Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Natural Hazards”

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 541 records · Page 30

Alternate Fuel Vehicles in Tunnels

Many types of vehicles using fuels that differ from typical hydrocarbons such as gasoline and diesel are in use throughout the world. These include vehicles running on the combustion of natural gas and propane as well as electrical drive vehicles utilizing batteries or hydrogen as energy storage. These alternative fuels pose hazards that are different from traditional fuels and the safety of these vehicles are being questioned in areas such as tunnels and other enclosed spaces. Much scientific research and analysis has been conducted on tunnel and garage hazard scenarios; however, the data and conclusions might not seem to be immediately applicable to highway tunnel owners and authorities having jurisdiction over tunnels. This report provides a comprehensive, concise summary of the literature available characterizing the various hazards presented by all alternative fuel vehicles, including light-duty, medium- and heavy-duty, as well as buses. Research characterizing both worst-case and more plausible scenarios and risk-based analysis is also summarized Gaps in the research are identified in order to guide future research efforts to provide a complete analysis of the hazards and recommendations for the use of alternative fuel vehicles in tunnels.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

Inert gas spraying device aids in repair of hazardous systems

Inert gas spraying device aids in safely making mechanical repairs to a cryogenic fluid system without prior emptying of the system. This method can be applied to any natural or bottled gas system and with modifications to gasoline transports.

Teleha, S.↗

Hydrogen Plus Other Alternative Fuels Risk Assessment Models (HyRAM+) Version 5.0 Technical Reference Manual

The HyRAM+ software toolkit provides a basis for conducting quantitative risk assessment and consequence modeling for hydrogen, natural gas, and autogas systems. HyRAM+ is designed to facilitate the use of state-of-the-art models to conduct robust, repeatable assessments of safety, hazards, and risk. HyRAM+ integrates deterministic and probabilistic models for quantifying leak sizes and rates, predicting physical effects, characterizing hazards (thermal effects from jet fires, overpressure effects from delayed ignition), and assessing impacts on people. HyRAM+ is developed at Sandia National Laboratories to support the development and revision of national and international codes and standards, and to provide developed models in a publicly-accessible toolkit usable by all stakeholders. This document provides a description of the methodology and models contained in HyRAM+ version 5.0. The most significant change for HyRAM+ version 5.0 from HyRAM+ version 4.1 is the ability to model blends of different fuels. HyRAM+ was previously only suitable for use with hydrogen, methane, or propane, with users having the ability to use methane as a proxy for natural gas and propane as a proxy for autogas/liquefied petroleum gas. In version 5.0, real natural gas or autogas compositions can be modeled as the fuel, or even blends of natural gas with hydrogen. These blends can be used in the standalone physics models, but not yet in the quantitative risk assessment mode of HyRAM+.

03 NATURAL GAS↗

Run Time Assurance for Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing Aircraft

NASA is conducting research to demonstrate and evaluate the application of Run Time Assurance (RTA) as a means to assure safety in Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft with highly automated or autonomous flight capability supervised by a single onboard pilot. The work described in this report demonstrates an application of RTA and examines the implications for design and analysis of aircraft functions and systems; aircraft safety hazards; safety assurance; development assurance; and pilot tasks and performance. This research effort also seeks to assess the efficacy of the combined application of traditional Functional Hazard Analysis (FHA) and the more modern System Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) techniques to perform hazard analyses on aircraft with complex automated and autonomous systems and an onboard pilot. During the research effort we developed architectural designs of two alternate eVTOL aircraft, generally following the process characterized in the SAE standards ARP4754 and ARP4761. The design has focused on the control architectures of these aircraft, which are identical except that one incorporates RTA techniques to reduce the criticality of some key software components. Artifacts of this process include a taxonomy of aircraft-level functions, aircraft-level architecture diagrams, aircraft-level functional hazard assessments (AFHA), function allocations onto aircraft systems and subsystems, functional block diagrams for a select set of control-related functions, and system-level functional hazard assessments (SFHA) for those functions. This project has highlighted the notion that DAL D is something of a sweet spot for low-confidence controllers in an RTA-based design. Among the many activities described in DO-178C, the activities related to requirement verifiability, algorithmic accuracy, and test coverage can be the most challenging for the kinds of advanced control techniques that may be desirable in novel UAM designs, such as adaptive control, machine-learning, artificial intelligence, numerical search, and Monte Carlo based algorithms. Moreover, the standard requires that development teams demonstrate that errors leading to unacceptable failure conditions have been removed from the software. The RTA architecture, which cordons off the low-confidence function, makes it much easier to show this for these kinds of algorithms. With regard to the use of STPA and FHA as complementary hazard analysis techniques, our research effort led us to the conclusion that STPA should be used to derive requirements for hardware and software systems and/or components. Also, STPA is a natural complement to other processes in ARP4754A involving design studies and iteration.

