Self-Aligned Focusing Schlieren (SAFS) Flow Visualization Tool: A Compact, Low-Cost, Easy-to-Use Flow Visualization Tool
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Joshua Weisberger↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “Focusing”
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.
Modular Interface for CLPS-Scale Excavators (MICE) – Feasibility Testing of a Modular Disconnect System for Regolith Manipulation Implements Focused on Excavation and Site Preparation Activies
The Artemis Program seeks to establish a sustained lunar presence and robust economy driven by re-sources available on the Moon and enabled by sup-porting infrastructure. This will require robotic manipulation of tens of thousands of metric tons of regolith. Excavation and site preparation tasks in the unforgiving lunar environment will inevitably lead to component wear and necessitate periodic maintenance and repair. System modularity and standard interfaces are key components of enabling robotic repair and maintenance. The Modular Interface for CLPS (Commercial Lunar Payloads Services) -scale Excavators (MICE) project is a funded fiscal year 2024 Internal Research and Development (IRAD) project at NASA KSC. The MICE project seeks to test concepts for modular re-configuration of a CLPS-scale excavation and site preparation rover. These concepts, henceforth referred to as Modular Disconnect Systems (MDS), allow a mobility platform to interface with regolith manipulation implements such as a bucket drum excavator or compactor. The MDS concepts allow the mobility platform to detect one implement and swap to another implement in-situ. Power and communications is fed through a dust-tolerant electrical connection on the MDS to the implement’s actuator(s) and sensors.
MICE↗
NASA Aeronautics Research: Emissions Focus 2024
Presentation for the Aviation Emissions Characterization ASCENT Joint Meeting hosted by the FAA. This a high level overview of ARMD and brief summary of recent NASA Emissions Research.
sustainable aviation fuels↗
Leaving the Nest: Have Users Incorporated Cloud Computing Into Their Work After Finishing Supportive Cloud-Focused Programs?
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Alexis Hunzinger↗
Mechanics of Preloaded Bolt Tensile Loading With Focus on Load Introduction Factor
The bolt tensile and joint separation loads are directly influenced by the locations at which the external loads enter the clamped members of a preloaded bolted joint (PBJ) and the associated load-paths through the joint. This physical load introduction mechanism affecting the bolt tensile loading is typically represented in the bolt tensile load equation, in part, by a load introduction factor (LIF), which was shown by H.M. Lee of Marshall Spaceflight Center to be a natural product of the bolt tensile load equation using a linear spring stiffness model. This LIF, being a function of load-path stiffness, has subsequently been denoted as the stiffness-based LIF (SBLIF), providing a framework to calculate the LIF using whatever load-path stiffness approximations are appropriate. Expanding upon the work of Lee, it is shown that the SBLIF and the joint stiffness factor are functions of the stiffnesses of the same load-paths and regions within a PBJ, and thus they should not be treated as independent variables. Mathematical expressions for the SBLIF are presented. Comparisons are shown between the analytically calculated SBLIF, the analytically calculated geometric LIF (GLIF), which is a simple clamped-member thickness ratio, the experimentally derived LIF, and the LIF determined by finite element analysis (FEA). Using experiment and FEA as a benchmark, the SBLIF, using traditional load-path stiffness approximations, enables a more accurate prediction of bolt tensile loading than the GLIF, although it can be unconservative near joint separation. The GLIF generally attributes more of the externally applied tensile load to the bolt than does the SBLIF, potentially resulting in heavier and/or more costly bolted joints. Mathematical relationships between the SBLIF and the GLIF are developed. Supplemental material is provided in the appendixes where the historical practice of using the joint compressive stiffness in place of the joint tensile stiffness is evaluated. The appendixes include step-by-step examples demonstrating the calculation of the SBLIF using traditional stiffness approximations and conclude with the development of the joint diagram in terms of the SBLIF, culminating into formulas for the key features of a joint diagram, which is useful for programming.
