Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Network centrality”

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 577 records · Page 32

UASs in the VOG/Edge/FOG Sensor Web Environment

This paper will describe the evolution of information collection, derivation and delivery mechanisms in sensor webs utilizing Uninhabited Aerial Systems (UAS).We will discuss the movement to "Fog Computing", also known as Edge Computing. Fog Computing facilitates the distribution of common operations and networking between edge devices and cloud computing facilities, optimizing the production of actionable intelligence. Initially, UASs utilized onboard data collection as standard, with minimal data downloaded directly. Information products were derived in conventional computational environments, generally desk top computers, and information products made available to the Science Community in weeks or months. With the increased availability, and increasingly lower costs, of beyond line of sight (BLOS) satellite based communication, transmission rates and data volumes increased, and processing migrated to Cloud based services. Contemporary UASs are moving some of that information product derivation to on vehicle services, and are creating a distributed Cloud/Fog environment. The Author will describe the technological advances that have made this possible, including low power multi-core Central Processing Units (CPU), and, more recently, the availability of high end Graphical Processing Units (GPU) that consume only a few watts. Intelligent system software, leveraging these hardware advances, finally allows for information product generation on-board, rather than simple data collection. Additionally, intelligent flight control systems now support mutual vehicle to vehicle collaboration, allowing UASs to create ad-hoc sensor webs on demand, as required. Also discussed will be the lessons learned by the Authors' development of data systems for NASA's large High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE) UASs like Predator and Global Hawk, and how those lessons are being applied to other UAS development This paper will focus on applications, rather a deep dive into the technology, and will highlight improving data management through these new technologies.

UAS↗

Service offerings and interfaces for the ACTS network of Earth stations

The Advanced Communications Satellite (ACTS) is capable of two modes of communication. Mode 1 is a mesh network of Earth stations using baseband-switched, time-division multiple-access (BBS-TDMA) and hopping beams. Mode 2 is a mesh network using satellite-switched, time-division multiple-access (SS-TDMA) and fixed (or hopping) beams. The purpose of this paper is to present the functional requirements and the design of the ACTS Mode 1 Earth station terrestrial interface. Included among the requirements are that: (1) the interface support standard telecommunications service offerings (i.e., voice, video and data at rates ranging from 9.6 kbps to 44 Mbps); (2) the interface support the unique design characteristics of the ACTS communications systems (e.g., the real time demand assignment of satellite capacity); and (3) the interface support test hardware capable of validating ACTS communications processes. The resulting interface design makes use of an appropriate combination of T1 or T3 multiplexers and a small central office (maximum capacity 56 subscriber lines per unit).

Coney, Thom A.↗

Full Mesh Audio Conferencing Using the Point-to-Multipoint On-Board Switching Capability of ACTS

The purpose of this paper is to describe an implementation of audio conferencing using the ACTS T1-VSAT network. In particular, this implementation evaluates the use of the on-board switching capability of the satellite as a viable alternative for providing the multipoint connectivity normally provided by terrestrial audio bridge equipment The system that was implemented provides full mesh, full-duplex audio conferencing, with end-to-end voice paths between all participants requiring only a single hop (i.e. 250 msec. delay). Moreover, it addresses the lack of spontaneity in current systems by allowing a user to easily start a conference from any standard telephone handset connected to an ACTS earth station, and quickly add new members to the conference at any time using the 'hook flash' capability. No prior scheduling of resources is required and there is no central point of control, thereby providing the user with the spontaneity desired in audio conference control.

Rivett, Mary L.↗

Temporal Evolution of SL-9 Impact Sites on Jupiter and Global Maps of Jupiter from Multi-Observatory Visible and Infrared Images

The objective of this research was to investigate the temporal behavior of the impact features on Jupiter created by the fragments of the Shoemaker Levy-9 comet that collided with the planet in July 1994. The primary observations used in the study were ground based images of Jupiter acquired from the Swedish Solar Vacuum Tube on the island of La Palma in the Canary Islands. The measurement of position of the impact features in images acquired immediately after the impact over a period of a few days revealed that the apparent drift rates were too high and that a repetitive pattern could be seen in the longitude position on successive rotations. This could be explained only by the fact that the measured longitudes of the impact sites were being affected by parallax due to a significant elevation of the impact debris above the nominal cloud top altitude value used for image navigation. Once the apparent positions are analyzed as a function of the meridian angle, the parallax equation can be used to infer the height of the impact features above the cloud deck, once the true impact position (longitude) for the feature is known. Due to their inherent high spatial resolution, the HST measurements of the impact site locations have been accepted widely. However, these suffer from the parallax themselves since few of them were obtained at central meridian. Ground based imaging have the potential to improve this knowledge as they do observe most of the impact sites on either side of the central meridian, except for the degraded resolution. Measurements over a large number of images enables us to minimize the position error through regression and thus estimate both the actual impact site location devoid of parallax bias, and also of the altitude level of the impact debris above the cloud deck. With rapid imaging there is the potential to examine the time evolution of the altitude level. Several hundred ground based images were processed, navigated and subjected to the impact site location measurements. HST images were also acquired and used to calibrate the results and to improve the sample. The resources available enabled an in-depth study only of impact site A, however, many more images have since become available through the global network observations through Lowell Observatory.