Run-time assurance↗

Advanced Air Bag Technology Assessment

As a result of the concern for the growing number of air-bag-induced injuries and fatalities, the administrators of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) agreed to a cooperative effort that "leverages NHTSA's expertise in motor vehicle safety restraint systems and biomechanics with NASAs position as one of the leaders in advanced technology development... to enable the state of air bag safety technology to advance at a faster pace..." They signed a NASA/NHTSA memorandum of understanding for NASA to "evaluate air bag to assess advanced air bag performance, establish the technological potential for improved technology (smart) air bag systems, and identify key expertise and technology within the agency (i.e., NASA) that can potentially contribute significantly to the improved effectiveness of air bags." NASA is committed to contributing to NHTSAs effort to: (1) understand and define critical parameters affecting air bag performance; (2) systematically assess air bag technology state of the art and its future potential; and (3) identify new concepts for air bag systems. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) was selected by NASA to respond to the memorandum of understanding by conducting an advanced air bag technology assessment. JPL analyzed the nature of the need for occupant restraint, how air bags operate alone and with safety belts to provide restraint, and the potential hazards introduced by the technology. This analysis yielded a set of critical parameters for restraint systems. The researchers examined data on the performance of current air bag technology, and searched for and assessed how new technologies could reduce the hazards introduced by air bags while providing the restraint protection that is their primary purpose. The critical parameters which were derived are: (1) the crash severity; (2) the use of seat belts; (3) the physical characteristics of the occupants; (4) the proximity of the occupants to the airbag module; (5) the deployment time, which includes the time to sense the need for deployment, the inflator response parameters, the air bag response, and the reliability of the air bag. The requirements for an advanced air bag technology is discussed. These requirements includes that the system use information related to: (1) the crash severity; (2) the status of belt usage; (3) the occupant category; and (4) the proximity to the air bag to adjust air bag deployment. The parameters for the response of the air bag are: (1) deployment time; (2) inflator parameters; and (3) air bag response and reliability. The state of occupant protection advanced technology is reviewed. This review includes: the current safety restraint systems, and advanced technology characteristics. These characteristics are summarized in a table, which has information regarding the technology item, the potential, and an date of expected utilization. The use of technology and expertise at NASA centers is discussed. NASA expertise relating to sensors, computing, simulation, propellants, propulsion, inflatable systems, systems analysis and engineering is considered most useful. Specific NASA technology developments, which were included in the study are: (1) a capacitive detector; (2) stereoscopic vision system; (3) improved crash sensors; (4) the use of the acoustic signature of the crash to determine crash severity; and (5) the use of radar antenna for pre-crash sensing. Information relating to injury risk assessment is included, as is a summary of the areas of the technology which requires further development.

Phen, R. L.↗

Addressing Unison and Uniqueness of Reliability and Safety for Better Integration

For a long time, both in theory and in practice, safety and reliability have not been clearly differentiated, which leads to confusion, inefficiency, and sometime counter-productive practices in executing each of these two disciplines. It is imperative to address the uniqueness and the unison of these two disciplines to help both disciplines become more effective and to promote a better integration of the two for enhancing safety and reliability in our products as an overall objective. There are two purposes of this paper. First, it will investigate the uniqueness and unison of each discipline and discuss the interrelationship between the two for awareness and clarification. Second, after clearly understanding the unique roles and interrelationship between the two in a product design and development life cycle, we offer suggestions to enhance the disciplines with distinguished and focused roles, to better integrate the two, and to improve unique sets of skills and tools of reliability and safety processes. From the uniqueness aspect, the paper identifies and discusses the respective uniqueness of reliability and safety from their roles, accountability, nature of requirements, technical scopes, detailed technical approaches, and analysis boundaries. It is misleading to equate unreliable to unsafe, since a safety hazard may or may not be related to the component, sub-system, or system functions, which are primarily what reliability addresses. Similarly, failing-to-function may or may not lead to hazard events. Examples will be given in the paper from aerospace, defense, and consumer products to illustrate the uniqueness and differences between reliability and safety. From the unison aspect, the paper discusses what the commonalities between reliability and safety are, and how these two disciplines are linked, integrated, and supplemented with each other to accomplish the customer requirements and product goals. In addition to understanding the uniqueness in reliability and safety, a better understanding of unison and commonalities will further help in understanding the interaction between reliability and safety. This paper discusses the unison and uniqueness of reliability and safety. It presents some suggestions for better integration of the two disciplines in terms of technical approaches, tools, techniques, and skills to enhance the role of reliability and safety in supporting a product design and development life cycle. The paper also discusses eliminating the redundant effort and minimizing the overlap of reliability and safety analyses for an efficient implementation of the two disciplines.

