Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “sampling”

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 613 records · Page 34

General-Surrogate Adaptive Sampling Using Interquartile Range for Design Space Exploration

Abstract A surrogate model is a common tool to approximate system response at untested points for design space exploration. Adaptive sampling has been studied for improving the accuracy of surrogates iteratively by introducing additional samples (simulations and experiments). New samples are often selected based on the estimated uncertainty in the design space. While some surrogates such as kriging have readily available uncertainty models for their predictions, other surrogates do not. Consequently, there have been studies of using the process of leaving-samples-out (LSO) used in cross-validation tools to estimate prediction uncertainty, such as the universal prediction distribution (UPD). In this paper, an adaptive sampling scheme for general surrogates is proposed based on LSO, similar to cross-validation and interquartile range (IQR). Multiple submodels are first developed from LSO. The uncertainty is then estimated from the IQR of these surrogates at a given point. New samples are added iteratively at the point with maximum IQR for design space exploration. The proposed scheme is illustrated using kriging, radial basis function, and neural network surrogates. The proposed scheme is evaluated using four algebraic test functions. Multiple sets of initial samples were produced to account for randomness. For these test functions, the proposed scheme was found to be more accurate and robust than kriging with its own uncertainty model. The proposed scheme was more accurate than the UPD for three out of the four test functions. For a fixed number of samples, the IQR-based adaptive sampling also proved to be more accurate than all-at-once sampling in most cases even when the estimated uncertainty was only mildly correlated with prediction errors.

Engineering↗

Using low volume eDNA methods to sample pelagic marine animal assemblages

Environmental DNA (eDNA) is an increasingly useful method for detecting pelagic animals in the ocean but typically requires large water volumes to sample diverse assemblages. Ship-based pelagic sampling programs that could implement eDNA methods generally have restrictive water budgets. Studies that quantify how eDNA methods perform on low water volumes in the ocean are limited, especially in deep-sea habitats with low animal biomass and poorly described species assemblages. Using 12S rRNA and COI gene primers, we quantified assemblages comprised of micronekton, coastal forage fishes, and zooplankton from low volume eDNA seawater samples (n = 436, 380–1800 mL) collected at depths of 0–2200 m in the southern California Current. We compared diversity in eDNA samples to concurrently collected pelagic trawl samples (n = 27), detecting a higher diversity of vertebrate and invertebrate groups in the eDNA samples. Differences in assemblage composition could be explained by variability in size-selectivity among methods and DNA primer suitability across taxonomic groups. The number of reads and amplicon sequences variants (ASVs) did not vary substantially among shallow (<200 m) and deep samples (>600 m), but the proportion of invertebrate ASVs that could be assigned a species-level identification decreased with sampling depth. Using hierarchical clustering, we resolved horizontal and vertical variability in marine animal assemblages from samples characterized by a relatively low diversity of ecologically important species. Low volume eDNA samples will quantify greater taxonomic diversity as reference libraries, especially for deep-dwelling invertebrate species, continue to expand.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

Midmorning Point Sampling May Not Accurately Represent Nitrous Oxide Emissions Following Fertilizer Applications

A common approach for measuring N 2 O emissions is to collect midmorning or early evening gas samples from experiments utilizing the chamber-based flux methodology. However, due to high spatial and temporal variability, N 2 O estimates based on midmorning or early evening sampling may not provide accurate estimates of total emissions. This study determined the impact of sampling collection timing on the precision and accuracy of N 2 O emissions estimates. Nitrous oxide emissions, air and soil temperatures, and soil moisture were measured for 21 d following the application of 224 kg urea-N ha –1 on 20 Sept. 2017, 11 Oct. 2017, and 1 May 2018, at six time intervals (0130–0230, 0530–0630, 0930–1030, 1330–1430, 1730–1830, and 2130–2230 h) over a 24-h period. Based on multiple daily measurements, point samples collected between 0930 and 1030 h (midmorning) were inconsistent in their ability to predict N 2 O emissions. However, samples collected between 2130 and 2230 h (early evening) were similar to average emissions. The number of randomly collected point samples to be within 20% of the mean 80% of the time over a 21-d period ranged from 13 samples for fertilizer applied on 20 Sept. 2017 to 48 samples for fertilizer applied on 11 Oct. 2017. This research indicates that management and climatic variability affect N 2 O emissions, and that accurate sampling protocols vary across management and climates. To reduce uncertainty, N 2 O sampling protocol should be tested under conditions likely to occur and where possible, near-continuous measurement systems should be adopted.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Results of Hg speciation testing on tanks 30, 32, and 37 depth samples