Load Path↗
Computational Materials for Qualification and Certification (CM4QC) Strategy Document: Maturation of Computational Materials Methods for Aviation-Focused Qualification and Certification of Metal Additive Manufacturing (as an Example of Process-Intensive Materials)
Although considerable scientific and technological advances have been made in recent years in additive manufacturing (AM) processes, these advances have not translated into significant market penetration of AM parts within the aviation industry. It is broadly acknowledged that using traditional qualification and certification (Q&C) approaches for AM components is one of the most significant barriers to broader adoption of AM, resulting in high costs, long product development and certification timelines, and complex design iterations during the product development cycle. A new approach is urgently needed. This document lays out a vision for a new Q&C paradigm with increased use of computational materials (CM) methods aimed at decreasing the time and cost of Q&C of process-intensive material (PIM) approaches in the aviation industry, with AM as the immediate use case. This vision was developed with substantial input from industry, regulatory agencies, government research organizations, and academia.
Edward H Glaessgen↗
Superboom Caustic Analysis and Measurement Program (SCAMP) Final Report
The objectives of the Superboom Caustic Analysis and Measurement (SCAMP) Program were to develop and validate, via flight-test measurements, analytical models for sonic boom signatures in and around focal zones as they are expected to occur during commercial aircraft transition from subsonic to supersonic flight, and to apply these models to focus boom prediction of low-boom aircraft designs. The SCAMP program has successfully investigated sonic boom focusing both analytically and experimentally, while gathering a comprehensive empirical flight test and acoustic dataset, and developing a suite of focused sonic boom prediction tools. An experimental flight and acoustic measurement test was designed during the initial year of the SCAMP program, with execution of the SCAMP flight test occurring in May 2011. The current SCAMP team, led by Wyle, includes partners from the Boeing Company, Pennsylvania State University, Gulfstream Aerospace, Eagle Aeronautics, and Central Washington University. Numerous collaborators have also participated by supporting the experiment with human and equipment resources at their own expense. The experiment involved precision flight of a McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing) F-18B executing different maneuvers that created focused sonic booms. The maneuvers were designed to center on the flight regime expected for commercial supersonic aircraft transonic transition, and also span a range of caustic curvatures in order to provide a variety of conditions for code validations. The SCAMP experiment was designed to capture concurrent F-18B on-board flight instrumentation data, high-fidelity ground-based and airborne acoustic data, and surface and upper air meteorological data. Close coordination with NASA Dryden resulted in the development of new experimental instrumentation and techniques to facilitate the SCAMP flight-test execution, including the development of an F-18B Mach rate cockpit display, TG-14 powered glider in-flight sonic boom measurement instrumentation and "Where's the Focus?" (WTF) software for near-real time way-point computation accounting for local atmospherics. In May 2011, 13 F-18B flights were conducted during 5 flying days over a 2 week period. A densely populated 10,000 ft-long ground acoustic array with 125-ft microphone spacing was designed to capture pre-, focus, and post-focus regions. The ground-based acoustic array was placed in a nominally east-west orientation in the remote Cuddeback lakebed region, north of Edwards AFB. This area was carefully selected to avoid placing focused booms on populated areas or solar power facilities. For the SCAMP measurement campaign, approvals were obtained to temporarily extend the Black Mountain supersonic corridor northward by three miles. The SCAMP flight tests successfully captured 70 boom events, with 61 focus passes, and 9 calibration passes. Seventeen of the focus passes and three of the calibration passes were laterally offset; with the others being centerline flights. Airborne incoming sonic boom wave measurements were measured by the TG-14 for 10 of the F-18B flight passes including one maximum focus signature, several N-u combinations, several overlapped N-u signatures, and several evanescent waves. During the 27-month program, the SCAMP team developed a suite of integrated computer codes with sonic boom focusing predictive capabilities: PCBoom, Lossy Nonlinear Tricomi Equation Method (LNTE) and the Nonlinear Progressive wave Equation (NPE) method. PCBoom propagates the rays through the atmosphere and, in addition to legacy focus signature prediction based on the Gill-Seebass method, provides input source characteristics and propagation parameters to LNTE and NPE. LNTE, a Tricomi solver that incorporates atmospheric losses, computes the focus signature at the focus, and computes the focus signature in the vicinity of the focal zone, including the evanescent and post-focus zones. LNTE signature auralization from low-boom vehicle designs has been demonstrated in the NASA Langley Interior Effects Room (IER). The NPE has also been validated for use in prediction of focused ground boom signatures in sonic boom focal zones. The NPE formulation has the capability to incorporate atmospheric turbulence in the predictions. This has been applied to sonic boom propagation in the past. Prediction of turbulence effects on focal zone signatures was not, however, explored during the SCAMP program.