Huang, Zhaofeng↗

Hydrogen Plus Other Alternative Fuels Risk Assessment Models (HyRAM+) Version 5.1 Technical Reference Manual

The HyRAM+ software toolkit provides a basis for conducting quantitative risk assessment and consequence modeling for hydrogen, natural gas, and autogas systems. HyRAM+ is designed to facilitate the use of state-of-the-art models to conduct robust, repeatable assessments of safety, hazards, and risk. HyRAM+ integrates deterministic and probabilistic models for quantifying leak sizes and rates, predicting physical effects, characterizing hazards (thermal effects from jet fires, overpressure effects from delayed ignition), and assessing impacts on people. HyRAM+ is developed at Sandia National Laboratories to support the development and revision of national and international codes and standards, and to provide developed models in a publicly-accessible toolkit usable by all stakeholders. This document provides a description of the methodology and models contained in HyRAM+ version 5.1. The most significant changes for HyRAM+ version 5.1 from HyRAM+ version 5.0 are updated default leak frequency values for propane, new default component counts for different fuel types, and an improved fuel specification view in the graphical user interface.

02 PETROLEUM↗

Humming Trains in Seismology: An Opportune Source for Probing the Shallow Crust

Abstract Seismologists are eagerly seeking new and preferably low-cost ways to map and track changes in the complex structure of the top few kilometers of the crust. By understanding it better, they can build on what is known regarding important, practical issues. These include telling us whether imminent earthquakes and volcanic eruptions are generating telltale underground signs of hazard, about mitigation of induced seismicity such as from deep injection of wastewater, how the Earth and its atmosphere couple, and where accessible natural resources are. Passive seismic imaging usually relies on blind correlations within extended recordings of Earth’s ceaseless “hum” or coda of well-mixed, small vibrations. In this article, we propose a complementary approach. It is seismic interferometry using opportune sources—specifically ones not stationary in time and moving in a well-understood configuration. Its interpretation relies on an accurate understanding of how these sources radiate seismic waves, precise timing, careful placement of pairs of listening stations, and seismic phase differentiation (surface and body waves). Massive freight trains were only recently recognized as such a persistent, powerful cultural (human activity-caused) seismic source. One train passage may generate a tremor with an energy output of a magnitude 1 earthquake and be detectable for up to 100 km from the track. We discuss the source mechanisms of train tremors and review the basic theory on sources. Finally, we present case studies of body- and surface-wave retrieval as an aid to mineral exploration in Canada and to monitoring of a southern California fault zone. We believe noise recovery from this new signal source, together with dense data acquisition technologies such as nodes or distributed acoustic sensing, will deeply transform our ability to monitor activity in the shallow crust at sharpened resolution in time and space.

Geochemistry & Geophysics↗

INL Environmental Monitoring Plan (DOE/ID-11088 Rev. 5)

This plan provides a high-level summary of environmental monitoring performed by various organizations within and around the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Site as required by U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, Guide DOE/EH-0173T, Environmental Regulatory Guide for Radiological Effluent Monitoring and Environmental Surveillance, and in accordance with 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. The purpose of these orders is to 1) implement sound stewardship practices that protect the air, water, land, and other natural and cultural resources that may be impacted by DOE operations, and 2) to establish standards and requirements for the operations of DOE and DOE contractors with respect to protection of the environment and members of the public against undue risk from radiation. This plan describes the organizations responsible for conducting environmental monitoring across the INL Site, the rationale for monitoring, the types of media being monitored, where the monitoring is conducted, and where monitoring results can be obtained. Detailed monitoring procedures, program plans, or other governing documents used by contractors or agencies to implement requirements are referenced in this plan. This plan covers all planned monitoring and environmental surveillance. Non-routine activities such as special research studies and characterization of individual sites for environmental restoration are outside the scope of this plan.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Evaluation of Safety Standards for Fuel System and Fuel Container Integrity of Alternative Fuel Vehicles