The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) was tasked with preparing and shipping samples for Hg speciation by Eurofins Frontier Global Sciences, Inc. in Seattle, WA on behalf of the Savannah River Remediation (SRR) Mercury Task Team. The twelfth shipment of samples was designated to include 3H evaporator system Tank 30, 32, and 37 depth samples. The Tank 30 depth sample (HTF-30-15-70) was taken at 190 inches from the tank bottom and the Tank 32 depth sample (HTF-32-15-68) was taken at 89 inches from the tank bottom and both were shipped to SRNL on June 29, 2015 in an 80 mL stainless steel dip bottles. The Tank 37 surface sample (HTF-37-15-94) was taken around 253.4 inches from the tank bottom and shipped to SRNL on July 21, 2015 in an 80 mL stainless steel dip bottle. All samples were placed in the SRNL Shielded Cells and left unopened until intermediate dilutions were made on July 24, 2015 using 1.00 mL of sample diluted to 100.00 mL with deionized H 2 O. A 30 mL Teflon® bottle was rinsed twice with the diluted tank sample and then filled leaving as little headspace as possible. It was immediately removed from the Shielded Cells and transferred to refrigerated storage where it remained at 4 °C until final dilutions were made on October 20. A second portion of the cells diluted tank sample was poured into a shielded polyethylene bottle and transferred to Analytical Development for radiochemical analysis data needed for Hazardous Material Transportation calculations.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Results of Hg speciation testing on DWPF SMECT-8, OGCT-1, AND OGCT-2 samples

The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) was tasked with preparing and shipping samples for Hg speciation by Eurofins Frontier Global Sciences, Inc. in Seattle, WA on behalf of the Savannah River Remediation (SRR) Mercury Task Team. The sixteenth shipment of samples was designated to include a Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) Slurry Mix Evaporator Condensate Tank (SMECT) sample from Sludge Receipt and Adjustment Tank (SRAT) Batch 738 processing and two Off-Gas Condensate Tank (OGCT) samples, one following Batch 736 and one following Batch 738. The DWPF sample designations for the three samples analyzed are provided. The Batch 738 ‘End of SME Cycle’ SMECT sample was taken at the conclusion of Slurry Mix Evaporator (SME) operations for this batch and represents the fourth SMECT sample examined from Batch 738. Batch 738 experienced a sludge slurry carryover event, which introduced sludge solids to the SMECT that were particularly evident in the SMECT-5 sample, but less evident in the ‘End of SME Cycle’ SMECT-8 sample.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Data Validation Package April 2016 Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Monticello, Utah, Disposal and Processing Sites August 2016

This semiannual event includes sampling groundwater and surface water at the Monticello Disposal and Processing Sites. Sampling and analyses were conducted as specified in the Sampling and Analysis Plan for U.S. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management Sites (LMS/PRO/S04351, continually updated) and Program Directive MNT-2016-01. Complete sample sets were collected from 42 of 48 planned locations (9 of 9 former mill site wells, 13 of 13 downgradient wells, 7 of 9 downgradient permeable reactive barrier wells, 4 of 7 seeps and wetlands, and 9 of 10 surface water locations). Planned monitoring locations are shown in Attachment 1, Sampling and Analysis Work Order. Locations R6-M3, SW00-01, Seep 1, Seep 2, and Seep 5 were not sampled due to insufficient water availability. A partial sample was collected at location R4-M3 due to insufficient water. All samples from the permeable reactive barrier wells were filtered as specified in the program directive. Duplicate samples were collected from surface water location Sorenson and from monitoring wells 92-07 and RlO-Ml. Water levels were measured at all sampled wells and an additional set of wells. See Attachment2, Trip Report for additional details. The contaminants of concern (COCs) for the Monticello sites are arsenic, manganese, molybdenum, nitrate+ nitrite as nitrogen (nitrate+ nitrite as N), selenium, uranium, and vanadium. Locations with COCs that exceeded remediation goals are listed in Table 1 and Table 2. Time-concentration graphs of the COCs for all groundwater and surface water locations are included in Attachment 3, Data Presentation. An assessment of anomalous data is included in Attachment 4.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