Limaye, Sanjay S.↗

State-of-the-Art: Small Spacecraft Technology

When the first edition of NASA’s Small Spacecraft Technology State-of-the-art report was published in 2013, 247 CubeSats and 105 other non-CubeSat small spacecraft under 50 kilograms (kg) had been launched worldwide, representing less than 2% of launched mass into orbit over multiple years. In 2013 alone, around 60% of the total spacecraft launched had a mass under 600 kg, and of those under 600 kg, 83% were under 200 kg and 37% were nanosatellites (1). Of the total 1,849 spacecraft launched in 2021, 94% were small spacecraft with an overall mass under 600 kg, and of those under 600 kg, 40% were under 200 kg, and 11% were nanosatellites (1). Since 2013, the fight heritage for small spacecraft has increased by over 30% and has become the primary source to space access for commercial, government, private, and academic institutions. The total number of spacecraft launched in the past 10 years is 5,681 and 45% of those had a mass. As with all previous editions of this report, the 2022 edition captures and distills a wealth of new information available on small spacecraft systems from NASA and other publicly available sources. This report is limited to publicly available information and cannot reflect major advances in development that are not publicly disclosed. We encourage any opportunity to publish mission outcomes and technology development milestones (e.g., via conference papers, press releases, company website) so they can be reflected in this report. Overall, this report is a survey of small spacecraft technologies sourced from open literature; it does not endeavor to be an original source, and only considers literature in the public domain to identify and classify devices. Commonly used sources for data include manufacturer datasheets, press releases, conference papers, journal papers, public filings with government agencies, news articles, presentations, the compendium of databases accessed via NASA’s Small Spacecraft Systems Virtual Institute (S3VI) Information Search, and engagement with companies. Data not appropriate for public dissemination, such as proprietary, export controlled, or otherwise restricted data, are not considered. As a result, this report includes many dedicated hours of desk research performed by subject matter experts reviewing resources noted above. Content in this 2022 edition is based on data available by October 2022. This report should not be considered as a comprehensive overview of all the technologies but a great reference for the current state-of-the-art SmallSat technologies. The organizational approach for each chapter is relatively consistent with previous editions and includes an introduction of the technology, current development status of the technology’s procurable systems, and summary tables of technologies surveyed. The content in each chapter is uniquely organized to present a mini-stand-alone report on spacecraft subsystems. As in previous years, chapters include information from previous editions but are updated with new and maturating technologies and reference missions. Tables in each section provide a convenient summary of the technologies discussed, with explanations and references in the body text. The authors have attempted to isolate trends in the small spacecraft industry to point out which technologies have been adopted after successful demonstration missions. Lastly, the authors tried to use the terms “SmallSat,” “microsatellite,” “nanosatellite,” and “CubeSat” in a consistent manner, even as these terms are often used interchangeably in the space industry. Every subsystem chapter contains updated information to reflect the growth in the small spacecraft market. Significant changes are included in several chapters. The “Complete Spacecraft Platforms” chapter now includes information on the two main market options, hosted payload services and dedicated buses. The “Power” chapter provides information on the development of solid-state batteries with significantly higher energy than the current state-of-theart lithium-ion batteries. A large effort was made to update the “Communications” chapter to appropriately capture the recent technology maturation of optical communications for SmallSats. The “Ground Data Systems and Mission Operations” chapter was updated to reflect the recent establishment of the Near Space Network and influx of SmallSat Optical Ground Stations. The “Guidance, Navigation and Control” chapter was updated to include Lidar sensor technology. The “Deorbit Systems” chapter includes a discussion of recently proposed changes by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to limit a spacecraft’s lifetime to no longer than 5 years after end-of-mission. The “Identification and Tracking” Chapter includes updated information on the progress of SmallSat tracking. Finally, this report now encompasses technology funded by NASA’s Small Spacecraft Technology (SST) program’s SmallSat Technology Partnerships (STP) initiative which is described further in this Introduction. The reader can find the included SST technology in the “On the Horizon” section of the “Thermal Systems”, “Communications”, and “Guidance, Navigation, and Control” chapters. A central element of this report is to list state-of-the-art technologies by NASA standard Technology Readiness Level (TRL) as defined by the 2020 NASA Engineering Handbook, found in NASA NPR 7123.1C NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements. The authors have endeavored to independently verify the TRL value of each technology by reviewing and citing published test results or publicly available data to the best of their ability. Where test results and data disagree with vendors’ own advertised TRL, the authors have attempted to engage the vendors to discuss the discrepancy. Readers are strongly encouraged to follow the references cited in the literature describing the full performance range and capabilities of each technology. Readers of this report should reach out to individual companies to further clarify information. It is important to note that this report takes a broad system-level view. To attain a high TRL, the subsystem must be in a flight-ready configuration with all supporting infrastructure—such as mounting points, power conversion, and control algorithms—in an integrated unit. An accurate TRL assessment requires a high degree of technical knowledge on a subject device, and an in-depth understanding of the mission (including interfaces and environment) on which the device was flown. There is variability in TRL values depending on design factors for a specific technology. For example, differences in TRL assessment based on the operating environment may result from the thermal environment, mechanical loads, mission duration, or radiation exposure. If a technology has flown on a mission without success, or without providing valid confirmation to the operator, such claimed “flight heritage” was discounted. The authors believe TRLs are most accurately determined when assessed within the context of a program’s unique requirements. While the overall capability of small spacecraft has matured since the 2021 edition of this report, technologies are still being developed to make deep space SmallSat missions more routine and more cost effective. Future editions of this report may include content dedicated to the rapidly growing fields of assembly, integration, and testing services, and mission modeling and simulation–all of which are now extensively represented at small spacecraft conferences. Many of these subsystems and services are still in their infancy, but as they evolve and reliable conventions and standards emerge, the next iteration of this report may also evolve to include additional chapters.

