Results for “library design” — Page 30

NASA NTRS1992

STELAR: An experiment in the electronic distribution of astronomical literature

STELAR (Study of Electronic Literature for Astronomical Research) is a Goddard-based project designed to test methods of delivering technical literature in machine readable form. To that end, we have scanned a five year span of the ApJ, ApJ Supp, AJ and PASP, and have obtained abstracts for eight leading academic journals from NASA/STI CASI, which also makes these abstracts available through the NASA RECON system. We have also obtained machine readable versions of some journal volumes from the publishers, although in many instances, the final typeset versions are no longer available. The fundamental data object for the STELAR database is the article, a collection of items associated with a scientific paper - abstract, scanned pages (in a variety of formats), figures, OCR extractions, forward and backward references, errata and versions of the paper in various formats (e.g., TEX, SGML, PostScript, DVI). Articles are uniquely referenced in the database by journal name, volume number and page number. The selection and delivery of articles is accomplished through the WAIS (Wide Area Information Server) client/server models requiring only an Internet connection. Modest modifications to the server code have made it capable of delivering the multiple data types required by STELAR. WAIS is a platform independent and fully open multi-disciplinary delivery system, originally developed by Thinking Machines Corp. and made available free of charge. It is based on the ISO Z39.50 standard communications protocol. WAIS servers run under both UNIX and VMS. WAIS clients run on a wide variety of machines, from UNIX-based Xwindows systems to MS-DOS and macintosh microcomputers. The WAIS system includes full-test indexing and searching of documents, network interface and easy access to a variety of document viewers. ASCII versions of the CASI abstracts have been formatted for display and the full test of the abstracts has been indexed. The entire WAIS database of abstracts is now available for use by the astronomical community. Enhancements of the search and retrieval system are under investigation to include specialized searches (by reference, author or keyword, as opposed to full test searches), improved handling of word stems, improvements in relevancy criteria and other retrieval techniques, such as factor spaces. The STELAR project has been assisted by the full cooperation of the AAS, the ASP, the publishers of the academic journals, librarians from GSFC, NRAO and STScI, the Library of Congress, and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Warnock, A.↗

NASA NTRS1994

A Navier-Strokes Chimera Code on the Connection Machine CM-5: Design and Performance

We have implemented a three-dimensional compressible Navier-Stokes code on the Connection Machine CM-5. The code is set up for implicit time-stepping on single or multiple structured grids. For multiple grids and geometrically complex problems, we follow the 'chimera' approach, where flow data on one zone is interpolated onto another in the region of overlap. We will describe our design philosophy and give some timing results for the current code. A parallel machine like the CM-5 is well-suited for finite-difference methods on structured grids. The regular pattern of connections of a structured mesh maps well onto the architecture of the machine. So the first design choice, finite differences on a structured mesh, is natural. We use centered differences in space, with added artificial dissipation terms. When numerically solving the Navier-Stokes equations, there are liable to be some mesh cells near a solid body that are small in at least one direction. This mesh cell geometry can impose a very severe CFL (Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy) condition on the time step for explicit time-stepping methods. Thus, though explicit time-stepping is well-suited to the architecture of the machine, we have adopted implicit time-stepping. We have further taken the approximate factorization approach. This creates the need to solve large banded linear systems and creates the first possible barrier to an efficient algorithm. To overcome this first possible barrier we have considered two options. The first is just to solve the banded linear systems with data spread over the whole machine, using whatever fast method is available. This option is adequate for solving scalar tridiagonal systems, but for scalar pentadiagonal or block tridiagonal systems it is somewhat slower than desired. The second option is to 'transpose' the flow and geometry variables as part of the time-stepping process: Start with x-lines of data in-processor. Form explicit terms in x, then transpose so y-lines of data are in-processor. Form explicit terms in y, then transpose so z-lines are in processor. Form explicit terms in z, then solve linear systems in the z-direction. Transpose to the y-direction, then solve linear systems in the y-direction. Finally transpose to the x direction and solve linear systems in the x-direction. This strategy avoids inter-processor communication when differencing and solving linear systems, but requires a large amount of communication when doing the transposes. The transpose method is more efficient than the non-transpose strategy when dealing with scalar pentadiagonal or block tridiagonal systems. For handling geometrically complex problems the chimera strategy was adopted. For multiple zone cases we compute on each zone sequentially (using the whole parallel machine), then send the chimera interpolation data to a distributed data structure (array) laid out over the whole machine. This information transfer implies an irregular communication pattern, and is the second possible barrier to an efficient algorithm. We have implemented these ideas on the CM-5 using CMF (Connection Machine Fortran), a data parallel language which combines elements of Fortran 90 and certain extensions, and which bears a strong similarity to High Performance Fortran. We make use of the Connection Machine Scientific Software Library (CMSSL) for the linear solver and array transpose operations.

