SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “LAB Homes”

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.

42 records · Page 3

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1995

A Comprehensive Approach to Management of Workplace and Environmental Noise at NASA Lewis Research Center

NASA Lewis Research Center is home to more than 100 experimental research testing facilities and laboratories, including large wind tunnels and engine test cells, which in combination create a varied and complex noise environment. Much of the equipment was manufactured prior to the enactment of legislation limiting product noise emissions or occupational noise exposure. Routine facility maintenance and associated construction also contributes to a noise exposure management responsibility which is equal in magnitude and scope to that of several small industrial companies. The Noise Program, centrally managed within the Office of Environmental Programs at LRC, maintains overall responsibility for hearing conservation, community noise control, and acoustical and noise control engineering. Centralized management of the LRC Noise Program facilitates the timely development and implementation of engineered noise control solutions for problems identified via either the Hearing Conservation of Community Noise Program. The key element of the Lewis Research Center Noise Program, Acoustical and Noise Control Engineering Services, is focused on developing solutions that permanently reduce employee and community noise exposure and maximize research productivity by reducing or eliminating administrative and operational controls and by improving the safety and comfort of the work environment. The Hearing Conservation Program provides noise exposure assessment, medical monitoring, and training for civil servant and contractor employees. The Community Noise Program aims to maintain the support of LRC's neighboring communities while enabling necessary research operations to accomplish their programmatic goals. Noise control engineering capability resides within the Noise Program. The noise control engineering, based on specific exposure limits, is a fundamental consideration throughout the design phase of new test facilities, labs, and office buildings. In summary, the Noise Program addresses hearing conservation, community noise control, and acoustical and noise control engineering.

Cooper, Beth A.↗

DOE OSTI2025

GeoBridge: Unearthing Insights from Connecting Communities to Geothermal Information and Opportunities: Preprint

Knowledge is essential for overcoming obstacles in the development and adoption of geothermal technologies, and the geothermal community is home to numerous tools, events and organizations dedicated to sharing knowledge. However, many of these tools can be difficult to find, their resources undiscoverable by search engines, available only to members, or hidden away behind pay walls (Weers et al., 2024). The Department of Energy's (DOE) GeoBridge was developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to help bridge gaps in information and connect the geothermal community to the resources it needs. Launched in October 2024, GeoBridge aspires to expand the pool of geothermal stakeholders by providing in-roads to geothermal information, tools, and community resources. It helps to make these resources available to the broader geothermal community as well as those looking to join, such as entrepreneurs or innovators in adjacent industries looking to expand into geothermal energy. This paper explores a post-launch analysis of GeoBridge including data from analytics, feedback from GeoBridge users, the geothermal community, and the GeoBridge Advisory Group as well as an analysis of efficacy of various promotions for GeoBridge.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Results for the Subjective Habitability Acceptability Questionnaire From HERA C5 and C6

BACKGROUND The impact of habitability on psychological and performance outcomes is recognized as an important factor in habitat and vehicle design—especially as missions increase in length. Formal evaluation of habitability’s impact is possible using the Spaceflight Habitability Acceptability Questionnaire (SHAQ), which was psychometrically validated by Roma et al. in 2022 [1]. The SHAQ survey systematically quantifies the relationships between habitat areas (e.g., bedroom, kitchen, hygiene area, office, etc.) and behavioral health and performance (BHP) outcomes (i.e., individual and team performance, mood, stress, sleep, social interaction), and considers the moderating effects of key habitability aspects (i.e., privacy, control, convenience, efficiency, comfort, social density) on that relationship. METHOD Respondents were HERA participants from Campaign 5 and 6 (n = 32). Data from three environments were used in our SHAQ analyses: SHAQ in HERA (in-mission), SHAQ at Home (pre-mission), and SHAQ in Hotel (pre- and post-mission for C6, just pre-mission for C5). For each habitat area, respondents are asked how that area layout impacts six BHP outcomes on a 201-point visual analog scale with the anchors: impairs, has no effect, and facilitates. They also had the option to respond “Not Applicable”. Follow up questions asked why six key habitability aspects (e.g., privacy) influenced the way the habitat area affected a given outcome. Participants indicated whether a habitat area’s habitability aspects were inadequate (low score) to adequate (midpoint) to ideal (high score), using a 201-point visual analog scale as well but were binned to a 7-point scale for analyses. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION When comparing across environments, ratings of BHP outcomes were worse in HERA compared to home and pre-mission hotel, but rebounded for the post-mission hotel such that post-mission hotel rating were often higher than all previous ratings. Within HERA, ratings of how a habitat area impacted an outcome skewed towards facilitation with communal areas (i.e., galley and office) rated most facilitating. The follow up questions about why six key aspects related to habitability moderated outcomes indicated that most habitat areas were rated as having “adequate” habitability characteristics. Privacy was the only moderator with average scores below adequate for all habitat areas. The office had the most moderators scoring above adequate for all habitat areas. Ratings indicated small to moderate effects of layouts on BHP outcomes: with facilitating layouts averaging between 4 and 5, and impairing layouts averaging between 2 and 4. The sleeping module layout facilitated sleep, with ratings indicating adequate comfort but inadequate privacy. The galley layout facilitated social interaction and mood, with ratings indicating adequate efficiency and convenience. The office layout facilitated social interaction, team and individual performance, with ratings similarly indicating adequate efficiency and convenience. The hygiene module worsened individual performance, mood and stress, with ratings indicating less than adequate privacy and social density. Our findings suggest there is value in having dedicated team and individual spaces. REFERENCES [1] Roma, P. G., Landon, L.B., Spencer, C. A., Whitmire, A. M., & Williams, T. J. (2022). SHAQ: Development and Validation. Human Factors: Special Issue on Spaceflight, 65(6), 1074-1104. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was funded by the NASA Human Research Program directed task Human Factors and Behavioral Performance in HERA (PI = S. Bell) to the BHP Lab. KBR Inc. and JES Tech authors were supported by KBR’s Human Health and Performance Contract NNJ15HK11B with NASA.

