Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “public administration”

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.

699 records · Page 39
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2017

Development and Testing of a Friction-Based Post-Installable Sensor for Subsea Fiber-Optic Monitoring System

This paper presents the design and development of a friction-based coupling device for a fiber-optic monitoring system that can be deployed on existing subsea structures. This paper provides a summary of the design concept, prototype development, prototype performance testing, and design refinements of the device. The results of the laboratory testing of the first prototype performed at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Johnson Space Center (JSC) are included in this paper. Limitations of the initial design were identified and future design improvements were proposed. These new features will enhance the coupling of the device and improve the monitoring system measurement capabilities. A major challenge of a post-installed instrumentation monitoring system is to ensure adequate coupling between the instruments and the structure of interest for reliable measurements. Friction-based coupling devices have the potential to overcome coupling limitations caused by marine growth and soil contamination on subsea structures, flowlines or risers. The work described in this paper investigates the design of a friction-based coupling device (friction clamp), which is applicable for pipelines and structures that are suspended in the water column and those that are resting on the seabed. The monitoring elements consist of fiber-optic sensors that are bonded to a metal clamshell with a high-friction coating. The friction clamp has a single hinge design to facilitate the operation of the clamp and dual rows of opposing fasteners to distribute the clamping force on the structure. The friction clamp can be installed by divers in shallow depths or by remotely operated vehicles in deep-water applications. NASA-JSC was involved in the selection and testing of the friction coating, and in the design and testing of the prototype clamp device. Four-inch diameter and eight-inch diameter sub-scale friction clamp prototypes were built and tested to evaluate the strain measuring capabilities of the design under different loading scenarios. The testing revealed some limitations of the initial design concept, and subsequent refinements were explored to improve the measurement performance of the system. This study was part of a collaboration between NASA-JSC and Astro Technology, Inc. within a study called Clear Gulf. The primary objective of the Clear Gulf study is to develop advanced instrumentation technologies that will improve operational safety and reduce the risk of hydrocarbon spillage. NASA provided unique insights, expansive test facilities, and technical expertise to advance these technologies that would benefit the environment, the public, and commercial industries.

Bentley, Nicole L.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Assessment of Bird Strike Likelihood to Refine Bird Strike Risk Models

In its most basic form, bird strike risk is comprised of a frequency component that reflects the likelihood of a collision and a severity component that reflects the cost (monetary or otherwise) of the incident. The bird strike risk model currently used by United State Department of Agriculture (USDA) Wildlife Services to evaluate the risk posed by individual bird species at airports and establish priorities for management was developed in 2018. The model uses airport-specific data on the number of reported strikes for a species recorded in the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)’s National Wildlife Strike Database as a measure of frequency and the species’ relative hazard score as a measure of severity. The model was tested against independent data, found to perform well overall, and is being implemented widely across the United States. However, the model has limitations, including that species known to pose risk to aircraft locally, but not present in the strike record database, are not reflected as a major component of risk. Standard bird survey methodology commonly used at airports (e.g. point counts or transects) potentially can be used to complement wildlife strike records to calculate frequency or relative abundance of species. However, these methods generally focus on airport-wide population estimation and often ignore vital information that contributes to the true likelihood of a strike, such as use of runway protection zones and other critical areas, and spatial and temporal overlap with departing or approaching aircraft. As such, a more detailed understanding of space use by birds across landcovers and population fluctuations across the year is needed to accurately estimate the likelihood of bird strikes at airports. In this manuscript, we will review the extant risk model, including a discussion on its limitations. We then discuss approaches for refining our understanding of strike likelihood and briefly touch on needs for estimating probability of strike severity (cost).