Bruce Yost↗

Simulations of Li+ in Ionic Liquids: Structure, Transport, and Electrochemical Windows

Ionic liquids have been proposed as candidate electrolytes for a number of electrochemical applications. The Li+ solvation structure in these liquids is of central importance to electrolyte properties, like ionic conductivity and electrochemical stability. To this point, we employ simulations at three different size scales to better understand various aspects of the interplay between Li+ solvation structure and dynamics. The smallest systems are Li(Anion)n clusters that are treated with high-accuracy density functional theory (DFT) techniques to provide insight into solvation shell structure through energetics and comparisons to experimental IRRaman spectra. Mid-range sized liquid-phase systems (12-24 ion pairs) are treated with DFT molecular dynamics (MD) to provide temperature-dependent insight into Li+ solvation structure, diffusion, and electrochemical window. The largest systems (144-216 ion pairs) are treated with polarizable MD simulations to evaluate the influence of Li-networks on structure and provide size independent values of transport properties. We perform this procedure on three technologically important ionic liquids and comment on property correlations with solvation structure.

batteries↗

The coming technological singularity: How to survive in the post-human era

The acceleration of technological progress has been the central feature of this century. I argue in this paper that we are on the edge of change comparable to the rise of human life on Earth. The precise cause of this change is the imminent creation by technology of entities with greater than human intelligence. There are several means by which science may achieve this breakthrough (and this is another reason for having confidence that the event will occur): (1) the development of computers that are 'awake' and superhumanly intelligent (to date, most controversy in the area of AI relates to whether we can create human equivalence in a machine. But if the answer is 'yes, we can', then there is little doubt that beings more intelligent can be constructed shortly thereafter); (2) large computer networks (and their associated users) may 'wake up' as a superhumanly intelligent entity; (3) computer/human interfaces may become so intimate that users may reasonably be considered superhumanly intelligent; and (4) biological science may find ways to improve upon the natural human intellect. The first three possibilities depend in large part on improvements in computer hardware. Progress in computer hardware has followed an amazingly steady curve in the last few decades. Based largely on this trend, I believe that the creation of greater than human intelligence will occur during the next thirty years.

Vinge, Vernor↗

Client/server study

The goal of this project is to find cost-effective and efficient strategies/solutions to integrate existing databases, manage network, and improve productivity of users in a move towards client/server and Integrated Desktop Environment (IDE) at NASA LeRC. The project consisted of two tasks as follows: (1) Data collection, and (2) Database Development/Integration. Under task 1, survey questionnaires and a database were developed. Also, an investigation on commercially available tools for automated data-collection and net-management was performed. As requirements evolved, the main focus has been task 2 which involved the following subtasks: (1) Data gathering/analysis of database user requirements, (2) Database analysis and design, making recommendations for modification of existing data structures into relational database or proposing a common interface to access heterogeneous databases(INFOMAN system, CCNS equipment list, CCNS software list, USERMAN, and other databases), (3) Establishment of a client/server test bed at Central State University (CSU), (4) Investigation of multi-database integration technologies/ products for IDE at NASA LeRC, and (5) Development of prototypes using CASE tools (Object/View) for representative scenarios accessing multi-databases and tables in a client/server environment. Both CSU and NASA LeRC have benefited from this project. CSU team investigated and prototyped cost-effective/practical solutions to facilitate NASA LeRC move to a more productive environment. CSU students utilized new products and gained skills that could be a great resource for future needs of NASA.