M3FT-17OR0301070211 - Preparation of Hot Isostatically Pressed AgZ Waste Form Samples

The production of radioactive iodine-bearing waste forms that exhibit long-term stability and are suitable for permanent geologic disposal has been the subject of substantial research interest. One potential method of iodine waste form production is hot isostatic pressing (HIP). Recent studies at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) have investigated the conversion of iodine-loaded silver mordenite (I-AgZ) directly to a waste form by HIP. ORNL has performed HIP with a variety of sample compositions and pressing conditions. The base mineral has varied among AgZ (in pure and engineered forms), silver-exchanged faujasite, and silverexchanged zeolite A. Two iodine loading methods, occlusion and chemisorption, have been explored. Additionally, the effects of variations in temperature and pressure of the process have been examined, with temperature ranges of 525°C–1,100°C and pressure ranges of 100–300 MPa. All of these samples remain available to collaborators upon request. The sample preparation detailed in this document is an extension of that work. In addition to previously prepared samples, this report documents the preparation of additional samples to support stability testing. These samples include chemisorbed I-AgZ and pure AgI. Following sample preparation, each sample was processed by HIP by American Isostatic Presses Inc. and returned to ORNL for storage. ORNL will store the samples until they are requested by collaborators for durability testing. The sample set reported here will support waste form durability testing across the national laboratories and will provide insight into the effects of varied iodine content on iodine retention by the produced waste form and on potential improvements in waste form durability provided by the zeolite matrix.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Solvent Hold Tank Sample Results for MCU-18-425- 427 (October 2018), MCU-18-459-460-461 (November 2018), and MCU-18-487-488-489 (December 2018) (Quarterly Report)

A trend summary of three Solvent Hold Tank (SHT) monthly samples MCU-18-425-426-427, MCU-18- 459-460-461 and MCU-18-487-488-489 are reported. Most of the conclusions are based on the December SHT sample (MCU-18-487-488-489). Analyses of the December SHT sample (MCU-18-487-488-489 indicated that the Modifier (Cs-7SB) and the extractant (MaxCalix) concentrations were below their nominal recommended concentrations (169,000 mg/L and 46,400 mg/L respectively) by 2% and 9% respectively. The suppressor (N,N’,N”–tris(3,7-dimethyloctyl)guanidine or TiDG) concentration has decreased since the October 2018 measurement (Modular Caustic-Side Solvent Extraction Unit or MCU resumed processing (from May through November 2018) to 528 mg/L, but it is above the minimum recommended concentration (479 mg/L). These new levels are consistent with the concentrations observed when MCU was fully operational in 2016. The Semi-Volatile Organic Analysis (SVOA) did not detect any impurities. However, the Fourier Transform Hydrogen Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (FT-HNMR) analysis detected presence of phthalates at a few ppm. The impurity concentration was highest in the October sample and consistently detected in the November and December samples (but always a few ppm or less). Another impurity observed in the samples was mercury. Based on the December SHT sample, up to 24 ± 5 micrograms of mercury per mL of solvent was detected (as the average of the Direct Mercury Analysis (DMA) and X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) methods). The higher mercury concentration in the solvent (as determined in the last three-monthly samples) is possibly due to the higher mercury concentration in Salt Batches 9 and 10. The gamma concentration (~3.6E5 dpm/mL) measured in the December SHT samples was consistent with previous values observed when MCU was fully operational (for example, between December 2016 and January 2017) but it was lower than the April SHT measurement. The “dip” in the gamma measurement for the May 2018 SHT sample was due to an Isopar™ L addition to MCU during April and May 2018. The laboratory will continue to monitor the quality of the solvent for any new impurities or degradation of the solvent components.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Calendar Year 2020 Underground Test Area Annual Sampling Report Nevada National Security Site, Nevada (Rev. 1)

