SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Assessment”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 919 records · Page 51

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2014

Integration of Earth Remote Sensing into the NOAA/NWS Damage Assessment Toolkit

Following the occurrence of severe weather, NOAA/NWS meteorologists are tasked with performing a storm damage survey to assess the type and severity of the weather event, primarily focused with the confirmation and assessment of tornadoes. This labor‐intensive process requires meteorologists to venture into the affected area, acquire damage indicators through photos, eyewitness accounts, and other documentation, then aggregation of data in order to make a final determination of the tornado path length, width, maximum intensity, and other characteristics. Earth remote sensing from operational, polar‐orbiting satellites can support the damage assessment process by helping to identify portions of damage tracks that are difficult to access due to road limitations or time constraints by applying change detection techniques. In addition, higher resolution commercial imagery can corroborate ground‐based surveys by examining higher‐resolution commercial imagery. As part of an ongoing collaboration, NASA and NOAA are working to integrate near real‐time Earth remote sensing observations into the NOAA/NWS Damage Assessment Toolkit, a handheld application used by meteorologists in the survey process. The team has recently developed a more streamlined approach for delivering data via a web mapping service and menu interface, allowing for caching of imagery before field deployment. Near real‐time products have been developed using MODIS and VIIRS imagery and change detection for preliminary track identification, along with conduits for higher‐resolution Landsat, ASTER, and commercial imagery as they become available. In addition to tornado damage assessments, the team is also investigating the use of near real‐time imagery for identifying hail damage to vegetation, which also results in large swaths of damage, particularly in the central United States during the peak growing season months of June, July, and August. This presentation will present an overview of recent activities, challenges and successes, best practices, and opportunities for future work and collaboration.

Molthan, Andrew↗

NASA NTRS2015

Temporal Wind Pairs for Space Launch Vehicle Capability Assessment and Risk Mitigation

Space launch vehicles incorporate upper-level wind assessments to determine wind effects on the vehicle and for a commit to launch decision. These assessments make use of wind profiles measured hours prior to launch and may not represent the actual wind the vehicle will fly through. Uncertainty in the winds over the time period between the assessment and launch introduces uncertainty in assessment of vehicle controllability and structural integrity that must be accounted for to ensure launch safety. Temporal wind pairs are used in engineering development of allowances to mitigate uncertainty. Five sets of temporal wind pairs at various times (0.75, 1.5, 2, 3 and 4-hrs) at the United States Air Force Eastern Range and Western Range, as well as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Wallops Flight Facility are developed for use in upper-level wind assessments on vehicle performance. Historical databases are compiled from balloon-based and vertically pointing Doppler radar wind profiler systems. Various automated and manual quality control procedures are used to remove unacceptable profiles. Statistical analyses on the resultant wind pairs from each site are performed to determine if the observed extreme wind changes in the sample pairs are representative of extreme temporal wind change. Wind change samples in the Eastern Range and Western Range databases characterize extreme wind change. However, the small sample sizes in the Wallops Flight Facility databases yield low confidence that the sample population characterizes extreme wind change that could occur.

Decker, Ryan K.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Exercise Equipment Usability Assessment for a Deep Space Concept Vehicle

