Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Roadmap”

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 685 records · Page 38

Spent Nuclear Fuel Exploratory Roadmaps - 20054

The U.S. Department of Energy manages nearly 2,500 metric tons of heavy metal (MTHM) of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) resulting from several decades of research, testing, and production reactors [DOE 1995]. This SNF is managed at the DOE Hanford Site in Washington State (Hanford), Idaho National Laboratory (INL), and Savannah River Site in South Carolina (SRS). From 1995 to 2004, the Department of Energy (DOE) made several key programmatic decisions, supported by appropriate documentation in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the management of SNF [DOE 1995]. These decisions have provided an overarching framework for SNF management, as well as site-specific and SNF-related management decisions for the past two decades. In the years since these decisions were made, with the notable exception of the successful drying and packaging of the production reactor fuel at Hanford, a majority of the decisions have been largely unimplemented. Also, since these decisions were made, a number of changes that bear on considerations relative to the path forward have occurred. A SNF Exploratory Road map activity, identified reasonable alternate pathways for DoE's inventory of SNF. Three fundamental pathways were identified in this activity for the long-term management and disposition of DOE SNF: Direct Disposal Pathway, Existing Processing Pathway and Alternate Processing Pathway. Further actions would be required (e.g., evaluation of NEPA analysis, technology maturity evaluations, refinement of cost and risks, benefits and advantages relative to other alternate paths) to define and inform many key decisions that will result in the selection of the disposition pathways that are most beneficial to the US Government in dispositioning DoE's SNF inventory. DOE is currently managing all SNF safely; however, the age of DOE-owned SNF and facilities for storing and processing SNF, coupled with the uncertainty of the storage duration, necessitates decisions and actions to ensure that the infrastructure will be in place to ensure continued safe and effective long-term management and eventual disposal. The identification of reasonable alternate pathways took these considerations into account in an effort to proactively manage conditions that could challenge the safety of storing and managing DOE SNF over the time periods now contemplated and also to ensure that flexibility is preserved to ensure that the DOE SNF remains compatible with final disposition pathways when they become available. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Clean Energy for the Battery-to-EV Supply Chain: A Roadmap for Indonesia - Summary Brief

Indonesia has a unique opportunity to support the clean energy transition, enhance energy security, and spur economic growth with local battery manufacturing, bridging from the material supply all the way to pack designs and, ultimately, the manufacturing of electric cars. Following the elevation of United States and Indonesia relations to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership, leaders of both countries highlighted the importance of Net Zero World support for Indonesia's energy transition, including collaboration on low-carbon battery supply chains. In support of this agreement, Net Zero World has partnered with Indonesia's Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources and other Indonesian partners to chart actionable steps for establishing a clean, resilient battery supply chain and circular economy. This partnership aims to position Indonesia as a regional leader in clean energy and can help attract investment in the domestic battery and electric vehicle (EV) sectors.

batteries↗

Power Systems for Future Missions: Appendices A-L

Selection of power system technology for space applications is typically based on mass, readiness of a particular technology to meet specific mission requirements, and life cycle costs (LCC). The LCC is typically used as a discriminator between competing technologies for a single mission application. All other future applications for a given technology are usually ignored. As a result, development cost of a technology becomes a dominant factor in the LCC comparison. Therefore, it is common for technologies such as DIPS and LMR-CBC to be potentially applicable to a wide range of missions and still lose out in the initial LCC comparison due to high development costs. This collection of appendices (A through L) contains the following power systems technology plans: CBC DIPS Technology Roadmap; PEM PFC Technology Roadmap; NAS Battery Technology Roadmap; PV/RFC Power System Technology Roadmap; PV/NAS Battery Technology Roadmap; Thermionic Reactor Power System Technology Roadmap; SP-100 Power System Technology Roadmap; Dynamic SP-100 Power System Technology Roadmap; Near-Term Solar Dynamic Power System Technology Roadmap; Advanced Solar Dynamic Power System Technology Roadmap; Advanced Stirling Cycle Dynamic Isotope Power System Technology Roadmap; and the ESPPRS (Evolutionary Space Power and Propulsion Requirements System) User's Guide.