This CY 2020 annual sampling report presents the background of the FFACO and Sampling Plan implementation, sampling and analysis methods, sampling results, quality assurance and quality control, regulatory requirements, and analytical data for the CY 2020. Appendix A presents data from samples collected in CY 2020 from the YF/CM CAU and the RM/SM CAU. This sampling was conducted in support of the Sampling Plan at these CAUs prior to approval of the final CRs. Appendix B presents the well completion diagrams for the wells sampled in CY 2020. Appendix C presents data from samples collected in CY 2019. These results were not reported in the previous sampling report because they were not available from the specialized laboratories at the time of the report’s publication.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

FY23 Update: Surface Sampling Activities for the Canister Deposition Field Demonstration

This report describes the results of a field demonstration of the proposed surface sampling techniques and plan for the multi-year Canister Deposition Field Demonstration (CDFD). The CDFD will evaluate salt deposition rates on three commercial 32PTH2 NUHOMS welded stainless steel storage canisters in Advanced Horizontal Storage Modules. Exposure testing is planned for up to 10 years and will incorporate periodic surface sampling campaigns. The goal of the planned dust sampling and analysis is to determine important environmental parameters that impact the potential occurrence of stress corrosion cracking on spent nuclear fuel (SNF) dry storage canisters. Specifically, measured dust deposition rates and deposited particle sizes will improve parameterization of dust deposition models employed to predict the potential occurrence and timing of stress corrosion cracks on the stainless steel SNF canisters. Previously, a preliminary sampling plan was developed, identifying possible sampling locations on the canister surfaces and sampling intervals; possible sampling methods were also described. Building from previous work, this report documents hand sampling from a spent nuclear fuel canister on a transfer skid mockup designed by Sandia National Laboratories. The sampling took place from a boom lift and salts were collected from mounted sample plates. The results of these efforts are presented in this report and compared to previous laboratory-controlled tests. The information obtained from the CDFD will be critical for ongoing efforts to develop a detailed understanding of the potential for stress corrosion cracking of SNF dry storage canisters.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

Characterization of Tank 15H Sample in Support of Preliminary Cease Waste Removal and Closure Mode Determination

The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) was requested by Savannah River Mission Completion (SRMC) to provide sample preparation and analysis of Tank 15H characterization samples. These samples follow an interest in exploring avenues to condense the extensive sampling of the Tank Closure process. One such pathway would be to collect a sample during an earlier waste removal campaign for analysis to determine comparability to the later residual tank inventory determined through Residual Material sampling and characterization prior to grouting. Six Tank 15H samples (HTF-15-24-9, HTF- HTF-15-24-10, HTF-15-24-11, HTF-15-24-12, HTF&#x2;15-24-13, and HTF-15-24-14) were delivered to SRNL in May of 2024. These six Tank 15H samples were taken as close as possible to the solids layer of the Tank 15H. These six Tank 15H samples were combined to form one composite sample for characterization due to the lack of sufficient solids fraction.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Sample Size Effects on Petrophysical Characterization and Fluid-to-Pore Accessibility of Natural Rocks

Laboratory-scale analysis of natural rocks provides petrophysical properties such as density, porosity, pore diameter/pore-throat diameter distribution, and fluid accessibility, in addition to the size and shape of framework grains and their contact relationship with the rock matrix. Different types of laboratory approaches for petrophysical characterization involve the use of a range of sample sizes. While the sample sizes selected should aim to be representative of the rock body, there are inherent limitations imposed by the analytical principles and holding capacities of the different experimental apparatuses, with many instruments only able to accept samples at the μm–mm scale. Therefore, a total of nine (three limestones, three shales, two sandstones, and one dolomite) samples were collected from Texas to fill the knowledge gap of the sample size effect on the resultant petrophysical characteristics. The sample sizes ranged from 3 cm cubes to <75 μm particles. Using a combination of petrographic microscopy, helium expansion pycnometry, water immersion porosimetry, mercury intrusion porosimetry, and (ultra-) small-angle X-ray scattering, the impact of sample size on the petrophysical properties of these samples was systematically investigated here. The results suggest that the sample size effect is influenced by both pore structure changes during crushing and sample size-dependent fluid-to-pore connectivity.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