With international aspirations to send astronauts to deep space, the world is now faced with the complex problem of keeping astronauts healthy in unexplored hostile environments for durations of time never before attempted by humans. The great physical demands imparted by space exploration compound the problem of astronaut health, as the astronauts must not only be healthy, but physically fit upon destination arrival in order to perform the scientific tasks required of them. Additionally, future deep space exploration necessitates the development of environments conducive to long-duration habitation that would supplement propulsive vehicles. Space Launch System (SLS) core stage barrel sections present large volumes of robust structure that can be recycled and used for long duration habitation. This assessment will focus on one such conceptual craft, referred to as the SLS Derived Habitat (SLS-DH). Marshall Space Flight Center's (MSFC) Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) has formulated a high-level layout of this SLS-DH with parameters such as floor number and orientation, floor designations, grid dimensions, wall placement, etc. Yet to be determined, however, is the layout of the exercise area. Currently the SLS-DH features three floors laid out longitudinally, leaving 2m of height between the floor and ceilings. This short distance between levels introduces challenges for proper placement of exercise equipment such as treadmills and stationary bicycles, as the dynamic envelope for the 95th percentile male astronauts is greater than 2m. This study aims to assess the optimal equipment layout and sizing for the exercise area of this habitat. Figure 1 illustrates the layout of the DSH concept demonstrator located at MSFC. The exercise area is located on the lower level, seen here as the front half of the level occupied by a crew member. This small volume does not allow for numerous or bulky exercise machines, so the conceptual equipment has been limited to a treadmill and stationary bicycle. With the most current treadmill aboard the International Space Station (ISS), the Combined Operational Load-Bearing External Resistance Treadmill (COLBERT), being located in an International Standard Payload Rack (ISPR), the bottom of the conceptual treadmill features a height of 38in. Making the treadmill flush with the floor would be impossible in this rack configuration, as the distance from the outer wall of the spacecraft to the bottom floor would be too shallow. From preliminary sizing, the 38in required for the bottom of the treadmill combined with a 78in operational envelope for a 95th percentile may not be accommodated in the exercise area in a vertical orientation. Figure 2 demonstrates the volume required (in maroon) for an ISPR-bound treadmill in the concept demonstrator. Early indications as seen in this figure indicate that the crew members would contact the ceiling in such an arrangement. An assessment will be conducted to evaluate various orientations of exercise equipment in the concept demonstrator. Orientations to be tested include putting the bottom of the treadmill on the wall, having the treadmill at an angle in the floor both horizontally and vertically, and having a shorter (non-rack bound) treadmill in a vertical orientation on the floor. This assessment will yield findings regarding sizing of the area and how well participants feel they could exercise in such an environment. Due to the restrictions of assessing a microgravity vehicle in a normal-gravity environment, simulations in MSFC's Virtual Environments Lab (VEL) may be necessary. Final deliverables will include recommendations regarding the location and size of possible exercise equipment aboard the SLS-Derived DSH.

Rhodes, Brooke M.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Probabilistic Asteroid Impact Risk Assessment for the Hypothetical PDC17 Impact Exercise

Performing impact risk assessment for the 2017 Planetary Defense Conference (PDC17) hypothetical impact exercise, to take place at the PDC17 conference, May 15-20, 2017. Impact scenarios and trajectories are developed and provided by NASA's Near Earth Objects Office at JPL (Paul Chodas). These results represent purely hypothetical impact scenarios, and do not reflect any known asteroid threat. Risk assessment was performed using the Probabilistic Asteroid Impact Risk (PAIR) model developed by the Asteroid Threat Assessment Project (ATAP) at NASA Ames Research Center. This presentation includes sample results that may be presented or used in discussions during the various stages of the impact exercisecenter dot Some cases represent alternate scenario options that may not be used during the actual impact exercise at the PDC17 conference. Updates to these initial assessments and/or additional scenario assessments may be performed throughout the impact exercise as different scenario options unfold.

Asteroid Impact Risk↗

NASA NTRS2018

Towards a Rigorous Basis for Specific Operations Risk Assessment of UAS

The Specific Operations Risk Assessment (SORA) guidance represents the consensus of various national aviation authorities on a common process to identify, qualitatively assess, and manage the safety risk posed by unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), when preparing the safety case required for regulatory approval to conduct certain types of operations. As such, it can be considered a de facto standard, being increasingly adopted by various relevant stakeholders. This paper first gives an overview of the SORA process and associated methods, identifying a number of inconsistencies in risk identification and assessment, also discussing plausible strategies to close the associated gaps. Then, we give a well-founded basis for the applicable concepts, such as barrier integrity, assurance, and robustness, following which we present a preliminary and simple probabilistic formalization of the underpinning barrier-based safety model. We illustrate our overall approach through a worked example, also discussing how a Bayesian framework can facilitate extending and enhancing our initial formalization. We conclude with a discussion of the opportunities afforded by our approach, such as a well-founded basis for barrier selection, whilst addressing the associated challenges. The main objective of this work is to complement the current SORA guidance through a principled, mathematicallybased approach to risk assessment, particularly when it is applied to higher-risk operational concepts that warrant greater rigor in safety assessment and assurance.