bird strike, aircraft collision, damage by wildlif↗
DOE OSTI2020

HarDWR - Water Management Area (WMA) Shapefiles

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - No changes v1.0 - Initial public release Description Borders of all Water Management Areas (WMAs) across the 11 western-most states of the coterminous United States are available filtered through a single source. The legal name for this set of boundaries varies state-by-state. The data is provided as two compressed shapefiles. One, stateWMAs, contains data for all 11 states. For 10 of those states, Arizona being the exception, the polygons represent the legal management boundaries used by those states to manage their surface and groundwater resources respectively. WMAs refer to the set of boundaries a particular state uses to manage its water resources. Each set of boundaries was collected from the states individually, and then merged into one spatial layer. The merging process included renaming some columns to enable merging with all other source layers, as well as removing columns deemed not required for followup analysis. The retained columns for each boundary are: basinNum - the state provided unique numerical ID; basinName - the state provided English name of the area, where applicable; state - the state name; and uniID - a unique identifier we created by concatenating the state name, and underscore, and the state numerical ID. Arizona is unique within this collection of states in that surface and groundwater resources are managed using two separate sets of boundaries. During our followup analysis (Grogan et al., in review) we decided to focus on one set of boundaries, those for surface water. This is due to the recommendation of our hydrologists that the surface water boundary set is a more realist representation of how water moves across the landscape, as a few of the groundwater boundaries are based on political and/or economic considerations. Therefore, the Arizona surface WMAs are included within stateWMAs. The Arizona groundwater WMAs are provided as a separate file, azGroundWMAs, as a companion to the first file for completeness and general reference. WMA spatial boundary data sources by state: Arizona: Arizona Surface Water Watersheds; Collected February, 2020; https://gisdata2016-11-18t150447874z-azwater.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/surface-watershed/explore?location=34.158174%2C-111.970823%2C7.50 Arizona: Arizona Ground Water Basins; Collected February, 2020; https://gisdata2016-11-18t150447874z-azwater.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/groundwater-basin-2/explore?location=34.158174%2C-111.970823%2C7.50 California: California CalWater 2.2.1; Collected February, 2020; https://www.mlml.calstate.edu/mpsl-mlml/data-center/data-entry-tools/data-tools/gis-shapefile-layers/ Colorado: Colorado Water District Boundaries; Collected February, 2020; https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdss/gis-data-category Idaho: Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) Administrative Basins; Collected November, 2015; https://data-idwr.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/fb0df7d688a04074bad92ca8ef74cc26_4/explore?location=45.018686%2C-113.862284%2C6.93 Montana: Collected June, 2019; Directly contacted Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) Office of Information Technology (OIT) Nevada: Nevada State Engineer Admin Basin Boundaries; Collected April, 2020 https://ndwr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?layers=1364d0c3a0284fa1bcd90f952b2b9f1c New Mexico: New Mexico Office of the State Engineer (OSE) Declared Groundwater Basins; Collected April, 2020 https://geospatialdata-ose.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ose-declared-groundwater-basins/explore?location=34.179783%2C-105.996542%2C7.51 Oregon: Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) Administrative Basins; Collected February, 2020; https://www.oregon.gov/OWRD/access_Data/Pages/Data.aspx Utah: Utah Adjudication Books; Collected April, 2020; https://opendata.gis.utah.gov/datasets/utahDNR::utah-adjudication-books/explore?location=39.497165%2C-111.587782%2C-1.00 Washington: Washington Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIA); Collected June, 2017; https://ecology.wa.gov/Research-Data/Data-resources/Geographic-Information-Systems-GIS/Data Wyoming: Wyoming State Engineer's Office Board of Control Water Districts; Collected June, 2019; Directly contacted Wyoming State Engineer's Office

Economics↗
NASA NTRS2017

Development and Testing of a Friction-Based Post-Installable Fiber-Optic Monitoring System for Subsea Applications

This paper presents the design and development of a friction-based coupling device for a fiber-optic monitoring system capable of measuring pressure, strain, and temperature that can be deployed on existing subsea structures. A summary is provided of the design concept, prototype development, prototype performance testing, and subsequent design refinements of the device. The results of laboratory testing of the first prototype performed at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Johnson Space Center (JSC) are also included. Limitations of the initial concept were identified during testing and future design improvements were proposed and later implemented. These new features enhance the coupling of the sensor device and improve the monitoring system measurement capabilities. A major challenge of a post-installed instrumentation monitoring system is to ensure adequate coupling between the instruments and the structure of interest for reliable measurements. Friction-based devices have the potential to overcome coupling limitations caused by marine growth and soil contamination on flowlines, risers, and other subsea structures. The work described in this paper investigates the design and test of a friction-based coupling device (herein referred to as a friction clamp) which is suitable for pipelines and structures that are suspended in the water column as well as for those that are resting on the seabed. The monitoring elements consist of fiberoptic sensors that are bonded to a stainless steel clamshell assembly with a high-friction surface coating. The friction clamp incorporates a single hinge design to facilitate installation of the clamp and dual rows of opposing fasteners to distribute the clamping force along the structure. The friction clamp can be modified to be installed by commercial divers in shallow depths or by remotely operated vehicles in deep-water applications. NASA-JSC was involved in the selection and testing of the friction coating, and in the design and testing of the prototype clamp device. Four-inch diameter and eight-inch diameter sub-scale friction clamp prototypes were built and tested to evaluate the strain measuring capabilities of the design under different loading scenarios. The testing revealed some limitations of the initial design concept, and subsequent refinements were explored to improve the measurement performance of the system. This study was part of a collaboration between NASA-JSC and Astro Technology Inc. within a study called Clear Gulf. The primary objective of the Clear Gulf study is to develop advanced instrumentation technologies that will improve operational safety and reduce the risk of hydrocarbon spillage. NASA provided unique insights, expansive test facilities, and technical expertise to advance technologies that will benefit the environment, the public, and commercial industries.