Page, Juliet↗
Variable magnification glancing incidence x ray telescope
A multispectral glancing incidence x ray telescope is disclosed, which capable of broadband, high resolution imaging of solar and stellar x ray and extreme ultraviolet radiation sources includes a primary optical system which focuses the incoming radiation to a primary focus. Two or more ellipsoidal mirrors are positioned behind the primary focus at an inclination to the optical axis, each mirror having a concave surface coated with a multilayer synthetic microstructure coating to reflect a desired wavelength. The ellipsoidal mirrors are segments of respective ellipsoids having a common first focus coincident with the primary focus. A detector such as an x ray sensitive photographic film is positioned at the second focus of each of the ellipsoids so that each of the ellipsoidal mirrors may reflect the image at the first focus to the detector. In one embodiment the mirrors are inclined at different angles and has its respective second focus at a different location, separate detectors being located at the respective second focus. The mirrors are arranged so that the magnification and field of view differ, and a solenoid activated arm may withdraw at least one mirror from the beam to select the mirror upon which the beam is to impinge so that selected magnifications and fields of view may be detected.
Hoover, Richard↗
Three-Dimensional Electron Optics Model Developed for Traveling-Wave Tubes
A three-dimensional traveling-wave tube (TWT) electron beam optics model including periodic permanent magnet (PPM) focusing has been developed at the NASA Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field. This accurate model allows a TWT designer to develop a focusing structure while reducing the expensive and time-consuming task of building the TWT and hot-testing it (with the electron beam). In addition, the model allows, for the first time, an investigation of the effect on TWT operation of the important azimuthally asymmetric features of the focusing stack. The TWT is a vacuum device that amplifies signals by transferring energy from an electron beam to a radiofrequency (RF) signal. A critically important component is the focusing structure, which keeps the electron beam from diverging and intercepting the RF slow wave circuit. Such an interception can result in excessive circuit heating and decreased efficiency, whereas excessive growth in the beam diameter can lead to backward wave oscillations and premature saturation, indicating a serious reduction in tube performance. The most commonly used focusing structure is the PPM stack, which consists of a sequence of cylindrical iron pole pieces and opposite-polarity magnets. Typically, two-dimensional electron optics codes are used in the design of magnetic focusing devices. In general, these codes track the beam from the gun downstream by solving equations of motion for the electron beam in static-electric and magnetic fields in an azimuthally symmetric structure. Because these two-dimensional codes cannot adequately simulate a number of important effects, the simulation code MAFIA (solution of Maxwell's equations by the Finite-Integration-Algorithm) was used at Glenn to develop a three-dimensional electron optics model. First, a PPM stack was modeled in three dimensions. Then, the fields obtained using the magnetostatic solver were loaded into a particle-in-cell solver where the fully three-dimensional behavior of the beam was simulated in the magnetic focusing field. For the first time, the effects of azimuthally asymmetric designs and critical azimuthally asymmetric characteristics of the focusing stack (such as shunts, C-magnets, or magnet misalignment) on electron beam behavior have been investigated. A cutaway portion of a simulated electron beam focused by a PPM stack is illustrated.
Kory, Carol L.↗
Variable magnification variable dispersion glancing incidence imaging x ray spectroscopic telescope
A variable magnification variable dispersion glancing incidence x ray spectroscopic telescope capable of multiple high spatial revolution imaging at precise spectral lines of solar and stellar x ray and extreme ultraviolet radiation sources includes a primary optical system which focuses the incoming radiation to a primary focus. Two or more rotatable carriers each providing a different magnification are positioned behind the primary focus at an inclination to the optical axis, each carrier carrying a series of ellipsoidal diffraction grating mirrors each having a concave surface on which the gratings are ruled and coated with a multilayer coating to reflect by diffraction a different desired wavelength. The diffraction grating mirrors of both carriers are segments of ellipsoids having a common first focus coincident with the primary focus. A contoured detector such as an x ray sensitive photographic film is positioned at the second respective focus of each diffraction grating so that each grating may reflect the image at the first focus to the detector at the second focus. The carriers are selectively rotated to position a selected mirror for receiving radiation from the primary optical system, and at least the first carrier may be withdrawn from the path of the radiation to permit a selected grating on the second carrier to receive radiation.