Safety Cases↗

NASA NTRS2018

A Prognostic Launch Vehicle Probability of Failure Assessment Methodology for Conceptual Systems Predicated on Human Causal Factors

Create an improved method to calculate reliability of a conceptual launch vehicle system prior to fabrication by using historic data of actual root causes of failures. While failures have unique "proximate causes", there are typically a finite amount of common "root causes". Heretofore launch vehicle reliability evaluation typically hardware-centric statistical analyses, while most root causes of failures are been shown to be human-centric. A method based on human-centric root causes can be used to quantify reliability assessments and focus proposed actions to mitigate problems. Existing methods have been optimistic in their projections of launch vehicle reliability compared to actuals. Hypothesis: reliability of a conceptual launch vehicle can be more accurately evaluated based on a rational, probabilistic approach using past failure assessment teams' findings predicated on human-centric causes."Human Reliability Analysis Methods Selection Guidance for NASA"Chandler F.T., et al., NASA HQ/OSMA study group, July 2006. Outside HRA experts from academia, other federal labs, and the private sector. 50 system reliability methods considered, fourteen selected for further study, four finally selected as best suited for human spaceflight. Probabilistic Risk Analysis (PRA) + Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) enabled incorporating effects and probabilities of human errors. While four down-selected methods deemed appropriate for failure assessment, it did not appear that these methods could be concisely applied to perform major system-wide assessment of probability of failure of a conceptual design without becoming unwieldy."Engineering a Safer World", Detailed, comprehensive study external to NASA Leveson N. G., MIT, 2011.Systems-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP). All-encompassing accident model based on systems theory analyzed accidents after they occurred and created approaches to prevent occurrence in developing systems not focused on failure prevention per se, but rather reducing hazards by influencing human behavior through use of constraints, hierarchical control structures, and process models to improve system safetySystem Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) addresses predictive part of problem (a "hazard analysis"). Includes all causal factors identified in STAMP: "...design errors, software flaws, component interaction accidents, cognitively complex human decision-making errors, and social organizational and management factors contributing to accidents" can guide design process rather than require it to exist before-hand did not appear capable of concise application for system-wide assessment of probability of failure of a conceptual design without becoming unwieldy.

Williams, Craig H.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Nasa Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis Updated Requirements Architecture

The NASA Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis (CARA) program has been performing routine on-orbit satellite conjunction risk analysis for unmanned NASA spacecraft since 2005, and has developed a robust operations procedure and set of recommended best practices for operational conjunction assessment. However, a number of recent developments in Space Situational Awareness and commercial space operations conduct, such as the immanent deployment of much more sensitive space sensing systems and the launching of much larger satellite constellations, have begun to challenge these standard collision risk parameters and calculations. In response CARA has pursued a multi-year evaluation initiative to re-examine risk assessment algorithms and techniques, to develop needed improvements, and to assemble analysis-based operational requirements. This paper gives an overview of the principal parts of the Conjunction Assessment (CA) risk assessment process used at CARA, outlines the technical challenges that each part presents, surveys the possible solutions, and then indicates which particular solution is being recommended for NASA.

Newman, Lauri K.↗

NASA NTRS2019

NASA Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis (CARA) Updated Requirements Architecture