Gill, S. P.↗

Human System Risk Management for Space Flight

This brief abstract reviews the development of the current day approach to human system risk management for space flight and the development of the critical components of this process over the past few years. The human system risk management process now provides a comprehensive assessment of each human system risk by design reference mission (DRM) and is evaluated not only for mission success but also for long‐term health impacts for the astronauts. The discipline of bioastronautics is the study of the biological and medical effects of space flight on humans. In 1997, the Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD) initiated the Bioastronautics Roadmap (Roadmap) as the "Critical Path Roadmap", and in 1998 participation in the roadmap was expanded to include the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI) and the external community. A total of 55 risks and 250 questions were identified and prioritized and in 2000, the Roadmap was base-lined and put under configuration control. The Roadmap took into account several major advisory committee reviews including the Institute of Medicine (IOM) "Safe Passage: Astronaut care for Exploration Missions", 2001. Subsequently, three collaborating organizations at NASA HQ (Chief Health and Medical Officer, Office of Space Flight and Office of Biological & Physical Research), published the Bioastronautics Strategy in 2003, that identified the human as a "critical subsystem of space flight" and noted that "tolerance limits and safe operating bands must be established" to enable human space flight. These offices also requested a review by the IOM of the Roadmap and that review was published in October 2005 as "A Risk Reduction Strategy for Human Exploration of Space: A Review of NASA's Bioastronautics Roadmap", that noted several strengths and weaknesses of the Roadmap and made several recommendations. In parallel with the development of the Roadmap, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) began a process in 2004 of evaluating the tolerance limits and safe operating bands called for in the Bioastronautics Strategy. Over the next several years, the concept of the "operating bands" were turned into Space Flight Human System Standards (SFHSS), developed by the technical resources of the SLSD at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC). These standards were developed and reviewed at the SLSD and then presented to the OCHMO for acceptance. The first set of standards was published in 2007 as the NASA‐STD‐3001, Volume 1, Crew Health that elaborated standards for several physiological areas such as cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, radiation exposure and nutrition. Volume 2, Human Factors, Habitability and Human Health was published in 2011, along with development guidance in the Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH). Taken together, the SFHSS Volumes 1 and 2, and the HIDH replaced the NASA‐STD‐3000 with new standards and revisions of the older document. Three other changes were also taking place that facilitated the development of the human system risk management approach. In 2005, the life sciences research and development portfolio underwent a comprehensive review through the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS) that resulted in the reformulation of the Bioastronautics Program into Human Research Program (HRP) that was focused on appropriate mitigation results for high priority human health risks. The baseline HRP budget was established in August 2005. In addition, the OCHMO formulated the Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) in 2006 that established the position of the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) at the NASA JSC along with other key technical disciplines, and the OCHMO became the responsible office for the SFHSS as noted above. The final change was the establishment in 2008 of the Human System Risk Board (HSRB), chaired by the CMO with representation from the HRP, SLSD management and technical experts. The HSRB then began to review all human system risks, established a comprehensive risk management and configuration management plan and data sharing policy. These major developments of standards, the HRP, the HMTA and a forum for review of human system risks (HSRB) facilitated the integration of human research, medical operations, systems engineering and many other disciplines in the comprehensive review of human system risks. The HSRB began a comprehensive review of all potential inflight medical conditions and events and over the course of several reviews consolidated the number of human system risks to 30 where the greatest emphasis is placed for investing program dollars for risk mitigation. The HSRB considers all available evidence from human research, medical operations and occupational surveillance in assessing the risks for appropriate mitigation and future work. All applicable DRMs (low earth orbit 6 and 12 months, deep space sortie for 30 days and 1 year, a one year lunar mission, and a planetary mission for 3 years) are considered as human system risks are modified by the hazards associated with space flight such as microgravity, exposure to radiation, distance from the earth, isolation and a closed environment. Each risk has a summary assessment representing the state of knowledge/evidence base for that risk, the available risk mitigations, traceability to the SFHSS and program requirements, and future work required. These data then can drive coordinated budgets across the HRP, the International Space Station, Crew Health and Safety and Advanced Exploration System budgets. These risk assessments were completed for 6 DRMs in December of 2014 and serve as the baseline for which subsequent research and technology development and crew health care portfolios can be assessed. The HSRB will review each risk at least annually and especially when new information is available that must be considered for effective risk mitigation. The current status of each risk can be reported to program management for operations, budget reviews and general oversight of the human system risk management program.