Hoover, Richard↗
Multispectral variable magnification glancing incidence x ray telescope
A multispectral, variable magnification, glancing incidence, x-ray telescope capable of broadband, high resolution imaging of solar and stellar x-ray and extreme ultraviolet radiation sources is discussed. The telescope includes a primary optical system which focuses the incoming radiation to a primary focus. Two or more rotatable mirror carriers, each providing a different magnification, are positioned behind the primary focus at an inclination to the optical axis. Each carrier has a series of ellipsoidal mirrors, and each mirror has a concave surface covered with a multilayer (layered synthetic microstructure) coating to reflect a different desired wavelength. The mirrors of both carriers are segments of ellipsoids having a common first focus coincident with the primary focus. A detector such as an x-ray sensitive photographic film is positioned at the second respective focus of each mirror so that each mirror may reflect the image at the first focus to the detector at the second focus. The carriers are selectively rotated to position a selected mirror for receiving radiation from the primary optical system, and at least the first carrier may be withdrawn from the path of the radiation to permit a selected mirror on the second carrier to receive the radiation.
Hoover, Richard B.↗
Variable magnification variable dispersion glancing incidence imaging x-ray spectroscopic telescope
A variable magnification variable dispersion glancing incidence x-ray spectroscopic telescope capable of multiple high spatial revolution imaging at precise spectral lines of solar and stellar x-ray and extreme ultraviolet radiation sources includes a pirmary optical system which focuses the incoming radiation to a primary focus. Two or more rotatable carries each providing a different magnification are positioned behind the primary focus at an inclination to the optical axis, each carrier carrying a series of ellipsoidal diffraction grating mirrors each having a concave surface on which the gratings are ruled and coated with a mutlilayer coating to reflect by diffraction a different desired wavelength. The diffraction grating mirrors of both carriers are segments of ellipsoids having a common first focus coincident with the primary focus. A contoured detector such as an x-ray sensitive photogrpahic film is positioned at the second respective focus of each diffraction grating so that each grating may reflect the image at the first focus to the detector at the second focus. The carriers are selectively rotated to position a selected mirror for receiving radiation from the primary optical system, and at least the first carrier may be withdrawn from the path of the radiation to permit a selected grating on the second carrier to receive radiation.
Hoover, Richard B.↗
Surface Habitat Systems
The Surface Habitat Systems (SHS) Focused Investment Group (FIG) is part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Johnson Space Center (JSC) effort to provide a focused direction and funding to the various projects that are working on human surface habitat designs and technologies for the planetary exploration missions. The overall SHS-FIG effort focuses on directing and guiding those projects that: 1) develop and demonstrate new surface habitat system concepts, innovations, and technologies to support human exploration missions, 2) improve environmental systems that interact with human habitats, 3) handle and emplace human surface habitats, and 4) focus on supporting humans living and working in habitats on planetary surfaces. The activity areas of the SHS FIG described herein are focused on the surface habitat project near-term objectives as described in this document. The SHS-FIG effort focuses on mitigating surface habitat risks (as identified by the Lunar Surface Systems Project Office (LSSPO) Surface Habitat Element Team; and concentrates on developing surface habitat technologies as identified in the FY08 gap analysis. The surface habitat gap assessment will be updated annually as the surface architecture and surface habitat definition continues to mature. These technologies are mapped to the SHS-FIG Strategic Development Roadmap. The Roadmap will bring to light the areas where additional innovative efforts are needed to support the development of habitat concepts and designs and the development of new technologies to support of the LSSPO Habitation Element development plan. Three specific areas of development that address Lunar Architecture Team (LAT)-2 and Constellation Architecture Team (CxAT) Lunar habitat design issues or risks will be focused on by the SHS-FIG. The SHS-FIG will establish four areas of development that will help the projects prepare in their planning for surface habitat systems development. Those development areas are the 1) surface habitat concept definition, 2) inflatable surface habitat development, and 3) autonomous habitat operations, and 4) cross-cutting / systems engineering. In subsequent years, the SHS-FIG will solicit a call for innovations and technologies that will support the development of these four development areas. The other development areas will be assessed yearly and identified on the SHS-FIG s Strategic Development Roadmap. Initial investment projects that are funded by the Constellation Program Office (CxPO), LSSPO, or the Exploration Technology Development Projects (ETDP) will also be included on the Roadmap. For example, in one or two years from now, the autonomous habitat operations and testbed would collaborations with the Integrated Systems Health Management (ISHM) and Automation for Operations ETDP projects, which will give the surface habitat projects an integrated habitat autonomy testbed to test software and systems. The SHS-FIG scope is to provide focused direction for multiple innovations, technologies and subsystems that are needed to support humans at a remote planetary surface habitat during the concept development, design definition, and integration phases of that project. Subsystems include: habitability, lightweight structures, power management, communications, autonomy, deployment, outfitting, life support, wireless connectivity, lighting, thermal and more.