Bentley, Nicole L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Plans for In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) Development, Demonstration, and Implementation

The United States (US) National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Artemis Moon to Mars program has four major goals: (1) Returning Americans to the Moon: 1st Woman & 1st Person of Color, (2) Learning to live and work on the Moon, (3) Translating lessons learned so that the United States has capabilities and operational experience for a mission to Mars, and (4) Inspires the next generation of explorers, researchers, scientists, and engineers worldwide. Overarching all of this, the NASA Artemis program also continues to follow Space Policy Directive One (SPD-1) which directs the US to lead an innovative and sustainable exploration program with commercial and international partners. A major objective to achieve the Artemis program goals and SPD-1 is to understand and characterize the resources that exist at these destinations, and to learn how to utilize these resources for sustained human exploration and the commercialization of space. This ability, commonly known as In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), involves any hardware or operation that harnesses and utilizes local resources to create products and services for robotic and human explo-ration. The NASA ISRU program is focused on the production of mission consumables and com-modities to enable sustained human exploration, such as rocket propellants, life support consuma-bles, fuel cell reactants, feedstock for manufacturing and construction, and nutrients for food and plant growth. In particular, propellants make up a significant fraction of the mass launched from Earth, are critical to mission success, and can reduce the cost for reusable transportation. Important for enabling long term surface stays, greater independence from Earth, and growing lunar infra-structure are the abilities to perform construction and manufacturing from in situ-derived metals and materials to create and expand on the infrastructure and reduce the logistical resupply needed for sustained surface and space operations. To achieve these ISRU capabilities, NASA, in partner-ship with industry, academia, and international partners has initiated a multi-faceted program which involves (i) Determining Customer Needs (Type and Quantity of Commodities), (ii) supporting ground Development of Hardware and Systems until Ready for Lunar Flight, (iii) utilize Commer-cial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) flights to fly resource assessment missions with the Science Mission Directorate (SMD), and public-private partnership (PPP) ISRU demonstrations of critical technologies and processes, and (iv) performing commercial-led end-to-end ‘Pilot’ Plant production of commodities and demonstration of usage at a scale and duration that minimizes or eliminates risk for full implementation of ISRU-derived commodities in mission critical applications. This paper will discuss the technologies, mission studies, and accomplishments achieved to date for the ISRU multi-faceted program, and plans for continued ground development and flight missions to reduce the risk of full ISRU implementation.

In situ resource utilization↗
NASA NTRS2003

Wilbur and Orville Wright: A Reissue of a Chronology Commemorating the Hundredth Anniversary of the Birth of Orville Wright, August 19, 1871

During the year 2003, hundreds of events will mark the one-hundredth anniversary of the Wright brothers historic first flights at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. The centennial year will witness exhibitions, lectures, television documentaries, films, air shows, flight recreations of Wright aircraft, the issuing of postage stamps and medals, the publication of dozens of new books and articles, and numerous other commemorative activities. One of these events, although not likely to make the evening news, is among the most important of all in terms of a lasting contribution to the observance of this ultimate aviation milestone: the reprinting of Arthur G. Renstrom WIlbur & Orville Wrght: A Chronology Commemorating the Hundredth Anniversary of the Birth of Orville Wright, August 19, 1871. Since its appearance in 1975, Wilbur end Orville Wright: A Chronology has become indispensable to students and authors concerned with the life and work of the famous brothers. No doubt every book on the subject published in the last quarter century, including three of my own, was written with this treasure close at hand. This volume is far more than a simple compilation of dates and facts. Renstrom was a master reference librarian and bibliographer with a passion for aviation and the Wright brothers. He brought his considerable research skills to bear on the topic, and the result is a richly detailed, ever-informative, often entertaining walk through the lives and achievements of these two extraordinary individuals. Renstrom was not content to offer a date with a one-line tidbit. His entries are brimming with information. This is a highly readable reference work that, believe it or not, can be enjoyably read from cover to cover. The project was clearly a labor of love by a talented professional. During most of the last twenty years, I have been privileged to be the curator of the 1903 Wright Flyer at the Smithsonian Institution s National Air and Space Museum. The position brings a steady stream of inquiries about the Wright airplane and the endlessly fascinating brothers who created it. I do not know how I would have done this job without Renstrom s superb volume on my bookshelf. It is the first place I go to check anything on the Wright brothers, and I typically find what I am looking for in its pages. Arthur Renstrom also published two other classic reference works on the Wright brothers: Wilbur & Orville Wright: A Bibliography Commemorating the Hundredth Anniversary of the Birth of Wilbur Wright, April 16, 1867, in 1968 (an updated revision was published by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in 2002) and Wilbur & Orville Wright, Pictorial Materials: A Documentary Guide in 1982, completing a series of research tools for which there are few peers on any subject. He was also part of the team that produced the landmark two-volume compilation of the Wrights letters, notebooks, and diaries in 1953, The Papers of Wilbur and Orville Wright, edited by Marvin W. McFarland. Renstrom s contribution to the documentation and preservation of the Wright story is a lasting legacy that will serve researchers, students, and general enthusiasts for generations to come. In this busy, high-profile anniversary year, the reprinting of a nearly thirty-year-old reference book may seem a mundane and quiet contribution to the celebration surrounding the Wright brothers world-changing achievement, but it is perhaps one of the most important. The U.S. Centennial of Flight Commission and NASA are to be commended for their foresight.

