SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
The Space Data Link Security (SDLS) Protocol is a Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) standard which extends the known Data Link protocols to secure data being sent over a space link by providing confidentiality and integrity services. This plan outlines the approach by National Aeronautics Space Administration (NASA) in performing testing of the SDLS protocol using a prototype based on an existing NASA missions simulator.
The Earth System Observatory (ESO) Atmosphere Observing System (AOS) mission will provide space-based and suborbital observations of collocated cloud, dynamic, precipitation and aerosol processing leading to improved weather, air quality, and climate predictions. The AOS Science Data System (SDS) will be a system of systems developed within the Cloud to manage the research and operational processing of AOS mission orbital and suborbital sensors and curate these data for reprocessing (e.g., in near real-time or by collection) and transfer them to a NASA Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) for long-term storage. Further, AOS SDS will follow guidelines provided by NASA Earth Science Data Systems (ESDS) program including standard conventions for data file formats, naming, and metadata to improve data interoperability, interpretability, usability, discovery, provenance, and spatiotemporal representativeness. The AOS mission follows NASA’s lead in making a commitment to Open-Source Science (OSS) including the sharing of data, software, and knowledge in an open and timely manner. Each of the AOS SDS system components will be developed with open-source concepts including components of SDS itself as well as AOS mission algorithms. Further, the AOS SDS assumes the role to lead and facilitate OSS activities for the AOS mission. This presentation describes the framework of the AOS SDS and its integral part in facilitating OSS within the AOS mission.
The Earth System Observatory (ESO) Atmosphere Observing System (AOS) mission will provide space-based and suborbital observations of collocated cloud, dynamic, precipitation and aerosol processing leading to improved weather, air quality, and climate predictions. The AOS Science Data System (SDS) will be a system of systems developed within the Cloud to manage the research and operational processing of AOS mission orbital and suborbital sensors and curate these data for reprocessing (e.g., in near real-time or by collection) and transfer them to a NASA Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) for long-term storage. Further, AOS SDS will follow guidelines provided by NASA Earth Science Data Systems (ESDS) program including standard conventions for data file formats, naming, and metadata to improve data interoperability, interpretability, usability, discovery, provenance, and spatiotemporal representativeness. The AOS mission follows NASA’s lead in making a commitment to Open-Source Science (OSS) including the sharing of data, software, and knowledge in an open and timely manner. Each of the AOS SDS system components will be developed with open-source concepts including components of SDS itself as well as AOS mission algorithms. Further, the AOS SDS assumes the role to lead and facilitate OSS activities for the AOS mission. This presentation describes the framework of the AOS SDS and its integral part in facilitating OSS within the AOS mission.
The NASA Earth System Observatory (ESO) atmospheric missions will provide space-based and suborbital observations of collocated cloud, dynamic, precipitation and aerosol processing leading to improved weather, air quality, and climate predictions. The Science Data System (SDS) will deploy the adaptive processing system (APS) developed within the Cloud to manage the research and operational processing of ESO atmospheric mission orbital and suborbital sensors and curate these data for near real-time and collection reprocessing and transfer them to a NASA Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) for long-term storage and distribution. Further, the SDS will follow guidelines provided by NASA Earth Science Data Systems (ESDS) program including standard conventions for data file formats, naming, and metadata to improve data interoperability, interpretability, usability, discovery, provenance, and spatiotemporal representativeness. The SDS follows NASA’s commitment to Open-Source Science (OSS) including the sharing of data, software, and knowledge in an open and timely manner. Each of the SDS system components will be developed with open-source concepts including components of APS itself as well as ESO atmospheric mission algorithms. This presentation describes the framework of the SDS and its integral part in facilitating OSS within the ESO atmospheric missions.
The number of variables measured during airborne field campaigns has increased more than tenfold over the last thirty years. With this increase in measurements, the complexity for distributed active archive centers (DAACs) to distribute the data and for data users to search for and find measurements of interest has also increased. Part of this complexity arises from the unique variable names in suborbital atmospheric composition field studies. With limited guidelines related to variable naming, variable names and structures can vary significantly, even for the same type of variable. It is common for instrument scientists to use their intended measurable quantity as the data variable name. This can make it difficult for users to locate and interact with a particular variable across multiple data sets. One effective solution to this problem, identified by the Earth Science Data System (ESDS) ICARTT Refresh Working Group [1], was to introduce variable standard names that can be used as tags for each data variable. This allows similar measurements (e.g., dew point) to be categorized and located across field campaigns, regardless of what variable name the instrument scientist has used. From this the atmospheric composition variable standard names were developed with the goal to use Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) principles [2] and provide context for all users, while remaining connected to those in the subject area. These standard names have been successfully implemented in FIREX-AQ, CAMP 2EX, ACTIVATE, and DCOTSS field campaigns.