Davis, Jeffrey↗

Path to a Research Plan

This viewgraph presentation discusses the status and goals for the NASA OBPR Physical Science Research Program. The following text was used to summarize the presentation. The OBPR Physical Sciences Research program has been comprehensively reviewed and endorsed by National Research Council. The value and need for the research have been re-affirmed. The research program has been prioritized and resource re-allocations have been carried out through an OBPR-wide process. An increasing emphasis on strategic, mission-oriented research is planned. The program will strive to maintain a balance between strategic and fundamental research. A feasible ISS flight research program fitting within the budgetary and ISS resource envelopes has been formulated for the near term (2003-2007). The current ISS research program will be significantly strengthened starting 2005 by using discipline dedicated research facility racks. A research re-planning effort has been initiated and will include active participation from the research community in the next few months. The research re-planning effort will poise PSR to increase ISS research utilization for a potential enhancement beyond ISS IP Core Complete. The Physical Sciences research program readily integrates the cross-disciplinary requirements of the NASA and OBPR strategic objectives. Each fundamental research thrust will develop a roadmap through technical workshops and Discipline Working Groups (DWGs). Most fundamental research thrusts will involve cross-disciplinary efforts. A Technology Roadmap will guide the Strategic Research for Exploration thrust. The Research Plan will integrate and coordinate fundamental Research Thrusts Roadmaps with the Technology Roadmap. The Technology Roadmap will be developed in coordination with other OBPR programs as well as other Enterprise (R,S,M,N). International Partners will contribute to the roadmaps and through research coordination. The research plan will be vetted with the discipline working groups, the BPRAC subcommittees, and with the BPRAC. Recommendations from NRC past and current committees will be implemented whenever appropriate.Proposed theme element content will be "missionized" around planned content and potential new projects (facilities, modules, initiatives) on approximately a five-year horizon, with the approval of PSRD management. Center/science working group teams will develop descriptions of "mission" objectives, value, and requirements. Purpose is to create a competitive environment for concept development and to stimulate community ownership/advocacy. Proposed theme elements reviewed and approved by PSRD management. Strawman roadmaps for themes developed. Program budget and technology requirements verified. Theme elements are prioritized with the input of advisory groups. Integration into program themes (questions) and required technology investments are defined by science and technology roadmaps. Review and assessment by OBPR management.

Chiaramonte, Fran↗

Prioritizing and Managing Technology Needs to Meet River Protection Project Mission Objectives - 16462

Over 56 million gallons of radioactive waste are stored in 177 large underground tanks at the Hanford Site, located in southeastern Washington State. This nuclear waste resulted from plutonium production for the nation's nuclear defense program. The River Protection Project (RPP) mission is to: - Safeguard and safely manage waste stored in the Hanford tanks, - Treat the waste using the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP), - Ensure safe disposition of the waste to protect the Columbia River and the environment. Each aspect of the mission requires some application of technology in order to meet the mission objectives. The RPP Technology Roadmap document presents a comprehensive, integrated assessment of the technology-related advances needed to ensure successful completion of the Hanford tank waste cleanup mission. This paper describes the development of the RPP Technology Roadmap, summarizes its content, describes integration and collaboration with the Department of Energy's national laboratories to support the work identified, and defines how priorities were identified to ensure near-term RPP mission commitments can be accomplished while preserving the longer term technology development elements necessary for mission completion. The Challenge - Managing a wide variety of technology needs that involve multiple organizations, contractors, and national laboratories presents additional challenges when funding constraints are factored in. A process was needed to ensure the technology needs supporting near term mission priorities were appropriately identified, prioritized, and supported through the fiscal year planning process. Additionally, the national laboratory resources necessary to support many of the technologies require coordination to ensure the most appropriate resources are applied at the appropriate level without duplication or contradiction of effort. The Solution - The RPP Technology Roadmap was developed with the primary purposes to: - Identify technology related items needed to support or enhance the River Protection Project (RPP) mission, - Prioritize technology needs to support fiscal year planning processes, - Organize National laboratory support of the RPP mission and communicate needs to the participating contractors. The Technology Roadmap is consistent with Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford mission priorities and is also in alignment with other Hanford Site technical initiatives and policy and planning documents. The Technology Roadmap highlights the current estimated technology needs and identifies where planning shortfalls exist and where national laboratory participation is needed to support mission success. This information assists fiscal year planning and national laboratory contracting processes to ensure that technology needs are supported. In addition to supporting the RPP baseline mission, the Technology Roadmap provides a basis for strategic planning by identifying opportunities to use technology solutions to enhance mission efficiency. This waste management paper describes the innovative and collaborative processes used to develop, validate, and communicate the results so the project owners and the national laboratories can most effectively plan work scope and resources. A discussion of the following processes is included: - Technology needs and task owner identification, - Functional area grouping and area lead identification, - Needs prioritization, - High priority needs ranking (including validation), - Results compilation and planning gap identification, - Results presentation by project and functional area, - National laboratory coordination and collaboration. Application - The process used to develop the RPP technology roadmap is applicable to any site where multiple national laboratories and contractors are involved in identifying and implementing technology based solutions. This process is also applicable to the DOE HQ role to provide prioritization and coordination of the nationwide technology development activities. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Oak Ridge National Laboratory Annual Sustainability Report 2023