Renstrom, Arthur George↗
DOE OSTI2020

Cybersecurity for Distance Relay Protection

This project is a DOE follow-up effort on the CREDC workshop held on September 13, 2018 in Cambridge, MA to discuss cybersecurity of distance relays, which considered the benefits, vulnerabilities and risk mitigations for the use of communication systems in power system protection. The objectives of this project are to define the taxonomy of relay protection and associated communications; define use cases describing approaches to reduce the cyber-attack surface on those protective relays; and evaluate the loss of operational functional capability from changes to communication coverage. Mitigating controls will also be evaluated to understand if there are other approaches to reduce attack surfaces while maintaining communications or partial communications. Distance relays are used to protect transmission lines of approximately 10 to 300 miles in length, by detecting short circuits (i.e., faults) on the lines and then tripping circuit breakers in the substation. Such protection systems are a subset of the power system and they incorporate sensing, logic and communication functions. Protection system exposure to cyberattack could be drastically limited by disconnecting relays from all vulnerable communication systems, but this may adversely impact overall power system performance in the absence of cyberattack. This project began with a use case analysis of protection systems with communications, as summarized in this report. It continued with modeling, testing and evaluation in a miniature power system (MPS), located in the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) Electric Power Training Center (EPTC). The project also incorporated feedback from two industry meetings held in February and September 2019. The suggested next steps account for and complement the work already underway with DOE/CESER funding: 1. Study the performance of LCD and PC vs. PUTT, which is less reliant on communication system performance and GPS timing references. The PUTT scheme could prove to be more resilient to cyberattack or communications-related disruption. It could also be more tolerant of message re-routing with SDN/SDR communication systems. On the other hand, it will be more vulnerable to false tripping during dynamic events or to loss of the voltage signal. The optimum choice of scheme may depend on the specific power system and risk assessment. This study could provide a new template for evaluation based on business functions. 2. Research and develop new methods to detect and monitor distributed physical attacks, possibly using drones, video sensors, thermal sensors, machine learning and other advanced techniques. This will help mitigate the impact of cyberattack on the protection system, and will also help mitigate the impact of wild fires. 3. Implement a scalable PKI for use in electric utility protection systems. This will encourage widespread adoption of secure authentication methods that are already available, but not widely used at present. This will help secure engineering access to the relays. 4. Investigate the use of SDN in combination with SDR to achieve better cybersecurity and electromagnetic security of the network, incorporating path variability. This would help secure both engineering access and peer-to-peer GOOSE messaging. 5. Perform additional testing, with operator evaluation of “red button” scenarios, PUTT vs. LCD, relay mis-operations, and other cyberattacks in the EPTC. This is an important advantage of testing in the EPTC rather than by computer simulation or even hardware-in-the-loop simulation; the EPTC is already dedicated to managing the situational awareness, operator response times and other human impacts. One of the project objectives was to settle on a common nomenclature for this problem space. We have concluded that the OSI layer model, supplemented by ANSI device numbers and other IEEE standards, is already well-accepted by the industry. The IEEE PSRC knowledge base provides a great deal of public information

