Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “crosscutting research”

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.

60 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

FY2020 Materials Annual Progress Report

The Materials Technology subprogram supports the Vehicle Technologies Office’s (VTO’s) mission to accelerate the deployment of clean energy technology toward achieving net-zero emissions in the transportation sector. The Propulsion Materials research portfolio seeks to develop higher performance materials that can withstand increasingly extreme environments and address the future properties needed for a variety of high-efficiency powertrain types, sizes, fueling concepts, and combustion modes. The Lightweight Materials research portfolio enables improvements in fuel economy by providing properties that are equal to or better than traditional materials at a lower weight. Because it takes less energy to accelerate a lighter object, replacing cast-iron (Fe) and traditional steel components with lightweight materials—such as advanced high-strength steels (AHSS), magnesium (Mg) alloys, aluminum (Al) alloys, and fiber-reinforced polymer composites—can directly reduce a vehicle’s fuel consumption. By 2025, the Materials Technology research activities seek to enable a 25% weight reduction of the glider for light-duty (LD) vehicles including body, chassis, and interior as compared to a 2015 baseline at no more than a $5/lb-saved increase in cost.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
NASA NTRS2011

Crosscutting Development- EVA Tools and Geology Sample Acquisition

Exploration to all destinations has at one time or another involved the acquisition and return of samples and context data. Gathered at the summit of the highest mountain, the floor of the deepest sea, or the ice of a polar surface, samples and their value (both scientific and symbolic) have been a mainstay of Earthly exploration. In manned spaceflight exploration, the gathering of samples and their contextual information has continued. With the extension of collecting activities to spaceflight destinations comes the need for geology tools and equipment uniquely designed for use by suited crew members in radically different environments from conventional field geology. Beginning with the first Apollo Lunar Surface Extravehicular Activity (EVA), EVA Geology Tools were successfully used to enable the exploration and scientific sample gathering objectives of the lunar crew members. These early designs were a step in the evolution of Field Geology equipment, and the evolution continues today. Contemporary efforts seek to build upon and extend the knowledge gained in not only the Apollo program but a wealth of terrestrial field geology methods and hardware that have continued to evolve since the last lunar surface EVA. This paper is presented with intentional focus on documenting the continuing evolution and growing body of knowledge for both engineering and science team members seeking to further the development of EVA Geology. Recent engineering development and field testing efforts of EVA Geology equipment for surface EVA applications are presented, including the 2010 Desert Research and Technology Studies (Desert RATs) field trial. An executive summary of findings will also be presented, detailing efforts recommended for exotic sample acquisition and pre-return curation development regardless of planetary or microgravity destination.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2021

Demonstrations of System-Level Autonomy for Spacecraft

System-level autonomy refers to autonomously meeting the crosscutting needs of a system through awareness and coordinated control spanning the system's breadth of capabilities. In contrast to function-level autonomy, which focuses on capabilities required to achieve a specific function such as surface navigation or image recognition, system-level autonomy addresses the needs to coordinate and manage activities and resources, and estimate the state, across subsystems. This paper describes demonstrations that were conducted on a spacecraft workstation testbed. The autonomy was provided by system-level planning and execution integrated with system-level estimators of orbit knowledge and spacecraft hardware health. These components are embedded in a system-level framework defining how goals are formed and executed, which elements exist, and how control authority is distributed among components. The planning and execution system at the heart of the framework has the capability to schedule, execute and monitor completion of tasks, as well as plan around unexpected events including new science opportunities and anomalies. The planning and scheduling system is the Multi-mission EXECutive (MEXEC), supported by the system-level health state estimator Model-Based Off-Nominal State Identification and Detection (MONSID), and Autonomous Navigation (AutoNav) algorithms, which determine the orbital system state based on optical observation of other targets. These components are applicable to many kinds of missions on different platforms. These demonstrations were elaborations of earlier experiments conducted on the ASTERIA (Arcsecond Space Telescope Enabling Research In Astrophysics) CubeSat, described in a companion submission [1]. The spacecraft’s extended mission served as an in-flight test platform, during which some individual autonomous capabilities were flown successfully. The autonomy experiments described here were performed on the ASTERIA workstation testbed.