Newman, L. K.↗

NASA NTRS2019

GOES-16 and GOES-17 ABI INR Assessment

The first two satellites of the US Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite R-Series (GOES-R) were launched on November 19, 2016 and March 1, 2018 respectively. GOES-16 officially became GOES East on December 18, 2017, and the designation of GOES-17 as GOES West occurred on February 12 2019. The Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI) is the primary instrument on GOES-16 and GOES-17 for imaging Earth’s surface and atmosphere to significantly improve the detection and observation of severe environmental phenomena. The Image Navigation and Registration (INR) Performance Assessment Tool Set (IPATS) was developed to assess INR performance of GOES-R series ABI images. In this paper, we first describe the assessment of IPATS algorithm accuracy. Next, we present the relationship between view zenith angle (VZA) and the quality of the IPATS measurements. Lastly, we present GOES-16 and GOES-17 navigation (NAV) assessments results from flight data spanning from the start of INR assessment to June 2019. The results show a) IPATS “stair step” measurement error is less or equal to 0.06 ABI pixel with IPATS baseline configuration; b) VZA is an effective filter to exclude outliers of the measurements; and c) ABI INR for both satellites has improved over time as post-launch tests (PLT) were performed and corrections applied. This paper also shows that the post-launch INR tuning of GOES-17 was much shorter than GOES-16.

GOES-17↗

NASA NTRS2019

The Missing Economic Risks in Assessments of Climate Change Impacts

Economic assessments of the potential future risks of climate change have been omitting or grossly underestimating many of the most serious consequences for lives and livelihoods because these risks are difficult to quantify precisely and lie outside of human experience. Political and business leaders need to understand the scale of these ‘missing risks’ because they could have drastic and potentially catastrophic impacts on citizens, communities and companies. Scientists are growing in confidence about the evidence for the largest potential impacts of climate change and the rising probability that major thresholds in the Earth’s climate system will be breached as global mean surface temperature rises, particularly if warming exceeds 2°C above the pre-industrial level. These impacts include: (1) Destabilisation of ice sheets and glaciers and consequent sea level rise. (2) Stronger tropical cyclones. (3) Extreme heat impacts. (4) More frequent and intense floods and droughts. (5) Disruptions to oceanic and atmospheric circulation. (6) Destruction of biodiversity and collapse of ecosystems. Many of these impacts will grow and occur concurrently across the world as global temperature climbs. Some of these impacts involve thresholds in the climate system beyond which major impacts accelerate, or become irreversible and unstoppable. When a threshold is breached, it might cause one or more other thresholds to be exceeded as well, leading to a cascade of impacts. Many of these impacts could exceed the capacity of human populations to adapt, and would significantly affect and disrupt the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions, if not billions, of people worldwide. These impacts would also undermine economic growth and development, exacerbate poverty and destabilise communities. Economic assessments fail to take account of the potential for large concurrent impacts across the world that would cause mass migration, displacement and conflict, with huge loss of life. Economic assessments that are expressed solely in terms of effects on output (e.g. gross domestic product), or that only extrapolate from past experience, or that use inappropriate discounting, do not provide a clear indication of the potential risks to lives and livelihoods. It is likely that there are additional risks that we are not yet anticipating simply because scientists have not yet detected their possibility, as we have entered a period of climate change that is unprecedented in human history. Some advances are being made in improving economic assessments of climate change impacts but much more progress is required if assessments are to offer reliable guidance for political and business leaders on the biggest risks. The lack of firm quantifications is not a reason to ignore these risks, and when the missing risks are taken into account, the case for strong and urgent action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions becomes even more compelling.

DeFries, Ruth↗

NASA NTRS2018

Rapid Tools for an AFP Manufacturing Defects Assessment Framework

This work formulates an automated fiber placement (AFP) defects assessment framework. Such framework assumes AFP manufacturing processes are able to identify manufacturing defects via automated inspection systems and intends to provide rapid analysis tools to create a defect assessment loop. The defect assessment loop defines an automated analysis process during AFP manufacturing to minimize the number of manual repairs on the part, thus accelerating AFP manufacturing of composite structures. This defects assessment loop advantages automated inspection data to evaluate the influence of encountered AFP defects on a ply-by-ply basis. Structural evaluation is based on strength criteria using local-global finite element models. Local models affect the global part model via material property reductions. Schemes to reduce material properties using the local models are the main enablers of this framework’s automated assessment capability. Finally, we discuss the main technical challenges to realize the feasibility of this framework.

