surface-based ISRU and possible re-supply of spacecraft in lunar or Mars orbit could significantly reduce the logistical need for ECLSS related spares on TH and possibly allow a similar open-loop and consumables-based architecture. Table 1 Notional ECLSS consumables per mission use for SH and TH [5]. SH (28-day) Open Loop: Water (kg) 288 | Oxygen (kg) 30 TH (1110-day) Closed-Loop: Water (kg) 182 | Oxygen (kg) 123 In addition to ECLSS mass concerns, the SH is facing challenges with energy storage to support operations over periods of darkness exceeding 100 hours. Both battery and fuel cell-based power architectures are being traded, opening options for external power generation and energy storage. One possibility is ISRU-produced H2 and O2 feeding external primary fuel cell systems which could supplement habitation power generation while reducing initial mass and volume until much more powerful fission power systems might be deployed. Conclusion: Significant advancements are being made in evolvable habitation concepts that span from near-term technologies, such as inflatable structures under NextSTEP, to potentially revolutionary capabilities like the lunar surface construction as funded through the Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies (MMPACT) project [7]. As NASA investigates both heritage capabilities and rap-idly advancing, disruptive technologies, there are likely many near-term opportunities for initial ISRU capabilities to significantly aid human habitation and increase self-sufficiency beyond Earth.

habitation↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Habitation Development Status: Current Concepts and ISRU Opportunities

Introduction: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a bold journey to return humankind to the Moon and onward to Mars with innovative commercial, international, and academic partnerships. Under the Artemis series of missions, NASA seeks to establish sustained human exploration of deep space through an objectives-based approach. This approach drives the identification of needed system functionality and the current and future capabilities which will eventually allow humanity to sustainably live beyond Earth. Providing evolvable and scalable habitation is a cornerstone function that calls for the collection and integration of current, developmental, and future technologies that can meet near-term exploration needs while growing into long-term sustained presence. NASA is advancing in-space habitation through its Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) model while designing lunar, Mars transit, and Mars surface habitat government reference concepts for Artemis missions. These efforts have unveiled possible near-term opportunities for the in-space resource utilization community if human habitation is considered a future customer of space resources. NextSTEP Habitation Development: NASA is closely working with commercial partners under its NextSTEP Appendix A model to advance habitation systems in the arena of inflatable and composite habitation structures. Such efforts promise efficiencies in volumetric packaging and overall spacecraft mass respectively. Recent testing by commercial partners have helped to quantify possible failure mechanisms for inflatable structures while advancing their technology towards eventual flight certification. The advancement of such Class II habitation structures, in which the habitat is only fully deployed once in-space or on a planetary surface, is critical to providing increased habitable volume for long-duration missions with no additional mass penalties. The progression of such technology is infused into NASA’s government reference concepts for notional deep space habitation concepts. Current Government Reference Concepts: To best inform the formulation of future collaborative solicitations, NASA employs the practice of internally developing reference concepts for future exploration elements. These concepts aid in identifying the functions and capabilities needed to complete NASA missions as well as feasible solutions within the timeframe needed. Government reference concepts for a lunar Surface Habitat, Mars Transit Habitat, and Mars Sur-face Habitat are continuously being developed and updated to better guide the Agency’s overall exploration architecture. Lunar Surface Habitat. As NASA returns to the Moon, it is evaluating possible lunar surface habitation concepts. The Surface Habitat (SH) reference concept entails a hybrid metallic-inflatable structure capable of initially housing two crew for surface stays of up to 30 days in duration. While initial missions may span ~7 days in duration, consideration is being given to expanding SH’s capability to support a crew of four for up to 60 days over its 15-year design life. Functionally, the SH serves as a ‘hub’ for all Artemis crewed surface operations, providing internal volume for maintenance, medical, logistics, science utilization, and extravehicular activity (EVA) support in addition to core habitation functionality such as environmental control and life support (ECLS) and power generation and distribution among many others. Additionally, NASA has entered a study agreement with the Italian Space Agency (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana – ASI) to investigation a possible Multi-Purpose Habitat (MPH) as an additional or augmenting habit-able element for the lunar surface. Mars Transit Habitat. NASA’s current architectural concept for initial human missions to Mars entails the utilization of a transit habitat (TH) to transport a four-person crew to and from Mars orbit, departing from and returning to a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO), over the course of a ~1,200-day mission. While holding a similar 15-year design lifetime, TH will also support a series of analog mission activities in NRHO to gradually test the systems and interaction with lunar surface elements, some of which may be adapted for Mars surface exploration. Holding similar functional capabilities as SH, TH is sized to support much longer durations in space and greater logistical independence. Mars Surface Habitat. NASA is still exploring the concept of operations for initial crewed missions to Mars. As such, the Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept is still in its infancy as options for mobile, pressurized habitation and stationary habitats are being explored. It is expected MSH will leverage heavily from the lunar SH and possible lunar pressurized rover, however the very different Martian environment will likely necessitate modifications. ISRU Opportunities: Despite the advancements under NASA’s NextSTEP habitation work and continually optimized reference concepts, NASA is facing near-term mass and power challenges that may create opportunities to the ISRU community by providing yet another possible customer for space resources. While NASA desires to use regenerative ECLS systems (ECLSS) for all habitation concepts, their operation comes with initial mass penalties and maintenance overheads when compared to simpler open-loop architectures. Because of this, NASA is currently pro-posing an open-loop, consumables-based architecture for its surface habitats to achieve initial launch and delivery lander mass targets while scarring for the in-corporation of regenerative ECLSS to meet longer mission durations and sustained presence. With such an architecture, oxygen and potable water are needed consumables, which initial ISRU systems may be able to provide in a pilot capacity. Although the TH is expecting to utilize regenerative ECLSS, advancements in lunar surface-based ISRU and possible re-supply of spacecraft in lunar or Mars orbit could significantly reduce the logistical need for ECLSS related spares on TH and possibly allow a similar open-loop and consumables-based architecture. In addition to ECLSS mass concerns, the SH is facing challenges with energy storage to support operations over periods of darkness exceeding 100 hours. Both battery and fuel cell-based power architectures are being traded, opening options for external power generation and energy storage. One possibility is ISRU-produced H2 and O2 feeding external primary fuel cell systems which could supplement habitation power generation while reducing initial mass and volume until much more powerful fission power systems might be deployed. Conclusion: Significant advancements are being made in evolvable habitation concepts that span from near-term technologies, such as inflatable structures under NextSTEP, to potentially revolutionary capabilities like the lunar surface construction as funded through the Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies (MMPACT) project. As NASA investigates both heritage capabilities and rap-idly advancing, disruptive technologies, there are likely many near-term opportunities for initial ISRU capabilities to significantly aid human habitation and increase self-sufficiency beyond Earth.