Prather, Maurice↗
NASA NTRS2013

Review of the Draft 2014 Science Mission Directorate Science Plan

At the request of NASA's Science Mission Directorate (SMD), the National Research Council's (NRC's) Space Studies Board (SSB) initiated a study to review a draft of the SMD's 2014 Science Plan. The request for this review was made at a time when NASA is engaged in the final stages of a comprehensive, agency-wide effort to develop a new strategic plan and at a time when NASA's budget is under considerable stress. SMD's Science Plan serves to provide more detail on its four traditional science disciplines-astronomy and astrophysics, solar and space physics (also called heliophysics), planetary science, and Earth remote sensing and related activities-than is possible in the agency-wide Strategic Plan. In conducting its review of the draft Science Plan, the Committee on the Assessment of the NASA Science Mission Directorate 2014 Science Plan was charged to comment on the following specific areas: (1) Responsiveness to the NRC's guidance on key science issues and opportunities in recent NRC reports; (2) Attention to interdisciplinary aspects and overall scientific balance; (3) Identification and exposition of important opportunities for partnerships as well as education and public outreach; (4) Integration of technology development with the science program; (5) Clarity on how the plan aligns with SMD's strategic planning process; (6) General readability and clarity of presentation; and (7) Other relevant issues as determined by the committee. The main body of the report provides detailed findings and recommendations relating to the draft Science Plan. The highest-level, crosscutting issues are summarized here, and more detail is available in the main body of the report.

Source record↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Coordinated Microstructural and Isotopic Characterization of Diamond Inclusions within the Kenna Ureilite

Introduction: The origin of diamonds in ureilitic meteorites, a major family of ultramafic achondrites, has long been debated, with various formation mechanisms inferred, including: 1) shock conversion of preexisting graphite due to a hypervelocity impact on the ureilite parent body [e.g., 1]; 2) vapor deposition during condensation of the solar nebula [e.g., 2]; or 3) static transformation in the mantle of a large planetesimal (>1000 km in diameter) [e.g., 3]. The Kenna ureilite is a 10.9 kg stone that was found in Kansas in 1972 and is dominantly composed of olivine and pigeonite (68% and 22% modal abundance, respectively), together with minor metal and carbon-rich regions. Within the carbon-rich domains researchers have identified microdiamonds up to ~10 µm in size [4]. Methods: Due to the proximity of the extremely hard microdiamonds with soft graphite and moderately hard silicates, achieving an appropriately flat surface for electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) analysis has proven challenging. We have, therefore, employed a Hitachi ArBlade 5000 broad beam Ar ion milling system to prepare a sample with an adequately uniform surface flatness across the various minerals. The ion milling dramatically im-proved indexing of the EBSD patterns and facilitated high-resolution microstructural analysis of the carbon-rich domains. After microstructural EBSD analyses using an Oxford Symmetry detector we collected coordinated hy-perspectral cathodoluminescence (CL) analyses using a Gatan Monarc system mounted on a JEOL 7900F field emission (FE) scanning electron microscope at NASA Johnson Space Center. A focused ion beam (FIB) foil was extracted from a region of interest and analyzed using a JEOL 2500 FE scanning transmission electron microscope (STEM). In situ carbon and nitrogen isotopic analyses were collected from diamond-bearing domains using a Cameca NanoSIMS 50L at NASA JSC. Results: The carbon rich regions occur as tabular domains between polygonal olivine and pigeonite, and are composed of aggregates of micrometer-scale diamond with intermediate graphite, oxides and metal grains. Within the microdiamonds, {111} twins are abundant, many of which form ragged lamellae consistent with mechanical twinning. The microdiamond assemblages appear to pseudomorph tabular graphite habits, which together with the abundant deformation twins, support a shock transformation mechanism for microdiamond formation within the Kenna meteorite. Further supporting this observation, the diamond laths show close alignment of <111> and <110> between domains, consistent with a solid-state transformation from graphite along <0001> and <1-210>, respec-tively [5]. A FIB foil was extracted from a region with mechanical twins, and high resolution STEM analyses reveal cross-cutting veins of graphite and oriented kamacite crystals together with additional sets of {111} nano-twins formed in at least three orientations. Isotopic analyses of C and N reveal sector zoning patterns [cf. 3] that are unre-lated to the diamond substructure identified by EBSD yet consistent with hyperspectral CL images. Conclusions: These data provide new constraints on microdiamond formation within ureilites. The microdia-monds exhibit orientation variants defined by aligned <111> and <110> axes consistent with inherited crystallo-graphic orientations from transformation of a single hexagonal graphite parent crystal [5]. Crosscutting the micro-diamonds are veins of graphite and kamacite, together with additional {111} nanotwins. Taken together these data suggest that microdiamonds from ureilites formed from a solid state, diffusionless transformation from graphite, likely associated with a major shock event, which was subject to subsequent reversion either during decompression or a later deformation event. The N and C isotopic sector zoning is unrelated to diamond microstructures and likely reflects inheritance from the parent graphite crystal.