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2026

CHESS 2025: Field-collected vegetation attributes and site photos

This dataset represents field observations of vegetation samples collected as part of the Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) during June and July of 2025. Samples were collected in the field using tablet computers and digital forms, with target data differing by sample type (individual trees, individual shrubs, or 1-meter square plots of meadow and subshrub vegetation). Field samples were collected within 72 hours of airborne data collection using the National Ecological Observatory Network’s Aerial Observation Platform (NEON AOP). The NEON AOP collected waveform LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) and imaging spectrometer data in 426 spectral bands from the visible to shortwave infrared. Remote sensing data for the project is available on ESS-DIVE (DOI and citation to be added upon publication). Field data collected included canopy height and per-species horizontal proportional cover for meadow plots, species identity and height information for shrubs, as well as species identity, height, diameter at breast height, and health assessment information for trees. Photos of the focal site and surrounding landscape were taken for all sampling sites and are included in this archive. Green leaves or needles were collected for plant trait and foliar chemistry analysis. This data is archived separately (DOI and citation to be added upon publication). High-precision geospatial data for each sample (crown perimeter polygons for trees and shrubs, plot boundaries for meadow plots) is available here (Henderson et al., 2026). Field and remote sensing protocols largely followed those of a previous field and airborne imaging campaign performed in 2018 (described in Chadwick et al. 2020). Field data from the 2018 campaign can be found here (Chadwick et al., 2020 doi:10.15485/1618130). Because different field measurements were taken for meadow, shrub, and tree sites, data from these three sample types are archived as separate tables (chess_meadow_site_cleaned.csv, chess_shrub_site_cleaned.csv, chess_tree_site_cleaned.csv). Meadow proportional cover data is stored in a separate table (chess_meadow_cover_cleaned.csv). Taxonomy was treated identically between sample types, and the dataset shares a common set of voucher specimens (chess_voucher_IDs_cleaned.csv), as well as a single species list (chess_species_list_cleaned.csv). All taxonomic determinations were performed to the species level, and adhere to the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) backbone taxonomy as of January 10th, 2026 (GBIF Secretariat 2023). CHESS Project Description: The Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) comprised a multi-week airborne remote sensing and field observation campaign in the Upper Gunnison Basin, Colorado, conducted in June and July of 2025. Airborne remote sensing was conducted by the National Ecological Observatory Network Airborne Observation Platform (NEON AOP), concurrent with a field campaign run by the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory (RMBL), the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Watershed Function Science Focus Area (SFA), and NASA-JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) Earth Surface Mineral Dust Source Investigation (EMIT) program. Between June 10 and July 18, 2025, the NEON AOP flight team collected high-resolution aerial imaging spectroscopy and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data over three domains: the Upper East River (CRBU), Almont Triangle (ALMO), and the Upper Taylor Basin (UPTA). In coordination with the flights, a field campaign acquired ground-truth observations, including observations of vegetation composition, foliar traits, forest demography, and subsurface properties in 18 core sampling areas within the domains. Additional surface water observations were taken at over 380 point locations. All CHESS campaign datasets can be found within the CHESS ESS-DIVE data portal: https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/chess. Funding Acknowledgment: Field and remote-sensing data acquisition was performed under a grant from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NSSC24K1005). This work was also supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗
NASA NTRS2018

Performance, Stability and Compatibility of Oxygen/RP-1 Multi-Element Oxidizer-Rich Staged-Combustion Injectors

In 2015 and 2016, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Marshall Space Flight Center designed, fabricated, assembled and hot-fire tested an oxygen/RP-1 propellant multi-element oxidizer-rich staged-combustion test article. The main objective was to provide thrust chamber combustion stability data as part of the Combustion Stability Tool Development program, although demonstration of performance and compatibility of oxidizer-rich main injectors was also important. Funding was provided by the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center. Five configurations of main injectors were designed and fabricated, using conventional gas-centered swirl coaxial injector element designs generally similar to those used in oxygen/kerosene oxidizer-rich staged combustion engines such as the Russian RD-180 or NK-33 engines. Variations of element features included element size, recess depth, fuel gap width, and the presence of the sleeve separating the swirling fuel flow from the axial oxidizer flow. Ablative combustion chambers were fabricated based on hardware previously used at the NASA MSFC for testing at similar size and pressure. Existing oxygen/RP-1 oxidizer-rich subscale preburner injectors and hot gas ducts from a previous NASA-funded program were modified for use to supply the oxidizer-rich combustion products to the oxidizer circuit of the main injector of the thrust chamber. Testing of the resulting integrated test article - which included the preburner, inter-connecting hot gas duct, main injector, and ablative combustion chamber - was conducted at Test Stand 116 at the East Test Area of the NASA MSFC. The test article was well instrumented with static and dynamic pressure, temperature, and vibration sensors. This paper presents and discusses all the hot-fire test results of the integrated test article thrust chamber. Eighteen successful hot-fire tests of the integrated rig were conducted. Testing was accomplished with all five of the injector element concepts. Main combustion chamber pressures ranged from 710 to 2350 psia, and main combustion chamber mixture ratios ranged from 2.47 to 2.87. A chamber barrier fuel film coolant of about 2% to 4% of the total fuel flow was used for most tests. Characteristic exhaust velocity efficiency excluding the influence of the fuel film cooling ranged from 91% to 98% of theoretical. All tests of the thrust chamber exhibited stable combustion, even down to 40% of nominal operating pressures. Compatibility of the injector face and combustion chamber walls was acceptable. This paper is a follow-on to publication of preliminary test data presented at the 2016 JANNAF Liquid Propulsion Subcommittee meeting.