Jespersen, Dennis C.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lunar Science Investigations and Exploration in Celestial Mapping System

Introduction: As NASA expands the mission portfolio on the lunar surface, there is a need for applications with a broad range of analytical and functional capabilities that can be simultaneously deployed onto multiple mobile and desktop platforms to perform in-situ operations and hence enabling extensive Lunar exploration. Celestial Mapping System (CMS) [1,2] is developed to address the need for tools for science investigations, mission planning, operations and support for planetary sciences. Built on top of NASA WorldWind libraries, CMS can be simultaneously deployed onto multiple platforms, has the flexibility to update to the latest imagery and terrain datasets as they are being acquired (in real time) before and/or during the exploration mission and has the potential to enable traverse path planning suited for rovers, EVA and surface mobility units. It can provide critical functionalities such as equipment planning and optimized placement on Lunar surface, line of sight analysis to inform the coverage area for various equipment, powerful measurement tools based on 3D terrain, 3D COLLADA models to represent rovers, humans and equipment, visualization of derived mapping products (e.g. resource maps), and a data engine for hosting new observations that are not available in other contemporary lunar data tools [1]. Visualization of PSRs: The current presentation focuses on the work performed by the authors, to consume a unique dataset of super-enhanced images of the permanently shadowed regions (PSRs) at the lunar poles which were produced by the Hyper-effective nOise Removal U-net Software (HORUS) tool [3]. This tool was developed in direct support of NASA's VIPER and Artemis programs to enhance the extremely low-light images of the interior of PSRs and provide the first-time ability to see within these regions at and discern surface features (i.e. boulders and craters) down to 3 meters in size. We focused on the region near Nobili crater near Lunar south pole, selected site for VIPER mission and stitched several images to create a high-resolution map within one of the PSR of Nobile crater. Line of Sight Analysis and Traverse Planning in PSRs: We have developed an in-built line of sight analysis (LOS) tool in CMS that analyzes the terrain profile and obstructions and provides the visibility of a given terrain for a remote observer. This tool was utilized to perform viewshed analysis to investigate the area inside the PSR, a remote observer such as a rover could see without actually crossing the region. Figure 1 shows the viewshed analysis on the PSR in Nobile region. The yellow pin shows the observer location outside the PSR. The yellow area shows the visible part of PSR. The obstructed area with no visibility for the observer is shown in red. Figure 1: (left) PSR image on top of a high-resolution mosaic of sunlit images of a crater, in Nobile region (right) Viewshed Analysis of the same PSR with observer location shown by yellow pin. This analysis was extended further to set different heights for various observers and then perform the viewshed analysis. Combining the different visibility profiles can help designing improved traverses within the crater. Future plans: Eventually, HORUS datasets will be integrated into CMS as a layer in selected lunar polar regions. Hazard Maps will then be created based on terrain analysis in those regions. This integration will enable multiple scientific and exploration applications, such as designing traverses within PSRs, analyzing potential landing and science mission targets, investigating the meter-scale geomorphology of PSRs, including craters, boulder, surface roughness, mass wasting features and other indications of the presence of water-ice and other volatiles. Acknowledgments: CMS developers team including Kaitlyn J. Dickinson, Tyler A. Lucarz, Tyler W. Choi from USRA, NASA WorldWind Advisory team including Mark Peterson and Guillermo Miguel Del Castillo, HORUS team member V.T. Bickel, Robinson, M., LRO MOON LROC 2 EDR V1.0, LRO-L-LROC-2-EDR-V1.0, NASA Planetary Data System (PDS), 2009. https://doi.org/10.17189/1520643 References: [1] https://celestial.arc.nasa.gov [2] Agrawal et. al. “Celestial Mapping System for Lunar Surface Mapping and Analytics”, Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium, 2021 [3] Bickel V. et al. (2021) Nat Commun 12, 5607