habitation↗

NASA NTRS2002

STS-111 Flight Day 3 Highlights

On Flight Day 3 of STS-111, the crew of Endeavour (Kenneth Cockrell, Commander; Paul Lockhart, Pilot; Franklin Chang-Diaz, Mission Specialist; Philippe Perrin, Mission Specialist) and the Expedition 5 crew (Valery Korzun, Commander; Peggy Whitson, Flight Engineer; Sergei Treschev, Flight Engineer), begin their final approach towards the International Space Station (ISS). From cameras aboard the ISS, live video of Endeavour is shown as it approaches the station. The Orbiter is maneuvered slowly to a position for docking, and cameras from multiple angles show this process. As it is maneuvered, there are clear views of its payload bay, which includes the Leonardo MultiPurpose Logistics Module (MPLM) and the Mobile Base System (MBS), both of which will be installed on the ISS during this mission. In the final stages of the docking procedure there is close-up footage of Endeavour meeting the ISS's Pressurized Mating Adapter 2 on the Destiny Laboratory Module. Inside the ISS, the Expedition 4 crew (Yury Onufrienko, Commander; Daniel Bursch, Flight Engineer; Carl Walz, Flight Engineer), which will be replaced by the Expedition 5 crew, prepares for final docking. Crew members are shown transferring equipment from the Endeavour to the ISS, prior to a replay of the mating of the two crafts. In the replay, the hatch is shown being opened and the two newly arrived crews are greeted with excitement by Expedition 4 crewmembers. The video closes with footage of the Quest airlock used for EVA (extravehicular activity) egress, and the Canadarm 2 robotic arm.

Source record↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Delay Tolerant, Radio Frequency Identification (RFID )-enabled Sensing

Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology offers a completely passive method to transmit fixed data sequences from an RFID tag, which typically doesn’t have its own power supply, to an interrogator. Radio frequency (RF) energy harvested from the interrogator is rectified by the tag and used to charge an integrated circuit (IC). The IC then modulates the received signal with the data stored on the tag and reflects the energy back to the interrogator. RFID has seen great proliferation in terrestrial inventory management applications, and it has recently made the jump to spaceflight applications onboard the International Space Station, augmenting an existing optical bar‐code infrastructure for tracking supplies. A number of advanced automated logistics management (ALM) concepts employing RFID are currently being developed and evaluated, including so‐called “smart” shelves, cubbies, and trash receptacles using low‐power, embeddable RFID interrogators. An infrastructure where both crew members and robotic assistants, such as autonomous free flyers, are similarly equipped with small RFID interrogators seems likely. It therefore behooves us to consider extending this infrastructure beyond ALM to applications such as low power, embedded sensing. Typically, data on an RFID tag can only be written by an RFID interrogator, using interrogator energy. In recent years, however, a few efforts have focused on using that energy to drive data acquisition from the tag IC, allowing the tag to modify its stored data sequence with sensor data before replying to an interrogator. In this way, the tag can act as a completely passive sensing device. One problem exists with this approach, however: the tag cannot gather data when an interrogator is not present. Thus, strictly passive RFID sensing tags cannot gather data at regular intervals, in the manner of a typical wireless sensor network, without careful, and impractical, planning of mobile interrogator movements. To address this shortcoming, we look to a recent advance in RFID technology which allows an external microprocessor to power the tag IC and write directly into its RFID memory using a wired serial interface. In this paradigm, data gathering is driven by a small, on‐board power supply (using batteries or harvested energy), and data transfer is provided passively through the RFID interrogation service. Since communication typically consumes the lion’s share of power in WSNs, such a technique has the potential to enable extremely long‐lived, embedded wireless sensing when used with extremely low‐current microcontrollers. Since the communication channel is only open when an interrogator is present and actively interrogating the RFID sensing tag, transport of periodically‐sampled sensor data presents itself as a delay/disruption‐tolerant networking (DTN) problem. In this paper, we present the design of a DTN‐like overlay on the common EPC Global, Class 1, Generation 2 RFID standard. This overlay allows seamless, guaranteed data transfer using the EPC Global protocol, supporting extremely low‐power, embedded sensing using an infrastructure likely to be already in place for ALM applications. We evaluate a prototype implementation of a complete end‐to‐end system using a robotic RFID interrogation agent, and we present future directions for the development of this sensing technique.

Raymond S. Wagner↗

NASA NTRS1994

Cryogenic probe station for use in automated microwave and noise figure measurements

A cryogenic measurement system capable of performing on-wafer RF testing of semiconductor devices and circuits has been developed. This 'CryoProbe Station' can wafer-probe devices and circuits at cryogenic temperatures, thus eliminating the need for wire bonds. The system operates under vacuum created by a sorption pump. It uses an open cycle cooling system that can be cooled with either liquid nitrogen or liquid helium. Presently, it can reach temperatures, as low as 80 K and 37 K for each of the coolants, respectively. The temperature can be raised using a heater and it is stabilized to within 0.2 K by use of a temperature controller. The CryoProbe Station features a 1 by 2 inch stage that can hold large circuits and calibration standards simultaneously. The system is used with a Hewlett Packard 8510C Automatic Network Analyzer (ANA) to obtain S-parameter data over the frequency range 0.045-26.5 GHz. S-parameter data on HEMT (high electron mobility transistors) devices has been obtained with this station. With the use of DEEMBED software from NIST, detailed transmission line studies have been performed. Although the CryoProbe Station is designed for frequencies up to 26.5 GHz, useful transmission line data has been obtained for frequencies as high as 40 GHz. The CryoProbe station has also been used with the ATN noise figure measurement system to perform automatic, temperature dependent noise figure measurements.

Taub, Susan R.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Lunar surface operations. Volume 1: Lunar surface emergency shelter

The lunar surface emergency shelter (LSES) is designed to provide survival-level accommodations for up to four astronauts for a maximum of five days. It would be used by astronauts who were caught out in the open during a large solar event. The habitable section consists of an aluminum pressure shell with an inner diameter of 6 ft. and a length of 12.2 ft. Access is through a 4 in. thick aluminum airlock door mounted at the rear of the shelter. Shielding is provided by a 14.9 in. thick layer of lunar regolith contained within a second, outer aluminum shell. This provides protection against a 200 MeV event, based on a 15 REM maximum dose. The shelter is self-contained with a maximum range of 1000 km. Power is supplied by a primary fuel cell which occupies 70.7 cu ft. of the interior volume. Mobility is achieved by towing the shelter behind existing lunar vehicles. It was assumed that a fully operational, independent lunar base was available to provide communication support and tools for set-up and maintenance. Transportation to the moon would be provided by the proposed heavy lift launch vehicle. Major design considerations for the LSES were safety, reliability, and minimal use of earth materials.