Modern sampled-data control theory: Design of the Large Space Telescope

This investigation was undertaken to determine the effect of varying the sampling period on the dynamic response of the sampled-data Large Space Telescope (LST) system. A range of sampling periods was recommended based on the criterion that self-sustained oscillations are to be avoided in the LST system. The step responses of the LST system were then investigated when various sampling periods are used. For small sampling periods, the dynamic behavior of the sampled-data system is very similar to that of the continuous-data system. When T is large (but less than 0.25 sec) the overshoot of the step response of the sampled-data becomes greater. However, the dynamic behavior of the sampled-data system may be improved by redesigning the controller. It appears that a sampling period as high as 0.1 second is feasible for the LST system. However, it should be noted that the conclusions are obtained with the existing system model. Other practical considerations such as noise, coupling effects and quantization errors, may restrict the sampling period to a lower value.

Kuo, B. C.↗

Sampling the cometary nucleus

Three modes for obtaining samples of cometary material: remote sampling, hover mode sampling, and landed (anchored) sampling are discussed. For each mode, trade-offs involving complexity, risk factors, and cost must be analyzed for the spacecraft and the sampling system. Flyby results for comet Halley indicate heterogeneity in the cometary nucleus that could dictate sampling at several different locations. Coring drills, drive tubes, and specialized mantle sampling devices must operate at cold temperatures (100 to 180 K) without heating the sample. Sample selections must be accomodated by the sample return canister, which must also be protected from thermal excursions.

Clark, B. C.↗

Mars sample return mission: Two alternate scenarios

Two scenarios for accomplishing a Mars Sample Return mission are presented. Mission A is a low-cost, low-mass scenario, while Mission B is a high-technology, high-science alternative. Mission A begins with the launch of one Titan 4 rocket with a Centaur G' upper stage. The Centaur performs the trans-Mars injection burn and is then released. The payload consists of two lander packages and the orbital transfer vehicle, which is responsible for supporting the landers during launch and interplanetary cruise. Near Mars, the landers separate - one bound for a polar site and the other for an equatorial site. After descending to the surface, the landers deploy small, local rovers to collect samples. The rovers return these samples to the landers for loading on the direct return rockets, which return the samples directly to the Earth's surface. Mission B starts with four Titan 4 launches, used to place the components of the planetary transfer vehicle (PTV) into orbit. The fourth launch payload is able to move to assemble the entire vehicle by simple docking routines. Once complete, the PTV begins a low-thrust trajectory out from low Earth orbit, through interplanetary space, and into low Mars orbit. It deploys a communications satellite into a one half sol orbit and then releases the lander pad cage at 500 km altitude. The lander package contains the lander, the Mars ascent vehicle (MAV), two lighter-than-air rovers (called Aereons), and one conventional land rover. The entire package is contained within a biconic aeroshell. After release from the PTV the lander package descends to the surface, where all three rovers are released to collect samples and map the terrain. The Aereons attempt to circumnavigate Mars and collect samples from a wide variety of sites, while the land rover examines a local area more thoroughly. The Aereons are equipped with small sample return rockets that can return their samples to the lander in the event that an Aereon is incapable of returning to the lander itself. Once all samples have been collected they are loaded onto the MAV and launched into orbit. The PTV then collects the samples and returns them to Earth orbit for recovery.

Source record↗

An unmanned mission to Mars with sample collection and in-situ resource utilization