Bahamonde Jacome, Luis G.↗

NASA NTRS2020

Lessons Learned from Recent Space Flight Assessments

This paper highlights four space flight assessments, each with an important lesson. The first assessment points to the challenge of material substitution for weight saving. Space Shuttle’s external tank stringers were changed from Al 2024 to Al 2090 without comprehensive analysis. Lack of understanding the low Short-Transverse (S-T) strength associated with Al 2090 led to widespread cracking. The second assessment addresses the failure to understand that time-dependent relationships and loading interactions of multiple disciplines can lead to non-conservative results. An aerodynamic test article of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Launch Abort System (LAS) was analyzed for worst-case single discipline loads, showing positive structural margins. When disciplines were combined with time dependent loading, the analysis resulted in negative margins. The third assessment highlights the pitfalls of putting blind trust in historical architecture. The MPCV re-entry heat shield adopted the Apollo design approach despite fundamental differences between the two designs (e.g., the underlying substructure design, material differences, scale, and geometry). Manufacturing resulted in cracking along seams of the cured MPCV heat shield and produced lower mechanical properties of the Avcoat witness panels. Subsequently, the design was changed to a block architecture, which introduced unperceived technical, cost, and schedule risk. The fourth assessment shows how the lack of a comprehensive investigation of design modifications and inappropriate Finite Element Analyses (FEA) can lead to trouble. A mass reduction campaign eliminated highly critical internal struts on the ISS Node-1 pressurized module based on inadequate and uncorrelated FEA. High strains were noted and ignored as a modeling aberration. A system level high fidelity FEA discovered large plastic strains in the gussets of all four radial ports. These findings initiated a full-scale test campaign, new test correlated assembly-level FEA, and significant design modifications.

James P Smith↗

NASA NTRS2020

Application of quasi-deep convective clouds method for MODIS and VIIRS TEB calibration assessments

A technique to use deep convective clouds (DCC) and quasi-DCC (qDCC) for the calibration assessment of the thermal emissive bands (TEB) on remote sensing instruments has proven feasible. The Terra and Aqua MODIS and S-NPP and NOAA-20 VIIRS TEB calibration uses a nonlinear algorithm whose nonlinear coefficients rely on on-orbit black body (BB) warm-up and cool-down (WUCD) activities for updates. However, the limited BB temperature range affects the calibration’s uncertainty. The DCC core, one of the coldest Earth scenes, is suitable for MODIS calibration assessments; more specifically, for the evaluation of the offset effect in its TEB quadratic calibration function. Moreover, nighttime qDCC measurements provide the advantage of removing solar reflectance effects, thus enhancing the assessment’s accuracy for the midwave infrared TEB. In this paper, the qDCC method is applied to the Terra MODIS and VIIRS TEB. Their stabilities are assessed using long-term DCC and qDCC trending measurements over the instruments’ entire missions. The measurements from bands with an approximately 11-μm wavelength are used to identify the DCC pixels. MODIS band31 (~ 11m) has demonstrated stable performance and accurate calibration for both instruments throughout their respective missions. MODIS band31 can therefore be used as a reference for the other TEB. Furthermore, it also allows for a Terra and Aqua MODIS TEB cross-comparison. The assessment results, along with the calibration uncertainty and Level 1B product impact modeling, can be quite helpful for calibration improvements.

MODIS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Functional Volume Assessment of an Early Version of the Mars Transit Habitat