There are two Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) in place that specify requirements for integrity of the fuel system and fuel container on compressed natural gas (CNG) fuel vehicles. These are FMVSS Nos. 303, “Fuel system integrity of compressed natural gas vehicles,” and FMVSS No. 304, “CNG fuel container integrity.” At this time, no FMVSS are defined for the fuel system and fuel container integrity of propane and liquefied natural gas (LNG) vehicles or fuel system integrity requirements for heavy-duty CNG vehicles on the road. However, there are voluntary industry design standards and best practices, as well as regulations defined in other countries. FMVSS No. 303 specifies requirements for the integrity of the CNG fuel system of light-duty vehicles and school buses, and FMVSS No. 304 specifies requirements for fuel container integrity on all CNG vehicles. FMVSS No. 304 applies to containers used for vehicle propulsion, whereas containers used to transport CNG and transportation of CNG containers are regulated by the DOT Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. FMVSS Nos. 303 and 304 are performance-based standards to consistently test and validate equipment and are not design restrictive. Despite the increasing number of natural gas and propane medium- and heavy-duty vehicles on the road, there are no FMVSS fuel system integrity requirements beyond light-duty and school buses for CNG vehicles and no FMVSS fuel system integrity requirements for propane vehicles. NHTSA is researching fuel system safety for medium- and heavy-duty natural gas and propane vehicles to update FMVSS Nos. 303 and 304. NHTSA is also researching current best practices and standards for high pressure fuel tanks in motor vehicles as they may apply to FMVSS No. 304.

30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗

SLS-SPEC-159 Cross-Program Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE) Revision D

This document is derived from the former National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Constellation Program (CxP) document CxP 70023, titled "The Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE), Revision C." The original document has been modified to represent updated Design Reference Missions (DRMs) for the NASA Exploration Systems Development (ESD) Programs. The DSNE completes environment-related specifications for architecture, system-level, and lower-tier documents by specifying the ranges of environmental conditions that must be accounted for by NASA ESD Programs. To assure clarity and consistency, and to prevent requirements documents from becoming cluttered with extensive amounts of technical material, natural environment specifications have been compiled into this document. The intent is to keep a unified specification for natural environments that each Program calls out for appropriate application. This document defines the natural environments parameter limits (maximum and minimum values, energy spectra, or precise model inputs, assumptions, model options, etc.), for all ESD Programs. These environments are developed by the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Natural Environments Branch (MSFC organization code: EV44). Many of the parameter limits are based on experience with previous programs, such as the Space Shuttle Program. The parameter limits contain no margin and are meant to be evaluated individually to ensure they are reasonable (i.e., do not apply unrealistic extreme-on-extreme conditions). The natural environments specifications in this document should be accounted for by robust design of the flight vehicle and support systems. However, it is understood that in some cases the Programs will find it more effective to account for portions of the environment ranges by operational mitigation or acceptance of risk in accordance with an appropriate program risk management plan and/or hazard analysis process. The DSNE is not intended as a definition of operational models or operational constraints, nor is it adequate, alone, for ground facilities which may have additional requirements (for example, building codes and local environmental constraints). "Natural environments," as the term is used here, refers to the environments that are not the result of intended human activity or intervention. It consists of a variety of external environmental factors (most of natural origin and a few of human origin) which impose restrictions or otherwise impact the development or operation of flight vehicles and destination surface systems. These natural environments include the following types of environments: Terrestrial environments at launch, abort, and normal landing sites (winds, temperatures, pressures, surface roughness, sea conditions, etc.); Space environments (ionizing radiation, orbital debris, meteoroids, thermosphere density, plasma, solar, Earth, and lunar-emitted thermal radiation, etc.); Destination environments (Lunar surface and orbital, Mars atmosphere and surface, near Earth asteroids, etc.). Many of the environmental specifications in this document are based on models, data, and environment descriptions contained in the CxP 70044, Constellation Program Natural Environment Definition for Design (NEDD). The NEDD provides additional detailed environment data and model descriptions to support analytical studies for ESD Programs. For background information on specific environments and their effects on spacecraft design and operations, the environment models, and the data used to generate the specifications contained in the DSNE, the reader is referred to the NEDD paragraphs listed in each section of the DSNE. Also, most of the environmental specifications in this document are tied specifically to the ESD DRMs in ESD-10012, Revision B, Exploration Systems Development Concept of Operations (ConOps). Coordination between these environment specifications and the DRMs must be maintained. This document should be compatible with the current ESD DRMs, but updates to the mission definitions and variations in interpretation may require adjustments to the environment specifications.