behavioral health↗

DOE OSTI2025

Detection of local-scale changes in greenhouse gas emissions in urban environments using micrometeorological methods and comparison to a high-resolution inventory

We used the Monin–Obukhov similarity theory (MOST) flux-variance relationship to estimate greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes from high-precision mole fraction measurements at 3 instrumented urban communication towers over several years, demonstrating the ability of this method to detect and quantify changes in emissions. Depending on data availability, we used carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and carbon monoxide (CO) measurements and/or tracer ratios to estimate fluxes at 1 urban site (Site 3) and 1 suburban site (Site 7) in Indianapolis, IN, USA, and 1 urban site (COM) in Los Angeles, CA, USA. We also compared the estimated fluxes of CO 2 from fossil fuel sources (CO 2 ff) at Sites 3 and 7 and the total CO 2 fluxes at Site 3 to 20 m, hourly resolution subdomains of the high-resolution CO 2 emissions inventory, Hestia, for the year 2020, introducing a new way to evaluate emissions inventories at small spatial and temporal scales. Using the flux-variance relationship, we detected and quantified abrupt decreases in CO and CO 2 fluxes at Site 3 and COM in April 2020, coinciding with the stay-at-home order due to COVID-19 pandemic, as well as abrupt decreases in CO and CO 2 fluxes at Site 3 in July 2018 coinciding with a highway closure next to the site. The Hestia emissions inventory detected a decrease in emissions in April 2020 at Sites 3 and 7, but this decrease differed in magnitude from those detected in the atmospheric estimates. Seasonal trends in emissions are similar between Hestia and the atmospheric estimates at Site 7. We use differences in seasonal and spatial trends between the flux estimation methods to identify potential sources of uncertainty in both the atmospheric and inventory methods. The results from this study show that the flux-variance estimation method is a useful tool to monitor local-scale emissions and evaluate high-resolution emissions inventories.