Dezhgosha, Kamyar↗

Volcanism of the Eastern Snake River Plain, Idaho: A comparative planetary geology-guidebook

The Planetary Geology Field Conference on the central Snake River Plain was conceived and developed to accomplish several objectives. Primarily, field conferences are sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to draw attention to aspects of terrestrial geology that appear to be important in interpreting the origin and evolution of extraterrestrial planetary surfaces. Another aspect is to present results of recent research in a region. A final objective of this conference is to bring together investigators of diverse backgrounds who share a common interest in the Snake River Plain. The Snake River Plain appears to be similar in surface morphology to many volcanic regions on the Moon, Mars, and possibly Mercury. Therefore, the Snake River Plain, in combination with the relatively good state of preservation, the lack of forests or other heavy vegetation, and the good network of jeep trails, is an area nearly ideal for analog studies.

Greeley, R.↗

NASA's Robotic Lunar Lander Development Project

Since early 2005, NASA's Robotic Lunar Lander Development (RLLD) office at NASA MSFC, in partnership with the Applied Physics Laboratory (APL), has developed mission concepts and preformed risk-reduction activities to address planetary science and exploration objectives uniquely met with landed missions. The RLLD team developed several concepts for lunar human-exploration precursor missions to demonstrate precision landing and in-situ resource utilization, a multi-node lunar geophysical network mission, either as a stand-alone mission, or as part of the International Lunar Network (ILN), a Lunar Polar Volatiles Explorer and a Mercury lander mission for the Planetary Science decadal survey, and an asteroid rendezvous and landing mission for the Exploration Precursor Robotics Mission (xPRM) office. The RLLD team has conducted an extensive number of risk-reduction activities in areas common to all lander concepts, including thruster testing, propulsion thermal control demonstration, composite deck design and fabrication, and landing leg stability and vibration. In parallel, the team has developed two robotic lander testbeds providing closed-loop, autonomous hover and descent activities for integration and testing of flight-like components and algorithms. A compressed-air test article had its first flight in September 2009 and completed over 150 successful flights. This small test article (107 kg dry/146 kg wet) uses a central throttleable thruster to offset gravity, plus 3 descent thrusters (~37lbf ea) and 6 attitude-control thrusters (~12lbf ea) to emulate the flight system with pulsed operation over approximately 10s of flight time. The test article uses carbon composite honeycomb decks, custom avionics (COTS components assembled in-house), and custom flight and ground software. A larger (206 kg dry/322 kg wet), hydrogen peroxide-propelled vehicle began flight tests in spring 2011 and fly over 30 successful flights to a maximum altitude of 30m. The monoprop testbed also uses a central gravity-canceling thruster and 3 descent thrusters, but has 12 attitude-control thrusters and a maximum flight time of over a minute. The testbed uses aluminum ortho-grid decks, an LN200-1 IMU, Roke Manor Radar Altimeter, Illunis optical cameras, Novatel Pro-Pak GPS truth data system, Pressure transducers & thermocouples for housekeeping, "In-Control" ground system software, and the core Flight Executive (cFE) modular software environment. The peroxide lander testbed is able to accept other sensors and algorithms for testing, both from within NASA and from other customers. Through these activities, the RLLD team has significantly reduced technical risks for all small and medium class robotic landers for the Moon and other airless planetary bodies.