Shields, William↗

NASA NTRS2002

STS-111 Flight Day 5 Highlights

On Flight Day 5 of STS-111, the crew of Endeavour (Kenneth Cockrell, Commander; Paul Lockhart, Pilot; Franklin Chang-Diaz, Mission Specialist; Philippe Perrin, Mission Specialist) and the Expedition 5 crew (Valery Korzun, Commander; Peggy Whitson, Flight Engineer; Sergei Treschev, Flight Engineer) and Expedition 4 crew (Yury Onufrienko, Commander; Daniel Bursch, Flight Engineer; Carl Walz, Flight Engineer) are aboard the docked Endeavour and International Space Station (ISS). The ISS cameras show the station in orbit above the North African coast and the Mediterranean Sea, as Chang-Diaz and Perrin prepare for an EVA (extravehicular activity). The Canadarm 2 robotic arm is shown in motion in a wide-angle shot. The Quest Airlock is shown as it opens to allow the astronauts to exit the station. As orbital sunrise approaches, the astronauts are shown already engaged in their EVA activities. Chang-Diaz is shown removing the PDGF (Power and Data Grapple Fixture) from Endeavour's payload bay as Perrin prepares its installation position in the ISS's P6 truss structure; The MPLM is also visible. Following the successful detachment of the PDGF, Chang-Diaz carries it to the installation site as he is transported there by the robotic arm. The astronauts are then shown installing the PDGF, with video provided by helmet-mounted cameras. Following this task, the astronauts are shown preparing the MBS (Mobile Base System) for grappling by the robotic arm. It will be mounted to the Mobile Transporter (MT), which will traverse a railroad-like system along the truss structures of the ISS, and support astronaut activities as well as provide an eventual mobile base for the robotic arm.

Source record↗

DOE OSTI2023

Physics-Based Model to Represent Membrane-Electrode Assemblies of Solid-Oxide Fuel Cells Based on Gadolinium-Doped Ceria

This paper reports a physics-based model that predicts membrane-electrode assembly (MEA) performance of solid-oxide fuel cells (SOFCs) with Ce 0.9 Gd 0.1 O 2− δ (GDC10) electrolyte membranes. The paper derives self-consistent thermodynamic and transport properties for GDC1o mobile charged defects (oxide vacancies and reduced-ceria small polarons) by fitting published measurements of oxygen non-stoichiometry and conductivity over ranges of temperature and O 2 partial pressures. The button-cell model is applied to evaluate how mixed ionic-electronic conductivity influences the performance of an SOFC MEA with a GDC10 electrolyte sandwiched between a porous, composite Ni-GDC10 anode and a porous, composite cathode of Sm 0.5 Sr 0.5 CoO 3− δ (i.e., SSC) and GDC10. SSC properties are also derived by fitting published conductivity and oxygen non-stoichiometry measurements. Mixed conductivity of GDC10 and competing charge transfer reactions at both electrodes reduce open circuit voltages due to leakage current and buildup of defect concentrations at electrode-electrolyte interfaces. To fit polarization data, the button-cell model includes heterogeneous reaction rates for defect incorporation on the GDC10 surface along with Butler–Volmer expressions derived for competing charge transfer reaction rates from rigorous analyses assuming rate-limiting, elementary charge transfer reactions for each electrode. The calibrated MEA model can support rigorous SOFC modeling with GDC10 electrolytes over the range of conditions within a fully operating cell.

Electrochemistry↗

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 NTRS2002

STS-111 Flight Day 7 Highlights

On Flight Day 7 of STS-111 (Space Shuttle Endeavour crew includes: Kenneth Cockrell, Commander; Paul Lockhart, Pilot; Franklin Chang-Diaz, Mission Specialist; Philippe Perrin, Mission Specialist; International Space Station (ISS) Expedition 5 crew includes Valery Korzun, Commander; Peggy Whitson, Flight Engineer; Sergei Treschev, Flight Engineer; ISS Expedition 4 crew includes: Yury Onufrienko, Commander; Daniel Bursch, Flight Engineer; Carl Walz, Flight Engineer), this video opens with answers to questions asked by the public via e-mail about the altitude of the space station, the length of its orbit, how astronauts differentiate between up and down in the microgravity environment, and whether they hear wind noise during the shuttle's reentry. In video footage shot from inside the Quest airlock, Perrin is shown exiting the station to perform an extravehicular activity (EVA) with Chang-Diaz. Chang-Diaz is shown, in helmet mounted camera footage, attaching cable protection booties to a fish-stringer device with multiple hooks, and Perrin is seen loosening bolts that hold the replacement unit accomodation in launch position atop the Mobile Base System (MBS). Perrin then mounts a camera atop the mast of the MBS. During this EVA, the astronauts installed the MBS on the Mobile Transporter (MT) to support the Canadarm 2 robotic arm. A camera in the Endeavour's payload bay provides footage of the Pacific Ocean, the Baja Peninsula, and Midwestern United States. Plumes from wildfires in Nevada, Idaho, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, and Montana are visible. The station continues over the Great Lakes and the Eastern Provinces of Canada.