During the summer of 2020, the NASA Mars Architecture Team (MAT) conducted a functional volume assessment of the Transit Habitat (TH). The TH has evolved substantially since that time and the current TH does not share the same internal configuration, but the insights gained from the assessment remain relevant. In virtually all architectures involving chemical, electric, or nuclear propulsion, the majority of the crew mission is spent aboard the TH. The Earth to Mars transit durations may vary from architecture to architecture, but all are on the order of hundreds of days, regardless of whether an opposition or conjunction class trajectory is selected, and regardless of whether the propulsion system is chemical, electric, or nuclear. Thus, the TH must provide capabilities appropriate to a very long duration. So, despite significant changes in the current Mars architecture over the past few years, this evaluation still provides useful recommendations in the form of habitability guidance that can be applied to current and future TH concepts. This assessment had six primary objectives: provide a sanity check to the BOC-derived TH layout; understand if we can fit the hardware and functional tasks in the volume; provide a high-level assessment of how aggressive the layout is; generate a list of challenges or assumptions necessary to make it work; generate a list of future work to refine understanding; and identify proposed requirements. All of this information is critical to drive habitat sizing studies and key architecture decisions. It was clear that a human-in-the-loop (HITL) evaluation of some kind would be necessary, but several challenges were immediately identified. The most information could be gleaned from a Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS) type of mission operations test (MOT), but the TH concept was too low fidelity to construct the type of prototype necessary to conduct a MOT, nor were their financial resources to do so. The next best option – and really the one most appropriate for the BOC’s stage of maturity – is a Virtual Reality (VR) walk-through evaluation. However, NASA was in a shutdown state due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the VR labs were inaccessible. As a result, a tabletop evaluation was created, using .jpg imagery from the ECM CAD model along with Excel-based datasheets. High-level crew living and working functions within the habitat were identified for evaluation. Questionnaires using Likert scales assessed acceptability of habitat functions and sim quality – the degree to which the function was represented in CAD. This enabled the evaluation to be conducted by personnel working remotely. Each function was evaluated individually along with several overarching habitability parameters and vehicle subsystems. The results of this evaluation are discussed, including methodological challenges and rating challenges. Acceptability results are discussed for functions that the participants were able to rate and participant comments for functions that could not be related are also described. Final conclusions are described, including challenges or assumptions needed to make the TH design acceptable, future work needed to refine understanding of the TH, and proposed habitat requirements based on test data.

Transit Habitat↗

NASA NTRS2022

Tri-Agency Reliability Engineering Guidance: Post Mission Disposal and Extension Assessment

The Trilateral partners — the European Space Agency (ESA), Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the United States Government (USG) in their execution of safe and successful missions, have a long-standing history of sustaining the shared space environment of operational Earth-Moon orbits with their global space-stewardship, or spacekeeping, of these areas. This has driven missions to limit the generation of new and long-lived debris, control debris releases, minimize accidental explosions and collisions, and ensure Post-Mission Disposal of space systems, so that the environment remains safe for future operations and explorations. Given the continued need for space systems to support global mandatory infrastructure and commercial enterprise, spacefarers are extending beyond the Trilateral partners, more and smaller satellites are being deployed, and current assets are being utilized much longer than expected. This is making space more congested than ever; therefore, the Trilateral partners are evaluating potential future debris mitigation strategies, evolving technology, developing on-orbit servicing capabilities, and advancing their abilities to assess disposal and mission extension plans. They are also sharing their lessons learned and identifying opportunities for future state-of-the-art advancements for current and future space enterprises. Sustaining the space environment cannot be ensured by any one agency or country. Thus, the Trilateral authors have shared their lessons learned, insights, and guidance, herein, on disposal and mission extension assessment strategies with the gratitude of each agency. As such, this document is not prescriptive, but was formulated to enhance value-and-risk-balanced operational decision-making, support policy refinement, and guide spacefaring partners beyond these agencies to assess their activities in space with safety and a global space-stewardship, or spacekeeping, in mind. This includes not only the disposal and mission extension assessment addressed herein, but also preserving space history, ensuring collaboration/interoperability of technology, supporting fellow operators without interfering, and the utilization of in-situ resources for the common benefit of humankind. It is the intention of the Trilateral partners that this document evolves based on community lessons learned and the introduction of new assessment methodologies. So, all readers are encouraged to share their insights with the authors from their own application of this guidance or other strategies to ensure each mission has a successful, safe, and judicious life and conclusion.