NASA’s Lightning Imaging Sensor (LIS) and the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) mission have contributed a wealth of data toward global lightning and precipitation studies, respectively. Combining lightning and precipitation datasets leverages their unique insights into deep convective processes that inform about characteristics of convection and its intensity. Recent efforts to synthesize the LIS and GPM datasets prepare the opportunity for unprecedented large-scale, value-added multiplatform analyses of convection. This data synthesis proof-of-concept study elaborates on the creation of a database of reflectivity-based multiplatform precipitation features (MPFs) that capture a combination of information extracted from spatiotemporally coincident lightning and precipitation data within individual storm features. The space-based GPM Dual-frequency Precipitation Radar (DPR) provides a record of precipitation data, while the GPM Validation Network (VN) additionally incorporates ground-based polarimetric Doppler radar data to provide microphysical and kinematic context to DPR data. The LIS instrument onboard the International Space Station has contributed lightning observations since 2017. MPFs encapsulating information from these datasets are created from isolated regions of filtered, smoothed DPR reflectivity data to which ellipses are fit. Each MPF includes feature location, size, and eccentricity information as well as summary reflectivity characteristics. They also include summaries of precipitation microphysics and derived three-dimensional wind available from ground-based radar data. LIS data provides standard lightning characteristics such as flash count and density to each MPF as well as other informative metrics such as flash area and radiance. Each MPF file includes information about the original data from which the MPF and its characteristics were determined, allowing end-user reconstruction of the ellipse and deeper “level I” analysis of captured data. This database of VN-LIS MPFs enables broad statistical analysis of the relationships between the microphysical, kinematic, and electrical properties of convection. Preliminary results from a demonstration of the database will be described as well as ongoing efforts and avenues for future work.
This paper presents results and analyses of applying an international space data compression standard to weather radar measurements that can easily span 8 orders of magnitude and typically require a large storage capacity as well as significant bandwidth for transmission. By varying the degree of the data compression, we analyzed the non-linear response of models that relate measured radar reflectivity and/or Doppler spectra to the moments and properties of the particle size distribution characterizing clouds and precipitation. Preliminary results for the meteorologically important phenomena of clouds and light rain indicate that for a 0.5 dB calibration uncertainty, typical for the ground-based pulsed-Doppler 94 GHz (or 3.2 mm, W-band) weather radar used as a proxy for spaceborne radar in this study, a lossless compression ratio of only 1.2 is achievable. However, further analyses of the non-linear response of various models of rainfall rate, liquid water content and median volume diameter show that a lossy data compression ratio exceeding 15 is realizable. The exploratory analyses presented are relevant to future satellite missions, where the transmission bandwidth is premium and storage requirements of vast volumes of data, potentially problematic.
The research developed the fundamental techniques of the emulsion chamber methods that permit measurements of the composition and energy spectra of cosmic rays at energies ranging from 1 GeV/n to over 1,000 TeV/n. The research program consisted of exploring new principles and techniques in measuring very high energy cosmic nuclei with large-area emulsion chambers for high statistics experiments. These tasks have been accomplished and their use was essential in successful analysis of the balloon-borne emulsion chamber experiments up to 10(exp 14) eV. It also provided the fundamental technologies for designing large-area detectors that are aimed at measuring the composition at above 1015 eV region. The latter is now partially succeeded by a NASA Mission Concept, Advanced Cosmic Composition Experiments on the Space Station (ACCESS). The cosmic ray group at the University of Alabama in Huntsville has performed technological R & D as well as contributing to the Japanese-American-Emulsion-Chamber-Experiments (JACEE) Collaboration with the regular data analysis. While primary research support for other institutions' efforts in the JACEE experiments came from NSF and DOE, primary support for the University of Alabama in Huntsville was this contract. Supplemental tasks to standardize the data base and hardware upgrades (automatized microscope) had this institutions cooperation. Investigation of new techniques in this program consisted of development of a fast calorimetry, magnetic/scattering selection of high momentum tracks for a pairmeter, and high statistics momentum measurements for low energy nuclei (E < 1 TeV/n). The highest energy calorimetry and a pairmeter have been considered as strawman instruments by the GOAL (Galactic Origin and Acceleration Limit) proposal of the NASA Cosmic Ray Working Group for long- duration balloon flights. We accomplished the objectives of the GOAL program with three circumpolar, Antarctic JACEE balloon flights during 1992 - 1994.