Ureilite↗
NASA NTRS2011

An Interim Report on NASA's Draft Space Technology Roadmaps

NASA has developed a set of 14 draft roadmaps to guide the development of space technologies under the leadership of the NASA Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT). Each of these roadmaps focuses on a particular technology area (TA). The roadmaps are intended to foster the development of advanced technologies and concepts that address NASA's needs and contribute to other aerospace and national needs. OCT requested that the National Research Council conduct a study to review the draft roadmaps, gather and assess relevant community input, and make recommendations and suggest priorities to inform NASA's decisions as it finalizes its roadmaps. The statement of task states that "based on the results of the community input and its own deliberations, the steering committee will prepare a brief interim report that addresses high-level issues associated with the roadmaps, such as the advisability of modifying the number or technical focus of the draft NASA roadmaps." This interim report, which does not include formal recommendations, addresses that one element of the study charge. NASA requested this interim report so that it would have the opportunity to make an early start in modifying the draft roadmaps based on feedback from the panels and steering committee. The final report will address all other tasks in the statement of task. In particular, the final report will include a prioritization of technologies, will describe in detail the prioritization process and criteria, and will include specific recommendations on a variety of topics, including many of the topics mentioned in this interim report. In developing both this interim report and the final report to come, the steering committee draws on the work of six study panels organized by technical area, loosely following the organization of the 14 roadmaps, as follows: A Panel 1: Propulsion and Power TA01 Launch Propulsion Systems TA02 In-Space Propulsion Technologies TA03 Space Power and Energy Storage Systems TA13 Ground and Launch Systems Processing B Panel 2: Robotics, Communications, and Navigation TA04 Robotics, TeleRobotics, and Autonomous Systems TA05 Communication and Navigation Systems C Panel 3: Instruments and Computing TA08 Science Instruments, Observatories, and Sensor Systems TA11 Modeling, Simulation, Information Technology, and Data Processing D Panel 4: Human Health and Surface Exploration TA06 Human Health, Life Support, and Habitation Systems TA07 Human Exploration Destination Systems E Panel 5: Materials Panel TA10 Nanotechnology TA12 Materials, Structures, Mechanical Systems, and Manufacturing TA14 Thermal Management Systems F Panel 6: Entry, Descent, and Landing Panel TA09 Entry, Descent, and Landing Systems In addition to drawing on the expertise represented on the steering committee and panels, the committee obtained input from each of 14 public workshops held on each of the 14 roadmaps. At these 1-day workshops, invited speakers, guests, and members of the public engaged in discussions on the different technology areas and their value to NASA. Broad community input was also solicited from a public website, where more than 240 public comments were received on the draft roadmaps in response to application of criteria (such as benefit, risk and reasonableness, and alignment with NASA and national goals) that the steering committee established. This interim report reflects the results of deliberations by the steering committee in light of these public inputs as well as additional inputs from the six panels. The steering committee's final report will be completed early in 2012. That report will prioritize the technologies that span the entire scope of the 14 roadmaps and provide additional guidance on crosscutting themes and other relevant topics.

Source record↗