Hulka, J. R.↗
DOE OSTI2021

Building and experimenting with an agent-based model to study the population-level impact of CommunityRx, a clinic-based community resource referral intervention

CommunityRx (CRx), an information technology intervention, provides patients with a personalized list of healthful community resources (HealtheRx). In repeated clinical studies, nearly half of those who received clinical “doses” of the HealtheRx shared their information with others (“social doses”). Clinical trial design cannot fully capture the impact of information diffusion, which can act as a force multiplier for the intervention. Furthermore, experimentation is needed to understand how intervention delivery can optimize social spread under varying circumstances. To study information diffusion from CRx under varying conditions, we built an agent-based model (ABM). This study describes the model building process and illustrates how an ABM provides insight about information diffusion through in silico experimentation. To build the ABM, we constructed a synthetic population (“agents”) using publicly-available data sources. Using clinical trial data, we developed empirically-informed processes simulating agent activities, resource knowledge evolution and information sharing. Using RepastHPC and chiSIM software, we replicated the intervention in silico, simulated information diffusion processes, and generated emergent information diffusion networks. The CRx ABM was calibrated using empirical data to replicate the CRx intervention in silico. We used the ABM to quantify information spread via social versus clinical dosing then conducted information diffusion experiments, comparing the social dosing effect of the intervention when delivered by physicians, nurses or clinical clerks. The synthetic population (N = 802,191) exhibited diverse behavioral characteristics, including activity and knowledge evolution patterns. In silico delivery of the intervention was replicated with high fidelity. Large-scale information diffusion networks emerged among agents exchanging resource information. Varying the propensity for information exchange resulted in networks with different topological characteristics. Community resource information spread via social dosing was nearly 4 fold that from clinical dosing alone and did not vary by delivery mode. This study, using CRx as an example, demonstrates the process of building and experimenting with an ABM to study information diffusion from, and the population-level impact of, a clinical information-based intervention. While the focus of the CRx ABM is to recreate the CRx intervention in silico, the general process of model building, and computational experimentation presented is generalizable to other large-scale ABMs of information diffusion.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2004

To Boldly Go: America's Next Era in Space. The Plasma Universe

Dr. France Cordova, NASA's Chief Scientist, chaired this, the eighth seminar in the Administrator's Seminar Series. She introduced the NASA Administrator, Daniel S. Goldin, who, in turn, introduced the subject of plasma. Plasma, an ionized gas, is a function of temperature and density. We ve learned that, at Jupiter, the radiation is dense. But, Goldin asked, what else do we know? Dr. Cordova then introduced Dr. James Van Allen, for whom the Van Allen radiation belt was named. Dr. Van Allen, a member of the University of Iowa faculty, discussed the growing interest in practical applications of space physics, including radiation fields and particles, plasmas and ionospheres. He listed a hierarchy of magnetic fields, beginning at the top, as pulsars, the Sun, planets, interplanetary medium, and interstellar medium. He pointed out that we have investigated eight of the nine known planets,. He listed three basic energy sources as 1) kinetic energy from flowing plasma such as constitutional solar wind or interstellar wind; 2) rotational energy of the planet, and 3) orbital energy of satellites. He believes there are seven sources of energetic particles and five potential places where particles may go. The next speaker, Dr. Ian Axford of New Zealand, has been associated with the Max Planck Institut fuer Aeronomie and plasma physics. He has studied solar and galactic winds and clusters of galaxies of which there are several thousand. He believes that the solar wind temperature is in the millions of degrees. The final speaker was Dr. Roger Blanford of the California Institute of Technology. He classified extreme plasmas as lab plasmas and cosmic plasmas. Cosmic plasmas are from supernovae remnants. These have supplied us with heavy elements and may come via a shock front of 10(sup 15) electron volts. To understand the physics of plasma, one must learn about x-rays, the maximum energy of acceleration by supernova remnants, particle acceleration and composition of cosmic rays, maximum acceleration, and how fast protons are heated by ions. He asked questions about where high energy cosmic rays are made, what accelerates electrons, radiates gamma rays, makes electronpositron plasma, and finally noted that pulsars are good time keepers, but we need a better understanding of their mechanism and of plasmas, both cosmic and ground-based. In the discussion period, Goldin asked if NASA should put up an x-ray interferometer. The answer was no; gamma rays are of greater interest just now. Goldin also asked what the assembled scientists would like to see for a future mission? They expressed an interest in learning more about the origin of galaxies, cosmic rays, solar systems, planets, the existence of life "out there", gamma ray sources, the nature of gamma ray bursts, and the flow of gases around black holes. The discussion concluded with a suggestion that NASA should communicate to the general public more information regarding actual technological trials and tribulations involved in getting an experiment to work. The speakers thought that this would help non-scientists to better appreciate what it is that NASA does in connection with the benefits that are achieved.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2022

Directed Acyclic Graphs: A Tool for Understanding the NASA Human Spaceflight System Risks - Human System Risk Board