Roberts, Barry C.↗

SLS-SPEC-159 Cross-Program Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE) Revision E

The DSNE completes environment-related specifications for architecture, system-level, and lower-tier documents by specifying the ranges of environmental conditions that must be accounted for by NASA ESD Programs. To assure clarity and consistency, and to prevent requirements documents from becoming cluttered with extensive amounts of technical material, natural environment specifications have been compiled into this document. The intent is to keep a unified specification for natural environments that each Program calls out for appropriate application. This document defines the natural environments parameter limits (maximum and minimum values, energy spectra, or precise model inputs, assumptions, model options, etc.), for all ESD Programs. These environments are developed by the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Natural Environments Branch (MSFC organization code: EV44). Many of the parameter limits are based on experience with previous programs, such as the Space Shuttle Program. The parameter limits contain no margin and are meant to be evaluated individually to ensure they are reasonable (i.e., do not apply unrealistic extreme-on-extreme conditions). The natural environments specifications in this document should be accounted for by robust design of the flight vehicle and support systems. However, it is understood that in some cases the Programs will find it more effective to account for portions of the environment ranges by operational mitigation or acceptance of risk in accordance with an appropriate program risk management plan and/or hazard analysis process. The DSNE is not intended as a definition of operational models or operational constraints, nor is it adequate, alone, for ground facilities which may have additional requirements (for example, building codes and local environmental constraints). "Natural environments," as the term is used here, refers to the environments that are not the result of intended human activity or intervention. It consists of a variety of external environmental factors (most of natural origin and a few of human origin) which impose restrictions or otherwise impact the development or operation of flight vehicles and destination surface systems.

Roberts, Barry C.↗

Natural Language Processing Techniques for Intelligent Knowledge Management of Safety Reports

Safety, failure, and incident reports are common artifacts across various domains, including aviation and wildfire response. These reports are often mandatory to submit, resulting in the culmination of large repositories of text-based documents. Simultaneously, these reports and corresponding repositories are often only manually analyzed and queried by users via out-of-date search engines. As a consequence, we have been developing the Manager for Intelligent Knowledge Access (MIKA) toolkit, which uses natural language processing to improve information access and reuse. In this presentation, we discuss natural language processing techniques for knowledge discovery and apply these methods to a repository of aerial wildfire mishap reports. Two methods are used for knowledge discovery: topic modeling and named-entity recognition. We use topic modeling to identify hazards and perform a trend analysis to produce a data-driven risk matrix. A custom named-entity recognition model, build from fine tuning a pre-trained language model, is used to identify failure modes, failure causes, failure effects, control processes, and recommendations to aid in failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA). Throughout the presentation, we discuss and apply natural language processing techniques to better leverage the vast amount of information contained in report repositories.

Machine learning↗

The Hazards Posed by Mesoscale Lightning Megaflashes

Lightning megaflashes extending over >100-km distances have been observed by the Geostationary Lightning Mappers (GLMs) on NOAA’s R-series Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites (GOES). The hazards posed by megaflashes are unclear, however, because of limitations in the GLM data. We address these by reprocessing GOES-16 GLM measurements from 1 January 2018 to 15 January 2020 and integrating them with Earth Networks Global Lightning Network (ENGLN) observations. ENGLN verified 194 880 GLM megaflashes as natural lightning. Of these, 127 479 flashes occurred following the October 2018 GLM software update that standardized GLM timing. Reprocessed GLM/ENGLN lightning maps from these postupdate cases provide a comprehensive view of how individual megaflashes evolve. This megaflash dataset is used to generate statistics that describe their hazards. The average megaflash produces 5–7 cloud-to-ground (CG) strokes that are spread across 40%–50% of the flash extent. As flash extent increases beyond 100 km, megaflashes become concentrated in key hot-spot regions in North and South America while the number of CG and intracloud events per flash and the overall peak current increase. CGs in the larger megaflashes occur over 80% of the flash extent measured by GLM, and the majority contain regions where the megaflash is the only lightning activity in the preceding hour. These statistics demonstrate that there is no safe location below an electrified cloud that is producing megaflashes, and current lightning safety guidance is not always sufficient to mitigate megaflash hazards.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