Kennedy, Kriss J.↗
Pre-Mission Input Requirements to Enable Successful Sample Collection by a Remote Field/EVA Team
This paper is intended to evaluate the sample collection process with respect to sample characterization and decision making. In some cases, it may be sufficient to know whether a given outcrop or hand sample is the same as or different from previous sampling localities or samples. In other cases, it may be important to have more in-depth characterization of the sample, such as basic composition, mineralogy, and petrology, in order to effectively identify the best sample. Contextual field observations, in situ/handheld analysis, and backroom evaluation may all play a role in understanding field lithologies and their importance for return. For example, whether a rock is a breccia or a clast-laden impact melt may be difficult based on a single sample, but becomes clear as exploration of a field site puts it into context. The FINESSE (Field Investigations to Enable Solar System Science and Exploration) team is a new activity focused on a science and exploration field based research program aimed at generating strategic knowledge in preparation for the human and robotic exploration of the Moon, near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) and Phobos and Deimos. We used the FINESSE field excursion to the West Clearwater Lake Impact structure (WCIS) as an opportunity to test factors related to sampling decisions. In contract to other technology-driven NASA analog studies, The FINESSE WCIS activity is science-focused, and moreover, is sampling-focused, with the explicit intent to return the best samples for geochronology studies in the laboratory. This specific objective effectively reduces the number of variables in the goals of the field test and enables a more controlled investigation of the role of the crewmember in selecting samples. We formulated one hypothesis to test: that providing details regarding the analytical fate of the samples (e.g. geochronology, XRF/XRD, etc.) to the crew prior to their traverse will result in samples that are more likely to meet specific analytical objectives than samples collected in the absence of this premission information. We conducted three tests of this hypothesis. Our investigation was designed to document processes, tools and procedures for crew sampling of planetary targets. This is not meant to be a blind, controlled test of crew efficacy, but rather an effort to recognize the relevant variables that enter into sampling protocol and to develop recommendations for crew and backroom training in future endeavors. Methods: One of the primary FINESSE field deployment objectives was to collect impact melt rocks and impact melt-bearing breccias from a number of locations around the WCIS structure to enable high precision geochronology of the crater to be performed [1]. We conducted three tests at WCIS after two full days of team participation in field site activities, including using remote sensing data and geologic maps, hiking overland to become familiar with the terrain, and examining previously-collected samples from other islands. In addition, the team members shared their projects and techniques with the entire team. We chose our "crew members" as volunteers from the team, all of whom had had moderate training in geologic fieldwork and became familiar with the general field setting. The first two tests were short, focused tests of our hypothesis. Test A was to obtain hydrothermal vugs; Test B was to obtain impact melt and intrusive rock as well as the contact between the two to check for contact metamorphism and age differences. In both cases, the test director had prior knowledge of the site geology and had developed a study-specific objective for sampling prior to deployment. Prior to the field deployment, the crewmember was briefed on the sampling objective and the laboratory techniques that would be used on the samples. At the field sites (Fig. 2), the crewmember was given 30 minutes to survey a small section of outcrop (10-15 m) and acquire a suite of three samples. The crewmember talked through his process and the test director kept track of the timeline in verbal cues to the crewmember. At the conclusion, the team member conducting the scientific study appraised the samples and train of thought. Test C was a 90-minute EVA simulation using two crewmembers working out of line-of-sight in communication with a science backroom. The science objectives were determined by the science backroom team in advance using a Gigapan image of the outcrop (Fig. 1). The science team formulated hypotheses for the outcrop units and created sampling objectives