For over a decade, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has tracked and configuration-managed approximately 30 risks to astronaut health and performance that occur before, during and after spaceflight. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB), a Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) Board at NASA Johnson Space Center, is the entity responsible for identifying, assessing, analyzing, and monitoring the official understanding of the risk or risk posture for each of the Human System Risks and determining – based on evaluation of the available evidence – when that risk posture changes. The ultimate purpose of tracking and researching these risks is to find ways to reduce the risk that astronaut crews face during spaceflight. Historically, research, development and operations relevant to one risk have been conducted in isolation from other risks; these individual risk ‘silos’ enabled initial characterization of each specific risk. In spaceflight however, the impact of exposure to risk for astronaut crews is cumulative, and not independent of exposures or other risks, as all the adverse effects of the spaceflight environment begin at launch, continue throughout the duration of the mission and in some cases across the lifetime of the crews. In January of 2020, the HSRB at NASA embarked on a pilot project designed to assess the potential value of causal diagramming as a tool to facilitate understanding of these cumulative and interdependent effects as applied within Human System Risk management. This process uses directed acyclic graphs as a means of formalizing a shared mental model of the causal flow of risk among Risk Board stakeholders. Initially this model was to improve communication among those stakeholders, but the potential value exceeds communication alone. The causal diagrams are formulated as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) to function as a type of knowledge graph for reference for the board and its stakeholders. This document is a sister document to NASA/TM 20220006812 Directed Acyclic Graph Guidance Documentation (1). In that document, the basic guidance for creating and standardizing directed acyclic graphs as tools for cross-risk analysis is provided. This document contains the initial configuration managed DAGs that were created as a result of applying those principles. These initial versions were accepted by the HSRB in January of 2022. Each of the Human System Risks are represented by a DAG that has been reviewed by the larger Human Health and Performance community at NASA including life scientists, physical scientists, physicians, nurses, pharmacists, exercise specialists and more. These results show the starting point for Human System Risk DAGs as shared mental models and communication aids across the boundaries of the various expertise needed to understand and mitigate the human risks in spaceflight. Because they are a starting point, each of these DAGs can be expected to change over time as new or refined evidence becomes available. The process for updating these DAGs can be found in the JSC-66705 Human System Risk Management Plan (2) that is publicly available on the NASA Technical Reports Server.

Erik L. Antonsen↗
DOE OSTI2024

Carbon Management Projects (CONNECT) Database and Explorer

Overview The Carbon Management Projects (CONNECT) Toolkit is an online exploratory visualization tool developed by the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management (FECM) with support from other federal agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). It provides a single point of access to authoritative information on federal agency investment in a portfolio of research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) projects that have been publicly announced to advance technologies for point source carbon capture, carbon dioxide removal, transport, storage, and conversion, collectively referred to as carbon management. The RD&D programs covered in this tool are authorized by annual congressional appropriations ("Base Program") and the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). The tool also incorporates public information on other federal initiatives, such as the Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs, and public information released by other government agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) and Primacy States’ Underground Injection Control Class VI permits and EPA’s facility level greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Developed in a geographic information system, the tool organizes carbon management projects into five groups based on the primary technology that a project aims to advance, each visually represented as a digital layer ("carbon management project layer"). Only federally funded projects are included, which can be awarded projects that are completed or ongoing, or projects that have been selected but are currently under negotiation. Project information can be viewed in the map or in the attribute table below it when turned on. In the map view, each project is displayed at either its host site (for field work), where available, or its performer site (project lead's location, further explained in the table below). Host sites and performer sites are represented in distinct icons. Several reference layers offer additional public information on infrastructural and natural resource environment for carbon management. These reference layers, combined with multiple geographical basemaps, enable users to visualize the carbon management project layers in context. Carbon management project information will be updated monthly based on feedback and information availability. Carbon management project layers Point Source Carbon Capture (PSC) This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from power plants or industrial facilities. Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on capturing CO2 from the atmosphere, including direct air capture (DAC) and DAC hubs, direct ocean capture, enhanced mineralization, and biomass carbon removal and storage. For projects with multiple host sites, each of the sites are displayed individually with the project cost and cost sharing information representing the total for the entire project. Carbon Transport This layer contains DOE- and DOT-funded projects focused on CO2 transport. The Transport Research and Development sublayer contains projects that do not involve physical infrastructure; the Proposed Transport Corridor sublayer contains projects for which either a route for the transport infrastructure has been proposed or a general area for the transport infrastructure has been identified. Carbon Storage This layer contains DOE-funded key projects focused on CO2 storage. For projects with multiple field-work sites, each of the sites are displayed individually on the map with the project cost and cost sharing information representing the overall total for the entire project. Carbon Conversion This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on converting CO2 into economically valuable products. Reference layers The following layers provide additional information in the geographic proximity of carbon management projects. Users should reference the original sources for more details (weblinks provided below and in pop-up windows on the map). Regional Clean Hydrogen Hub and Facility These layers illustrate the approximate areas of the Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs announced by DOE's Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED) and the approximate locations of individual facilities that constitute the hubs (see "Where are the H2Hubs located?" on the webpage linked above). EPA Facility Level GHG Emissions (direct emitter) This layer shows direct CO2 emissions from stationary sources in 2022, using data extracted from EPA's Facility Level Information on GreenHouse gases Tool (FLIGHT). Captured and injected CO2 are not deducted from direct emitters’ total emissions. Contact EPA for additional details. Underground Injection Control Class VI permit/permit application This layer shows the locations of CO2 injection wells that are granted or in the process of applying for an Underground Injection Control Class VI permit by EPA or a Primacy State (currently Louisiana, North Dakota, and Wyoming). The URLs for the permits or permit applications are provided in the pop-up windows associated with the well locations. Contact EPA for additional details. Carbon Storage Resource This layer contains information on prospective CO2 storage resources in saline formations and oil and gas reservoirs provided by the National Carbon Sequestration Database and Geographic Information System (NATCARB) spatial database. Contact NETL for additional details. Existing CO2 pipeline This layer shows active CO2 pipelines based on information digitized from the map issued by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). Contact PHMSA for additional details.