ORNL, managed under contract by UT-Battelle LLC, is DOE’s largest science and energy laboratory and, as such, executes the widest range of mission capabilities. Diverse expertise spans a broad range of scientific and engineering disciplines, enabling research and science achievements to accelerate the delivery of solutions to the marketplace. ORNL supports DOE’s national missions of scientific discovery, clean energy, and security. To execute these activities, ORNL has grown significantly over 80 years of continuous operations, consisting of facilities with commissioning dates ranging from the 1940s to the present—an extraordinary set of distinctive scientific facilities and equipment. The complexities of such a variety of facilities require teamwork among divisions, a wide variety of conservation projects, and creative strategies to achieve the desired energy and water savings. Such a diverse and unique set of major facilities, totaling over 5.5 million square feet, with 6,000 employees, requires an innovative plan to accomplish advancements in operational efficiencies. ORNL is tasked with the management of an extraordinary set of distinctive scientific facilities and equipment for DOE. ORNL is mission-driven, and its mission has grown substantially over the decades. ORNL’s core research capabilities provide broad science and technology support for DOE in the areas of energy, environment, and national security. Currently, ORNL is a world leader in materials, neutron, and nuclear science and engineering, and in high-performance computing and data analytics. ORNL’s vast portfolio of research facilities must be maintained and carefully upgraded to protect the nation’s investment in scientific analysis. The goal of sustainable and resilient operations is to enable more effective execution of ORNL’s science and technology mission. Sustainable operational practices and enhanced resilience strive for excellent results while remaining diligent in energy conservation, environmental stewardship, asset management, and community engagement. The Sustainable ORNL Program (Sustainable ORNL) Continuous improvements in operational and business processes must be integrated into the fabric of the ORNL culture to maximize the return from the investment made in modernizing facilities and equipment. The Sustainable ORNL program promotes the legacy of system-wide best practices, management commitment, and employee engagement that will lead ORNL into a future of efficient, resilient, and sustainable operations. ORNL leadership and Sustainable ORNL champions receive regular status reports on the progress of each project and focus area (i.e., roadmap) and periodic summary reports. More information can be found at the program’s website. The Sustainable ORNL roadmap structure endorses 15 vital roadmaps. The figure below summarizes the current project assignments and demonstrates that each project contributes to the wellbeing of the whole. Continuous employee engagement and regular status reports confirm the ideals of the program. The roadmap structure is not static; as the science mission advances and the needs of the organization evolve, the Sustainable ORNL roadmap structure elements are modified to align with developing priorities. In 2022, Sustainable ORNL made roadmap changes to better align ORNL to support new federal requirements that have been issued.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Circular Economy Contributions to Decarbonizing the US Steel Sector

The potential benefits of the circular economy (CE) for decarbonization have recently attracted much attention in the academic and grey literature. The department of energy (DOE) industrial decarbonization roadmap highlight that in addition to the four pillars (energy efficiency, electrification, low-carbon fuels, feedstocks, and energy sources, and carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS)) identified in the roadmap, "scenarios [...] will need to be developed that incorporate materials efficiency and circular economy strategies". Moreover, the roadmap identifies hard-to-abate CO2 emissions across the five industrial subsectors included in the analysis (iron & steel, chemical, food & beverage, refining, and cement manufacturing). Thus, additional options to decarbonize the industrial sector, like the CE, could prove beneficial to address those hard-to-abate emissions. Moreover, they may be less costly, require less R&D or incentives, and be more readily adopted than other strategies such as energy efficiency and CCUS. While the Industrial Decarbonization Roadmap includes some CE strategies (e.g., the increasing market share of steel from electric arc furnaces - which incorporate steel scrap), a deeper dive into what role the CE could play in the United States (US) industrial decarbonization is needed. In this work, we present several industrial decarbonization scenarios that incorporate materials efficiency and circular economy strategies for the iron & steel subsector. The scenarios identify barriers (including technical limits and constraints), opportunities, and R&D needs.Moreover, we estimate the contribution of those scenarios to reducing the industrial sector's CO2 emissions and their potential synergies with the Industrial Decarbonization Roadmap's four pillars. Iron & steel manufacturing was responsible for 90 million tons of industrial CO2 emissions in 2020 - 7% of the industrial sector's total process- related emissions. Besides recycling - which presents technical limitations due to trace contaminants - CE strategies on the demand side could lower iron & steel manufacturing emissions (e.g., the development of lighter products or business models that encourage a more intensive use). This study reviews barriers, opportunities, and trade-offs for 5 material efficiency strategies. Many topics explored in the review call for further research.

