Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “PbS”

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.

77 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2019

European Service Module - Structural Test Article (E-STA) Building Block Test Approach and Model Correlation Observations

The Orion European Service Module - Structural Test Article (E-STA) underwent sine vibration testing in 2016 using the Mechanical Vibration Facility (MVF) multi-axis shaker system at NASA Glenn Research Center’s (GRC) Plum Brook Station (PBS) Space Power Facility (SPF). The main objective was to verify the structural integrity of the European Service Module (ESM) under sine sweep dynamic qualification vibration testing. A secondary objective was to perform a fixed-base modal survey, while E-STA was still mounted to MVF, in order to achieve a test correlate the finite element model (FEM). To facilitate the E-STA system level correlation effort, a building block test approach was implemented. Modal tests were performed on two major subassemblies, the crew module/launch abort structure (CM/LAS) and the crew module adapter (CMA) mass simulators. These subassembly FEMs were individually correlated and then integrated into the E-STA FEM prior to the start of the E-STA sine vibration test. This paper summarizes the modal testing and model correlation efforts of both of these subassemblies and how the building block approach assisted in the overall correlation of the E-STA FEM. This paper will also cover modeling practices that should be avoided, recommended instrumentation positioning on complex structures, and the importance of the FEM geometrically matching CAD in sufficient detail in order to adequately replicate internal load paths. The goal of this paper is to inform the reader of the hard earned lessons learned and pitfalls to avoid when applying a building block test approach.

Winkel, James P.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modal Test and Model Correlation of NASA Plum Brook Station Mechanical Vibration Facility Head Expander –Lessons Learned from the Perspective of an Early-Career Engineer

In preparation for the Sierra Nevada Corporation’s (SNC) Dream Chaser spacecraft vibration test campaign at the Mechanical Vibration Facility (MVF) at NASA Plum Brook Station (PBS) in Sandusky, Ohio, a test-verified model of MVF is needed in order to be able to perform accurate pretest analysis used for determining response limits and abort levels. MVF was designed to vibration test MPCV Orion and was used to perform the system level vibration test of the European Service Module Structural Test Article (E-STA) in 2016. MVF is comprised of an 18 ft diameter annulus table that is driven with sixteen hydraulic vertical actuator assemblies and four hydraulic horizontal actuator assemblies, which allow it to perform single axis vibration testing in the vertical axis and in each of the two orthogonal horizontal axes without the need for reconfiguring the test article. A head expander for the MVF Table has been designed and built that fills in the center opening providing a continuous flat mounting surface with a maximum diameter of 16.25feet that expands the vibration testing capabilities of MVF. The MVF Table with this head expander will be used during the SNC Dream Chaser spacecraft vibration test campaign. Therefore, a critical element in a test-verified model of the MVF will be a test correlated finite element model (FEM) of the head expander. To obtain this, engineers from the Structural Dynamics Lab (SDL) at NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in Cleveland, Ohio performed a modal pretest analysis, conducted a modal test in July 2019, and most recently correlated the head expander finite element model to the modal test data up to 300 Hz. From the initial test preparations to the final delivery of a correlated finite element model, all efforts mentioned were led by the same early-career engineers at NASA GRC. From the viewpoint of an early-career engineer, lessons learned about modal pretest analysis, modal testing, and finite element model correlation of the MVF Table expander head will be presented and discussed. This will include the importance of understanding the limitations of using uncorrelated finite element models in the modal pretest analysis and planning, the importance of orthogonality metrics in judging adequacy and accuracy of test mode shapes, and the importance of having the FEM match the as built hardware in the model correlation effort.

Emma L Pierson↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Enumeration and Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization of Microbial Bioburden on Cleanroom Surfaces