Cohen, Barbara A.↗

The IOAG Recommendations on Spacecraft Emergency Cross Support

In 2014, the Inter-agency Operations Advisory Group (IOAG) chartered a multi-agency team effort to study how to best handle spacecraft emergency as part of cross support among network assets. The original intent is to put in place for the first time a process and guidelines to make emergency support as part of a permanent cross-support capability between space agencies. From the perspective of space communications service providers, a few key issues, common to all agencies, concerning the Spacecraft Emergency Cross Support (SECS) have been explored. They are: context of emergency support, provision of emergency support under a cross-support agreement, provision of emergency support with no cross-support agreement, legal and liability issues, response time, support priority, services provided, sustaining emergency support capabilities, and charge for the support. The positions of the various participating agencies with respect to these issues have been collected, analyzed, and finally harmonized to form the recommended IOAG positions. A central challenge most communications service providers are facing is that since the spacecraft emergency is an unplanned critical event, it typically requires fast response to the emergency call, hence lacking an international standard process for the operational interfaces seems to exacerbate the difficulty in providing SECS. For reducing the response time, i.e. from the time of accepting a request for SECS to the readiness for support, it is recommended that a “cross-support emergency system” be established by IOAG member agencies. Along with it, the IOAG core services, just-in-time ground communications line, cross support service management (CSSM), and standard operations procedures (SOP) for operational interfaces form the basic foundation of the “cross support emergency system”. Of the above, new to the cross support conducted thus far in the IOAG community is the concept of the SOP specifically for the interfaces between the service provider and service user during the SECS. Use cases, salient features, and definition of the key operational activities/tasks relevant to the interfaces are addressed by the effort. Underpinning such a system is the availability of the RF license granted by the local authority, at national and/or regional level, for a given ground station to communicate with and track the spacecraft in emergency mode at the uplink and downlink frequencies assigned to that spacecraft. That means it is critical for the IOAG member agencies to obtain a priori all-band licenses (for the entire X-band or S-band) for some, if not all, of their ground stations that are most capable of or likely to provide SECS. It is also recommended that certain prior arrangements be made with the relevant local licensing authorities for a process that will allow expedited authorization to transmit/receive signals to/from the declared spacecraft over the declared ground stations specifically and solely for the emergency case. Our analysis of the SECS has also uncovered a few fundamental programmatic issues. Recognizing any IOAG positions reached on these issues do not necessarily lead to any binding authority, it is recommended that they, along with those key attributes of the cross support emergency system, be explicitly stated as multi-agency guidelines to guide the implementation and provision of the SECS. The paper will present the results of the working group on Spacecraft Emergency Cross Support and, in particular, its findings, products and recommendations. It will also identify the next steps of this work that may include the production of some international standards as an extension of this work, or the process to make this emergency system usable by other spacecraft operators beyond the space agencies.

Tai, Wallace S.↗

The IOAG Recommendations on Spacecraft Emergency Cross Support

In 2014, the Inter-agency Operations Advisory Group (IOAG) chartered a multi-agency team effort to study how to best handle spacecraft emergency as part of cross support among network assets. The original intent is to put in place for the first time a process and guidelines to make emergency support as part of a permanent cross-support capability between space agencies. From the perspective of space communications service providers, a few key issues, common to all agencies, concerning the Spacecraft Emergency Cross Support (SECS) have been explored. They are: context of emergency support, provision of emergency support under a cross-support agreement, provision of emergency support with no cross-support agreement, legal and liability issues, response time, support priority, services provided, sustaining emergency support capabilities, and charge for the support. The positions of the various participating agencies with respect to these issues have been collected, analyzed, and finally harmonized to form the recommended IOAG positions. A central challenge most communications service providers are facing is that since the spacecraft emergency is an unplanned critical event, it typically requires fast response to the emergency call, hence lacking an international standard process for the operational interfaces seems to exacerbate the difficulty in providing SECS. For reducing the response time, i.e. from the time of accepting a request for SECS to the readiness for support, it is recommended that a “cross-support emergency system” be established by IOAG member agencies. Along with it, the IOAG core services, just-in-time ground communications line, cross support service management (CSSM), and standard operations procedures (SOP) for operational interfaces form the basic foundation of the “cross support emergency system”. Of the above, new to the cross support conducted thus far in the IOAG community is the concept of the SOP specifically for the interfaces between the service provider and service user during the SECS. Use cases, salient features, and definition of the key operational activities/tasks relevant to the interfaces are addressed by the effort. Underpinning such a system is the availability of the RF license granted by the local authority, at national and/or regional level, for a given ground station to communicate with and track the spacecraft in emergency mode at the uplink and downlink frequencies assigned to that spacecraft. That means it is critical for the IOAG member agencies to obtain a priori all-band licenses (for the entire X-band or S-band) for some, if not all, of their ground stations that are most capable of or likely to provide SECS. It is also recommended that certain prior arrangements be made with the relevant local licensing authorities for a process that will allow expedited authorization to transmit/receive signals to/from the declared spacecraft over the declared ground stations specifically and solely for the emergency case. Our analysis of the SECS has also uncovered a few fundamental programmatic issues. Recognizing any IOAG positions reached on these issues do not necessarily lead to any binding authority, it is recommended that they, along with those key attributes of the cross support emergency system, be explicitly stated as multi-agency guidelines to guide the implementation and provision of the SECS. The paper will present the results of the working group on Spacecraft Emergency Cross Support and, in particular, its findings, products and recommendations. It will also identify the next steps of this work that may include the production of some international standards as an extension of this work, or the process to make this emergency system usable by other spacecraft operators beyond the space agencies.