Carbon dioxide↗

NASA NTRS2014

Simulation Technology at NASA

NASA Ames Research Center is home to several high-fidelity research flight and air-traffic control simulation facilities which, together with an experienced workforce, produce high-quality research data and findings that have proven to be applicable in the real world. These assets include the Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS), Crew Vehicle Systems Research Facility (CVSRF), Future Flight Central (FFC) air traffic control tower simulator, and several air-traffic control (ATC) simulators. The VMS combines a high-fidelity simulation capability with an adaptable simulation environment, enabling customization for numerous human-in-the-loop research applications. The distinctive feature of the VMS is its unparalleled large amplitude, high-fidelity motion capability. In over 30 years of continuous operation, the VMS has contributed significantly to the body of knowledge in a range of disciplines directly benefiting several aerospace programs and flight safety, including the design and development of flight control systems for the Joint Strike Fighter, Space Shuttle Orbiter, and rotorcraft. It continues to be used for researching new vehicle configurations, vehicle control and safety, transfer-of-training, etc., by NASA, other government agencies, and Industry.The CVSRF includes two motion-based flight simulators: a Boeing 747-400 full flight simulator and the reconfigurable Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator (ACFS). These simulators are primarily used to research air-traffic management concepts and procedures, advanced navigation and avionics concepts, and cockpit human factors. FFC is a full-sized control tower simulator with a 360-degree external field-of-view display system and reconfigurable system architecture. FFC and the ATC simulators are used for testing air-traffic management automation and decision support tools and demonstrate their feasibility in a realistic environment prior to technology transfer for implementation in the National Airspace System (NAS).To support integrated simulations and flight-tests for NASA's Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) Project, NASA developed a distributed test environment incorporating Live, Virtual, Constructive, (LVC) concepts. Development of the software enabling the LVC is conducted primarily at the Distributed Simulation Research Lab (DSRL) at NASA Ames. The LVC components provide the core infrastructure supporting simulation of UAS operations by integrating live and virtual aircraft in a realistic air traffic environment. This provides the ability to conduct tests more efficiently by promoting the use of existing distributed assets. The LVC infrastructure was used in several human-in-the-loop simulations to evaluate acceptance of Detect and Avoid (DAA) advisories used by UAS pilots to maintain well clear of other virtual traffic and to negotiate maneuvers with air traffic control. It is currently being used to support testing of self-separation algorithms between unmanned and manned aircraft in live flight. Further simulations with more comprehensive air traffic scenarios mixing live and virtual aircraft is planned.In the current fiscal environment, maintaining and upgrading these high-fidelity simulation assets and retaining the skilled workforce necessary to meet future research needs is the primary non-technical challenge.

CVSRF↗

NASA NTRS2022

“Just Do It” Mission Operations Training in a COVID World

“No”- “not”- “can’t do it” – these words don’t fly in M2020 Mission Operations. The M2020 Surface Mission Operations Team trained for landing the Perseverance Rover under COVID-19 remote work/mandatory stay-at-home conditions. Training activities included presenting Flight Schools to the team via video conferencing, training COVID personal safety requirements to on-premises staff, and constantly updating and communicating COVID restrictions to the team as safety requirements changed. This paper explores the impact of COVID on the Mission System Training for M2020 Mission Operations. The layers of COVID, aptly named the “COVID Tax” by team management, affected project roles, communications, personnel interactions, operations facility usage and training exercises practiced by the team. Flight Schools and Operational Readiness Tests (ORTs) are driving forces behind the surface mission operations training. These activities work hand-in-hand to prepare the team for landing day, surface operations that transition from cruise to nominal operations, and nominal operations. Under normal training conditions, Flight Schools and ORTs are only concerned with tactical operations for the Uplink (Command) Downlink (Analysis) and Campaign Implementation (Planning) Teams of scientists and system engineers. Due to COVID, and the necessity to maintain physical distance between people, training for the landing team needed to include the new category of COVID personal safety. COVID also necessitated remote teams and video conferencing of the entirety of Flight Schools. This reliance on distance learning had not been done on previous missions. We will explore the advantages and disadvantages of video conferencing as a training platform; training effectiveness in communicating and practicing the multiple changes to the COVID safety protocols; and the timing in which we received and responded to COVID directives. Additionally, this paper will review the practical measures taken by the on-premises team and how the team adapted during the readiness tests, landing, and early mission operations, as well as how the team responded to the post-vaccine ramping down of COVID Protocols. The M2020 Surface Mission Operations Team responded very well to the challenges of COVID. All pre-landing operational and COVID-related training was completed. Post-landing COVID Training was provided as needed to new on-premises personnel. Training presented on COVID for the first operational readiness test (ORT) consisted of 2.5 hours of training. Each ORT had COVID Training. A person who had participated in all of the ORTs from September 2020 – February 2021 would have received over 7 hours of COVID Training. By ORT-12 (approximately 8 weeks after the first ORT), the Training team consolidated the original COVID training to a one-hour COVID Basic Training course, with additional recommended training. The Basic training course was updated after landing, as vaccines became available. COVID Training had multiple Flight Schools in the self-directed Blackboard Learning system, as well as a Quick Reference Wiki for Onboarding of new on-premises personnel and keeping on-premises personnel up-to-date. COVID Training covered many topics including practical methods of 6-foot distancing, how to interact with an IT professional when help was needed at a workstation, and challenging indoor meal-eating protocols. COVID Training continued to be updated, as the lab and the project respond to the virus variants and federal, state and local ordinances.

Rosette, Theresa↗