barriers↗

Rapid Cost Assessment of Space Mission Concepts Through Application of Complexity-Based Cost Indices

This slide presentation reviews the development of a rapid cost assessment models for evaluation of exploration missions through the application of complexity based cost indices. In Fall of 2004, NASA began developing 13 documents, known as "strategic roadmaps," intended to outline a strategy for space exploration over the next 30 years. The Third Strategic Roadmap, The Strategic Roadmap for Solar System Exploration, focused on strategy for robotic exploration of the Solar System. Development of the Strategic Roadmap for Solar System Exploration led to the investigation of a large variety of missions. However, the necessity of planning around scientific inquiry and budgetary constraints made it necessary for the roadmap development team to evaluate potential missions not only for scientific return but also cost. Performing detailed cost studies for each of the large number of missions was impractical given the time constraints involved and lack of detailed mission studies; so a method of rapid cost assessment was developed by us to allow preliminary analysis. It has been noted that there is a strong correlation between complexity and cost and schedule of planetary missions. While these correlations were made after missions had been built and flown (successfully or otherwise), it seemed likely that a similar approach could provide at least some relative cost ranking. Cost estimation relationships (CERs) have been developed based on subsystem design choices. These CERs required more detailed information than available, forcing the team to adopt a more high level approach. Costing by analogy has been developed for small satellites, however, planetary exploration missions provide such varying spacecraft requirements that there is a lack of adequately comparable missions that can be used for analogy.

cost estimation↗

Graphical Visualization of Human Exploration Capabilities

NASA's pioneering space strategy will require advanced capabilities to expand the boundaries of human exploration on the Journey to Mars (J2M). The Evolvable Mars Campaign (EMC) architecture serves as a framework to identify critical capabilities that need to be developed and tested in order to enable a range of human exploration destinations and missions. Agency-wide System Maturation Teams (SMT) are responsible for the maturation of these critical exploration capabilities and help formulate, guide and resolve performance gaps associated with the EMC-identified capabilities. Systems Capability Organization Reporting Engine boards (SCOREboards) were developed to integrate the SMT data sets into cohesive human exploration capability stories that can be used to promote dialog and communicate NASA's exploration investments. Each SCOREboard provides a graphical visualization of SMT capability development needs that enable exploration missions, and presents a comprehensive overview of data that outlines a roadmap of system maturation needs critical for the J2M. SCOREboards are generated by a computer program that extracts data from a main repository, sorts the data based on a tiered data reduction structure, and then plots the data according to specified user inputs. The ability to sort and plot varying data categories provides the flexibility to present specific SCOREboard capability roadmaps based on customer requests. This paper presents the development of the SCOREboard computer program and shows multiple complementary, yet different datasets through a unified format designed to facilitate comparison between datasets. Example SCOREboard capability roadmaps are presented followed by a discussion of how the roadmaps are used to: 1) communicate capability developments and readiness of systems for future missions, and 2) influence the definition of NASA's human exploration investment portfolio through capability-driven processes. The paper concludes with a description of planned future work to modify the computer program to include additional data and of alternate capability roadmap formats currently under consideration.

Rodgers, Erica M.↗

Reliable, Practical Kilowatt-class Cryogenics for Superconducting Devices

Following the successful development of a Flexibly-Attached Remote cryocooler for ~200W at 80K under a Phase II DOE grant, Clever Fellows Innovation Consortium, Inc. (dba CFIC-Qdrive; acquired by Chart Industries in 2012) was invited by the DOE to scale up this technology to ~1000W/80K in a Phase III program. This target is responsive to the “Cryogenics Roadmap” developed by the DOE to accelerate the development of cryogenic cooling necessary to support the emerging superconducting power applications. Mirroring the Roadmap, our proposal included a capacity target (1000W at 80K) and a cost target (<$40/watt, at 80K), but unlike the Roadmap, we did not formally propose to meet a specific efficiency target. We achieved 75% of the capacity target, with a record-size coaxial “pulse-tube” coldfinger, but only by working on the project well beyond the original “period of performance” on unfunded extension. We believe 100% of the capacity target was within reach, but our own budget and time constraints forbade additional effort. We were less successful in meeting the cost targets. Ultimately, the specific configuration that was the subject of Phase III was not commercialized, largely because the market for superconducting devices has not been nearly as robust as was expected at the advent of the Roadmap.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Action-based dynamical modeling for the Milky Way disk