Tai, Wallace S.↗

Deep Space Network Antenna Logic Controller

The Antenna Logic Controller (ALC) software controls and monitors the motion control equipment of the 4,000-metric-ton structure of the Deep Space Network 70-meter antenna. This program coordinates the control of 42 hydraulic pumps, while monitoring several interlocks for personnel and equipment safety. Remote operation of the ALC runs via the Antenna Monitor & Control (AMC) computer, which orchestrates the tracking functions of the entire antenna. This software provides a graphical user interface for local control, monitoring, and identification of faults as well as, at a high level, providing for the digital control of the axis brakes so that the servo of the AMC may control the motion of the antenna. Specific functions of the ALC also include routines for startup in cold weather, controlled shutdown for both normal and fault situations, and pump switching on failure. The increased monitoring, the ability to trend key performance characteristics, the improved fault detection and recovery, the centralization of all control at a single panel, and the simplification of the user interface have all reduced the required workforce to run 70-meter antennas. The ALC also increases the antenna availability by reducing the time required to start up the antenna, to diagnose faults, and by providing additional insight into the performance of key parameters that aid in preventive maintenance to avoid key element failure. The ALC User Display (AUD) is a graphical user interface with hierarchical display structure, which provides high-level status information to the operation of the ALC, as well as detailed information for virtually all aspects of the ALC via drill-down displays. The operational status of an item, be it a function or assembly, is shown in the higher-level display. By pressing the item on the display screen, a new screen opens to show more detail of the function/assembly. Navigation tools and the map button allow immediate access to all screens.

Ahlstrom, Harlow↗

Construction of Polarimetric Radar-Based Reference Rain Maps for the Iowa Flood Studies Campaign

The Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) Mission Iowa Flood Studies (IFloodS) campaign was conducted in central and northeastern Iowa during the months of April-June, 2013. Specific science objectives for IFloodS included quantification of uncertainties in satellite and ground-based estimates of precipitation, 4-D characterization of precipitation physical processes and associated parameters (e.g., size distributions, water contents, types, structure etc.), assessment of the impact of precipitation estimation uncertainty and physical processes on hydrologic predictive skill, and refinement of field observations and data analysis approaches as they pertain to future GPM integrated hydrologic validation and related field studies. In addition to field campaign archival of raw and processed satellite data (including precipitation products), key ground-based platforms such as the NASA NPOL S-band and D3R Ka/Ku-band dual-polarimetric radars, University of Iowa X-band dual-polarimetric radars, a large network of paired rain gauge platforms, and a large network of 2D Video and Parsivel disdrometers were deployed. In something of a canonical approach, the radar (NPOL in particular), gauge and disdrometer observational assets were deployed to create a consistent high-quality distributed (time and space sampling) radar-based ground "reference" rainfall dataset, with known uncertainties, that could be used for assessing the satellite-based precipitation products at a range of space/time scales. Subsequently, the impact of uncertainties in the satellite products could be evaluated relative to the ground-benchmark in coupled weather, land-surface and distributed hydrologic modeling frameworks as related to flood prediction. Relative to establishing the ground-based "benchmark", numerous avenues were pursued in the making and verification of IFloodS "reference" dual-polarimetric radar-based rain maps, and this study documents the process and results as they pertain specifically to efforts using the NPOL radar dataset. The initial portions of the "process" involved dual-polarimetric quality control procedures which employed standard phase and correlation-based approaches to removal of clutter and non-meteorological echo. Calculation of a scale-adaptive KDP was accomplished using the method of Wang and Chandrasekar (2009; J. Atmos. Oceanic Tech.). A dual-polarimetric blockage algorithm based on Lang et al. (2009; J. Atmos. Oceanic Tech.) was then implemented to correct radar reflectivity and differential reflectivity at low elevation angles. Next, hydrometeor identification algorithms were run to identify liquid and ice hydrometeors. After the quality control and data preparation steps were completed several different dual-polarimetric rain estimation algorithms were employed to estimate rainfall rates using rainfall scans collected approximately every two to three minutes throughout the campaign. These algorithms included a polarimetrically-tuned Z-R algorithm that adjusts for drop oscillations (via Bringi et al., 2004, J. Atmos. Oceanic Tech.), and several different hybrid polarimetric variable approaches, including one that made use of parameters tuned to IFloodS 2D Video Disdrometer measurements. Finally, a hybrid scan algorithm was designed to merge the rain rate estimates from multiple low level elevation angle scans (where blockages could not be appropriately corrected) in order to create individual low-level rain maps. Individual rain maps at each time step were subsequently accumulated over multiple time scales for comparison to gauge network data. The comparison results and overall error character depended strongly on rain event type, polarimetric estimator applied, and range from the radar. We will present the outcome of these comparisons and their impact on constructing composited "reference" rainfall maps at select time and space scales.