for impact-melt lithologies; the science team turned these into a science plan, which they communicated to the crew in camp prior to crew deployment. As part of the science plan, the science team also discussed their sample needs in depth with the crewmembers, including laboratory methods, objectives, and samples sizes needed. During the deployment, the two crewmembers relayed real-time information to the science backroom by radio with no time delay. Both the crew and science team re-evaluated their hypotheses and science plans in real-time. Discussion: Upon evaluation, we found that the focused tests (Tests A and B) were successful in meeting their scientific objectives. The crewmember used their knowledge of how the samples were to be used in further study (technique, sample size, and scientific need) to focus on the sampling task. The crewmember was comfortable spending minimal time describing and mapping the outcrop. The crewmember used all available time to get a good sample. The larger test was unsuccessful in meeting the sampling objectives. When the crewmembers began describing the lithologies, it was quickly apparent that the lithologies were not as the backroom expected and had communicated to the crew. When the outcrop wasn't as expected, the crew members instinctively switched to field characterization mode, taking significant time to characterize and map the outcrop. One crew member admitted that he "kind of lost track" of the sampling strategy as he focused on the basic outcrop characterization. This is the logical first step in a field geology campaign, that a significant amount of time must be spent by the crew and backroom to understand the outcrop and its significance. Basic field characterization of an outcrop is a focused activity that takes significant time and training [2, 3]. Sampling of representational lithologies can be added to this activity for little cost [4]. However, we have shown that identification of unusual or specific samples for laboratory study also takes significant time and knowledge. We suggest that sampling of this type be considered a separate activity from field characterization, and that crewmembers be trained in sampling needs for different kinds of studies (representative lithologies vs. specialized samples) to acquire a mindset for sampling similar to field mapping. Sampling activities should be given a significant amount of specifically allocated time in scheduling EVA activities; and in the better case, that sampling be done as a second activity to a previously studied outcrop where both crew and backroom are comfortable with its context and characteristics. Our hypothesis posited that crewmember knowledge of how the samples would be used upon return would aid them in choosing relevant samples. Our testing bore this hypothesis out to some extent. We therefore recommend that crewmember training should include exposure to the laboratory techniques and analyses that will be used on the samples to foster this knowledge. There is also the potential for increasing crewmember contextual knowledge real-time in the field through the introduction of in situ geochemical technologies such as field portable XRF. The presence of field portable geochemical technology could enable the astronauts to interrogate the samples for K abundance real-time, ensuring they could collect valuable and dateable samples [5]. Though simulations such as these can teach us a fair bit about decision making processes and timeline building, one EVA participant noted that when he wasn't collecting "real" samples, he wasn't at his best. This effect suggests that higher-fidelity studies involving truly remote participants conducting actual scientific studies merit further attention to capture lessons for application to future crew situations.
sample collection↗
Servo-controlled intravital microscope system
A microscope system is described for viewing an area of a living body tissue that is rapidly moving, by maintaining the same area in the field-of-view and in focus. A focus sensing portion of the system includes two video cameras at which the viewed image is projected, one camera being slightly in front of the image plane and the other slightly behind it. A focus sensing circuit for each camera differentiates certain high frequency components of the video signal and then detects them and passes them through a low pass filter, to provide dc focus signal whose magnitudes represent the degree of focus. An error signal equal to the difference between the focus signals, drives a servo that moves the microscope objective so that an in-focus view is delivered to an image viewing/recording camera.