Carbon Conversion↗
DOE OSTI2025

Advancing ocean monitoring and knowledge for societal benefit: the urgency to expand Argo to OneArgo by 2030

The ocean plays an essential role in regulating Earth’s climate, influencing weather conditions, providing sustenance for large populations, moderating anthropogenic climate change, encompassing massive biodiversity, and sustaining the global economy. Human activities are changing the oceans, stressing ocean health, threatening the critical services the ocean provides to society, with significant consequences for human well-being and safety, and economic prosperity. Effective and sustainable monitoring of the physical, biogeochemical state and ecosystem structure of the ocean, to enable climate adaptation, carbon management and sustainable marine resource management is urgently needed. The Argo program, a cornerstone of the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS), has revolutionized ocean observation by providing real-time, freely accessible global temperature and salinity data of the upper 2,000m of the ocean (Core Argo) using cost-effective simple robotics. For the past 25 years, Argo data have underpinned many ocean, climate and weather forecasting services, playing a fundamental role in safeguarding goods and lives. Argo data have enabled clearer assessments of ocean warming, sea level change and underlying driving processes, as well as scientific breakthroughs while supporting public awareness and education. Building on Argo’s success, OneArgo aims to greatly expand Argo’s capabilities by 2030, expanding to full-ocean depth, collecting biogeochemical parameters, and observing the rapidly changing polar regions. Providing a synergistic subsurface and global extension to several key space-based Earth Observation missions and GOOS components, OneArgo will enable biogeochemical and ecosystem forecasting and new long-term climate predictions for which the deep ocean is a key component. Driving forward a revolution in our understanding of marine ecosystems and the poorly-measured polar and deep oceans, OneArgo will be instrumental to assess sea level change, ocean carbon fluxes, acidification and deoxygenation. Emerging OneArgo applications include new views of ocean mixing, ocean bathymetry and sediment transport, and ecosystem resilience assessment. Implementing OneArgo requires about $100 million annually, a significant increase compared to present Argo funding. OneArgo is a strategic and cost-effective investment which will provide decision-makers, in both government and industry, with the critical knowledge needed to navigate the present and future environmental challenges, and safeguard both the ocean and human wellbeing for generations to come.

ARGO↗
NASA NTRS2000

A national survey of policies on disclosure of conflicts of interest in biomedical research

BACKGROUND: Conflicts of interest pose a threat to the integrity of scientific research. The current regulations of the U.S. Public Health Service and the National Science Foundation require that medical schools and other research institutions report the existence of conflicts of interest to the funding agency but allow the institutions to manage conflicts internally. The regulations do not specify how to do so. METHODS: We surveyed all medical schools (127) and other research institutions (170) that received more than $5 million in total grants annually from the National Institutes of Health or the National Science Foundation; 48 journals in basic science and clinical medicine; and 17 federal agencies in order to analyze their policies on conflicts of interest. RESULTS: Of the 297 institutions, 250 (84 percent) responded by March 2000, as did 47 of the 48 journals and 16 of the 17 federal agencies. Fifteen of the 250 institutions (6 percent)--5 medical schools and 10 other research institutions--reported that they had no policy on conflicts of interest. Among the institutions that had policies, there was marked variation in the definition and management of conflicts. Ninety-one percent had policies that adhered to the federal threshold for disclosure ($10,000 in annual income or equity in a relevant company or 5 percent ownership), and 9 percent had policies that exceeded the federal guidelines. Only 8 percent had policies requiring disclosure to funding agencies, only 7 percent had such policies regarding journals, and only 1 percent had policies requiring the disclosure of information to the relevant institutional review boards or to research subjects. Twenty journals (43 percent) reported that they had policies requiring disclosure of conflicts of interest. Only four federal agencies had policies that explicitly addressed conflicts of interest in extramural research, and all but one of the agencies relied primarily on institutional discretion. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variation among policies on conflicts of interest at medical schools and other research institutions. This variation, combined with the fact that many scientific journals and funding agencies do not require disclosure of conflicts of interest, suggests that the current standards may not be adequate to maintain a high level of scientific integrity.

Human↗