Radar↗

A Notional Artemis Lunar Surface Exploration Package (ArLSEP) based on the Gandalf Staff Platform

Introduction: The Artemis program is planning to deliver crew and cargo to the lunar surface, but there is no current package for supporting lunar in-struments and experiments similar to the Apollo Lunar Surface Exploration Package (ALSEP). This abstract provides a possible concept for such a package using the Gandalf Staff Platform as a common core. Gandalf Staff: The Gandalf Staff is an early prototype system developed over FY’21/FY’22 using NASA Science Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) Center Information Fund (CIF) grants to de-sign, build and test “proof-of-concept” components. These components include a 24v battery powered monopole that powers a suite of subsystems, including a Graphical User Interface (GUI) for crew, surface voice and data communications, Lunar Search and Rescue (LunaSAR) navigation and communications, LiDAR, field site external lighting, 360-degree camera, and a geothermal instrument for measuring sub-surface temperature gradient. The staff can be carried independently by an Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) astronaut, or can be mounted into a tripod for “hands free” support at a surface site being investigated. The staff can be attached to an external solar array and power storage system for long-duration operations. [1,2] ALSEP: An ASLEP flew on each mission Apollo 12 to Apollo 17. For Apollo 11, a simplified packaged called the Early Apollo Scientific Experiments Pack-age (EASEP) was flown. Each package included a “Central Station” that provided the power and communications connected to a variety of instruments and sensors. The power was provided by a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (RTG) fueled by Plutoni-um-238 generating 70 watts of power (initially, decayed over time) [3]. The communications system provide for direct to Earth data transfer from the lunar surface. Each pack-age was stowed externally in the Lunar Module (LM) Scientific Equipment (SEQ) bay with a mass up to 163 kg (Apollo 17). The crew unloaded the ALSEP from the LM and deployed the instruments on the lunar surface. Although designed to operate for only 1 year, many sites operated for up to 8 years successfully [4]. The Active Seismic Experiment (ASE) included 3 geophones for detecting seismic waves created by mortars and thumpers deployed by the crew. Other active experiments measured the lunar atmosphere, the heat flow in the subsurface, the lunar gravity and potential gravity waves, the lunar magnetic field, the solar wind and plasma interactions in cislunar space. Passive experiments included collectors for dust and cosmic rays, and retroreflectors for precise measurements of distance using a laser from Earth. The ALSEP program continues to generate insights into lunar formation and evolution. ArLSEP Concepts: The lunar surface science package for the Artemis program will hopefully exceed the capability of the ALSEP. There are multiple issues for discussion leading to the design of a new ArLSEP, needing requirements definition from the science community, NASA mission architecture, and NASA budget planners. 1. Delivery Mechanism Two possible projects currently provide capability to deliver scientific cargo to the lunar surface: 1) the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) [5] and the Human Landing System (HLS) [6, 7]. Each project is controlled by a different organization within NASA and budgeted with different criteria although both support lunar exploration. The HLS system delivers crew (and potentially cargo) to human landing sites. If an ArLSEP is “predeployed” to such a site, the design must include power (either from the vehicle or independently) to keep the electronics functioning until deployed by the crew. If an ArLSEP is delivered on a vehicle after the crew is present on the lunar surface, safety protocols require adequate distance from the humans for impact from descent propelled sur-face regolith ejecta. This distance can not exceed the capability of the crew to walk (if no rover) to the vehicle for ArLSEP deployment. 2. Overall Guidelines The general design of ArLSEP will likely follow the ALSEP with a common system for communications and power; however, significant architecture differences between Apollo and Artemis exist. Power: The RTG will not be available for early Artemis missions nor likely follow-on Lunar Exploration Transportation Services (LETS) missions [8]. Thus, ArLSEP power must be supplied by solar arrays with sufficient battery capability to “keep alive” necessary electronics during any lunar surface eclipse period. Communication: The Artemis program is developing a series of communications satellites for lunar orbit to provide surface transmission of data and voice to Earth. Called “LunaNET”, this network is component useful for ArLSEP since south polar locations may not always have direct “line-of-sight” to Earth [9]. 3. Concept of Operations (ConOps) The general ConOps for ArLSEP is to deliver the package to lunar surface before the crew arrives, and then have the crew deploy the package after some period of time. This requires coordinated design (for power systems) and launch window (for schedule) on both the cargo and crew missions. Once the ArLSEP is deployed, it will operate autonomously for a number of years. It should be designed to be EVA compatible for crew maintenance and upgrade. 4. Notional Design (for discussion purpose only) The landing site near the South Pole is expected to have no eclipse cycle exceeding 5 days, so the “keep alive” power is 144 hours (6 days to include margin). A 12v ArLSEP will use rechargeable LiFePO4 cells, which are common in the Electric Vehicle (EV) industry. With a current of 5 amps and a 125 watt system, the mass is about 90kg. The comm. system and structure adds another 10kg, thus the “Central Station” is approximately 100kg. The solar power is collected on four arrays (each 2m above the surface), and the entire ArLSEP is designed to stow in a 2m x 1m x 1m volume. The experiment and instrument design will vary for each installation and add mass to the total (although they are expected to fit within the 2m3 volume). Seismic wave generation will likely not be provided with mortars, thus an electric “thumper” will be required. Active instruments such as imaging systems and sensing instruments will benefit from the additional power and communication capability provided by ArLSEP. Passive systems such as retroreflectors, witness plates, and cosmic dust collectors can be added to either the landing vehicle and/or the ArLSEP. With repeated HLS missions to the same human site, the ArLSEP can be expanded and easily maintained for long duration science collection on the lunar surface.