We present RoadMapping, a full-likelihood dynamical modeling machinery that aims to recover the Milky Way’s (MW) gravitational potential from large samples of stars in the Galactic disk. RoadMapping models the observed positions and velocities of stars with a parameterized, three-integral distribution function (DF) in a parameterized axisymmetric potential. We investigate through differential test cases with idealized mock data how the breakdown of model assumptions and data properties affect constraints on the potential and DF. Our key results are: (i) If the MW’s true potential is not included in the assumed model potential family, we can—in the axisymmetric case—still find a robust estimate for the potential, with only ≲10% difference in surface density within |z|⩽1.1 kpc inside the observed volume. (ii) Modest systematic differences between the true and model DF are inconsequential. E.g., when binning stars to define sub-populations with simple DFs, binning errors do not affect the modeling as long as the DF parameters of neighboring bins differ by <20%. In addition, RoadMapping ensures unbiased potential estimates for either (iii) small misjudgements of the spatial selection function (i.e., ≲15% at the survey volume’s edge), (iv) if distances are known to within 10%, or (v) if proper motion uncertainties are known within 10% or are smaller than δμ≲1 mas yr{sup −1}. Challenges are the rapidly increasing computational costs for large sample sizes. Overall, RoadMapping is well suited to making precise new measurements of the MW’s potential with data from the upcoming Gaia releases.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗

Action-based Dynamical Modeling for the Milky Way Disk: The Influence of Spiral Arms

RoadMapping is a dynamical modeling machinery developed to constrain the Milky Way’s (MW) gravitational potential by simultaneously fitting an axisymmetric parametrized potential and an action-based orbit distribution function (DF) to discrete 6D phase-space measurements of stars in the Galactic disk. In this work, we demonstrate RoadMapping's robustness in the presence of spiral arms by modeling data drawn from an N-body simulation snapshot of a disk-dominated galaxy of MW mass with strong spiral arms (but no bar), exploring survey volumes with radii 500 pc⩽r{sub max}⩽5 kpc. The potential constraints are very robust, even though we use a simple action-based DF, the quasi-isothermal DF. The best-fit RoadMapping model always recovers the correct gravitational forces where most of the stars that entered the analysis are located, even for small volumes. For data from large survey volumes, RoadMapping finds axisymmetric models that average well over the spiral arms. Unsurprisingly, the models are slightly biased by the excess of stars in the spiral arms. Gravitational potential models derived from survey volumes with at least r{sub max}=3 kpc can be reliably extrapolated to larger volumes. However, a large radial survey extent, r{sub max}∼5 kpc, is needed to correctly recover the halo scale length. In general, the recovery and extrapolability of potentials inferred from data sets that were drawn from inter-arm regions appear to be better than those of data sets drawn from spiral arms. Our analysis implies that building axisymmetric models for the Galaxy with upcoming Gaia data will lead to sensible and robust approximations of the MW’s potential.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗

Office of Biological and Physical Research: Overview Transitioning to the Vision for Space Exploration

Viewgraphs on NASA's transition to its vision for space exploration is presented. The topics include: 1) Strategic Directives Guiding the Human Support Technology Program; 2) Progressive Capabilities; 3) A Journey to Inspire, Innovate, and Discover; 4) Risk Mitigation Status Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and Countermeasures Readiness Level (CRL); 5) Biological And Physical Research Enterprise Aligning With The Vision For U.S. Space Exploration; 6) Critical Path Roadmap Reference Missions; 7) Rating Risks; 8) Current Critical Path Roadmap (Draft) Rating Risks: Human Health; 9) Current Critical Path Roadmap (Draft) Rating Risks: System Performance/Efficiency; 10) Biological And Physical Research Enterprise Efforts to Align With Vision For U.S. Space Exploration; 11) Aligning with the Vision: Exploration Research Areas of Emphasis; 12) Code U Efforts To Align With The Vision For U.S. Space Exploration; 13) Types of Critical Path Roadmap Risks; and 14) ISS Human Support Systems Research, Development, and Demonstration. A summary discussing the vision for U.S. space exploration is also provided.

Crouch, Roger↗