We have developed a technique for estimating the intrinsic size distribution of orbital debris objects via optical measurements alone. The process is predicated on the empirically observed power-law size distribution of debris (as indicated by radar RCS measurements) and the log-normal probability distribution of optical albedos as ascertained from phase (Lambertian) and range-corrected telescopic brightness measurements. Since the observed distribution of optical brightness is the product integral of the size distribution of the parent [debris] population with the albedo probability distribution, it is a straightforward matter to transform a given distribution of optical brightness back to a size distribution by the appropriate choice of a single albedo value. This is true because the integration of a powerlaw with a log-normal distribution (Fredholm Integral of the First Kind) yields a Gaussian-blurred power-law distribution with identical power-law exponent. Application of a single albedo to this distribution recovers a simple power-law [in size] which is linearly offset from the original distribution by a constant whose value depends on the choice of the albedo. Significantly, there exists a unique Bond albedo which, when applied to an observed brightness distribution, yields zero offset and therefore recovers the original size distribution. For physically realistic powerlaws of negative slope, the proper choice of albedo recovers the parent size distribution by compensating for the observational bias caused by the large number of small objects that appear anomalously large (bright) - and thereby skew the small population upward by rising above the detection threshold - and the lower number of large objects that appear anomalously small (dim). Based on this comprehensive analysis, a value of 0.13 should be applied to all orbital debris albedo-based brightness-to-size transformations regardless of data source. Its prima fascia genesis, derived and constructed from the current RCS to size conversion methodology (SiBAM Size-Based Estimation Model) and optical data reduction standards, assures consistency in application with the prior canonical value of 0.1. Herein we present the empirical and mathematical arguments for this approach and by example apply it to a comprehensive set of photometric data acquired via NASA's Liquid Mirror Telescopes during the 2000-2001 observing season.
Abstract A large literature exists on mechanisms driving soil production of the greenhouse gases CO 2 and CH 4 . Although it is common knowledge that measurements obtained through field studies vs. laboratory incubations can diverge because of the vastly different conditions of these environments, few studies have systematically examined these patterns. These data are used to parameterize and benchmark ecosystem- to global-scale models, which are then susceptible to the biases of the source data. Here, we examine how greenhouse gas measurements may be influenced by whether the measurement/incubation was conducted in the field vs. laboratory, focusing on CO 2 and CH 4 measurements. We use Q 10 of greenhouse gas flux (temperature sensitivity) for our analyses because this metric is commonly used in biological and Earth system sciences and is an important parameter in many modeling frameworks. We predicted that laboratory measurements would be less variable, but also less representative of true field conditions. However, there was greater variability in the Q 10 values calculated from lab-based measurements of CO 2 fluxes, because lab experiments explore extremes rarely seen in situ , and reflect the physical and chemical disturbances occurring during sampling, transport, and incubation. Overall, respiration Q 10 values were significantly greater in laboratory incubations (mean = 4.19) than field measurements (mean = 3.05), with strong influences of incubation temperature and climate region/biome. However, this was in part because field measurements typically represent total respiration (Rs), whereas lab incubations typically represent heterotrophic respiration (Rh), making direct comparisons difficult to interpret. Focusing only on Rh-derived Q 10 , these values showed almost identical distributions across laboratory ( n = 1110) and field ( n = 581) experiments, providing strong support for using the former as an experimental proxy for the latter, although we caution that geographic biases in the extant data make this conclusion tentative. Due to a smaller sample size of CH 4 Q 10 data, we were unable to perform a comparable robust analysis, but we expect similar interactions with soil temperature, moisture, and environmental/climatic variables. Our results here suggest the need for more concerted efforts to document and standardize these data, including sample and site metadata.