Lunar Mapping↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Delay Tolerant Networks: Operational, Evolving, an Ready for Expansion

The future of humanity’s presence beyond Earth depends on the successful commercialization of space. For commercialization to succeed, companies need cost-efficient architectures to support their business models and minimize risks for human capital, design, development, and operations. An ongoing challenge to any space enterprise is the reality that terrestrial network technologies are insufficient to provide reliable communications between assets in space. Whether you need to ensure your valuable data is safely transmitted to the ground or reliably delivered between platforms in orbit, ensuring data integrity over intermittent communication links is a necessity. Current solutions to space communications rely heavily on manual recording, storing, and retrieval of data from spacecraft. The current standard in space communication protocols, Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) Space Packet standard, is reliant on inflexible network architectures based around mission-critical infrastructure to ensure data delivery. However, by automating the recording, storing, retrieval, and verification of data with Delay Tolerant Networks (DTN), the operator is freed from the dependence on manual data management and expensive mission critical infrastructure. NASA has been developing delay tolerant systems since the late 1990’s. Multiple DTN implementations have been established during that time, each suited to different use cases. Most notably, the DTN deployment for the International Space Station (ISS) includes demonstration of two DTN technologies: Interplanetary Overlay Network (ION) and Delay Tolerant Network Marshall Enterprise (DTNME). Beyond ISS, there are even more NASA DTN deployments being considered. Now that DTN implementations are maturing, it is appropriate to reflect upon these decades of work, review the integration and performance of the existing ISS deployment, and explore the future possibilities for DTN deployment industry-wide. The ISS DTN deployment is a complex architecture consisting of different DTN implementations for the onboard and ground network environments. The ION DTN implementation is being used in the on-board network. The Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) DTN implementation, DTNME, is used by the ground network supporting ISS and will soon be a second onboard gateway too. The two implementations work cooperatively to provide high fidelity data services to flight operations users and payload developers across the globe. Though the two implementations yield a quality service, limitations are evident. Data rate, data storage, and device management are constrained by the services themselves and the complex nature of the deployment. Evolution of operations concepts will improve system capabilities and stability, but significant improvement will require additional development to the implementations themselves and to the overall deployment architecture. Taking advantage of the ongoing development and operation of the ISS DTN service will be central to the success of the future evolutions of NASA DTN deployments while demonstrating the benefits of DTN’s low-cost reliable data communication protocols for the growing commercial space industry. A broad effort on DTN integration and support is necessary to promote expansion beyond existing applications. NASA is developing several useful DTN implementations across a number of different systems: ION, DTNME, High-Rate DTN (HDTN), Bundle Protocol Library (BPLib), and others. To prevent fragmentation, DTN implementation teams need to communicate, collaborate, and integrate with one another to build a solid operational foundation for new DTN deployments. The establishment of a group that can assist new DTN users with understanding the purpose of each DTN implementation, provide best practices, and serve as a general knowledge base is paramount. Potential use of DTN on Gateway and other future NASA missions further drives the need for streamlined communication between DTN implementation teams. A well-integrated and highly engaged NASA DTN working group should help provide system architects the best DTN solutions for future commercial space efforts. This paper will first review the history of DTN implementations, explore the shortcoming of current space networking solutions given available limits in technology, and therefore establish the need for Delay Tolerant Networking in space communications. Secondly, the authors will explore NASA’s array of DTN implementations and highlight their usefulness to space applications. Thirdly, this paper will establish general DTN implementation distinguishing factors. Fourthly, the authors will discuss attempts to create a generic DTN comparison matrix, and the authors will review potential future topics in DTN innovation and collaboration, highlighting several key future efforts. Finally, this paper will describe how the institution of a NASA DTN Working Group will benefit DTN adoption across the governmental and commercial space sector. The goal of this paper is to encourage enthusiasm for DTN, share strategies for improving DTN on both current and future applications, promote the collaboration of DTN implementation groups within the international space operations community, and open the conversations about DTN, priorities, complexities, and innovation to the wider spaceflight industry.