Source record↗

DOE OSTI2026

Dataset for "A primer on forest structure measurement with lidar for ecologists"

This repository includes data and code accompanying the case study included in the manuscript "A primer on forest structure measurement with lidar for ecologists" (submitted to Ecosphere). We compiled lidar datasets from multiple platforms in a common area to: 1. Demonstrate how differences in sensor characteristics influence density and resolution of lidar data. 2. Provide open-source, co-located datasets for users to further inspect differences in lidar data. 3. Provide example code to perform basic lidar analysis. This case study is meant to allow readers to get hands-on experience with real-world data from different platforms. This case study is not meant to be a rigorous comparison of derived ecological metrics among all sensors; such comparisons can be found throughout other publications referenced throughout the main manuscript. Code includes basic functions in R commonly used to visualize and manipulate lidar data accessible with a normal laptop computer; more sophisticated algorithms for advanced users are also referenced throughout the main manuscript. Terrestrial laser scanning (TLS), mobile laser scanning (MLS), UAS laser scanning (ULS), airborne laser scanning (ALS), and spaceborne laser scanning (SLS) data were collected within the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center (SERC) forest dynamics plot in Maryland, USA. TLS, MLS, and ALS data were collected within 1 month of the 2021 growing season; ULS data were collected in November 2020 (“leaf-off” data) and July 2022 (“leaf-on” data).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2007

Biomedical Support of U.S. Extravehicular Activity

The world's first extravehicular activity (EVA) was performed by A. A. Leonov on March 18, 1965 during the Russian Voskhod-2 mission. The first US EVA was executed by Gemini IV astronaut Ed White on June 3, 1965, with an umbilical tether that included communications and an oxygen supply. A hand-held maneuvering unit (HHMU) also was used to test maneuverability during the brief EVA; however the somewhat stiff umbilical limited controlled movement. That constraint, plus difficulty returning through the vehicle hatch, highlighted the need for increased thermal control and improved EVA ergonomics. Clearly, requirements for a useful EVA were interrelated with the vehicle design. The early Gemini EVAs generated requirements for suits providing micro-meteor protection, adequate visual field and eye protection from solar visual and infrared radiation, gloves optimized for dexterity while pressurized, and thermal systems capable of protecting the astronaut while rejecting metabolic heat during high workloads. Subsequent Gemini EVAs built upon this early experience and included development of a portable environmental control and life support systems (ECLSS) and an astronaut maneuvering unit. The ECLSS provided a pressure vessel and controller with functional control over suit pressure, oxygen flow, carbon dioxide removal, humidity, and temperature control. Gemini EVA experience also identified the usefulness of underwater neutral buoyancy and altitude chamber task training, and the importance of developing reliable task timelines. Improved thermal management and carbon dioxide control also were required for high workload tasks. With the Apollo project, EVA activity was primarily on the lunar surface; and suit durability, integrated liquid cooling garments, and low suit operating pressures (3.75 pounds per square inch absolute [psia] or 25.8 kilopascal [kPa],) were required to facilitate longer EVAs with ambulation and significant physical workloads with average metabolic rates of 1000 BTU/hr and peaks of up to 2200 BTU/hr. Mobility was further augmented with the Lunar Roving Vehicle. The Apollo extravehicular mobility unit (EMU) was made up of over 15 components, ranging from a biomedical belt for capturing and transmitting biomedical data, urine and fecal containment systems, a liquid cooling garment, communications cap, a modular portable life support system (PLSS), a boot system, thermal overgloves, and a bubble helmet with eye protection. Apollo lunar astronauts performed successful EVAs on the lunar surface from a 5 psia (34.4 kPa) 100% oxygen environment in the Lunar Lander. A maximum of three EVAs were performed on any mission. For Skylab a modified A7LB suit, used for Apollo 15, was selected. The Skylab astronaut life support assembly (ALSA) provided umbilical support through the life support umbilical (LSU) and used open loop oxygen flow, rather than closed-loop as in Apollo missions. Thermal control was provided by liquid water circulated by spacecraft pumps and electrical power also was provided from the spacecraft via the umbilical. The cabin atmosphere of 5 psia (34.4 kPa), 70% oxygen, provided a normoxic atmosphere and because of the very low nitrogen partial pressures, no special protocols were required to protect against decompression sickness (DCS) as was the case with the Apollo spacecraft with a 5 psi, 100% oxygen environment.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