Introduction: Microorganisms are everywhere on Earth, even in the cleanest of places. Spacecraft assembly cleanrooms can harbor low levels of living and dead microbial cells (e.g., [1,2]), and cleanroom bioburden can also include organic molecules from industrial sources and in situ biomass. Life detection missions require careful attention to avoid contaminants that can be easily convoluted with analytical targets. We are evaluating epifluorescent microscopy and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) as methods to complement organic contamination detection techniques. Epifluorescent cell counting offers an accurate and cost-effective way to quantify low levels of surface biomass. FISH could allow for the identification of residual organisms, and can be targeted to detect active populations of specific organisms such as bacteria known to resist cleaning procedures. This effort is part of a larger study that is concentrated on characterizing the surface and airborne molecular organic contamination background in Johnson Space Center (JSC) Astromaterials curation laboratories and Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) spacecraft assembly rooms, and understanding contaminants in the context of cleaning procedures and residual bioburden. Methods: Samples were collected by swabbing surfaces in ISO 5 and ISO 7 equivalent cleanrooms at JSC. Swabs for FISH were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) for 3 hours and then stored in 1:1 ethanol:PBS, while swabs for cell counting were stored in 4% PFA until analysis to avoid any cell loss during centrifugation that could impact quantification of very low biomass samples. Cell counting was performed with SYBR Gold as in [3], but adapted for very low biomass. FISH was performed as in [4], using DAPI as a counterstain for all DNA-containing cells. Negative controls included wells with no probe applied, to test for natural fluorescence, as well as the nonsense probe NONEUB (reverse complement of EUB338) to evaluate non-specific probe binding. Results and Discussion: Cleanroom surfaces had 102-103 cells cm-2. The extremely low biomass of these samples was challenging for enumeration, and required careful and routine use of “field” and laboratory blanks. FISH was performed with the general archaeal and bacterial probes ARCH915 and EUB338 (EUBMIX, [4]), probe GAMBET ([4]), and PSE227, which targets the genus Pseudomonas [5]). The latter two probes were selected because Pseudomonas spp. and other Gammaproteobacteria have not been isolated from cleanroom surfaces but do appear frequently in rRNA gene libraries from these surfaces. While some active bacteria were identified (Fig. 1c), most cells detectable by DAPI did not have a strong or any fluorescent signal (e.g., Fig. 1d), indicating that the vast majority of cells are dead or inactive. This suggests that cleaning protocols are effective at inactivating microbial contaminants, but that dead or inactive cells can remain on surfaces. Cells were often clumped in a weakly autofluorescent matrix, possibly biofilm material (Fig. 1c,d). We also observed other particulate material that was collected by the swabs, including apparent textile fibers (Fig. 1b). Our results are consistent with other studies that show that the bioburden present in clean rooms includes active, dormant, and dead cells. We will discuss how FISH and epifluorescent cell counting could be applied in planetary protection protocols, including the advantages and disadvantages of FISH and cell counting for routine use, as well as different possible applications for more specialized FISH procedures. References: [1] Moissl-Eichinger et al. (2015) Sci Rep, 5, 9156 [2] Hendrickson et al. (2021) Microbiome, 9, 238 [3] Jones et al. (2017) Appl Environ Microbiol, 83, e00909-17 [4] Jones et al. (2015) Appl Environ Microbiol, 81, 1242-1250. [5] Watt et al. (2006) Environ Microbiol, 8, 871-884

C J Huff↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Does Collection Time Bias the Ecology of Cleanroom Air Samples?