DTN↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Delay Tolerant Networks: Operational, Evolving, an Ready for Expansion

The future of humanity’s presence beyond Earth depends on the successful commercialization of space. For commercialization to succeed, companies need cost-efficient architectures to support their business models and minimize risks for human capital, design, development, and operations. An ongoing challenge to any space enterprise is the reality that terrestrial network technologies are insufficient to provide reliable communications between assets in space. Whether you need to ensure your valuable data is safely transmitted to the ground or reliably delivered between platforms in orbit, ensuring data integrity over intermittent communication links is a necessity. Current solutions to space communications rely heavily on manual recording, storing, and retrieval of data from spacecraft. The current standard in space communication protocols, Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) Space Packet standard, is reliant on inflexible network architectures based around mission-critical infrastructure to ensure data delivery. However, by automating the recording, storing, retrieval, and verification of data with Delay Tolerant Networks (DTN), the operator is freed from the dependence on manual data management and expensive mission critical infrastructure. NASA has been developing delay tolerant systems since the late 1990’s. Multiple DTN implementations have been established during that time, each suited to different use cases. Most notably, the DTN deployment for the International Space Station (ISS) includes demonstration of two DTN technologies: Interplanetary Overlay Network (ION) and Delay Tolerant Network Marshall Enterprise (DTNME). Beyond ISS, there are even more NASA DTN deployments being considered. Now that DTN implementations are maturing, it is appropriate to reflect upon these decades of work, review the integration and performance of the existing ISS deployment, and explore the future possibilities for DTN deployment industry-wide. The ISS DTN deployment is a complex architecture consisting of different DTN implementations for the onboard and ground network environments. The ION DTN implementation is being used in the on-board network. The Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) DTN implementation, DTNME, is used by the ground network supporting ISS and will soon be a second onboard gateway too. The two implementations work cooperatively to provide high fidelity data services to flight operations users and payload developers across the globe. Though the two implementations yield a quality service, limitations are evident. Data rate, data storage, and device management are constrained by the services themselves and the complex nature of the deployment. Evolution of operations concepts will improve system capabilities and stability, but significant improvement will require additional development to the implementations themselves and to the overall deployment architecture. Taking advantage of the ongoing development and operation of the ISS DTN service will be central to the success of the future evolutions of NASA DTN deployments while demonstrating the benefits of DTN’s low-cost reliable data communication protocols for the growing commercial space industry. A broad effort on DTN integration and support is necessary to promote expansion beyond existing applications. NASA is developing several useful DTN implementations across a number of different systems: ION, DTNME, High-Rate DTN (HDTN), Bundle Protocol Library (BPLib), and others. To prevent fragmentation, DTN implementation teams need to communicate, collaborate, and integrate with one another to build a solid operational foundation for new DTN deployments. The establishment of a group that can assist new DTN users with understanding the purpose of each DTN implementation, provide best practices, and serve as a general knowledge base is paramount. Potential use of DTN on Gateway and other future NASA missions further drives the need for streamlined communication between DTN implementation teams. A well-integrated and highly engaged NASA DTN working group should help provide system architects the best DTN solutions for future commercial space efforts. This paper will first review the history of DTN implementations, explore the shortcoming of current space networking solutions given available limits in technology, and therefore establish the need for Delay Tolerant Networking in space communications. Secondly, the authors will explore NASA’s array of DTN implementations and highlight their usefulness to space applications. Thirdly, this paper will establish general DTN implementation distinguishing factors. Fourthly, the authors will discuss attempts to create a generic DTN comparison matrix, and the authors will review potential future topics in DTN innovation and collaboration, highlighting several key future efforts. Finally, this paper will describe how the institution of a NASA DTN Working Group will benefit DTN adoption across the governmental and commercial space sector. The goal of this paper is to encourage enthusiasm for DTN, share strategies for improving DTN on both current and future applications, promote the collaboration of DTN implementation groups within the international space operations community, and open the conversations about DTN, priorities, complexities, and innovation to the wider spaceflight industry.