ESA↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessment Overview: Regional Impacts of Using the Day Cloud Phase Distinction RGB for Lightning IDSS

The new generation of GOES satellites has presented a wealth of novel observations and data products to the National Weather Service forecasters throughout the country. While high quality, low latency data is always welcome in operational environments, it is valuable to understand how new information is interpreted, and how it complements and supplements existing datasets. To that end, NASA SPoRT, in partnership with the NWS, hosted a formal assessment of the use of the Day Cloud Phase Distinction RGB to anticipate lightning initiation as indicated by either GLM, NLDN, or both, using an approach outlined by Elsenheimer and Gravelle (2019). As is typical for SPoRT assessments, we focused on a targeted time period (about 6 weeks in June and July 2021) and provided a brief training module to help forecasters become familiar with the application we were targeting and the objectives of our assessment. Unlike typical SPoRT assessments, we focused on a broad geographic region, coordinating with NWS Regional offices to garner participation from several different WFOs throughout the country. Given the field of view and observation angles of GOES-East and GOES-West, which anecdotally impacts GLM lightning observations in particular, having a geographically diverse participant list helps us interpret how these viewing differences may impact interpretation of the RGB and its value in anticipating lightning. Not unexpectedly, we found that the participating forecasters expressed that they could readily interpret the RGB to recognize glaciation and, in the absence of lightning data, use the RGB to anticipate that lightning was possible, for the purpose of impact-based decision support services (IDSS). Lead times from observations of glaciation to first flash were 19 minutes on average, and -10C isothermal reflectivities ranged from 34.5 to 52.5 dBZ. Herein, we present the detailed results of the formal assessment period and provide next steps and recommendations based on forecaster feedback for using the DCPD RGB in the context of anticipating lightning initiation and for IDSS, including regional differences in observations.

satellite remote sensing↗

NASA NTRS2023

Fire Station #2, Former Sewage Treatment Plant #17, and Towway Area-SWMU 114 PFAS Site Assessment Progress Report Kennedy Space Center, Florida

This PFAS Site Assessment Progress Report (SAPR) presents the findings of the 2022 PFAS investigation conducted from November 2021 through August 2022 at Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) 114 located within Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Florida. SWMU 114 includes area around Fire Station #2, Former Sewage Treatment Plant #17, the southern portion of the Shuttle Landing Facility Runway, Remote Launch Vehicle Hangar, and the Towway area. Fire Station #2 was constructed in 2008 and is currently active, housing fire station personnel and equipment, including aqueous film forming foam (AFFF). Releases of AFFF has occurred at SWMU 114. Previous environmental assessments have been performed at SWMU 114, including soil, groundwater, and surface water sampling for volatile organic compounds, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, total petroleum hydrocarbons, and metals. No active remediation has been performed at the SWMU 114. PFAS site assessment field activities were conducted at SWMU 114 from November 2021 through August 2022. During the 2021-2022 Site Assessment, 124 direct-push samples were collected from 27 locations, 17 surface water samples were collected from 15 locations, 41 groundwater samples were collected from 37 newly installed monitoring wells, five concrete samples were collected from four locations, and one asphalt sample was collected. Additionally, two soil borings were advanced to 60 feet for lithologic descriptions, ten staff gauges were installed, and one round of water level measurements were collected from monitoring wells and staff gauges for groundwater flow determination. All groundwater and surface water samples were analyzed for 25 PFAS analytes by USEPA Method 537M. Concrete, and asphalt samples were analyzed by synthetic precipitation leaching procedure (SPLP) PFAS analysis by USEPA Modified Method 537M. Groundwater results were compared to the most recent Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) published by USEPA for residential tap water (USEPA, 2022a) to determine the extent of PFAS contamination at SWMU 114 for six PFAS analytes (PFOA, PFNA, PFBS, PFHxS, PFOS, and GenX). Surface water results were compared to the FDEP surface water screening levels (SW SLs) (FDEP, 2020) for PFOA and PFOS. The PFAS investigation concluded that groundwater exceeding RSLs extends east and south to Banana Creek and west to approximately the center of the SLF runway. The extent of PFAS is approximated to the north, to an area between Sharkey Road and Astronaut Road, where samples below the RSLs do not fully bound SWMU 114. At least two distinct PFAS source areas are located near Fire Station #2 and along Towway, at S114-MW0007S, within SWMU 114. Groundwater head measurements indicate that flow at SWMU 114 is generally similar across the shallow and intermediate water tables. A northeast to southwest trending groundwater divide is located near the middle of Towway where groundwater southeast of the divide flows to the south and groundwater northwest of the divide flows to the west. The groundwater divide generally separates the two areas of higher PFAS concentrations. Surface water samples indicated concentrations of PFOS above the SW SLs in surface water bodies across the site. Further assessment and sampling are required to better understand the interaction between groundwater and surface water at SWMU 114. Concrete and asphalt samples collected confirm that a significant release of AFFF occurred near the stormwater pond northwest of Fire Station #2. Additional concrete samples surrounding Fire Station #2 and at the northwest and southeast edges of the SLF tarmac indicate elevated PFOS concentrations. These results indicate that discharges of AFFF in these locations have infiltrated into asphalt and concrete and may act as a continuing source of PFAS to groundwater and surface water after rain events. Additional direct-push samples are required to delineate PFAS at SWMU 114. Samples may need to extend beyond the Former SLF Rescue Building and Morpheous Test Site to delineate PFAS in groundwater. Monitoring wells should be sampled and gauged quarterly to determine if seasonal impacts are observable, especially in shallow wells near surface water features. Furthermore, surface water samples should be collected from additional ditches to further define the extent of surface water impacts at SWMU 114 and extending along the SLF runway. Staff gauges should be gauged quarterly with groundwater gauging to determine surface water flow and interaction with groundwater. The PFAS sampling results and path forward for SWMU 114 were presented to the KSC Remediation Team in October 2022. Once the PFAS SAPR is approved, it will be submitted to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection.