This dataset contains data and code used for the paper "Carbon flux estimates are sensitive to data source: A comparison of field and lab temperature sensitivity data" [DOI COMING SOON]A large literature exists on mechanisms driving soil production of the greenhouse gases CO2 and CH4. Measurements of these gases’ fluxes are often performed using closed-chamber incubations in the laboratory or in situ, i.e., in the field. Although it is common knowledge that measurements obtained through field studies vs. laboratory incubations can diverge because of the vastly different conditions of these environments, few studies have systematically examined these patterns. It is crucial to understand the magnitude and reasons for any differences, as these data are used to parametrize and benchmark ecosystem- to global-scale models, which are then susceptible to the biases of the source data. Here, we specifically examine how greenhouse gas measurements may be influenced by whether the measurement/incubation was conducted in the field vs. laboratory, focusing on CO2 and CH4 measurements. We use Q10 of greenhouse gas flux (temperature sensitivity) for our analyses, because of the ubiquity of this metric in biological and Earth system sciences and its importance to many modeling frameworks. We predicted that laboratory measurements would be less variable, but also less representative of true field conditions. However, there was greater variability in the Q10 values calculated from lab-based measurements of CO2 fluxes, because lab experiments explore extremes rarely seen in situ, and reflect the physical and chemical disturbances occurring during sampling, transport, and incubation. Overall, respiration Q10 values were significantly greater in laboratory incubations (mean = 4.19) than field measurements (mean = 3.05), with strong influences of incubation temperature and climate region/biome. However, this was in part because field measurements typically represent total respiration (Rs), whereas lab incubations typically represent heterotrophic respiration (Rh), making direct comparisons difficult to interpret. Focusing only on Rh-derived Q10, these values showed almost identical distributions across laboratory (n = 1110) and field (n = 581) experiments, providing strong support for using the former as an experimental proxy for the latter, although we caution that geographic biases in the extant data make this conclusion tentative. Due to a smaller sample size of CH4 Q10 data, we were unable to perform a comparable robust analysis, but we expect similar interactions with soil temperature, moisture, and environmental/climatic variables. Our results here suggest the need for more concerted efforts to document and standardize these data, including sample and site metadata. This dataset contains a compressed (.zip) archive of the data and R scripts used for this manuscript. The dataset includes files in .csv format, which can be accessed and processed using MS Excel or R. This archive can also be accessed on GitHub at https://github.com/kaizadp/field_lab_q10 (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7106554).
This document is being provided as part of ITT's NASA Glenn Research Center Aerospace Communication Systems Technical Support (ACSTS) contract NNC05CA85C, Task 7: "New ATM Requirements--Future Communications, C-Band and L-Band Communications Standard Development." The proposed future C-band (5091- to 5150-MHz) airport surface communication system, referred to as the Aeronautical Mobile Airport Communications System (AeroMACS), is anticipated to increase overall air-to-ground data communications systems capacity by using a new spectrum (i.e., not very high frequency (VHF)). Although some critical services could be supported, AeroMACS will also target noncritical services, such as weather advisory and aeronautical information services as part of an airborne System Wide Information Management (SWIM) program. AeroMACS is to be designed and implemented in a manner that will not disrupt other services operating in the C-band. This report defines the AeroMACS concepts of use, high-level system requirements, and architecture; the performance of supporting system analyses; the development of AeroMACS test and demonstration plans; and the establishment of an operational AeroMACS capability in support of C-band aeronautical data communications standards to be advanced in both international (International Civil Aviation Organization, ICAO) and national (RTCA) forums. This includes the development of system parameter profile recommendations for AeroMACS based on existing Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering (IEEE) 802.16e- 2009 standards
SAND2023-05387O The Counter Unmanned Aircraft System (CUAS) Metrics Tool consists of three applications: • The Data Collection Tool is designed to be used during testing and captures details that can be imported into the Figure Creator application. • The Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Log Converter converts different UAS logs into a standardized hierarchical data format with a timeline of geospatial data. • The Figure Creator develops relevant images for the test event. The application includes logic to ingest and correlate data from the Data Collection Tool and the UAS Log Converter to produce the chosen figures. Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-NA0003525.