The design for the Mars Analysis and Return Vehicle with In-Situ Resource Utilization (MARVIN) project is outlined. The MARVIN mission is designed to collect samples of the Martian environment; to produce fuel from local Martian resources; and to use the fuel produced to return the samples to earth. It uses only existing technologies. Exploratory Technologies' mission-design efforts have focused on methods of orbit determination, sample collection, fuel production, power, communications, control, and structural design. Lambert Targeting provided Delta-V's, launch dates, and travel times. The landing site is the Tharsis Plateau, to the southeast of Olympus Mons, chosen for its substantial scientific value. Samples of soil, dust, and atmosphere are collected with lander-based collection devices: the soil sample, with a robotic arm similar to those used in the Viking missions; the atmospheric sample, from a bleed line to the compressor in the fuel-production facility; a dust sample, from the dust-collection container in the fuel-production facility; and a redundant dust sample, with a with a passive filter system, which relies upon neither a power source nor other collection methods. The sample-return capsule (SRC) houses these samples, which are triply contained to prevent contamination. Proven technology can be used to produce methane and oxygen for fuel with relative ease at the landing site: the Sabatier reactor produces methane and water by combining carbon dioxide and hydrogen (brought from earth); the Reverse Water-Gas Shift unit combines carbon dioxide and hydrogen to form carbon monoxide and water; a water-electrolysis unit splits the water into hydrogen and oxygen. The Mars-lander vehicle (MLV) transports the equipment from earth to Mars. The Mars-ascent vehicle (MAV) contains the SRC and the engine, which is the same for both the MLV and the MAV. All equipment that is unnecessary for the Mars-Earth trajectory remains on Mars. This report presents detailed sizing information, for which a spreadsheet has been developed. The trends suggest possibilities for expansion, and suggestions for future work in these areas are offered.

Source record↗

Comet coma sample return instrument

The sample collection technology and instrument concept for the Sample of Comet Coma Earth Return Mission (SOCCER) are described. The scientific goals of this Flyby Sample Return are to return to coma dust and volatile samples from a known comet source, which will permit accurate elemental and isotopic measurements for thousands of individual solid particles and volatiles, detailed analysis of the dust structure, morphology, and mineralogy of the intact samples, and identification of the biogenic elements or compounds in the solid and volatile samples. Having these intact samples, morphologic, petrographic, and phase structural features can be determined. Information on dust particle size, shape, and density can be ascertained by analyzing penetration holes and tracks in the capture medium. Time and spatial data of dust capture will provide understanding of the flux dynamics of the coma and the jets. Additional information will include the identification of cosmic ray tracks in the cometary grains, which can provide a particle's process history and perhaps even the age of the comet. The measurements will be made with the same equipment used for studying micrometeorites for decades past; hence, the results can be directly compared without extrapolation or modification. The data will provide a powerful and direct technique for comparing the cometary samples with all known types of meteorites and interplanetary dust. This sample collection system will provide the first sample return from a specifically identified primitive body and will allow, for the first time, a direct method of matching meteoritic materials captured on Earth with known parent bodies.

Albee, A. L.↗

Specimen Sample Preservation for Cell and Tissue Cultures

The era of the International Space Station with its longer duration missions will pose unique challenges to microgravity life sciences research. The Space Station Biological Research Project (SSBRP) is responsible for addressing these challenges and defining the science requirements necessary to conduct life science research on-board the International Space Station. Space Station will support a wide range of cell and tissue culture experiments for durations of 1 to 30 days. Space Shuttle flights to bring experimental samples back to Earth for analyses will only occur every 90 days. Therefore, samples may have to be retained for periods up to 60 days. This presents a new challenge in fresh specimen sample storage for cell biology. Fresh specimen samples are defined as samples that are preserved by means other than fixation and cryopreservation. The challenge of long-term storage of fresh specimen samples includes the need to suspend or inhibit proliferation and metabolism pending return to Earth-based laboratories. With this challenge being unique to space research, there have not been any ground based studies performed to address this issue. It was decided hy SSBRP that experiment support studies to address the following issues were needed: Fixative Solution Management; Media Storage Conditions; Fresh Specimen Sample Storage of Mammalian Cell/Tissue Cultures; Fresh Specimen Sample Storage of Plant Cell/Tissue Cultures; Fresh Specimen Sample Storage of Aquatic Cell/Tissue Cultures; and Fresh Specimen Sample Storage of Microbial Cell/Tissue Cultures. The objective of these studies was to derive a set of conditions and recommendations that can be used in a long duration microgravity environment such as Space Station that will permit extended storage of cell and tissue culture specimens in a state consistent with zero or minimal growth, while at the same time maintaining their stability and viability.

Meeker, Gabrielle↗