Mansour, M. N.↗
The Athena Microscopic Imager Investigation
The Athena science payload on the Mars Exploration Rovers (MER) includes the Microscopic Imager (MI) [1]. The MI is a fixed-focus camera mounted on the end of an extendable instrument arm, the Instrument Deployment Device (IDD; see Figure 1).The MI was designed to acquire images at a spatial resolution of 30 microns/pixel over a broad spectral range (400 - 700 nm; see Table 1). Technically, the microscopic imager is not a microscope: it has a fixed magnification of 0.4 and is intended to produce images that simulate a geologist s view through a common hand lens. In photographers parlance, the system makes use of a macro lens. The MI uses the same electronics design as the other MER cameras [2, 3] but has optics that yield a field of view of 31 31 mm across a 1024 1024 pixel CCD image (Figure 2). The MI acquires images using only solar or skylightillumination of the target surface. A contact sensor is used to place the MI slightly closer to the target surface than its best focus distance (about 66 mm), allowing concave surfaces to be imaged in good focus. Because the MI has a relatively small depth of field (3 mm), a single MI image of a rough surface will contain both focused and unfocused areas. Coarse focusing will be achieved by moving the IDD away from a rock target after the contact sensor is activated. Multiple images taken at various distances will be acquired to ensure good focus on all parts of rough surfaces. By combining a set of images acquired in this way, a completely focused image can be assembled. Stereoscopic observations can be obtained by moving the MI laterally relative to its boresight. Estimates of the position and orientation of the MI for each acquired image will be stored in the rover computer and returned to Earth with the image data. The MI optics will be protected from the Martian environment by a retractable dust cover. The dust cover includes a Kapton window that is tinted orange to restrict the spectral bandpass to 500-700 nm, allowing color information to be obtained by taking images with the dust cover open and closed. The MI will image the same materials measured by other Athena instruments (including surfaces prepared by the Rock Abrasion Tool), as well as rock and soil targets of opportunity. Subsets of the full image array can be selected and/or pixels can be binned to reduce data volume. Image compression will be used to maximize the information contained in the data returned to Earth. The resulting MI data will place other MER instrument data in context and aid in petrologic and geologic interpretations of rocks and soils on Mars.
K E Herkenhoff↗
NASA's Aeronautics Vision
Six long-term technology focus areas are: 1. Environmentally Friendly, Clean Burning Engines. Focus: Develop innovative technologies to enable intelligent turbine engines that significantly reduce harmful emissions while maintaining high performance and increasing reliability. 2. New Aircraft Energy Sources and Management. Focus: Discover new energy sources and intelligent management techniques directed towards zero emissions and enable new vehicle concepts for public mobility and new science missions. 3. Quiet Aircraft for Community Friendly Service. Focus: Develop and integrate noise reduction technology to enable unrestricted air transportation service to all communities. 4. Aerodynamic Performance for Fuel Efficiency. Focus: Improve aerodynamic efficiency,structures and materials technologies, and design tools and methodologies to reduce fuel burn and minimize environmental impact and enable new vehicle concepts and capabilities for public mobility and new science missions. 5. Aircraft Weight Reduction and Community Access. Focus: Develop ultralight smart materials and structures, aerodynamic concepts, and lightweight subsystems to increase vehicle efficiency, leading to high altitude long endurance vehicles, planetary aircraft, advanced vertical and short takeoff and landing vehicles and beyond. 6. Smart Aircraft and Autonomous Control. Focus: Enable aircraft to fly with reduced or no human intervention, to optimize flight over multiple regimes, and to provide maintenance on demand towards the goal of a feeling, seeing, sensing, sentient air vehicle.
Tenney, Darrel R.↗
Propulsion System Choices and Their Implications
In defining a space vehicle architecture, the propulsion system and related subsystem choices will have a major influence on achieving the goals and objectives desired. There are many alternatives and the choices made must produce a system that meets the performance requirements, but at the same time also provide the greatest opportunity of reaching all of the required objectives. Recognizing the above, the SPST Functional Requirements subteam has drawn on the knowledge, expertise, and experience of its members, to develop insight that wiIJ effectively aid the architectural concept developer in making the appropriate choices consistent with the architecture goals. This data not only identifies many selected choices, but also, more importantly, presents the collective assessment of this subteam on the "pros" and the "cons" of these choices. The propulsion system choices with their pros and cons are presented in five major groups. A. System Integration Approach. Focused on the requirement for safety, reliability, dependability, maintainability, and low cost. B. Non-Chemical Propulsion. Focused on choice of propulsion type. C. Chemical Propulsion. Focused on propellant choice implications. D. Functional Integration. Focused on the degree of integration of the many propulsive and closely associated functions, and on the choice of the engine combustion power cycle. E. Thermal Management. Focused on propellant tank insulation and integration. Each of these groups is further broken down into subgroups, and at that level the consensus pros and cons are presented. The intended use of this paper is to provide a resource of focused material for architectural concept developers to use in designing new advanced systems including college design classes. It is also a possible source of input material for developing a model for designing and analyzing advanced concepts to help identify focused technology needs and their priorities.
Joyner, Claude R., II↗