DTN↗

NASA NTRS1997

Cooperative Data Sharing: Simple Support for Clusters of SMP Nodes

Libraries like PVM and MPI send typed messages to allow for heterogeneous cluster computing. Lower-level libraries, such as GAM, provide more efficient access to communication by removing the need to copy messages between the interface and user space in some cases. still lower-level interfaces, such as UNET, get right down to the hardware level to provide maximum performance. However, these are all still interfaces for passing messages from one process to another, and have limited utility in a shared-memory environment, due primarily to the fact that message passing is just another term for copying. This drawback is made more pertinent by today's hybrid architectures (e.g. clusters of SMPs), where it is difficult to know beforehand whether two communicating processes will share memory. As a result, even portable language tools (like HPF compilers) must either map all interprocess communication, into message passing with the accompanying performance degradation in shared memory environments, or they must check each communication at run-time and implement the shared-memory case separately for efficiency. Cooperative Data Sharing (CDS) is a single user-level API which abstracts all communication between processes into the sharing and access coordination of memory regions, in a model which might be described as "distributed shared messages" or "large-grain distributed shared memory". As a result, the user programs to a simple latency-tolerant abstract communication specification which can be mapped efficiently to either a shared-memory or message-passing based run-time system, depending upon the available architecture. Unlike some distributed shared memory interfaces, the user still has complete control over the assignment of data to processors, the forwarding of data to its next likely destination, and the queuing of data until it is needed, so even the relatively high latency present in clusters can be accomodated. CDS does not require special use of an MMU, which can add overhead to some DSM systems, and does not require an SPMD programming model. unlike some message-passing interfaces, CDS allows the user to implement efficient demand-driven applications where processes must "fight" over data, and does not perform copying if processes share memory and do not attempt concurrent writes. CDS also supports heterogeneous computing, dynamic process creation, handlers, and a very simple thread-arbitration mechanism. Additional support for array subsections is currently being considered. The CDS1 API, which forms the kernel of CDS, is built primarily upon only 2 communication primitives, one process initiation primitive, and some data translation (and marshalling) routines, memory allocation routines, and priority control routines. The entire current collection of 28 routines provides enough functionality to implement most (or all) of MPI 1 and 2, which has a much larger interface consisting of hundreds of routines. still, the API is small enough to consider integrating into standard os interfaces for handling inter-process communication in a network-independent way. This approach would also help to solve many of the problems plaguing other higher-level standards such as MPI and PVM which must, in some cases, "play OS" to adequately address progress and process control issues. The CDS2 API, a higher level of interface roughly equivalent in functionality to MPI and to be built entirely upon CDS1, is still being designed. It is intended to add support for the equivalent of communicators, reduction and other collective operations, process topologies, additional support for process creation, and some automatic memory management. CDS2 will not exactly match MPI, because the copy-free semantics of communication from CDS1 will be supported. CDS2 application programs will be free to carefully also use CDS1. CDS1 has been implemented on networks of workstations running unmodified Unix-based operating systems, using UDP/IP and vendor-supplied high- performance locks. Although its inter-node performance is currently unimpressive due to rudimentary implementation technique, it even now outperforms highly-optimized MPI implementation on intra-node communication due to its support for non-copy communication. The similarity of the CDS1 architecture to that of other projects such as UNET and TRAP suggests that the inter-node performance can be increased significantly to surpass MPI or PVM, and it may be possible to migrate some of its functionality to communication controllers.