Howard Franklin Fowler↗

NASA NTRS2023

Commercial Smallsat Data Acquisition Program: Airbus U.S. Synthetic Aperture Radar Quality Assessment Summary

Quality assessment of the Airbus X-band Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) satellite products was conducted by the Commercial Smallsat Data Acquisition (CSDA) program’s radar subject matter experts, following the Joint NASA/ESA (European Space Agency) assessment draft guidelines. All three Airbus SAR spacecraft (TerraSAR-X, TanDEM-X, and PAZ) are based on the TerraSAR-X platform, and each have an active phased array antenna that is 4.8 x 0.7 m in the along-track and cross-track dimensions, respectively. TerraSAR-X and TanDEM-X are in a helical orbit, creating a bistatic imaging geometry, in addition to being capable of independent monostatic observations. The PAZ mission follows TerraSAR-X and TanDEM-X in the same 11-day orbit with a 5.5-day lag. TerraSAR-X and TanDEM-X are designed, developed, and operated through a Public-Private Partnership, while PAZ is a dual-use mission (civil and defense agencies), funded and owned by the Spanish Ministry of Defense and managed by Hisdesat (Hisdesat Servicios Estratégicos, S.A.), a Spanish private communications company. The assessment presented in this document is divided into two main parts: documentation review and the assessment of test datasets. The documentation review in sections 2.1 through 2.4 includes the assessment of the Airbus documentation provided to the CSDA evaluation team. The grading of these documents is given in columns 1-4 of the maturity matrix shown in section 1.1. Section 2.5 summarizes the evaluation performed by NASA using the data purchased through the CSDA program. The grading for this is given in the last column of the maturity matrix. Section 3 provides more detailed explanations on the methods and the results of the data analysis performed by NASA. Only the documents provided by Airbus for the evaluation were considered for the review. Additional documentation with more detailed description of the calibration and validation procedures may be available online but were not considered for this evaluation. The product information provided in the available documentation (RD-1, RD-2) and the product metadata together provided adequate information to work with the data. The product details in the metadata included the required information to work with the data in the common XML file format. Metrological traceability documentation was not provided to CSDA. All relevant characterization of the SAR system and data were provided, and the metadata include all relevant ancillary information. Documentation provided to CSDA included limited pre-flight and post-launch calibration information.

Batuhan Osmanoglu↗