NASA has an extensive history of conducting suborbital field campaigns to further advances in atmospheric sciences. Beginning with the Chemical Instrument Test and Evaluation (CITE) conducted in 1983-1984, NASA has completed many suborbital campaigns over the past three decades. Since the early 2010s, suborbital missions are typically assigned to a NASA Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) prior to the mission for long-term archival and distribution. Efforts are being made by NASA’s Earth Science Data and Information System (ESDIS) Project and the Airborne Data Management Group (ADMG) to assign legacy missions to DAACs for permanent archival and distribution, so that these valuable datasets remain to be available to the scientific community. NASA’s Atmospheric Science Data Center (ASDC) has been named the assigned DAAC for nearly 20 atmospheric composition legacy missions, including missions conducted as part of the Global Tropospheric Experiment (GTE) and expects to be named the assigned DAAC for more of these missions over the next few years. The primary goal of the ASDC is to provide access to the datasets as they are currently formatted to the broad user community and enhance their findability and accessibility. However, data reporting standards have evolved significantly since 1983 and the datasets span a wide variety of file formats, including text, Ames, GTE, and ICARTT (International Consortium for Atmospheric Research on Transport and Transformation), and the amount of metadata and relevant information included in the files also varies greatly and can not be readily extracted without subject matter knowledge. This has caused challenges for the ASDC’s suborbital metadata extraction pipeline in ensuring that accurate and necessary metadata is being provided for the missions by all the ASDC’s existing search mechanisms. To make the data more findable and accessible, the ASDC has begun researching ways to further enhance the datasets, including distributing value-added products (i.e. consistent file format such as ICARTT or netCDF), adding standard names from the ESDIS Standards Coordination Office (ESCO)-approved Atmospheric Composition Variable Standard Names Convention (ACVSNC), and creating outreach materials such as ArcGIS StoryMaps, User Guides, and Micro Articles, providing overviews of the missions and what type of data was collected during the missions. These efforts also help support NASA’s Open-Source Science by enhancing the FAIRness of the legacy data products. This presentation will review the ASDC’s ongoing efforts, progress made, and future plans for legacy missions.
Standard cosmological data analyses typically constrain simple phenomenological dark-energy parameters, for example the present-day value of the equation of state parameter, w 0 , and its variation with scale factor, w a . However, results from such an analysis cannot easily indicate the presence of modified gravity. Even if general relativity does not hold, experimental data could still be fit sufficiently well by a phenomenological w 0 w a CDM, unmodified-gravity model. Hence, it would be very useful to know if there are generic signatures of modified gravity in standard analyses. Here we present, for the first time to our knowledge, a quantitative mapping showing how modified gravity models look when (mis)interpreted within the standard unmodified-gravity analysis. Scanning through a broad space of modified-gravity (Horndeski) models, and assuming a near-future survey consisting of CMB, BAO, and SNIa observations, we report values of the best-fit set of cosmological parameters including (w 0 , w a ) that would be inferred if modified gravity were at work. We find that modified gravity models that can masquerade as standard gravity lead to very specific biases in standard-parameter spaces. Here, we also comment on implications for measurements of the amplitude of mass fluctuations described by the parameter S 8 .
Analyze 2D time- and energy-resolved data, such as from a pump-probe spectroscopy experiment. User can select and input different peak shapes/ functions and background types to first fit a ground state/ unperturbed spectrum. This would be similar to how standard spectroscopy data is fit. Subsequently, to describe the time domain, users can choose functions that describe the temporal dynamics of one or more spectral features, such as a peak amplitude, peak position, etc. These time dynamics functions can be added or convoluted (e.g. describing an instrument response function) with each other. Functionality to integrate implicit variables leading to distributions of certain parameters/ functions is in development. Alternatively, 2D data can be analyzed one time step at a time to get an idea of the time dynamics of the system before deploying the global 2D fit described above. Typically people write custom software for this purpose. During my PhD I've seen five internal LBL and external researchers write one-off code in different languages to analyze time- and energy-resolved spectra. While this was specifically was for a laser pump - X-ray probe spectroscopy experiment, I'm trying to write a general package for the time-resolved spectroscopy community.
Standard meteorological data to compute transports of momentum, sensible heat and moisture in atmosphere - transport and mixing in atmosphere