DiNucci, David C.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Use of Generalized Fluid System Simulation Program (GFSSP) for Teaching and Performing Senior Design Projects at the Educational Institutions

This paper describes the experience of the authors in using the Generalized Fluid System Simulation Program (GFSSP) in teaching Design of Thermal Systems class at University of Alabama in Huntsville. GFSSP is a finite volume based thermo-fluid system network analysis code, developed at NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center, and is extensively used in NASA, Department of Defense, and aerospace industries for propulsion system design, analysis, and performance evaluation. The educational version of GFSSP is freely available to all US higher education institutions. The main purpose of the paper is to illustrate the utilization of this user-friendly code for the thermal systems design and fluid engineering courses and to encourage the instructors to utilize the code for the class assignments as well as senior design projects. The need for a generalized computer program for thermofluid analysis in a flow network has been felt for a long time in aerospace industries. Designers of thermofluid systems often need to know pressures, temperatures, flow rates, concentrations, and heat transfer rates at different parts of a flow circuit for steady state or transient conditions. Such applications occur in propulsion systems for tank pressurization, internal flow analysis of rocket engine turbopumps, chilldown of cryogenic tanks and transfer lines, and many other applications of gas-liquid systems involving fluid transients and conjugate heat and mass transfer. Computer resource requirements to perform time-dependent, three-dimensional Navier-Stokes computational fluid dynamic (CFD) analysis of such systems are prohibitive and therefore are not practical. Available commercial codes are generally suitable for steady state, single-phase incompressible flow. Because of the proprietary nature of such codes, it is not possible to extend their capability to satisfy the above-mentioned needs. Therefore, the Generalized Fluid System Simulation Program (GFSSP1) has been developed at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) as a general fluid flow system solver capable of handling phase changes, compressibility, mixture thermodynamics and transient operations. It also includes the capability to model external body forces such as gravity and centrifugal effects in a complex flow network. The objectives of GFSSP development are: a) to develop a robust and efficient numerical algorithm to solve a system of equations describing a flow network containing phase changes, mixing, and rotation; and b) to implement the algorithm in a structured, easy-to-use computer program. The analysis of thermofluid dynamics in a complex network requires resolution of the system into fluid nodes and branches, and solid nodes and conductors as shown in Figure 1. Figure 1 shows a schematic and GFSSP flow circuit of a counter-flow heat exchanger. Hot nitrogen gas is flowing through a pipe, colder nitrogen is flowing counter to the hot stream in the annulus pipe and heat transfer occurs through metal tubes. The problem considered is to calculate flowrates and temperature distributions in both streams. GFSSP has a unique data structure, as shown in Figure 2, that allows constructing all possible arrangements of a flow network with no limit on the number of elements. The elements of a flow network are boundary nodes where pressure and temperature are specified, internal nodes where pressure and temperature are calculated, and branches where flowrates are calculated. For conjugate heat transfer problems, there are three additional elements: solid node, ambient node, and conductor. The solid and fluid nodes are connected with solid-fluid conductors. GFSSP solves the conservation equations of mass and energy, and equation of state in internal nodes to calculate pressure, temperature and resident mass. The momentum conservation equation is solved in branches to calculate flowrate. It also solves for energy conservation equations to calculate temperatures of solid nodes. The equations are coupled and nonlinear; therefore, they are solved by an iterative numerical scheme. GFSSP employs a unique numerical scheme known as simultaneous adjustment with successive substitution (SASS), which is a combination of Newton-Raphson and successive substitution methods. The mass and momentum conservation equations and the equation of state are solved by the Newton-Raphson method while the conservation of energy and species are solved by the successive substitution method. GFSSP is linked with two thermodynamic property programs, GASP2 and WASP3 and GASPAK4, that provide thermodynamic and thermophysical properties of selected fluids. Both programs cover a range of pressure and temperature that allows fluid properties to be evaluated for liquid, liquid-vapor (saturation), and vapor region. GASP and WASP provide properties of 12 fluids. GASPAK includes a library of 36 fluids. GFSSP has three major parts. The first part is the graphical user interface (GUI), visual thermofluid analyzer of systems and components (VTASC). VTASC allows users to create a flow circuit by a 'point and click' paradigm. It creates the GFSSP input file after the completion of the model building process. GFSSP's GUI provides the users a platform to build and run their models. It also allows post-processing of results. The network flow circuit is first built using three basic elements: boundary node, internal node, and branch.

Majumdar, A. K.↗