High-performance visible/UV CCD focal plane technology for spacebased applications

We describe recent technology developments aimed at large CCD imagers for space based applications in the visible and UV. Some of the principal areas of effort include work on reducing device degradation in the natural space-radiation environment, improvements in quantum efficiency in the visible and UV, and larger-device formats. One of the most serious hazards for space based CCD's operating at low signal levels is the displacement damage resulting from bombardment by energetic protons. Such damage degrades charge-transfer efficiency and increases dark current. We have achieved improved hardness to proton-induced displacement damage by selective ion implants into the CCD channel and by reduced temperature of operation. To attain high quantum efficiency across the visible and UV we have developed a technology for back-illuminated CCD's. With suitable antireflection (AR) coatings such devices have quantum efficiencies near 90 percent in the 500-700-nm band. In the UV band from 200 to 400 nm, where it is difficult to find coatings that are sufficiently transparent and can provide good matching to the high refractive index of silicon, we have been able to substantially increase the quantum efficiency using a thin film of HfO2 as an AR coating. These technology efforts were applied to a 420 x 420-pixel frame-transfer imager, and future work will be extended to a 1024 x 1024-pixel device now under development.

Burke, B. E.↗

Galactic cosmic ray composition and energy spectra

Galactic cosmic ray nuclei represent a significant risk to long-duration spaceflight outside the magnetosphere. We review briefly existing measurements of the composition and energy spectra of heavy cosmic ray nuclei, pointing out which species and energy ranges are most critical to assessing cosmic ray risks for spaceflight. Key data sets are identified and a table of cosmic ray abundances is presented for elements from H to Ni (Z = 1 to 28). Because of the 22-year nature of the solar modulation cycle, data from the approaching 1998 solar minimum is especially important to reducing uncertainties in the cosmic ray radiation hazard. It is recommended that efforts to model this hazard take advantage of approaches that have been developed to model the astrophysical aspects of cosmic rays.

Mewaldt, R. A.↗

International Space Station (ISS) Low Pressure Intramodule Quick Disconnect Failures

A failure of an ISS intermodule Quick Disconnect (QD) during protoflight vibration testing of ISS regenerative Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) hardware led to the discovery of QD design, manufacturing, and test flaws which can yield the male QD susceptible to failure of the secondary housing seal and inadequate housing assembly locking mechanisms. Discovery of this failure had large implications when considering that currently there are 399 similar units on orbit and approximately 1100 units on the ground integrated into flight hardware. Discovery of the nature of the failure required testing and analysis and implementation of a recovery plan requiring part screening and review of element level and project hazard analysis to determine if secondary seals are required. Implementation also involves coordination with the Nodes and MPLM project offices, Regenerative ECLS Project, ISS Payloads, JAXA, ESA, and ISS Logistics and Maintenance.

Lewis, John F.↗

Land Use Planning

Computer technology, aerial photography and space imagery are being combined in a NASA community services program designed to help solve land use and natural resource planning problems. As urban areas grow, so grows the need for comprehensive, up-to-date information on which to base intelligent decisions regarding land use. State and local planners need information such as the nature of urban change, where the changes are occurring, how they affect public safety, transportation, the economy, tax assessment, sewer systems, water quality, flood hazard, noise impact and a great variety of other considerations. Most importantly they need continually updated maps. Preparing timely maps, gathering the essential data and maintaining it in orderly fashion are becoming matters of increasing difficulty. The NASA project, which has nationwide potential for improving efficiency in the planning process, is a pilot program focused on Tacoma, Washington and surrounding Pierce County. Its key element, developed by Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), is a computerized Land Use Management Information System (LUMIS).

Source record↗