Microbial monitoring of astromaterials collections has taken on increased importance with the return of biologically sensitive samples from the asteroids Ryugu and Bennu and the initiation of the Mars Sample Return Program. Terrestrial bacteria and fungi can alter the mineralogy and organic composition of our collections causing irreversible contamination of pristine samples and increasing the risk of false positives for life detection measurements. NASA has conducted routine microbial monitoring of its existing collections since 20181. Initial monitoring focused on surface samples collected with foam swabs. Although, airborne microbiology is often decoupled from surface microbiology in the built environment2 culture-based air sampling techniques like impactors were not compliant with existing contamination control requirements. Bringing organic rich media, gelatin or liquids into curation cleanrooms presents an unacceptable risk to pristine samples. In 2022 NASA purchased a materials complaint air sampler and began collecting air samples from the cleanrooms in addition to surface samples3. The new instrument uses an electret filter to collect samples that are suitable for cultivating organisms or for direct DNA sequencing. Preliminary DNA sequencing results appeared to indicate that longer sampling times biased the microbial community in favor of hearty, spore-forming bacteria3. We present the results of a study comparing overnight sampling (17 hours) to short (1 hour) sampling of unoccupied curation cleanrooms. The results will help us optimize our monitoring protocols and develop a more detailed inventory of the ecology of astromaterials curation cleanrooms. Methods: We analyzed 72 paired air samples from six different cleanrooms including the meteorite processing lab (ISO 7 equivalent, 16 samples), the lunar lab (ISO 6 equivalent, 10 samples), the stardust lab (ISO 5 equivalent 14 samples), the OSIRIS-REx lab (ISO 5 equivalent, 12 samples), the Hayabusa2 lab (ISO 5 equivalent, 14 samples), and the Genesis lab (ISO 4 equivalent, 6 samples). All the samples were collected with an InnovaPrep Bobcat air sampler operating at a sampling rate of 200 L/min. The sampler operates for 5 minutes out of every 20 minute period. Half of the samples were collected by filtering 3,000L (15 min. of active sampling) of air across an electret filter for one hour. The rest of the samples were collected by filtering approximately 51,000 L air across the filter overnight (~17 hours, 255 min. of active sampling). Cells were eluted from the filter using 6-7 ml of pressurized 0.15% tween 20 in PBS (phosphate buffered saline). This liquid was used to cultivate bacteria according to previously published methods1,4,5 and for DNA extraction and next generation sequencing. DNA was extracted with a Qiagen MagAttract PowerMicrobiome kit6. To identify bacteria and archaea, the 16S rRNA gene was amplified using Earth Microbiome primers for the V4 region 7. The amplified DNA was sequenced on an Illumina MiSeq using a V3 reagent kit. The resulting sequences were processed using DADA2 and QIIME2 as implemented on the EDGE bioinformatics platform8–10. Results: Only two of the 72 samples had no amplifiable DNA. Amplified DNA concentrations ranged from 2.67 – 0.272 ng/µl. The median concentration of amplified DNA for the 1 hour samples was 0.770 ± 0.368 ng/µl. The median concentration of amplified DNA for the overnight samples was 0.877 ± 0.434 ng/µl. On average the overnight samples had slightly more sequences (58,960 vs. 59,456) and ASV’s (amplicon sequence variants) (60 vs 64.5) than the one hour samples, but these differences are not statistically significant. The most abundant ASV in every sample mapped to the genus Cupravidus. ASV’s mapping to the genuses Bacillus, Schlegelella, Thermus, and Staphylococcus were also common. Discussion and Future Work: Alpha diversity statistics like Shannon Entropy and Faith Phylogenetic Diversity are used to describe the diversity of organisms in a single sample. If a longer sampling time was biasing the data, we would expect to see a change in these diversity statistics vs. sample time. However, we did not observe this in our data. The median Shannon entropy was slightly higher for the overnight samples (3.773 vs 3.611) as was the Faith Phylogenetic Diversity (4.042 vs 3.596), but both values were within a standard deviation of each other for the two sampling times (Fig. 1). It is unlikely, that the longer sampling time is introducing bias into our data. We do observe a significant decrease in diversity when comparing the air samples by lab. The Genesis lab (ISO 4 equivalent) has a lower median number of ASV’s (45.5) than the other labs (62). Median values for Shannon Entropy (3.717 vs. 3.430) and Faith Phylogenetic Diversity (3.796 vs. 3.548) are also lower for Genesis, but those values are with one standard deviation of each other for the different sampling times. This is consistent with previous culture-based results suggesting that the environment in cleanrooms tends to select for a core group of organisms capable of surviving under dry, low nutrient, conditions. The presence of the ASV’s mapping to Cupravidus and Thermus in our sequencing blanks and controls suggests that several of the most common organisms in our samples represent contaminants from the reagents used to perform the DNA extractions and sequencing. Further work is needed to identify these contaminants, remove them from our data and recalculate the diversity statistics. This is a systematic error. Therefore, we do not expect removing the sequencing contaminants to change our conclusions. Longer air sample collection times appear to result in slightly higher diversity and do not bias the results towards “hardy” bacteria like spore-formers. Based on these preliminary results we conclude that sampling at least 3,000 liters of air is sufficient to capture the microbial diversity of cleanrooms, and that air samples can also be collected overnight without negatively impacting diversity. These results allow us to be flexible when designing microbial monitoring plans so that they do not interfere with routine lab activity. References: 1. Regberg, A. B. et al. 49th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2018). 2. The United States Pharmacopeial Convention. USP General Chapter <1116> (2013). 3. Regberg, A. B., et al. 54th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2023). 4. Regberg, A. B. et al. 53rd Lunar and Planetary Science Conference ( 2022). 5. Davis, R. E.,et al. 50th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2019). 6. Qiagen. MagAttract® PowerMicrobiome® DNA/RNA EP Kit Handbook. (2018). 7. Walters, W. et al. mSystems 1, (2015). 8. Callahan, B. J. et al. Nat. Methods 13, 581–583 (2016). 9. Hall, M. & Beiko, R. G. Microbiome Analysis: Methods and Protocols113–129 (Springer, 2018). 10. Philipson, C. et al. Bio-Protoc. 7, e2622 (2017).

A. B. Regberg↗