ALSEP↗

Support for International Space University?s (ISU) 2003 Summer Session Program and the Theme Day on ?Living and Working in Space?

The 2003 Summer Session Program of the International Space University (ISU) was conducted at the ISU Central Campus in Strasbourg, France, July 5-September 6, 2003. Attending the Summer Session were 114 students from 27 countries including the US. The International Space University (ISU) offers its students a unique and comprehensive educational package covering all disciplines related to space programs and enterprises - space science, space engineering, systems engineering, space policy and law, business and management, and space and society. By providing international graduate students and young space professionals both an intensive interdisciplinary curriculum and also the opportunity to solve complex problems together in an intercultural environment, ISU is preparing the future leaders of the emerging global space community. Since its founding in 1988, ISU has graduated more than 2200 students from 87 countries. Together with hundreds of ISU faculty and lecturers from around the world, ISU alumni comprise an extremely effective network of space professionals and leaders that actively facilitates individual career growth, professional activities and international space cooperation. ISU's interdisciplinary Student Theme Days and Student Workshops are intended to have great educational value for the participants. Along with the interdisciplinary Core Lectures, they apprise the students of state-of-the-art activities, programs and policies in spacefaring nations. They also provide ISU students the opportunity to meet world experts in space-related subjects.

Finarelli, Margaret G.↗

The Pilot Land Data System (PLDS) at the Ames Research Center manages aircraft data in collaboration with an ecosystem research project

The Pilot Land Data System (PLDS) is a data and information system serving NASA-supported investigators in the land science community. The three nodes of the PLDS, one each at the Ames Research Center (ARC), the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), cooperate in providing consistent information describing the various data holding in the hardware and software (accessible via network and modem) that provide information about and access to PLDS-held data, which is available for distribution. A major new activity of the PLDS node at the Ames Research Center involves the interaction of the PLDS with an active NASA ecosystem science project, the Oregon Transect Ecosystems Research involves the management of, access to, and distribution of the large volume of widely-varying aircraft data collected by OTTER. The OTTER project, is managed by researchers at the Ames Research Center and Oregon State University. Its principal objective is to estimate major fluxes of carbon, nitrogen, and water of forest ecosystems using an ecosystem process model driven by remote sensing data. Ten researchers at NASA centers and universities are analyzing data for six sites along a temperature-moisture gradient across the western half of central Oregon (called the Oregon Transect). Sensors mounted on six different aircraft have acquired data over the Oregon Transect in support of the OTTER project.

Angelici, Gary↗

A Distributed Prognostic Health Management Architecture

This paper introduces a generic distributed prognostic health management (PHM) architecture with specific application to the electrical power systems domain. Current state-of-the-art PHM systems are mostly centralized in nature, where all the processing is reliant on a single processor. This can lead to loss of functionality in case of a crash of the central processor or monitor. Furthermore, with increases in the volume of sensor data as well as the complexity of algorithms, traditional centralized systems become unsuitable for successful deployment, and efficient distributed architectures are required. A distributed architecture though, is not effective unless there is an algorithmic framework to take advantage of its unique abilities. The health management paradigm envisaged here incorporates a heterogeneous set of system components monitored by a varied suite of sensors and a particle filtering (PF) framework that has the power and the flexibility to adapt to the different diagnostic and prognostic needs. Both the diagnostic and prognostic tasks are formulated as a particle filtering problem in order to explicitly represent and manage uncertainties; however, typically the complexity of the prognostic routine is higher than the computational power of one computational element ( CE). Individual CEs run diagnostic routines until the system variable being monitored crosses beyond a nominal threshold, upon which it coordinates with other networked CEs to run the prognostic routine in a distributed fashion. Implementation results from a network of distributed embedded devices monitoring a prototypical aircraft electrical power system are presented, where the CEs are Sun Microsystems Small Programmable Object Technology (SPOT) devices.

Bhaskar, Saha↗